the impact of delaying ground level ozone naaqs in 2010 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
The Impact of Delaying Ground Level Ozone NAAQS in 2010 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
The Impact of Delaying Ground Level Ozone NAAQS in 2010

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 6

The Impact of Delaying Ground Level Ozone NAAQS in 2010 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 75 Views
  • Uploaded on

The Impact of Delaying Ground Level Ozone NAAQS in 2010. Current Standard v. Proposed Standard. Current standard is the 8 hour GLO (ground level ozone) be below .075ppm Average over 8 hours 4 th highest such number average with the similar number from prior 2 years

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'The Impact of Delaying Ground Level Ozone NAAQS in 2010' - felton


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
current standard v proposed standard
Current Standard v. Proposed Standard
  • Current standard is the 8 hour GLO (ground level ozone) be below .075ppm
    • Average over 8 hours
    • 4th highest such number average with the similar number from prior 2 years
  • Proposed Standard had two prongs –
    • Reduce the .075 ppm to .065 (approx).
    • Introduce a 1 hr standard aimed at peak levels of ozone.
impact of not tightening
Impact of NOT Tightening
  • Main Conclusions:
    • About half of jurisdictions are out of compliance with current .075 standard ->tightening would merely have made them further out of compliance
    • Monitoring GLO itself may not even be an effective approach to GLO reduction
    • Even in the absence of stricter standards progress can and should be made
current standard already challenging jurisdictions
Current Standard Already Challenging Jurisdictions
  • More than half of jurisdictions don’t meet current standard
  • Long term trend is down
directly tracking glo may not be the way to go
Directly Tracking GLO – May Not be the Way to Go
  • GLO is the result of Nox and VOCS.
    • Need both precursors to be controlled
    • Either may be dominant
    • GLO may “happen” far from precursor emissions
  • Other tool in the tool box –
    • Separate precursors in place and time!
    • E.g. target VOCs for night production
    • Separate emitters
targeted reduction illustrative case
Targeted Reduction- Illustrative Case

Peak NOx emission on hottest days – worst possible case for GLO production

Taking action to reduce these (based on other NAAQS will lower GLO in CT)