Jondaryan Dust Monitoring Program - Queensland€¦ · March 2014 to April 2015 monitoring report...

Jondaryan Dust Monitoring

Program

March 2014 to April 2015 monitoring report

November 2015

Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation

Prepared by

Rhiannon Tooker, Don Neale, David Wainwright, Steven Torr, Ronald Musenze, Brian Davis, Russell Harper, Daniel

Harvest, Esther O’Brien

Air Quality Monitoring

Science Delivery Division


PO Box 5078

Brisbane QLD 4001

© The State of Queensland (Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation) 2015

The Queensland Government supports and encourages the dissemination and exchange of its information. The

copyright in this publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia (CC BY) licence

Under this licence you are free, without having to seek permission from DSITI, to use this publication in accordance with the licence terms. You must keep intact the copyright notice and attribute the State of Queensland, Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation as the source of the publication.

For more information on this licence visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en

Image on cover: © Ray Cash Photography

Disclaimer

This document has been prepared with all due diligence and care, based on the best available information at the time of

publication. The department holds no responsibility for any errors or omissions within this document. Any decisions made

by other parties based on this document are solely the responsibility of those parties. Information contained in this

document is from a number of sources and, as such, does not necessarily represent government or departmental policy.

If you need to access this document in a language other than English, please call the Translating and Interpreting

Service (TIS National) on 131 450 and ask them to telephone Library Services on +61 7 3170 5725

Acknowledgements

This report has been prepared by the Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation. Acknowledgement

is made of assistance with sample collection and routine equipment maintenance provided by the Department of

Environment and Heritage Protection officers based in Toowoomba.

November 2015

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/

Jondaryan Dust Monitoring Program: March 2014 to April 2015 monitoring report

i

Executive summary

Residents of Jondaryan, a community of around 400 people located 40 kilometres north west of

Toowoomba, have expressed concerns about coal dust pollution from New Hope Group’s New

Acland Coal Mine and rail loading facility operations. The rail loading facility and coal stockpile is

situated less than one kilometre from Jondaryan township.

In March 2014 the Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation (DSITI)

commenced an investigation into ambient air particle levels in the Jondaryan community. The

primary objective of the investigation is to collect information on particle exposure experienced by

Jondaryan residents and to assess the contribution to overall particle concentrations from the rail

loading facility. The monitoring station is located where the highest community impacts of any

particle emissions from the rail loading facility would be expected to occur.

The investigation focuses on acquiring data to assess both health and nuisance impacts in the

community, together with the determination of the contribution of coal dust and other particle types

to overall dust levels. The monitoring program collects information on:

total suspended particles (TSP) – for assessment against amenity-based (nuisance) criteria

PM10 (particles less than 10 micrometres in diameter) and PM2.5 (particles less than 2.5

micrometres in diameter) concentrations – for assessment against criteria for protection of

human health

particle composition of TSP and deposited dust – for assessment of the contribution of coal and

other particle types to overall dust levels

meteorology (e.g. wind speed and direction) – for identifying particle sources

This report summarises the monitoring results obtained by DSITI over the period from when the

station was established in Jondaryan on 12 March 2014 to the end of April 2015.

Particle measurements during this period indicate that ambient PM2.5 concentrations in the

Jondaryan community complied with human health protection criteria, while TSP and PM10

concentrations exceeded dust nuisance and human health protection guidelines respectively on a

number of occasions over this period. Levels of deposited dust exceeded the dust nuisance

guideline for one monthly sample only during the reporting period.

Daily TSP concentrations at Jondaryan exceeded the trigger level for dust nuisance of

80 micrograms per cubic metre (µg/m3) recommended by the Department of Environment and

Heritage Protection (EHP) on 36 days between 12 March 2014 and 30 April 2015. Twelve-month

average TSP concentrations however complied with the Environmental Protection (Air) Policy 2008

(EPP Air) annual objective of 90 µg/m3. For every period where the TSP dust nuisance trigger level

was exceeded, analysis of the data shows that multiple dust sources contributed to the

exceedence occurring. The amount of TSP coming from the direction of the rail loading facility

during these periods ranged from 0.0 to 46.8 per cent of the total TSP measured at the monitoring

station. Short periods of very high TSP concentrations were often responsible for the exceedence

of the dust nuisance trigger level.

Daily PM10 concentrations at Jondaryan exceeded the EPP Air 24-hour objective for protection of

human health of 50 µg/m3 on nine days between 12 March 2014 and 30 April 2015. The number of

exceedences was greater than the five days in a 12-month period permitted under the EPP Air. On

each of the nine days that the EPP Air objective was exceeded, the TSP dust nuisance trigger

level was also exceeded, indicating that the same dust sources were most likely responsible for


ii

both the PM10 and TSP guideline exceedences. The amount of PM10 associated with winds from

the direction of the rail loading facility during periods when the EPP Air 24-hour objective was

exceeded ranged from 4.0 to 44.1 per cent of the total PM10 measured at the monitoring station.

The EPP Air PM2.5 objectives for protection of human health and wellbeing were not exceeded at

the monitoring station at any time between 12 March 2014 and 30 April 2015.

Dust deposition rates at the Jondaryan monitoring site were generally around half of the dust

nuisance guideline value of 120 mg/m2/day recommended by EHP. Higher deposition rates were

measured in August 2014 and October to December 2014, although only the October 2014

deposition rate of 146 mg/m2/day exceeded the guideline value recommended by EHP. The higher

deposited dust levels coincided with the period when major road works were taking place on the

Warrego Highway, and this source was the most likely cause for increased dust emissions in the

vicinity of the monitoring station at these times.

Soil and rock particles have been found to be the major particle type present in deposited dust and

TSP collected at the monitoring site. Soil and rock dust made up between 50 and 80 per cent of all

particles in deposited dust samples and 60 to 100 per cent in the TSP samples. Coal dust was

present at levels between 2 and 30 per cent in deposited dust samples and up to 20 per cent in

TSP samples. The coal dust content was found to generally align with the proportion of winds

coming from the direction of the rail loading facility and coal stockpile during the sample collection

period, indicating that particle emissions from coal handling operations do impact on the monitoring

station under favourable meteorological conditions. However, it is also possible that some of the

coal identified in the particle samples could have originated from re-suspension of surface dust

containing coal in the vicinity of the monitoring station rather than all the coal dust originating from

the rail loading facility or coal stockpile.

The monitoring results obtained between March 2014 and April 2015 have identified windblown

dust from bare or sparsely vegetated ground during dry conditions, unsealed local roads and other

activities involving ground disturbance as the main contributor to episodes when particle levels

exceeded guideline values for protection of human health or avoidance of dust nuisance at the

monitoring station. Dust emissions from Warrego Highway road works appear to have been a

significant contributor to a number of the particle guideline exceedences recorded between July

and December 2014. While particle composition analysis shows that emissions from the rail

loading facility and coal stockpile do impact on the monitoring station, the conclusion drawn from

analysis of the monitoring results is that emissions from coal handling operations are not of

sufficient magnitude to result in exceedences of guidelines for protection of human health

protection and dust nuisance avoidance in the Jondaryan community in the absence of emissions

from other dust sources at the same time.

