The above graph, provided by Simpson Lumber Company, shows boiler output vs. the PM 2.5 pollution monitor readings for the period of 4/17/2011 through 7/26/2011.QUESTION SENT TO ORCAA:
Simpson Engineer, Tony Enslow, stated that this indicates there is no correlation between the Simpson incinerator pollution (PM 2.5) output and the air pollution monitor readings for the new monitor site in downtown Shelton.
That the PM 2.5 monitor, located a few hundred yards from the incinerator, does not seem to detect any of the PM 2.5 pollution seems a bit "strange" to us. We contacted Mark Goodin at ORCAA for his opinion.
From: John Cox
Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2011
To: Mark Goodin (ORCAA)
Subject: SHELTON MONITOR and SIMPSON
Dear Mr. Goodin,
I have attached a study that Tony Enslow, an engineer with Simpson, sent us per our request.
The study is comparing the Simpson incinerator output vs. the PM 2.5 levels recorded at the new air monitor location in Shelton.
The study shows, basically, no correlation and this bothers us. Why would a monitor that is situated only a few hundred yards away from a major PM 2.5 source not show any sign of detecting the pollution?
Lack of monitor sensitivity? Out of calibration? Wind?
Thanks for your time.
John Cox
Shelton, WA 98584
________________________
RESPONSE FROM ORCAA:
From: Mark Goodin
To: John Cox
CC: "Fran McNair" fran.mcnair@orcaa.org, "Robert Moody" robert.moody@orcaa.org, "
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011
Subject: RE: SHELTON MONITOR and SIMPSON
Dear Mr. Cox,
Thanks for forwarding the analysis tables that Mr. Enslow compiled. I believe there are conclusions that can be drawn from these results, but more general than the conclusion you came to.
One conclusion is that air quality in Shelton at the monitoring station was "Good" during the time period analyzed (April 22 - July 27, 2011). The Shelton continuous fine particulate, PM2.5, monitor is operated and maintained in accordance with the Washington State Department of Ecology Quality Assurance Plan and Procedures. The ORCAA operator reviews the hourly data on a monthly basis, requests data edits if necessary and submits operator performed quality control checks to the Ecology Quality Assurance Section for their final data validation. Therefore, we can assure you that the results are reliable.
Another conclusion is that the Simpson boiler operated during this time period and at operating levels approaching its maximum output. We know this because output of the boiler and performance of air pollution control devices are monitored continuously. This data is sent to ORCAA semiannually and reviewed. During the time period analyzed by Mr. Enslow, Simpson's boiler operated normally and there were no reports of malfunction of the electrostatic precipitator (main air pollution control device) except for a 24 minute period on May 29th, which was due to a PUD power outage.
Comparing the two data sets, it can be concluded that, for the time period analyzed, air quality was "Good" at the monitoring station in Shelton regardless of operation of the Simpson boiler. This is a general conclusion and appropriate based on the nature of the data sets. However, going beyond this general conclusion to determine whether there is a correlation or not would require a more refined statistical analysis of the data considering wind direction and speed, dispersion characteristics of the boiler stack and other influences on air quality. It does not appear these influences were considered in the analysis by Mr. Enslow based on the tables provided.
Therefore, ORCAA's conclusion is that the analysis is not detailed enough to draw any conclusions except that air quality was "Good" for the time period analyzed and that the Simpson boiler operated during this period.
If you have any other questions or would like to talk about this further, please give me a call. I would be happy to talk.
Mark V. Goodin
ORCAA Senior Engineer
(360) 539-7610
mark.goodin@orcaa.org
SHELTON BLOG NOTE:
Link to pdf documents sent by Simpson:
http://myweb.hcc.net/pkands/docs/boiler _vs_time.pdf
Simpson Contact:
Tony Enslow
Project Engineer
Simpson Lumber Company
(360) 427-4966
tenslow@simpson.com
White man speak with forked tongue...
ReplyDeleteAnyone who has ever stood on the downwind side of a campfire knows that wind direction is the most important factor when determining areas of pollution. The ORCCA pollution monitor is situated on a site parallel to the prevailing wind, and, therefore, provides little useful data unless no wind exists.
ReplyDeleteI scan hundreds of charts on a daily basis. The key to charting is what timeline you are looking at, and then what type of chart you use to show you the information you need.
ReplyDeleteUsing this type of chart to illustrate possible correlations in smaller time lines is impossible. It's like trying to determine daily stock market fluctuations on a five minute basis using a monthly chart. You have to use the proper tool. The five minute chart will show many smaller variations (in five minute increments) while the monthly chart will show fewer and much larger and smoother variations (in monthly increments).
The timeline provided by Mr. Enslow is too large a timeline to see variations, and it is too small and compressed a format to be of any use.
To do something like that would require at least a daily chart in a much larger format. Even better would be a hourly chart to which wind direction, precipitation and perhaps baseline PM 2.5 from prevailing winds could be subtracted to determine the impact of the Simpson incinerator.
The chart provided by Mr. Enslow is useless for the intended purpose, and I suspect he knows this.
BTW, Mr. Goodin was kind enough to inform us that the data for the incinerator and the nephelometer are kept on an hourly basis and THAT is the data we should request. We should request that information on perhaps a weekly overall time frame broken into hourly bits on both the "boiler" and the nephelometer. This way the smaller time frames would better show and possible correlations and we could put those together with weather reports, perhaps from the airport or Pioneer school weather stations that send data to KING 5. The other option would be for us to compile a bit of cash and to compile and keep our own weather data for this use.
ReplyDeleteFrom just looking at the silly chart from Simpson there ARE periods of time that show some correlation, but being the late spring and summer months the weather is more variable so the results will appear to sometimes be non-correlated. Mr. Goodwin as much as says this and Mr. Enslow knows it.
Of particular interest to me was the high peak of the boiler and the nephelometer followed by lows for both and then both peaking in late June/early July. One would expect to see peaks on start up of the boiler when it is less efficient as we see in late April, mid May, early June and right after July 6. I would love to see what the weather (wind/rain) was doing on the low reading/supposedly uncorrelated days.
If I were a betting man.....
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWe requested more data from Simpson after receiving the charts and was told by Tony Enslow that it was not available.
ReplyDeleteI will request the complete data from Simpson again.
Hey Dave McEntee! Why pay Tony to do a complete (real) analysis when there are citizens willing to do it for free?
Mr. Enslow is mistaken. Read the response from ORCAA again. Mr. Goodin writes: "Another conclusion is that the Simpson boiler operated during this time period and at operating levels approaching its maximum output. We know this because output of the boiler and performance of air pollution control devices are monitored continuously. This data is sent to ORCAA semiannually and reviewed."
ReplyDeleteWhat we want is the same data sent to ORCAA. Because it is a public entity, these records are public property and they MUST provide them in accordance with State law. We need to specify exactly what we want, which is the same data provided to ORCAA.