2001-06-30 Rochester, NY and Syracuse, NY mixed-source pollution episode
June 30, 2001
Daily PM2.5 peaked at 39.9 µg/m³ near Rochester across
2 covered metros home to 1.7 million people.
Counting the extra PM2.5 above each metro's typical day, this event handed the
average affected resident ≈ 1.5 cigarettes.
Across everyone living in the affected metros, that is the collective equivalent of
≈ 2.6 million cigarettes.
An awareness illustration of outdoor exposure at 22 µg/m³
per cigarette (Berkeley Earth), counting only the event's ranked days; not a
medical dose.
Why we think this happened
The basis for “Mixed causes”
NASA documented a large exact-period aerosol shroud and poor-air advisories over the eastern U.S., while explicitly describing the aerosol as a possible mixture of pollution and smoke.
PossibleThis is a transparent hypothesis supported by limited evidence or an explicit inference, not a definitive attribution.
NASA imaged an aerosol shroud over much of the eastern United States during June 26-29 poor-air advisories and described it as potentially containing pollution and smoke.
A cause is more convincing when the record connects three things: something happened,
the air mass moved toward the region, and local instruments responded. Here is how much
of that chain is documented for this event.
The catalog has a grouping hypothesis, but no retained source directly establishes the proposed cause.
Open question
2
Air-mass movement
Transport into the affected region is documented
NASA imaged an aerosol shroud over much of the eastern United States during June 26-29 poor-air advisories and described it as potentially containing pollution and smoke.
Before, during, and after the episode: nearby pollutant monitors and surface-weather
stations show what changed. This context tests the “Mixed causes” explanation; it does
not assign the cause by itself.
Observed context · not attribution
Rochester, NY
Monitor comparison window 2001-06-27 to 2001-07-03
4 pollutant signals
Fine-particle pulse39.3 µg/m³
7% above nearby days
Air movement3.83 kt
54% higher than surrounding days
Carbon monoxide0.392 ppm
About the same as surrounding days
Pollution fingerprint
Metro-wide median of reporting monitors
PM2.539.3 µg/m³
7% higher than surrounding days
Before36.9 µg/m³ Event39.3 µg/m³ After8.50 µg/m³
Carbon monoxide0.392 ppm
About the same as surrounding days
Before0.429 ppm Event0.392 ppm After0.285 ppm
Sulfur dioxide5.19 ppb
11% lower than surrounding days
Before6.54 ppb Event5.19 ppb After5.85 ppb
Ozone0.075 ppm
91% higher than surrounding days
Before0.073 ppm Event0.075 ppm After0.025 ppm
Atmospheric conditions
Nearby EPA weather observations
Humidity64 %
About the same as surrounding days
Pressure995 Millibars
About the same as surrounding days
Temperature81.2 °F
8% higher than surrounding days
Wind3.83 kt
54% higher than surrounding days
Syracuse, NY
Monitor comparison window 2001-06-27 to 2001-07-03 · PM2.5 target: ELMWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
4 pollutant signals
Fine-particle pulse37.5 µg/m³
11% above nearby days
Air movement4.77 kt
About the same as surrounding days
Carbon monoxide0.454 ppm
About the same as surrounding days
Pollution fingerprint
Metro-wide median of reporting monitors
PM2.537.5 µg/m³
11% higher than surrounding days
Before33.6 µg/m³ Event37.5 µg/m³ After6.50 µg/m³
Carbon monoxide0.454 ppm
About the same as surrounding days
Before0.563 ppm Event0.454 ppm After0.250 ppm
Sulfur dioxide3.04 ppb
16% higher than surrounding days
Before3.35 ppb Event3.04 ppb After1.23 ppb
Ozone0.064 ppm
71% higher than surrounding days
Before0.063 ppm Event0.064 ppm After0.030 ppm
Atmospheric conditions
Nearby EPA weather observations
Humidity76.2 %
About the same as surrounding days
Pressure976 Millibars
About the same as surrounding days
Temperature75.4 °F
7% higher than surrounding days
Wind4.77 kt
About the same as surrounding days
Source: U.S. EPA AirData daily observations and, where available, nearby ASOS/AWOS
surface observations. Values are descriptive medians over the retained monitor set;
missing measurements remain missing. Transport and source evidence remain separate
layers because this instrument pattern does not assign a cause by itself.
Measured daily PM2.5 at EPA monitors, as cigarette-equivalents
EPA monitors sit in metro areas, so the colour clusters there. Land between and beyond
them is unmeasured, not clean: this map shows where IAQng has readings, not the extent
of the smoke.
—
Episode peak
--cigarettes
The smoke map's scale, replayed over this event: the surface interpolates between
covered metros' daily records, framed to the affected region. Hover for a reading,
click a metro to pin it to the card. Days a monitor did not report draw nothing.
Select a metro on the map to see nearby cameras. Where an operator archive reaches
the event, drag the divider to compare two moments, adjust either date and time, or
play the available event-day frames. Camera imagery is visual context, not an
air-quality measurement or proof of smoke.
No useful public camera views are currently available within 80 km of this metro.
"Cigarettes, whole event" totals a metro's ranked event days at 22 µg/m³ per
cigarette: what a person outdoors there breathed across the event, as the
illustration. "All-time standing" is where this episode's days sit in each metro's
ranked record (worst-area measure, since 1999). Full local context is on each
metro's Air Records page.
Public evidence library
What supports this account
Each card states what a source supports—and what it does not. Official records, research, reporting, community observations, and transparent inferences remain visibly different kinds of evidence.
1 retained source
Official record
Code Red Air over the Mid-Atlantic States
NASA Earth Observatory
NASA imaged an aerosol shroud over much of the eastern United States during June 26-29 poor-air advisories and described it as potentially containing pollution and smoke.
What it supports
This source supports a possible mechanism or occurrence; it does not establish the cause by itself.
Limit
The source does not separate smoke from anthropogenic aerosol or prove surface attribution at every affected metro.
What remains uncertain
The evidence supports a regional mixed-aerosol hypothesis only at possible confidence.
Status and provenance
PossibleThis is a transparent hypothesis supported by limited evidence or an explicit inference, not a definitive attribution.
This episode was grouped from the monitor record by the catalog pipeline and given
its cause from the evidence listed above. It has not been individually reviewed and
signed off, so its boundaries, cause, and name may change as evidence accumulates.
Grouping policy common_sense_root_cause_grouping.v2. The cause label reflects the
assembled evidence above, not an IAQng detection formula. If it is wrong,
tell us.