As the monitoring results were significantly affected by additional dust emissions from road works

on the Warrego Highway between Jondaryan and the rail loading facility from July to December

2014, the monitoring program timeframe has been extended until December 2015 to obtain more

representative particle concentration data for the period from July to December.


iii

Contents

Executive summary ....................................................................................................................... i

Glossary of terms ........................................................................................................................ vi

Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1

Monitoring program design .......................................................................................................... 3

Results ........................................................................................................................................... 8

Meteorology 8

TSP 10

PM10 24

PM2.5 34

Deposited dust 41

Particle composition 43

Deposited dust 44

TSP 46

Conclusions ................................................................................................................................ 49

Appendix ..................................................................................................................................... 51


iv

List of tables

Table 1. Criteria used for assessing air quality at the Jondaryan monitoring station ........................ 4

Table 2. Proportion of winds recorded at the Jondaryan monitoring station blowing from the direction of the rail loading facility by wind speed ............................................................................ 9

Table 3. TSP concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015.............................................................................................................................................. 10

Table 4. TSP contribution from the direction of the rail loading facility during periods when rolling 24-hour average TSP concentrations exceeded 80 µg/m3 at the Jondaryan monitoring station between 12 March 2014 and 30 April 2015 ................................................................................... 22

Table 5. PM10 concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015.............................................................................................................................................. 24

Table 6. PM10 contribution from the direction of the rail loading facility during periods when rolling 24-hour average PM10 concentrations exceeded 50 µg/m3 at the Jondaryan monitoring station between 12 March 2014 and 30 April 2015 ................................................................................... 33

Table 7. PM2.5 concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015.............................................................................................................................................. 34

Table 8. Average daily dust deposition rates (mg/m2/day) at the Jondaryan monitoring station from March 2014 to April 2015 .............................................................................................................. 42

Table 9. Deposited dust particle composition analysis results for Jondaryan from March 2014 to April 2015 ..................................................................................................................................... 45

Table 10. TSP composition analysis results for Jondaryan from August 2014 to April 2015 .......... 47

Table 11. Monthly deposited dust sampling results for the Jondaryan monitoring site from March 2014 to April 2015 ......................................................................................................................... 51

Table 12. Deposited dust particle composition analysis results for Jondaryan from March 2014 to April 2015 ..................................................................................................................................... 52

Table 13. Weekly TSP particle composition analysis results for Jondaryan from 29 August 2014 to 01 May 2015 ................................................................................................................................. 54

List of figures

Figure 1. Monitoring station at Jondaryan ....................................................................................... 1

Figure 2. Road works at Jondaryan ................................................................................................ 2

Figure 3. Location of the Jondaryan monitoring station ................................................................... 6

Figure 4. Wind rose for Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March to 30 April 2015 .................... 8

Figure 5. Rainfall at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015 ........ 10

Figure 6. Daily average TSP concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015 .................................................................................................................... 11

Figure 7. Hourly and rolling 24-hour TSP concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015 .................................................................................................... 12


v

Figure 8. Pollution roses for periods when rolling 24-hour average TSP concentrations exceeded 80 µg/m3 at the Jondaryan monitoring station between 12 March 2014 and 30 April 2015 ............ 18

Figure 9. Daily average PM10 concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015 .................................................................................................................... 24

Figure 10. Hourly and rolling 24-hour PM10 concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015 .................................................................................................... 26

Figure 11. Pollution roses for periods when rolling 24-hour average PM10 concentrations exceeded 50 µg/m3 at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015 ..................... 31

Figure 12. Daily average PM2.5 concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015 .................................................................................................................... 35

Figure 13. Hourly and rolling 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015 ............................................................................................ 36

Figure 14. Insoluble dust deposition rates at the Jondaryan monitoring station from March 2014 to April 2015 ..................................................................................................................................... 41

Figure 15. Relationship between daily dust deposition rate and (a) the proportion of winds from the direction of the rail loading facility and (b) the proportion of winds greater than 4 m/s at the Jondaryan monitoring station from March 2014 to April 2015 ........................................................ 43

Figure 16. Deposited dust composition at the Jondaryan monitoring station from March 2014 to April 2015 ..................................................................................................................................... 45

Figure 17. TSP composition at the Jondaryan monitoring station from August 2014 to April 2015 48


vi

Glossary of terms

AS/NZS Australian Standard/New Zealand Standard

Ash The mass of the insoluble portion of particles deposited in a dust deposit gauge

which remains after heating the sample to a temperature of 850 degrees Celsius

for 30 minutes. This is an indication of the mineral content of the sample.

Combustible

matter

The mass of the insoluble portion of particles deposited in a dust deposit gauge

which is lost on heating the sample to a temperature of 850 degrees Celsius for

30 minutes. This is an indication of the amount of organic matter of the sample.

Deposited dust Particles collected in a dust deposit gauge which pass through a one millimetre

mesh sieve.

EHP Department of Environment and Heritage Protection.

DSITI Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation.

DSITIA Department of Science, Information Technology, Innovation and the Arts.

DTMR Department of Transport and Main Roads.

EPP Air Queensland Environmental Protection (Air) Policy 2008.

g/m2/30days Grams per square metre per 30 day period. A measure of the average mass of

particles settling on a unit area over a 30 day period.

Insoluble solids The mass of the insoluble portion of particles deposited in a dust deposit gauge.

µg Microgram (= one millionth of a gram).

µg/m3 Micrograms per cubic metre. A measure of the mass of particles suspended in a

unit volume of air.

µm Micrometre (= one millionth of a metre).

m/s Metres per second. A measure of wind speed.

mg Milligram (= one thousandth of a gram).

mg/m2/day Milligrams per square metre per day. A measure of the average mass of particles

settling on a unit area on a daily basis.

mm Millimetre (= one thousandth of a metre).

NZ MfE New Zealand Ministry for the Environment.

OCAA Oakey Coal Action Alliance.

Partisol™ Low volume sampler that collects suspended particles onto a 47 mm diameter

filter over discrete periods of time.

PM2.5 Atmospheric suspended particles with aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 µm.

PM10 Atmospheric suspended particles with aerodynamic diameter less than 10 µm.

Pollution rose A diagram representing the frequency distribution of a pollutant in relation to wind

direction on a polar coordinate map.

Soluble solids The mass of the soluble portion of particles deposited in a deposit gauge.

TEOM™ Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance instrument that measures particle

concentrations on a continuous basis.

Total solids The total mass of particles deposited in a dust deposit gauge (the sum of

insoluble and soluble solids fractions).

TSP Total suspended particles.

UQMP University of Queensland Materials Performance laboratory.


vii

Wind rose A diagram representing the frequency distribution of wind speed and direction on

a polar coordinate map. Wind direction is the direction the wind is blowing from.


viii


1

Introduction

Residents of Jondaryan, a community of around 400 people located 40 kilometres north west of

Toowoomba, have expressed concerns about air pollution by coal dust from New Hope Group’s

New Acland Coal Mine and rail loading facility operations. The rail loading facility is situated less

than one kilometre from Jondaryan township. Community concerns focus on the potential impacts

of dust generated by the rail loading facility operations on the health of people in the community

and the local amenity (i.e. dust nuisance).

These concerns were raised by the Oakey Coal Action Alliance (OCAA) at the Toowoomba

Community Cabinet meeting in November 2013. Following the meeting, the Department of

Environment and Heritage Protection (EHP) was requested to undertake an independent dust

monitoring investigation at Jondaryan to address these concerns. EHP commissioned the former

Department of Science, Information Technology, Innovation and the Arts (DSITIA), now the

Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation (DSITI), to develop a dust

monitoring program for the Jondaryan community that addressed issues raised by the OCAA.

The Jondaryan dust monitoring program developed by DSITI and EHP (described in this report)

uses two continuously measuring particle samplers, one seven-day particle sampler and one

monthly dust deposition collection bottle located at one monitoring station in the Jondaryan

community. Community representatives accepted the Jondaryan dust monitoring program proposal

at a meeting on 20 February 2014 during which the location of the residential monitoring station

was also selected. The monitoring station is situated where the highest community impacts from

any particle emissions from the rail loading facility would be expected to occur.

The two continuously measuring TEOM™ samplers

record concentrations of total suspended particles

(called TSP) to evaluate dust nuisance, and

particles concentrations less than 10 and 2.5

micrometres in diameter (called PM10 and PM2.5,

respectively) to evaluate health risk. TSP

concentrations are assessed against dust trigger

levels set by the New Zealand Ministry for the

Environment (NZ MfE) (as recommended in the

EHP publication Application requirements for

activities with impacts to air (Air Impacts

Guideline)1). PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations

measured at Jondaryan are assessed against

human health-based criteria in the Environmental

Protection (Air) Policy 2008 (EPP Air). A low-

volume Partisol™ sampler collects TSP particles

over seven-day periods when winds blow from the

direction of the rail loading facility, while the

amount of dust settling out is collected using a dust

deposition gauge over periods of one month. The

amount of dust deposited monthly is assessed

against the guideline recommended by EHP for

1 available at http://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/era/air-impacts-em960.

Figure 1. Monitoring station at Jondaryan


2

assessing dust nuisance potential. The seven-day TSP and monthly deposited dust samples

collected are analysed to determine the different types of particles present in the dust.

Continuous monitoring of TSP, PM10 and PM2.5 commenced in Jondaryan on 12 March 2014. Dust

deposition collection began on 13 March 2014 while TSP sample collection using the low-volume

sampler commenced on 29 August 2014. Hourly TSP, PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations and

meteorological parameters monitored at the site have been published on the Queensland

Government website2 since 19 April 2014.

