4.7 Article

Photochemical and meteorological relationships during the Texas-II Radical and Aerosol Measurement Project (TRAMP)

Journal

ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT
Volume 44, Issue 33, Pages 4005-4013

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.03.011

Keywords

Ozone exceedance episodes; TexAQS-II; Post-frontal ozone events

Funding

  1. Houston Advanced Research Center (HARC)
  2. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)
  3. University of Houston

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Moody Tower measurement site at the University of Houston experienced several large ozone events during the Texas-II Radical and Aerosol Measurement Project (TRAMP) campaign between 13 Aug-02 Oct, 2006. This rooftop site samples that atmosphere 70 m a.g.l. and consequently is less susceptible to local surface emissions. Several high-ozone episodes encountered at Moody Tower during the TRAMP campaign were preceded one to two days earlier by a cold front passage, creating a situation where polluted air is transported from the North interacts with local Houston emissions and with light local winds. High quality CO measurements were good indicators of long range transport of pollution and/or biomass burning. During TRAMP there were also 4 periods with low background CO characterized by southerly winds, overcast conditions and low NOx and O-3 mixing ratios. The summer and fall of 2000 was an unusually hot period in Houston with considerably higher ozone levels than the 2000-2007 climatology. The 2006 TRAMP time period is more representative of the typical conditions for these 8 years. Over the time period from 1991 to 2009 the number of 8-h ozone episode days in Houston has decreased, as have the peak 1-h ozone mixing ratios. It is not possible from this analysis to demonstrate whether these improvements in Houston air quality are due to reductions in NOx levels, VOCs levels, and/or changes in meteorology. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available