Author(s)

Raghava R. Kommalapati^1,2*, Md Tarkik Shahriar^1,2, Venkata S. V. Botlaguduru¹, Hongbo Du¹, Ziaul Huque^1,3

¹Center for Energy & Environmental Sustainability, Prairie View A & M University, Prairie View, USA.
²Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Prairie View A & M University, Prairie View, USA.
³Department of Mechanical Engineering, Prairie View A & M University, Prairie View, USA.

The goal of this study is to analyze the relative contribution of different emission source categories to ozone in the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) area of Texas. Emission Processing System (EPS3) is used to prepare the emission files for five different source combination cases (Base case, Biogenic, Area + Biogenic, Mobile + Biogenic, Low-level Point + Biogenic). These emission files are used to perform photochemical modeling with Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions (CAMx), and the results are analyzed with Visual Environment for Rich Data Interpretation (VERDI) tool. The daily maximum ozone concentrations and individual contributions of the source categories were analyzed over a 15-day study period between June 1-15, 2012, at three locations (University of Houston-Sugarland, Bayland Park and Conroe). Biogenic sources contributed an average of 49.7% ± 12.8%, 43.1% ± 12.0%, and 39.9% ± 9.28% at Sugarland, Bayland Park and Conroe sites respectively, indicating the significance of isoprene emissions from the vegetation in northeast Houston. On peak ozone days, contribution of Mobile + Biogenic source category averages about 80.1% ± 12.6%, 79.9% ± 6.50%, and 75.9% ± 10.9% at Sugarland, Bayland Park and Conroe sites respectively, indicating the dominance of mobile source NOX emissions and the necessity for regulatory focus on mobile source emissions control.

Ozone, Houston, CAMx, Biogenic, Mobile Sources

Kommalapati, R. , Shahriar, M. , Botlaguduru, V. , Du, H. and Huque, Z. (2018) Relative Contribution of Different Source Categories to Ozone Exceedances in the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria Area. Journal of Environmental Protection, 9, 847-858. doi: 10.4236/jep.2018.98052.