The Jondaryan dust monitoring program was

initially planned to run for one year.

However, during the course of this study the

Department of Transport and Main Roads

(DTMR) began road works to upgrade a

section of the Warrego Highway located

between the rail loading facility and the

monitoring station. At times the road work

operations produced dust emissions (see

Figure 2) which likely compromised the

measurements at the monitoring site when

winds were blowing from the direction of the

rail loading facility. The road works

commenced in July 2014 and were

completed in December 2014. For this

reason a decision was made to extend the

monitoring program through to December 2015 to provide a dataset for the months of July to

December which is not impacted by road works.

This report details the results of the Jondaryan dust monitoring program for the period from March

2014 to April 2015. The monitoring program is ongoing and measurement data collected between

May 2015 and the end of the investigation period will be presented in a subsequent report.

2 available at www.ehp.qld.gov.au/air/data/search

Figure 2. Road works at Jondaryan


3

Monitoring program design

Particles of different sizes are continuously monitored at Jondaryan. Generally, airborne particle

sizes range from half a millimetre to less than 0.1 micrometres (µm) in diameter (one millimetre is

equal to 1000 micrometres). TSP refers to total suspended particles and is a measure of the total

amount of particles in the air. PM10 and PM2.5 refer to particles that are less than 10 and 2.5

micrometres in diameter, respectively.

TSP and PM10 particles are produced from various sources including mechanical processes (e.g.

earthworks and windblown dust) and combustion processes (e.g. motor vehicle engines, industrial

boilers and bushfires). PM2.5 particles are primarily produced by combustion processes.

There are different reasons for monitoring different particle sizes in this program. Small particles

can have impacts on human health; PM10 and PM2.5 are small enough to pass through the upper

respiratory tract and penetrate past the larynx and into the lower airways. Particles larger than

20 micrometres in diameter settle relatively quickly after being emitted and are most commonly

associated with dust nuisance effects, although particles of any size in sufficient quantities can

cause dust nuisance problems by settling and soiling property.

The Jondaryan dust monitoring program is concerned with both human health and amenity in the

community. To assess air quality in Jondaryan with regard to these two concerns, the monitoring

program collects information on:

TSP – for assessment against amenity-based (nuisance) criteria

PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations – for assessment against criteria for protection of human health

particle composition of TSP and deposited dust – for assessment of the contribution of coal and

other particle types to overall dust levels

meteorology (e.g. wind speed and direction) – for identifying particle sources

There are no national or State criteria for short-term TSP concentrations and the Department of

Environment and Heritage Protection (EHP) recommends the use of trigger levels set by the New

Zealand Ministry for the Environment (NZ MfE) for assessment of likely dust nuisance.3 As such,

short-term TSP concentrations recorded at Jondaryan were compared against the NZ MfE 24-hour

trigger level for sensitive areas of 80 µg/m3 (micrograms per cubic metre). The Environmental

Protection (Air) Policy 2008 (EPP Air)4 annual objective for TSP is 90 µg/m3.

Short-term (24-hour averages) PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations monitored at Jondaryan were

compared against health-based objectives contained in the EPP Air. The EPP Air 24-hour

objective for PM10 is 50 µg/m3, with the objective not to be exceeded on more than five days in a

12 month period. The EPP Air 24-hour objective for PM2.5 is 25 µg/m3 and the annual objective for

PM2.5 is 8 µg/m3. There are no health-based PM10 or PM2.5 guidelines for averaging periods shorter

than 24 hours. While monitoring data for shorter periods was collected by the program, it is not

possible to assess health impacts for shorter periods in the absence of recognised criteria.

Deposited dust levels are compared to the 120 mg/m2/day (or 3.6 g/m2/30days) limit for dust levels

recommended in the EHP guideline document Application requirements for activities with impacts

3 Ministry for the Environment, Good practice guide for assessing and managing the environmental effects of dust

emissions, Government of New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand, September 2001, available at

www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/dust-guide-sep01.pdf. 4 available at www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/CURRENT/E/EnvProtAirPo08.pdf


4

to air (Air Impacts Guideline)5, which is applied to the insoluble solids fraction of the deposited dust

collected. There are no criteria for specific particle types present in deposited dust samples.

The criteria for assessing the particle concentrations and deposited dust levels monitored at

Jondaryan are summarised in Table 1.

Table 1. Criteria used for assessing air quality at the Jondaryan monitoring station

Substance Criteria and period Environmental value Criteria source

PM10 50 µg/m3, averaged over 24 hours, not to be

exceeded on more than five days each year

Health and wellbeing EPP Air

PM2.5 25 µg/m3, averaged over 24 hours Health and wellbeing EPP Air

8 µg/m3, averaged over one year Health and wellbeing EPP Air

TSP 80 µg/m3, averaged over 24 hours Nuisance effects NZ MfE

90 µg/m3, averaged over one year Health and wellbeing EPP Air

Deposited dust 120 mg/m2/day, averaged over 30 days Nuisance effects EHP

For 24-hour average air quality criteria, calendar day average (calculated using hourly averages)

particle concentrations are generally used to assess compliance with air quality criteria6. This

report adopts this approach when assessing compliance with 24-hour air quality criteria. However,

rolling 24-hour average (i.e. 24-hour concentrations calculated for each hour of the study period

using hourly average concentrations for the previous 24 hours) and hourly average particle

concentrations are also used to assist with identifying sources of elevated particle concentrations

measured at the Jondaryan monitoring station.

Continuous TSP concentrations (averaged over five minute periods) are monitored using a Model

1405 Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance (TEOM™). The TEOM™ instrument draws air

through an inlet designed to sample total suspended particles at the flow rate of the instrument

(16.7 L/min). The particle stream then passes through a filter mounted on a glass tube (tapered

element) vibrating at its natural frequency (similar to how a tuning fork operates). The change in

the oscillating frequency of the glass tube following particle deposition on the filter is used to

measure the particle mass, and the particle concentration is calculated using the flow rate for the

particle stream. The TSP instrument is operated in accordance with the requirements of Australian

Standard AS 3580.9.8—2008 Method 9.8: Determination of suspended particulate matter—PM10

continuous direct mass method using a tapered element oscillating microbalance analyser, with a

TSP inlet fitted in place of a size-selective PM10 inlet.

Continuous PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations (averaged over five minute periods) are monitored

using a Model 1405DF dichotomous TEOM™ instrument operated in accordance with the

Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZ 3580.9.13:2013 Method 9.13: Determination of

suspended particulate matter—PM2.5 continuous direct mass method using a tapered element

oscillating microbalance monitor. The dichotomous TEOM™ instrument operates by first drawing

air through a size-selective inlet that excludes particles larger than PM10. In the instrument’s

sampling system the air stream is split into two separate particle streams, one containing particles

less than 2.5 µm in diameter (PM2.5) and the other containing particles between 2.5 µm and 10 µm

5 available at www.ehp.qld.gov.au/era/air-impacts-em960 6 An example of this is the Commonwealth National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure, available

from https://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2004H03935. For the purposes of assessing compliance with the standards

and goals of this Measure, Schedule 2 defines an averaging period of 1 day as a calendar day average.


5

in diameter (PM2.5-10). The two particle streams then pass through separate filters mounted on

glass tubes vibrating at their natural frequencies. Particle masses are then measured using the

change in the oscillating frequency of each tube following particle deposition on the filters. The

particle concentrations are calculated using the flow rates for each particle stream, with PM10

concentrations calculated as the sum of the simultaneous measurements from the PM2.5 and

PM2.5-10 particle streams.

Deposited dust levels are measured over monthly periods using a funnel and collection bottle

(called a dust deposition gauge), which catches dust settling on the internal surface of the funnel.

Following sampling, the dust is washed from the bottle and then filtered and weighed. The dust

deposition results are expressed as the weight of dust collected per unit of surface area per day,

averaged over a standardised 30-day sampling period (e.g. mg/m2/day averaged over a 30-day

period). The deposited dust is further characterised as insoluble solids (the fraction of total

particles deposited which are not water-soluble – these are the particles typically responsible for

nuisance impacts), ash (the part of the insoluble dust fraction which remains after heating the

sample to a temperature of 850 degrees Celsius for 30 minutes) and combustible matter (the part

of the insoluble dust fraction which is lost on heating the sample to a temperature of 850 degrees

Celsius for 30 minutes). Deposited dust is collected and analysed in accordance with the

Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 3580.10.1:2003 Method 10.1: Determination of

particulate matter—Deposited Matter—Gravimetric method.

