2002-11-30 San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA stagnant mixed-pollution episode
November 30, 2002
Daily PM2.5 peaked at 76.7 µg/m³ near San Francisco across
1 covered metro home to 4.6 million people.
Counting the extra PM2.5 above each metro's typical day, this event handed the
average affected resident ≈ 3.0 cigarettes.
Across everyone living in the affected metros, that is the collective equivalent of
≈ 14 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 “Stagnant pollution mixture”
NWS San Francisco documented a flat surface-pressure pattern, weakening offshore flow, boundary-layer saturation, and calm stable air on the exact event date. This supports stagnant accumulation as a possible mechanism for the Bay Area place-first child; the same evidence does not cover Sacramento, which remains unresolved.
PossibleThis is a transparent hypothesis supported by limited evidence or an explicit inference, not a definitive attribution.
National Weather Service San Francisco Bay Area via Iowa Environmental Mesonet · Nov 30, 2002hypothesis
NWS San Francisco reported weakening offshore flow, a flat surface-pressure pattern, increasing low-level moisture and boundary-layer saturation, and calm stable air conducive to inland valley fog.
Inference, not direct attribution
documented_stagnation_overlap_possible.v1: This inference is recorded in the catalog methodology.
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.
documented_stagnation_overlap_possible.v1. This inference is recorded in the catalog methodology.
Inferred
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
Local response
76.7 µg/m³ near San Francisco
EPA monitors recorded the event across 1 metro.
The peak daily concentration is roughly 3.5 cigarette-equivalents at the outdoor daily rate.
Before, during, and after the episode: nearby pollutant monitors and surface-weather
stations show what changed. This context tests the “Stagnant pollution mixture” explanation; it does
not assign the cause by itself.
Observed context · not attribution
San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA
Monitor comparison window 2002-11-27 to 2002-12-03 · PM2.5 target: Concord
5 pollutant signals
Fine-particle pulse75.8 µg/m³
73% above nearby days
Air movement1.96 kt
11% lower than surrounding days
Carbon monoxide1.18 ppm
About the same as surrounding days
Pollution fingerprint
Metro-wide median of reporting monitors
PM2.575.8 µg/m³
73% higher than surrounding days
Before40.7 µg/m³ Event75.8 µg/m³ After43.8 µg/m³
Carbon monoxide1.18 ppm
About the same as surrounding days
Before1.16 ppm Event1.18 ppm After1.31 ppm
Nitrogen dioxide30.1 ppb
About the same as surrounding days
Before31.2 ppb Event30.1 ppb After31.3 ppb
Sulfur dioxide2.58 ppb
About the same as surrounding days
Before3.09 ppb Event2.58 ppb After2.43 ppb
Ozone0.006 ppm
29% lower than surrounding days
Before0.010 ppm Event0.006 ppm After0.009 ppm
Atmospheric conditions
Nearby EPA weather observations
Humidity72.7 %
About the same as surrounding days
Temperature52.8 °F
About the same as surrounding days
Wind1.96 kt
11% lower than 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
Area Forecast Discussion: calm, stable Bay Area boundary layer
National Weather Service San Francisco Bay Area via Iowa Environmental Mesonet
NWS San Francisco reported weakening offshore flow, a flat surface-pressure pattern, increasing low-level moisture and boundary-layer saturation, and calm stable air conducive to inland valley fog.
What it supports
This source supports a possible mechanism or occurrence; it does not establish the cause by itself.
Limit
The discussion does not mention PM2.5 or identify the accumulated emissions mixture.
What remains uncertain
The mechanism estimate is capped at possible, and Sacramento remains unresolved rather than inheriting Bay Area evidence.
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.