Peter Kuma Software and Science

The winter 2019 air pollution (PM2.5) measurement campaign in Christchurch, New Zealand

Ethan R. Dale1, Stefanie Kremser1, Jordis S. Tradowsky1, Greg E. Bodeker1, Leroy J. Bird1, Gustavo Olivares2, Guy Coulson2, Elizabeth Somervell2, Woodrow Pattinson3, Jonathan Barte4, Jan-Niklas Schmidt5, Nariefa Abrahim6, Adrian J. McDonald7, Peter Kuma7

1Bodeker Scientific, 42 Russell Street, Bridge Hill, Alexandra 9320, New Zealand
2National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA), 41 Market Place, Auckland Central 1010, Auckland, New Zealand
3Mote Ltd. 40A George Street, Mount Eden Auckland 1024, New Zealand
4Météo-France, 42 avenue Gaspard Coriolis, 31100 Toulouse, France
5Luisental 28, 28359 Bremen, Germany
6University of Otago, 362 Leith Street, North Dunedin, Dunedin 9016, New Zealand
7University of Canterbury, 20 Kirkwood Avenue, Upper Riccarton, Christchurch 8041, New Zealand

Abstract

MAPM (Mapping Air Pollution eMissions) is a project whose goal is to develop a method to infer airborne particulate matter (PM) emissions maps from in situ PM concentration measurements. In support of MAPM, a winter field campaign was conducted in New Zealand in 2019 (June to September) to obtain the measurements required to test and validate the MAPM methodology. Two different types of instruments measuring PM were deployed: ES-642 remote dust monitors (17 instruments) and Outdoor Dust Information Nodes (ODINs; 50 instruments). The measurement campaign was bracketed by two intercomparisons where all instruments were co-located, with a permanently installed tapered element oscillating membrane (TEOM) instrument, to determine any instrument biases. Changes in biases between the pre- and post-campaign intercomparisons were used to determine instrument drift over the campaign period. Once deployed, each ES-642 was co-located with an ODIN. In addition to the PM measurements, meteorological variables (temperature, pressure, wind speed, and wind direction) were measured at three automatic weather station (AWS) sites established as part of the campaign, with additional data being sourced from 27 further AWSs operated by other agencies. Vertical profile measurements were made with 12 radiosondes during two 24 h periods and complimented measurements made with a mini micropulse lidar and ceilometer. Here we present the data collected during the campaign and discuss the correction of the measurements made by various PM instruments. We find that when compared to measurements made with a simple linear correction, a correction based on environmental conditions improves the quality of measurements retrieved from ODINs but results in over-fitting and increases the uncertainties when applied to the more sophisticated ES-642 instruments. We also compare PM2.5 and PM10 measured by ODINs which, in some cases, allows us to identify PM from natural and anthropogenic sources. The PM data collected during the campaign are publicly available from https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4542559 (Dale et al., 2020b), and the data from other instruments are available from https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4536640 (Dale et al., 2020a).
Journal:
Earth System Science Data
Volume:
13
Issue:
5
Pages:
2053–2075
DOI:
10.5194/essd-13-2053-2021
Submitted:
11 September 2020
Accepted:
12 March 2021
Published:
18 May 2021
PDF:
PDF document
BibTeX: @article{dale2021,
  journal={Earth System Science Data},
  year={2021},
  volume={13},
  issue={5},
  pages={2053-2075},
  doi={10.5194/essd-13-2053-2021},
  url={https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-2053-2021},
  author={Dale, Ethan R. and Kremser, Stefanie and Tradowsky, Jordis S. and Bodeker, Greg E. and Bird, Leroy J. and Olivares, Gustavo and Coulson, Guy and Somervell, Elizabeth and Pattinson, Woodrow and Barte, Jonathan and Schmidt, Jan-Niklas and Abrahim, Nariefa and McDonald, Adrian J. and Kuma, Peter},
  title={The winter 2019 air pollution (PM$_{2.5}$) measurement campaign in Christchurch, New Zealand}
}