Determining the types of particles present in the dust at the monitoring site is an important element

of the monitoring program as this information assists in identifying likely sources of the particles. At

the beginning of the monitoring program particle composition analysis was limited to the deposited

dust samples as the filters from the continuous monitoring instruments are not suitable for the

microscope technique used. However, it quickly became evident that information on the

composition of suspended particles collected over shorter sampling periods was required to better

understand the contribution from rail loading facility activities during periods when elevated particle

levels occurred. To assist with this, TSP samples suitable for particle composition analysis have

been collected on mixed cellulose ester filters using a Partisol™ Model 2025 sequential low-volume

air sampler since August 2014. To better determine the contribution from rail loading facility

emissions, the Partisol™ sampler is programmed to operate only when the wind is blowing from the

direction of the rail loading facility. TSP samples are collected over seven-day periods in order to

accumulate sufficient particle matter for analysis. The Partisol™ sampler is operated in accordance

with the Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 3580.9.9:2006 Method 9.9: Determination of

suspended particulate matter—PM10 low volume sampler—Gravimetric method, with the exception

that a TSP inlet is fitted in place of a size-selective PM10 inlet.

Sub-samples of the deposited dust and the TSP filters are examined through a microscope and the

proportions of different particles in each dust sample are measured based on the surface area

coverage of each particle type. The particle composition analysis is conducted by the University of

Queensland’s Materials Performance laboratory (UQMP). The analysis method is able to

distinguish a range of black-coloured particles (coal, soot and rubber dust), mineral dust particles

(e.g. soil, rock, cement, glass), biological particles (e.g. insect and plants) and other general

organic particles (e.g. wood, fibres and plastics). The method accuracy is in the order of ± 5 per

cent. It should be noted that as the microscopic examination is based on surface area coverage

and not particle mass, the proportions of the different particles (based on area) cannot be directly

applied to generate particle concentration ratios (based on mass and volume) or particle deposition

(based on mass). Instead, the particle composition analysis results are only used as an indicator of

particle mass composition.


6

Wind speed and direction, relative humidity, temperature and rainfall measurements (averaged

over five minute periods) are also recorded at Jondaryan to assist with determining the contribution

from operations taking place at the rail loading facility to PM10, PM2.5, TSP and coal dust levels.

Monitoring is conducted at a residence on the eastern boundary of Jondaryan, between the rail

loading facility and the town. The monitoring station is located approximately one kilometre west-

northwest of the rail loading facility and coal stockpile. The location of the monitoring station and

the rail loading facility are shown in Figure 3. From its location, it is expected that particle

concentrations and dust levels at the monitoring site are indicative of maximum levels experienced

at residences in Jondaryan.

Figure 3. Location of the Jondaryan monitoring station

From Figure 3 it can also be seen that, in addition to the rail loading facility and coal stockpile,

there are a number of other potential dust sources in the vicinity of the monitoring site. Primary

among these are dust raised by vehicle movements on the unsealed road running along one side

of the property (Earl Street) and vehicles using the road shoulder when passing on the single lane

bitumen road (Lagoon Street) on the adjacent side of the property. Other dust sources include the

Warrego Highway and other local roads, railway lines, agricultural activities and undeveloped land.

During dry conditions, much of the land area surrounding the monitoring station could potentially

contribute to windblown dust levels.

1 kilometre

Monitoring station

Rail loading facility

and coal stockpiles


7

TSP, PM10 and PM2.5 concentration and meteorological parameter monitoring commenced on 12

March 2014; dust deposition monitoring began on 13 March 2014 and weekly TSP filter sampling

began on 29 August 2014. DSITI Air Quality Monitoring staff established the monitoring station at

Jondaryan and are responsible for the ongoing operation and maintenance of the equipment and

collection and validation of the monitoring data. Staff from the EHP office in Toowoomba assist

with sample collection and routine equipment maintenance such as filter changes.


8

Results

This report details the findings from the Jondaryan dust monitoring program data collected

between March 2014 and April 2015.

Meteorology

Meteorological parameters are continuously monitored in conjunction with particle concentrations

to assist with determining the source of particles recorded at the Jondaryan monitoring station. The

speed and direction of winds recorded during instances of elevated particle concentrations are

used to identify possible sources of those particles. Analysis of particle concentrations with respect

to wind conditions are shown in the results sections for the respective particle sizes.

Wind speed and direction are monitored to assist with determining the source of particles and dust

recorded at the Jondaryan monitoring station. In this report, wind conditions are shown

diagrammatically through the use of wind roses – diagrams showing the frequency distribution of

wind speed and direction on polar coordinate maps. The length of each ‘arm’ shows the proportion

of winds blowing from that direction, with the shading within each ‘arm’ showing the breakdown of

wind speeds for the particular wind direction.

The wind rose for the reporting period at Jondaryan is shown in Figure 4. The wind rose is divided

into 20 degree wind direction ranges.

Figure 4. Wind rose for Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March to 30 April 2015

500 metres

25%


9

Figure 4 shows that easterly winds prevail at Jondaryan and that winds between 100 and 120

degrees (i.e. east-southeast) are required for particle and dust emissions from the rail loading

facility and coal stockpile to impact on the monitoring station. The frequency of one-hour average

winds from this wind direction range, together with a breakdown for different wind speed ranges,

for each month of the reporting period are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Proportion of winds recorded at the Jondaryan monitoring station blowing from the direction of the rail loading facility by wind speed

Year Month Proportion of winds blowing from 100 to 120 degrees by wind speed range

0.0–2.0 m/s 2.0–4.0 m/s 4.0–6.0 m/s ≧ 6.0 m/s All wind speeds

2014

Marcha 6% 4% 2% 1% 13%

April 13% 6% 2% 0% 21%

May 11% 8% 3% 0% 22%

June 8% 2% 1% 0% 12%

July 7% 1% 0% 0% 8%

August 7% 8% 3% 1% 20%

September 5% 5% 4% 1% 15%

October 4% 3% 1% 0% 9%

November 2% 2% 2% 1% 8%

December 3% 3% 2% 1% 9%

2015

January 5% 6% 2% 1% 13%

February 4% 14% 14% 9% 41%

March 6% 5% 2% 0% 13%

April 5% 7% 2% 0% 14%

a data from 12 to 31 March 2014 only (monitoring commenced at Jondaryan on 12 March 2014).

Table 2 shows that the proportion of winds from the direction of the rail loading facility was higher

in April, May and August 2014 and February 2015. Higher wind speeds would be expected to

result in greater lift-off of dust particles, and hence greater impacts at the monitoring site. With the

exception of February 2015, the proportion of winds with speeds greater than 4 m/s from the

direction of the rail loading facility is fairly consistent at between two and four per cent across most

months. The effects of these wind conditions on particle concentrations are discussed further in the

respective particle size results sections of this report.

The amount and frequency of rain can also have significant impacts on local air quality. Dry

conditions are more conducive to the generation and suspension of dust. Total monthly rainfall

recorded at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015 against the

median monthly rainfall7 recorded at the Bureau of Meteorology’s Jondaryan Post Office site8

(located approximately 570 metres north west of DSITI’s monitoring station) are shown in Figure 5.

7 Median monthly rainfall calculated over the Australian standard climate period (climate normal) from 1961 to 1990.

Further information is available at www.bom.gov.au/climate/cdo/about/about-stats.shtml. 8 Station number 041053, data available at www.bom.gov.au/climate/data/


10

Figure 5. Rainfall at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015

Figure 5 shows that monthly rainfall totals from April 2014 to April 2015 were below median. The

lower rainfall indicates that particle levels recorded during this period would not have been

suppressed to any significant extent by rain.

TSP

Summary TSP concentration data recorded at the Jondaryan monitoring station for the period are

provided in Table 3. The number of hourly and daily average samples, and average, maximum and

percentile concentration values are shown. Data availability over the reporting period was 97.7 per

cent.

Table 3. TSP concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015

Number of

samples TSP concentration (µg/m3)

Hourly Dailya Average

Maximum Days

>NZ dust

nuisance

trigger

levela

Hourly average percentile values

Rolling

24-houra

Calendar

daya 99th 98th 95th 90th 75th 50th

9756 408 46.2 221.2 199.8 36 224.6 175.8 123.0 90.1 55.2 33.6

a where data availability during the 24-hour period is at least 75 per cent.

