← Air events

Regional secondary PM Possible

2003-01-30 Springfield, MA regional secondary-particle pollution episode

January 30, 2003

Daily PM2.5 peaked at 51.1 µg/m³ near Springfield across 1 covered metro home to 464,151 people.

Why we think this happened

The basis for “Regional secondary PM”

EPA's exact-date CSN sample for Springfield, MA shows ammonium sulfate plus ammonium nitrate made up 60.8% of reconstructed PM2.5 mass. This supports regional secondary-particle pollution as a possible mechanism for this place only.

Possible This is a transparent hypothesis supported by limited evidence or an explicit inference, not a definitive attribution.

U.S. EPA AirData Chemical Speciation Network · Jan 30, 2003 hypothesis

Springfield, MA PM2.5 composition on 2003-01-30

EPA's exact-date CSN sample reconstructed 15.5 µg/m³ of PM2.5. Ammonium sulfate and ammonium nitrate contributed 9.4 µg/m³, or 60.8% of reconstructed mass; every usable site exceeded 50%.

Inference, not direct attribution

Same-day particle composition: EPA speciation observations on the peak date show a majority secondary-inorganic aerosol signature. This supports a regional secondary-particle mechanism, not a single emitting source.

See every retained source and limitation ↓

Evidence path

From source to city

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.

Open the evidence ledger ↓
  1. 1

    Source or mechanism

    Pattern-based explanation

    Same-day particle composition. EPA speciation observations on the peak date show a majority secondary-inorganic aerosol signature. This supports a regional secondary-particle mechanism, not a single emitting source.

    Inferred
  2. 2

    Air-mass movement

    The transport path has not been reconstructed

    The retained record does not yet show how air traveled from the proposed source to these metros. A trajectory replay or dated plume analysis belongs here.

    Research gap
  3. 3

    Local response

    51.1 µg/m³ near Springfield

    EPA monitors recorded the event across 1 metro. The peak daily concentration is roughly 2.3 cigarette-equivalents at the outdoor daily rate.

    Inspect the pollutant and weather signals ↓
    Documented

Event autopsy

What the instruments saw

Before, during, and after the episode: nearby pollutant monitors and surface-weather stations show what changed. This context tests the “Regional secondary PM” explanation; it does not assign the cause by itself.

Observed context · not attribution

Springfield, MA

Monitor comparison window 2003-01-27 to 2003-02-02 · PM2.5 target: LIBERTY ST PARKING LOT

5 pollutant signals
Fine-particle pulse 49.5 µg/m³

249% above nearby days

Air movement 3 kt median wind

5 kt maximum

What observers saw 6 mi minimum visibility

0 hours at or below 3 miles

Pollution fingerprint

Metro-wide median of reporting monitors
PM2.5 49.5 µg/m³

249% higher than surrounding days

Before12.3 µg/m³ Event49.5 µg/m³ After13.7 µg/m³
3 monitors · 24 HOUR
Carbon monoxide 1.76 ppm

169% higher than surrounding days

Before0.652 ppm Event1.76 ppm After0.594 ppm
2 monitors · 1 HOUR
Nitrogen dioxide 31.6 ppb

50% higher than surrounding days

Before27.9 ppb Event31.6 ppb After8.73 ppb
3 monitors · 1 HOUR
Sulfur dioxide 18 ppb

63% higher than surrounding days

Before11 ppb Event18 ppb After7.20 ppb
2 monitors · 1 HOUR
Ozone 0.012 ppm

50% lower than surrounding days

Before0.015 ppm Event0.012 ppm After0.028 ppm
2 monitors · 8-HR RUN AVG BEGIN HOUR

Atmospheric conditions

CHICOPEE/WESTOVER, 10.5 km from the PM2.5 target
Wind 3 kt median

5 kt maximum · No calm observed hours

Visibility 6 mi minimum

0 observed hours at or below 3 miles

Temperature 21.2°F median

-2.2°F to 28.4°F

Humidity 79% median

92% maximum

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.

Views from the selected metro

Camera views near

Browse the camera map →

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.

Affected metros

MetroPeak PM2.5Cigarettes, whole eventPeak dayAll-time standing
Springfield, MA 51.1 µg/m³ 2.3 Jan 30, 2003 #12 of its top days

"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

Springfield, MA PM2.5 composition on 2003-01-30

U.S. EPA AirData Chemical Speciation Network

EPA's exact-date CSN sample reconstructed 15.5 µg/m³ of PM2.5. Ammonium sulfate and ammonium nitrate contributed 9.4 µg/m³, or 60.8% of reconstructed mass; every usable site exceeded 50%.

What it supports

This source supports a possible mechanism or occurrence; it does not establish the cause by itself.

Limit

Chemical composition identifies the measured aerosol mechanism, not a particular emitting facility or source region.

What remains uncertain

Status and provenance

Possible This 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.