[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Area Sources



Steering Committee,

On last week's conference call, we discussed briefly the prospect of
calculating some area sources at the regional level where it makes sense to
do so from a standpoint of work efficiency and overall consistency. I
mentioned that I would compile and send out a table summarizing what area
source categories have been estimated by each state/province for the 2002
inventory to provide a better basis for further discussion. The table is
attached here and a description of how it was compiled and some initial
observations are below.

The SCCs shown are all those that anyone has reported emissions for in
2002 using source type "A." This is a query of the 2002 repository that
looked for activity records linked to "A" sources and returned the SCCs
for the processes those activities belong to. I added to that a count of
the number of sources within each state that had emissions from a
process with the each SCC. This list therefore includes only a list of
the Area Source SCCs that are actually being used, not all the potential
Area Source SCCs, of which there are probably many more.

I then went through and classified these 170+ SCCS into about 30
categories that I've called "GLC methodology category." This is intended
to be at a similar level to the distinctions we've made in putting
together the methodology documents in the past. My classification here
is probably not perfect and some feedback could be used. I also added a
column showing how many jurisdictions reported emissions for any of the
SCCs within an given methodology classification. Looking at it that way
helps minimize  the focus on differences in which SCCs people are using and
focus on whether certain types of sources are being estimated. I also added
columns for what type of activity data is required and a column to
indicate the feasibility of estimating a certain category at the
regional level rather than state-by state. These last few columns aren't
very complete at this point and input could be used there as well. Perhaps
on the next call we can try to fill some of those fields in more fully.

Some states are in the process of adding a few area sources as part of the
b(a)p assessment and if that data hasn't yet reached the repository, it's
not reflected in the attached table.

It should also be pointed out that the table only presents information on
whether or not certain SCCs are being reported by various states/provices
and doesn't say anything about whether similar methodologies or emission
factors are used. 

The table shows that there are 5 categories that all nine states/province
have estimated and 6 more that 7-8 jurisdiction estimated. There are 7 that
3-5 estimated and 13 that 1-2 estimated. I would say that it's generally the
case that those source types that many states are currently estimating are
those that will be the best candidates for estimating at the regional level.
Among the others, there may be a handful that are significant categories and
easily estimated that we decide to do at the regional level also. We can
assess each on its own merits in terms of whether it's worth the effort to
inventory and whether inventorying it at the regional level makes sense. 

It should be clear at the outset of the discussion that if we do choose to
do some of these calculations on a regional basis, we would do so with the
understanding that: 1) each state and province always has control of it's
own data and can change or omit data for a given source if they feel the
regional method isn't suitable to them; and 2) when the calculations are
done, each state would receive all the underlying data (activity data,
emission factors, emissions, etc.) so that they would have complete
ownership of the data within their own agency for future analysis or use.

As a sidenote, Minnesota wins the award for best source category for their
inclusion of human perspiration. Michigan runs a close second for their
inclusion of beer fermentation as an area source. Is that home-brew that
you're attempting to quantify, Dennis? 

______________________
Jon Dettling
Great Lakes Commission
734-971-9135
dettling@glc.org

Attachment: Area_Sources.xls
Description: MS-Excel spreadsheet