The EPP Air annual average objective for TSP is 90 µg/m3.

The NZ MfE 24-hour TSP dust nuisance trigger level for sensitive areas is 80 µg/m3.

The average TSP concentration over the reporting period was 46.2 µg/m3. The maximum rolling

12-month average TSP concentration was 47.6 µg/m3, which is 53 per cent of the EPP Air annual

average objective.

Hourly percentile values have been included in Table 3 to show the distribution of hourly average

concentrations. Half of all hourly TSP concentrations were less than 34 µg/m3.

Daily TSP concentrations exceeded the NZ MfE dust nuisance trigger level for sensitive areas of

80 µg/m3 on 36 days during the reporting period. Figure 5 shows that the majority of these

exceedences occurred between late July and November 2014, which coincided with dry conditions

and the period when road works were taking place on the Warrego Highway between the

monitoring station and the coal stockpile and rail loading facility.


11

Figure 6. Daily average TSP concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015

Hourly average and rolling 24-hour average TSP concentrations measured at the Jondaryan

monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015 are shown in Figure 7. To ensure the

rolling 24-hour averages above the NZ MfE dust nuisance trigger level can be clearly identified, the

y-axis scale has been set to 240 µg/m3, although hourly TSP concentrations above 240 µg/m3

were recorded. Rolling 24-hour TSP concentrations above the NZ MfE dust nuisance trigger level

appear as a solid red line in Figure 7.

During the reporting period there were 27 separate episodes when the rolling 24-hour average

TSP concentration at the Jondaryan monitoring station was greater than 80 µg/m3, the NZ MfE

24-hour dust nuisance trigger level for sensitive areas. Fifteen of these episodes occurred between

July and October 2014, which is the drier period of the year (see Figure 5) and when Warrego

Highway roadworks were also taking place. Figure 7 shows that often very high hourly TSP

concentrations over a short period (often only several hours) were primarily responsible for the

rolling 24-hour exceedence.


12

Figure 7. Hourly and rolling 24-hour TSP concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015

Hourly average TSP Rolling 24-hour average TSP < 80 µg/m3 Rolling 24-hour average TSP > 80 µg/m3 NZ dust nuisance trigger level T

SP

co

nc

en

trati

on

, µ

g/m

3

Ma

rch 2

014

April 2014

Ma

y 2

014

Day of the month

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

0

40

80

120

160

200

240


13

Figure 7 (continued). Hourly and rolling 24-hour TSP concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015


SP

co

nc

en

trati

on

, µ

g/m

3

June 2

014

July

2014

August 2014

Day of the month

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

0

40

80

120

160

200

240


14



SP

co

nc

en

trati

on

, µ

g/m

3

Septe

mb

er

2014

Octo

ber

2014

Novem

ber

2014

Day of the month

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

0

40

80

120

160

200

240


15



SP

co

nc

en

trati

on

, µ

g/m

3

Decem

ber

2014

January

2015

Fe

bru

ary

2015

Day of the month

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

0

40

80

120

160

200

240


16



SP

co

nc

en

trati

on

, µ

g/m

3 M

arc

h 2

015

April 2015

Day of the month

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

0

40

80

120

160

200

240


17

To determine the dust sources contributing to TSP concentrations above the NZ MfE dust

nuisance trigger level, pollution roses were generated using five-minute average wind speed and

direction and TSP concentration data for each episode. These pollution roses are shown in Figure

8.

The length of each pollution rose ‘arm’ shows the fraction of total TSP particles measured during

winds from that particular five degree direction range over the exceedence episode period (shown

to the left of the pollution rose). The shading within each ‘arm’ gives a breakdown of the relative

proportions of 5-minute TSP particle concentrations for the four ranges shown in the legend box in

Figure 8. Pink shading indicates 5-minute average TSP concentrations greater than 400 µg/m3.

The percentage of total TSP measured is shown by the black vertical scale.

Periods for each pollution rose begin 24 hours before the rolling 24-hour average first exceeded

80 µg/m3 and continued to the end of the hour when the rolling 24-hour average dropped below

80 µg/m3. For periods when the rolling 24-hour average exceeded 80 µg/m3 and then dropped

below 80 µg/m3 before exceeding again within 24 hours, TSP concentrations from 24 hours prior to

the first exceedence to the final hour of the last exceedence have been included in a single

pollution rose.

Any dust emissions from the rail loading facility contributing to these exceedence episodes would

be incorporated in the pollution rose ‘arms’ between 100 to 120 degrees, shown by the two red

lines in Figure 8. The percentage contribution to total TSP from this wind direction range is listed

next to each pollution rose in Figure 8.

A summary of the information obtained from the pollution roses for the 27 TSP dust nuisance

trigger level exceedence episodes is provided in Table 4. Also included in Table 4 are the

proportions of coal and soil/rock particles detected in the TSP filter samples collected by the

Partisol™ sampler (where available) during the week when the exceedence episode occurred to

provide added information on the likely contribution of dust emissions from the rail loading facility to

the elevated TSP concentrations. More detailed discussion of the composition of TSP particles

collected during winds from the direction of the rail loading facility is provided later in this report.


18

Figure 8. Pollution roses for periods when rolling 24-hour average TSP concentrations exceeded 80 µg/m3 at the Jondaryan monitoring station between 12 March 2014 and 30 April 2015

10:00

26/04/14

to

04:00

28/04/14

(504

samples)

14:00

07/05/14

to

18:00

08/05/14

(336

samples)

06:00

19/05/14

to

07:00

22/05/14

(875

samples)

17:00

28/05/14

to

02:00

30/05/14

(396

samples)

10:00

26/06/14

to

12:00

27/06/14

(312

samples)

02:00

13/07/14

to

03:00

15/07/14

(588

samples)

20:00

20/07/14

to

01:00

22/07/14

(348

samples)

09:00

28/07/14

to

05:00

01/08/14

(1079

samples)

17.8 % 46.3 %

46.8 % 17.1 %

12.3 % 27.4 %

14.4 % 13.4 %


19

Figure 8 (continued). Pollution roses for periods when rolling 24-hour average TSP concentrations exceeded 80 µg/m3 at the Jondaryan monitoring station between 12 March 2014 and 30 April 2015

21:00

01/08/14

to

22:00

03/08/14

(587

samples)

07:00

05/08/14

to

03:00

07/08/14

(528

samples)

02:00

07/08/14

to

02:00

09/08/14

(576

samples)

02:00

10/08/14

to

15:00

12/08/14

(731

samples)

12:00

11/09/14

to

02:00

13/09/14

(456

samples)

01:00

17/09/14

to

12:00

21/09/14

(1284

samples)

08:00

01/10/14

to

03:00

03/10/14

(516

samples)

14:00

05/10/14

to

23:00

09/10/14

(1258

samples)

10.9 % 9.0 %

21.6 % 36.9 %

23.4 % 20.0 %

30.4 % 7.8 %


20


00:00

16/10/14

to

00:00

18/10/14

(575

samples)

20:00

22/10/14

to

21:00

24/10/14

(588

samples)

23:00

24/10/14

to

18:00

26/10/14

(516

samples)

23:00

29/10/14

to

21: 00

31/10/14

(552

samples)

12:00

15/11/14

to

09:00

17/11/14

(540

samples)

21:00

23/11/14

to

19:00

28/11/14

(1416

samples)

12:00

01/02/2015

to

15:00

03/02/2015

(612

samples)

06:00

05/03/2015

to

02:00

07/03/2015

(528

samples)

25.4 % 14.6 %

14.5 % 7.4 %

0.0 % 12.9 %

5.0 % 33.6 %


21


04:00

12/03/2015

to

20:00

16/03/2015

(1319

samples)

08:00

19/03/2015

to

20:00

22/03/2015

(1008

samples)

11:00

09/04/2015

to

06:00

11/04/2015

(516

samples)

21.8 %

19.7 %

15.1 %


22

Table 4. TSP contribution from the direction of the rail loading facility during periods when rolling 24-hour average TSP concentrations exceeded 80 µg/m3 at the Jondaryan monitoring station between 12 March 2014 and 30 April 2015

Period

rolling 24-hour

TSP concentration

>80 µg/m3

Average

rolling 24-hour

TSP

concentration

(µg/m3)

Contribution

from direction

of rail loading

facilitya

(%)

