← Air events

Temperature inversion Possible

2001-01-06 Provo-Orem, UT temperature-inversion pollution episode

January 6, 2001

Daily PM2.5 peaked at 74 µg/m³ near Provo across 1 covered metro home to 760,531 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 ≈ 2.3 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 “Temperature inversion”

NWS Salt Lake City documented stagnant conditions in northern Utah valleys and existing valley inversions on the exact event date, with insufficient mixing expected to clear them. This supports inversion trapping as the episode mechanism but does not identify the contributing particle sources.

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

National Weather Service Salt Lake City via Iowa Environmental Mesonet · Jan 6, 2001 hypothesis

Utah Area Forecast Discussion: stagnant valley inversions

NWS Salt Lake City reported another several days of stagnant northern-Utah valley conditions, explicitly described valley inversions, and said the weak disturbance was unlikely to provide enough mixing to clear them.

Inference, not direct attribution

Documented inversion overlap: The event overlaps a documented inversion period, but the retained material does not directly attribute the measured PM2.5 episode.

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

    Documented inversion overlap. The event overlaps a documented inversion period, but the retained material does not directly attribute the measured PM2.5 episode.

    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

    74 µg/m³ near Provo

    EPA monitors recorded the event across 1 metro. The peak daily concentration is roughly 3.4 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 “Temperature inversion” explanation; it does not assign the cause by itself.

Observed context · not attribution

Provo-Orem, UT

Monitor comparison window 2001-01-03 to 2001-01-09 · PM2.5 target: Lindon

4 pollutant signals
Fine-particle pulse 74 µg/m³

50% above nearby days

PM10 100 µg/m³

15% higher than surrounding days

Pollution fingerprint

Metro-wide median of reporting monitors
PM2.5 74 µg/m³

50% higher than surrounding days

Before54.4 µg/m³ Event74 µg/m³ After44.5 µg/m³
4 monitors · 24 HOUR
PM10 100 µg/m³

15% higher than surrounding days

Before87 µg/m³ Event100 µg/m³ After72 µg/m³
2 monitors · 24 HOUR
Carbon monoxide 2.15 ppm

6% higher than surrounding days

Before1.85 ppm Event2.15 ppm After2.12 ppm
3 monitors · 1 HOUR
Nitrogen dioxide 60.5 ppb

24% higher than surrounding days

Before41.1 ppb Event60.5 ppb After50.5 ppb
1 monitor · 1 HOUR

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
Provo-Orem, UT 74 µg/m³ 3.4 Jan 6, 2001 #23 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

Utah Area Forecast Discussion: stagnant valley inversions

National Weather Service Salt Lake City via Iowa Environmental Mesonet

NWS Salt Lake City reported another several days of stagnant northern-Utah valley conditions, explicitly described valley inversions, and said the weak disturbance was unlikely to provide enough mixing to clear them.

What it supports

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

Limit

The discussion is regional to northern Utah valleys and does not name the Provo PM2.5 monitor.

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.