← Air events

Stagnant pollution mixture Possible

2002-11-30 Sacramento--Roseville--Arden-Arcade, CA stagnant mixed-pollution episode

November 30, 2002

Daily PM2.5 peaked at 91 µg/m³ near Sacramento across 1 covered metro home to 2.5 million people.

Counting the extra PM2.5 above each metro's typical day, this event handed the average affected resident ≈ 3.7 cigarettes. Across everyone living in the affected metros, that is the collective equivalent of ≈ 9.2 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”

Exact-date NWS meteorology documents a persistent blocking and valley-fog setting, while Sacramento-specific winter research identifies the recurring mixed aerosol accumulated in those conditions. Neither source apportions the 2002 daily value, so the estimate is possible only.

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

California Air Resources Board / Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association · Sep 1, 1999 hypothesis

Wintertime PM2.5 and PM10 Source Apportionment at Sacramento, California

A Sacramento-specific winter source-apportionment study found that peak fine-particle days reflected a mixture of secondary ammonium nitrate, motor-vehicle exhaust, and residential wood smoke under cool, low-wind, low-inversion conditions.

Inference, not direct attribution

local_seasonal_profile_with_exact_trapping_possible.v1: This inference is recorded in the catalog methodology.

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

    local_seasonal_profile_with_exact_trapping_possible.v1. This inference is recorded in the catalog methodology.

    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

    91 µg/m³ near Sacramento

    EPA monitors recorded the event across 1 metro. The peak daily concentration is roughly 4.1 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 “Stagnant pollution mixture” explanation; it does not assign the cause by itself.

Observed context · not attribution

Sacramento--Roseville--Arden-Arcade, CA

Monitor comparison window 2002-11-27 to 2002-12-03 · PM2.5 target: Sacramento Health Department-Stockton Blvd.

6 pollutant signals
Fine-particle pulse 78 µg/m³

18% above nearby days

Air movement 1.64 kt

16% lower than surrounding days

PM10 42.5 µg/m³

18% higher than surrounding days

Pollution fingerprint

Metro-wide median of reporting monitors
PM2.5 78 µg/m³

18% higher than surrounding days

Before66 µg/m³ Event78 µg/m³ After47 µg/m³
6 monitors · 24 HOUR
PM10 42.5 µg/m³

18% higher than surrounding days

Before36.5 µg/m³ Event42.5 µg/m³ After33.5 µg/m³
2 monitors · 24-HR BLK AVG
Carbon monoxide 0.950 ppm

About the same as surrounding days

Before0.980 ppm Event0.950 ppm After0.887 ppm
10 monitors · 1 HOUR
Nitrogen dioxide 18.7 ppb

17% lower than surrounding days

Before24.5 ppb Event18.7 ppb After22.7 ppb
9 monitors · 1 HOUR
Sulfur dioxide 2.22 ppb

20% higher than surrounding days

Before1.80 ppb Event2.22 ppb After1.85 ppb
2 monitors · 1 HOUR
Ozone 0.011 ppm

31% lower than surrounding days

Before0.018 ppm Event0.011 ppm After0.016 ppm
12 monitors · 8-HR RUN AVG BEGIN HOUR

Atmospheric conditions

Nearby EPA weather observations
Humidity 76.5 %

About the same as surrounding days

Pressure 1009 Millibars

About the same as surrounding days

Temperature 48.8 °F

About the same as surrounding days

Wind 1.64 kt

16% 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.

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
Sacramento--Roseville--Arden-Arcade, CA 91 µg/m³ 4.1 Nov 30, 2002 #21 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.

2 retained sources

Official record

Area Forecast Discussion: persistent blocking pattern and valley fog

National Weather Service Sacramento via Iowa Environmental Mesonet

NWS Sacramento described a persistent blocking pattern over northern California, patchy valley fog, and high pressure expected to regain control during the Sacramento event window.

What it supports

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

Limit

The discussion documents a weak-ventilation setting but does not directly connect it to the PM2.5 measurement.

Scientific research

Wintertime PM2.5 and PM10 Source Apportionment at Sacramento, California

California Air Resources Board / Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

A Sacramento-specific winter source-apportionment study found that peak fine-particle days reflected a mixture of secondary ammonium nitrate, motor-vehicle exhaust, and residential wood smoke under cool, low-wind, low-inversion conditions.

What it supports

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

Limit

The study analyzed winter samples from 1991 through 1996, not the November 30, 2002 filter.

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.