Highest

TSP contribution

wind direction

range

(deg)

Proportion of particle type

in weekly TSP sampleb

(%)

Coal dust Soil/rock

dust

26 to 28 April 2014 96.0 17.8 85 to 110

150-175

Partisol™ sampler

not deployed

7 to 8 May 2014 80.9 46.3 90 to 115

19 to 22 May 2014 107.9 46.8 100 to 115

28 to 30 May 2014 85.3 17.1 75 to 105

26 to 27 June 2014 81.0 12.3 215 to 235

13 to 15 July 2014 89.0 27.4 90 to 110

20 to 22 July 2014 82.1 14.4 70 to 155

28 July to 1 August 2014 113.7 13.4 105 to 165

220 to 255

1 to 3 August 2014 109.1 21.6 95 to 110

175 to 190

5 to 7 August 2014 81.0 36.9 90 to 110

7 to 9 August 2014 86.9 23.4 65 to 120

10 to 12 August 2014 91.3 20.0 65 to 120

240 to 255

11 to 13 September 2014 83.1 30.4 95 to 115 20 75

17 to 21 September 2014 145.1 7.8 65 to 85 15 80

1 to 3 October 2014 85.0 10.9 65 to 100 trace 95

5 to 9 October 2014 129.4 9.0 70 to 105

260 to 285 5 87

16 to 18 October 2014 99.1 25.4 75 to 115 8 87

22 to 24 October 2014 88.5 14.6 60 to 115 7 90

24 to 26 October 2014 87.4 14.5 85 to 120

220 to 330 10 90

29 to 31 October 2014 87.1 7.4 65 to 80 8 90

15 to 17 November 2014 80.6 0.0 250 to 310 10 90

23 to 28 November 2014 136.1 12.9 90 to 115

200 to 220 8 85

1 to 3 February 2015 92.0 33.6 100 to 120 5 95

5 to 7 March 2015 81.0 5.0 210 to 235 10 80

12 to 16 March 2015 94.7 21.8 70 to 115 9 84

19 to 22 March 2015 104.4 15.1 75 to 105 6 89

9 to 11 April 2015 100.1 19.7 40 to 50

85 to 105 5 92

a impacts from the rail loading facility and coal stockpile require winds between 100 and 120 degrees b where exceedence period extends across two weekly TSP sampling periods, the average of the two weekly TSP samples is shown


23

The individual TSP pollution roses show considerable variability, indicating that a range of particle

sources in addition to the rail loading facility contributed to elevated TSP concentrations above

80 µg/m3 across the different periods. This is particularly evident for the 15 to 17 November 2014

when no winds blew from the direction of the rail loading facility and, hence, the facility could not

have contributed to the elevated TSP concentrations for this period. Conversely, the TSP pollution

rose for the period 19 to 22 May 2014 suggests that emission sources from the direction of the rail

loading facility were the main contributor to the rolling 24-hour average TSP concentration

exceeding 80 µg/m3.

Over the 27 periods where TSP concentrations exceeded 80 µg/m3, the amount of TSP associated

with winds from the direction of the rail loading facility ranged from 0.0 to 46.8 percent of the total

TSP measured at the monitoring station, with this contribution typically being only 20 per cent or

less. Even if all the TSP coming from this direction is assumed to originate from the rail loading

facility (which ignores any contribution from other dust sources located between the facility and the

monitoring station), these results suggest that emissions from the rail loading facility and coal

stockpile on their own would not be sufficient to result in exceedences of the NZ MfE TSP dust

nuisance trigger value at the monitoring station.

The coal content of the weekly TSP particle samples collected during the dust nuisance trigger

level exceedence events between September 2014 and April 2015 also points to rail loading facility

and coal stockpile emissions being a relatively minor contributor to overall TSP levels at the

monitoring site during the exceedence episodes. The amount of coal in the TSP samples was

generally only ten per cent or less. By far the greatest contributor to TSP concentrations was soil or

rock dust, which typically accounted for 80 per cent or more of the collected TSP particles.

The combination of the variability in source directions seen across the individual TSP pollution

roses, particle composition data showing that soil and rock dust is the major component of the dust

(discussed later in this report) and most of the TSP dust nuisance events occurring during drier

periods of the year, leads to the conclusion that windblown dust from bare or lightly vegetated

ground and/or generated by vehicle movements on unsealed surfaces such as local roads was the

main contributor to the elevated TSP concentrations.

While the TSP pollution roses show that elevated TSP concentrations can result from a wide range

of dust sources across almost all wind directions, over the period covered by this report the

frequency of impacts is greatest for winds between 60 degrees and 120 degrees. As the prevailing

winds at Jondaryan come from these directions it is not unexpected that elevated TSP episodes

are more frequently associated with these directions, however this wind range also coincided with

the direction of Warrego Highway road works carried out between July and December 2014.

During monitoring site maintenance visits, DSITI and EHP officers observed that these road works

generated significant dust emissions in the vicinity of the monitoring site (see Figure 2 for an

example). Therefore it is likely that the road works were a major contributor to a number of the dust

nuisance trigger level exceedences during this time. The monitoring program has been extended

until at least December 2015 to obtain monitoring data for the July to December period which

better represents TSP levels at the monitoring station resulting from typical activities taking place

during these months.


24

PM10

Summary PM10 concentration data recorded at the Jondaryan monitoring station for the reporting

period are provided in Table 5. The number of hourly and daily average samples, and average,

maximum and percentile concentration values are shown. Hourly percentile values have been

included in Table 5 to show the distribution of hourly average concentrations. Data availability for

PM10 over the reporting period was 92.7 per cent.

Table 5. PM10 concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015

Number of

samples PM10 concentration (µg/m3)


Maximum Days

>EPP Air

objectivea


Rolling

24-houra

Calendar


9259 388 21.4 111.6 103.5 9 98.0 78.0 54.6 40.6 25.8 16.2


The EPP Air 24-hour objective for PM10 is 50 µg/m3, with this concentration not to be exceeded on more than 5 days in a 12 month

period.

The average PM10 concentration over the reporting period was 21.4 µg/m3. Approximately 75 per

cent of the hourly PM10 concentrations were less than half the EPP Air 24-hour objective.

Figure 9 shows the daily PM10 concentrations measured at the Jondaryan monitoring site over the

reporting period.

Figure 9. Daily average PM10 concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015


25

Daily PM10 concentrations exceeded the EPP Air 24-hour objective for protection of human health

of 50 µg/m3 on nine days during the reporting period; one day in May 2014, two days in September

2014, two days in October 2014, one day in November 2014 and three days in March 2015. This

frequency exceeds the number of days that the EPP Air permits the PM10 objective value to be

exceeded in a 12-month period. On each of the nine days that the EPP Air objective was

exceeded, the NZ MfE 24-hour TSP dust nuisance trigger level value of 80 µg/m3 was also

exceeded.

Hourly average and rolling 24-hour average PM10 concentrations recorded at the Jondaryan


rolling 24-hour averages can be clearly identified the y-axis scale has been set to 150 µg/m3,

although hourly PM10 concentrations above 150 µg/m3 were recorded. Rolling 24-hour PM10

concentrations above the EPP Air objective appear as a solid red line in Figure 10.

During the reporting period there were ten separate episodes when the rolling 24-hour average

PM10 concentration at the Jondaryan monitoring station was greater than 50 µg/m3, the EPP Air

24-hour objective. Seven of these episodes occurred between July and November 2014, which is

the drier period of the year (see Figure 5) and when road works were also taking place. Figure 10

shows that, like TSP, very high hourly PM10 concentrations over a short period (typically only

several hours) were often responsible for the rolling 24-hour exceedence.


26

Figure 10. Hourly and rolling 24-hour PM10 concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015

Hourly average PM10 Rolling 24-hour average PM10 < 50 µg/m3 Rolling 24-hour average PM10 > 50 µg/m3 EPP Air objective P

M10 c

oncentr

atio

n,

µg/m

3

Ma

rch 2

014

April 2014

Ma

y 2

014

Day of the month

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

0

25

50

75

100

125

150


27

Figure 10 (continued). Hourly and rolling 24-hour PM10 concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015


M10 c

oncentr

atio

n,

µg/m

3

June 2

014

July

2014

August

2014

Day of the month

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

0

25

50

75

100

125

150


28



M10 c

oncentr

atio

n,

µg/m

3

Septe

mb

er

2014

Octo

ber

2014

Novem

ber

2014

Day of the month

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

0

25

50

75

100

125

150


29



M10 c

oncentr

atio

n,

µg/m

3

Decem

ber

2014

January

2015

Fe

bru

ary

2015

Day of the month

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

0

25

50

75

100

125

150


30



M10 c

oncentr

atio

n,

µg/m

3 M

arc

h 2

015

April 2015

Day of the month

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

0

25

50

75

100

125

150


31

To determine the dust sources contributing to PM10 concentrations above the EPP Air objective,

pollution roses were generated using five-minute average wind speed and direction and PM10

concentration data for each episode. These pollution roses are shown in Figure 11.

The length of each pollution rose ‘arm’ shows the proportion of total PM10 particles measured

during winds from that particular five degree direction range over the exceedence episode period

(shown to the left of the pollution rose). The shading within each ‘arm’ gives a breakdown of the

relative proportions of 5-minute PM10 particle concentrations for the four ranges shown in the

legend box in Figure 11. Pink shading indicates 5-minute average PM10 concentrations greater

than 200 µg/m3. The percentage of total PM10 measured is shown by the black vertical scale.

Periods for each pollution rose begin 24 hours before the rolling 24-hour average exceeded

50 µg/m3 and continued to the end of the hour when the rolling 24-hour average dropped below

50 µg/m3. For periods when the rolling 24-hour average exceeded 50 µg/m3 and then dropped

below 50 µg/m3 before exceeding again within 24 hours, PM10 concentrations from 24 hours prior

to the first exceedence to the final hour of the last exceedence have been included in a single

pollution rose.

Any dust emissions from the rail loading facility contributing to these exceedence episodes would

be incorporated in the pollution rose ‘arms’ between 100 to 120 degrees, shown by the two red

lines in Figure 11. The percentage contribution to total PM10 from this wind direction range is listed

next to each pollution rose in Figure 11.

A summary of the information obtained from the pollution roses for the ten PM10 EPP Air objective

exceedence episodes is provided in Table 6. Also included in Table 6 are the proportions of coal

and soil/rock particles detected in the TSP filter samples collected by the Partisol™ sampler during

the week when the PM10 exceedence episode occurred (where available) to provide added

information on the likely contribution of dust emissions from the rail loading facility to the elevated

PM10 concentrations.

Figure 11. Pollution roses for periods when rolling 24-hour average PM10 concentrations exceeded 50 µg/m3 at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015

06:00

19/05/14

to

06:00

21/05/14

(575

samples)

18:00

29/07/14

to

14:00

31/07/14

(528

samples)

12.3 % 44.1 %


32

Figure 11 (continued). Pollution roses for periods when rolling 24-hour average PM10 concentrations exceeded 50 µg/m3 at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015

06:00

10/08/14

to

23:00

11/08/14

(492

samples)

22:00

17/09/14

to

04:00

21/09/14

(936

samples)

20:00

06/10/14

to

08:00

09/10/14

(719

samples)

01:00

16/10/14

to

23:00

17/10/14

(551

samples)

09:00

25/10/14

to

17:00

26/10/14

(384

samples)

07:00

24/11/14

to

16:00

26/11/14

(684

samples)

19:00

12/03/2015

to

20:00

13/03/2015

(300

samples)

00:00

19/03/2015

to

02:00

22/03/2015

(887

samples)

4.0 % 14.3 %

20.9 % 13.0 %

12.3 % 19.9 %

26.3 % 11.8 %


33

Table 6. PM10 contribution from the direction of the rail loading facility during periods when rolling 24-hour average PM10 concentrations exceeded 50 µg/m3 at the Jondaryan monitoring station between 12 March 2014 and 30 April 2015

Period

rolling 24-hour

PM10 concentration

>50 µg/m3

Average

rolling 24-hour

PM10

concentration

(µg/m3)

Contribution

from direction

of rail loading

facilitya

(%)

Highest

PM10

contribution

wind direction

range

(deg)

Proportion of particle type

in weekly TSP sampleb

(%)

Coal dust Soil/rock

dust

19 to 21 May 2014 55.8 44.1 90 to 115

Partisol™ sampler

not deployed 29 to 31 July 2014 51.6 12.3 115 to 165

10 to 11 August 2014 54.4 19.9 85 to 120

17 to 21 September 2014 84.3 12.3 55 to 95 15 80

6 to 9 October 2014 87.4 13.0 75 to 95 5 87

16 to 17 October 2014 60.1 20.9 65 to 90 8 87

25 to 26 October 2014 51.4 14.3 85 to 120

195 to 230 10 90

24 to 26 November 2014 55.4 4.0 10 to 75 8 85

12 to 13 March 2015 50.6 26.3 80 to 115 9 84

19 to 22 March 2015 55.1 11.8 70 to 105 6 89

a impacts from the rail loading facility and coal stockpile require winds between 100 and 120 degrees b where exceedence period extends across two weekly TSP sampling periods, the average of the two weekly TSP samples is shown

For most episodes, the PM10 pollution rose and the amount of PM10 coming from wind directions

between 100 and 120 degrees is very similar to the corresponding TSP pollution rose, indicating

that the same dust sources were responsible for both the PM10 and TSP guideline value

exceedences.

Over the ten periods where PM10 concentrations exceeded 50 µg/m3, the amount of PM10

associated with winds from the direction of the rail loading facility ranged from 4.0 to 44.1 per cent

of the total PM10 measured at the monitoring station, with this contribution typically being only 20

per cent or less. Even if all the PM10 coming from this direction is assumed to originate from the rail

loading facility (which ignores any contribution from other dust sources located between the facility

and the monitoring station), these results suggest that PM10 emissions from the rail loading facility

and coal stockpile on their own would not be sufficient to result in exceedences of the EPP Air

objective for protection of human health at the monitoring station.

The coal content of the weekly TSP particle samples collected during the EPP Air PM10 objective

exceedence events between September 2014 and April 2015 also points to rail loading facility and

coal stockpile emissions being a relatively minor contributor to overall PM10 levels at the monitoring

site during the exceedence episodes. The amount of coal in the TSP samples collected at the time

of the PM10 exceedences was generally ten per cent or less.

Corresponding PM2.5 measurements at the Jondaryan monitoring station during the periods when

PM10 concentrations exceeded 50 µg/m3 show that particles less than 2.5 µm in diameter made up

less than 20 per cent of the PM10 particles and that the PM10 exceedences were the result of

emissions of particles larger than 2.5 µm in size. Particles between 2.5 µm and 10 µm are


34

generated associated with mechanical processes such as wind erosion, which is consistent with

windblown dust from bare or lightly vegetated ground and/or generated by vehicle movements on

unsealed surfaces such as local roads being the main contributor to the elevated PM10

concentrations.

As for TSP, it is likely that the Warrego Highway road works contributed significantly to a number of

the EPP Air PM10 objective exceedences recorded at the Jondaryan monitoring site between July

and December 2014.

PM2.5

Summary PM2.5 concentration data recorded at the Jondaryan monitoring station for the reporting

period are provided in Table 7. The number of hourly and daily average samples, and average,

maximum and percentile concentration values are shown. Hourly percentile values have been

included in Table 7 to show the distribution of hourly average concentrations. Data availability for

PM2.5 over the reporting period was 92.7 per cent.

Table 7. PM2.5 concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015

Number of

samples PM2.5 concentration (µg/m3)


Maximum Days

>EPP Air

objectivea


Rolling

24-houra

Calendar


9259 388 6.1 20.7 19.9 0 21.7 17.9 14.3 11.8 8.3 5.3


The EPP Air 24-hour objectives for PM2.5 are an annual average of 8 µg/m3 and a 24-hour average of 25 µg/m3.

More than 75 per cent of the hourly PM2.5 concentrations were less than half the EPP Air 24-hour

PM2.5 objective.

The average PM2.5 concentration over the reporting period was 6.1 µg/m3. This is also the

maximum rolling 12-month average PM2.5 concentration during the reporting period, and is

76 per cent of the EPP Air annual objective for protection of human health of 8 µg/m3.

Daily PM2.5 concentrations measured at the Jondaryan monitoring site over the reporting period are

shown in Figure 12. The EPP Air 24-hour objective for protection of human health of 25 µg/m3 was

not exceeded on any day during the reporting period. The maximum daily average PM2.5

concentration was 19.9 µg/m3, which is 80 per cent of the EPP Air 24-hour objective.

Hourly average and rolling 24-hour average PM2.5 concentrations recorded at the Jondaryan


rolling 24-hour averages can be clearly identified the y-axis scale has been set to 75 µg/m3,

although hourly PM2.5 concentrations above 75 µg/m3 were recorded. Figure 13 shows that all

rolling 24-hour average PM2.5 concentrations during the reporting period also complied with the

EPP Air 24-hour objective for protection of human health.

Emissions from particle sources in the Jondaryan area, including the rail loading facility and coal

stockpile, do not result in ambient PM2.5 concentrations above guidelines for protection of human

health in the Jondaryan community.


35

Figure 12. Daily average PM2.5 concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015


36

Figure 13. Hourly and rolling 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015

Hourly average PM2.5 Rolling 24-hour average PM2.5 < 25 µg/m3 Rolling 24-hour average PM2.5 > 25 µg/m3 EPP Air 24-hour objective P

M2.5 c

oncentr

atio

n,

µg/m

3

Ma

rch 2

014

April 2014

Ma

y 2

014

Day of the month

0

25

50

75

0

25

50

75

0

25

50

75


37

Figure 13 (continued). Hourly and rolling 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations at the Jondaryan monitoring station from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015


M2.5 c

oncentr

atio

n,

µg/m

3

June 2

014

July

2014

August

2014

Day of the month

0

25

50

75

0

25

50

75

0

25

50

75


38



M2.5 c

oncentr

atio

n,

µg/m

3

Septe

mb

er

2014

Octo

ber

2014

Novem

ber

2014

Day of the month

0

25

50

75

0

25

50

75

0

25

50

75


39



M2.5 c

oncentr

atio

n,

µg/m

3

Decem

ber

2014

January

2015

Fe

bru

ary

2015

Day of the month

0

25

50

75

0

25

50

75

0

25

50

75


40



M2.5 c

oncentr

atio

n,

µg/m

3 M

arc

h 2

015

April 2015

Day of the month

0

25

50

75

0

25

50

75


41

Deposited dust

Deposited dust is measured at the Jondaryan monitoring site to assess if the amount of dust

settling out from the air is sufficient to cause significant dust annoyance. Dust that settles from the

air is made up almost entirely of particles 30 micrometres and greater in diameter9. Measured dust

deposition values are the combined total of all dust emission sources in proximity to the monitoring

site, not just dust emissions from the rail loading facility and coal stockpile. The composition of the

deposited dust samples is determined to assist with identification of contributing particle sources.

The dust deposition analysis method determines total, dissolved and insoluble deposited matter,

with a further breakdown of the insoluble fraction into combustible (organic) matter and ash

(mineral) content. Insoluble matter is the solid material collected by filtering the sample, while the

dissolved matter is determined by evaporating some or all of the liquid filtrate. As dust annoyance

is correlated primarily with levels of the insoluble dust fraction, nuisance assessment guidelines are

generally expressed in terms of insoluble dust deposition. The Department of Environment and

Heritage Protection recommends that an insoluble dust deposition rate of 120 mg/m2/day

(averaged over a 30 day period) be used to assess whether deposited dust levels constitute a

nuisance.

‘Combustible (organic) matter’ is that portion of the insoluble matter lost on heating at a

temperature of 850oC for 30 minutes and is an indication of the amount of organic matter in the

dust. Any coal particles present in the insoluble deposited dust will be part of this organic matter

fraction, along with other organic material such as plant fragments, insect material, plastic

fragments, wood dust, soot and rubber dust. The ash content is an indication of the mineral content

of the dust. The ash is often primarily soil or rock particles.

The results of dust deposition sampling at the Jondaryan monitoring site for the reporting period

are summarised in Table 8 and displayed graphically in Figure 14. In Figure 14 the contributions

from combustible (organic) matter particles and ash (mineral) particles to the overall insoluble dust

deposition rate are shown by the divisions on each column, and the proportion of winds blowing

from the direction of the rail loading facility and coal stockpile during each sampling period is

shown by the dotted line. Details of the individual monthly dust deposition samples and analysis

results can be found in Table 11 in the Appendix to this report.

Figure 14. Insoluble dust deposition rates at the Jondaryan monitoring station from March 2014 to April 2015

9 J.H. Fairweather, A.F. Sidlow and W.L. Faith, Particle size distribution of settled dust, Journal of the Air Pollution

Control Association, 15:8, 345-347, 1965, available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00022470.1965.10468389.


42

Table 8. Average daily dust deposition rates (mg/m2/day) at the Jondaryan monitoring station from March 2014 to April 2015

Month

Dust deposition rate

(mg/m2/day) Winds from

direction of

rail loading

facility

(%)

Winds

>4 m/s

(all

directions)

(%)

Rainfall

(mm) Insoluble

solidsa

Ash

(mineral)

Combustible

(organic)

matter

March 2014 60 38 22 14.6 27.7 92.0

April 2014 49 35 14 14.7 14.4 23.2

May 2014 43 29 14 23.0 15.6 0.0

June 2014 65 45 20 10.0 12.9 14.4

July 2014 47 35 12 11.2 20.8 2.7

August 2014 74 63 11 17.6 22.8 10.6

September 2014 60 46 14 13.0 33.1 24.1

October 2014 146 96 50 9.3 35.4 33.1

November 2014 96 63 33 6.7 38.1 10.4

December 2014 92 82 10 11.4 29.3 76.4

January 2015 60 39 21 13.7 36.0 53.0

February 2015 65 38 27 35.6 41.8 38.9

March 2015 52 41 11 13.4 30.3 41.6

April 2015 62 38 24 10.9 17.3 81.0

a the EHP Air Impacts Guideline recommends that the insoluble solids deposition rate not exceed 120 mg/m2/day (averaged over a

normalised 30-day period) to minimise dust nuisance impacts.

Figure 14 shows that dust deposition levels at the Jondaryan monitoring site generally comply with

the EHP dust nuisance assessment value of 120 mg/m2/day. The only exceedence of the EHP

dust deposition guideline occurred in October 2014 when the daily average insoluble dust

deposition rate was 146 mg/m2/day.

With the exception of August 2014 and October to December 2014, daily average insoluble dust

deposition rates at the Jondaryan monitoring site were generally around half of the EHP dust

nuisance assessment value. The higher deposition rates in August and October to December 2014

coincided with the period when Warrego Highway road works were taking place and it is likely that

activities associated with these works contributed to the higher dust deposition rates in these

months.

All the deposited dust samples had a higher mineral content than organic content, consistent with

soil and rock particles being the predominant particle type present (discussed further in the next

section). The ratio of ash to organic content ranged from 1.4 to 8.2 across the 14 samples.

There is no positive correlation between the daily average dust deposition rate and the proportion

of winds from the direction of the rail loading facility and coal stockpile during the sampling period

(see Figure 15(a)). The higher dust deposition rates observed between October and December

2014 were associated with some of the lowest frequencies of winds from the direction of the rail

loading facility. A better correlation is observed between daily average dust deposition rate and the

proportion of winds greater than 4 m/s regardless of direction, particularly during the period from


43

April to November 2014 when conditions were drier (see Figure 15(b)). This suggests that dust

deposition at the monitoring site is influenced to a greater extent by particles generated by wind

erosion from bare or sparsely vegetated ground across a wide range of wind directions than from

dust emissions from the rail loading facility and coal stockpile.

Figure 15. Relationship between daily dust deposition rate and (a) the proportion of winds from the direction of the rail loading facility and (b) the proportion of winds greater than 4 m/s at the Jondaryan monitoring station from March 2014 to April 2015

Dust deposition results obtained between March 2014 and April 2015 demonstrate that, based on

the EHP criterion, rail loading facility activities do not result in dust levels sufficient to cause dust

nuisance at the monitoring station.

Particle composition

One of the aims of the monitoring program is to investigate the contribution of coal dust to overall

dust levels in the Jondaryan community. This is done by microscopic examination of the monthly

deposited dust samples and, from late August 2014, weekly TSP samples collected during winds

blowing from the direction of the rail loading facility and coal stockpile. The TSP samples are

collected over seven-day periods to ensure sufficient particle matter is collected for analysis.

The deposited dust composition analysis involved taking a sub-sample from the dust deposition

gauge bottle, filtering this through a membrane filter and examining the insoluble particles retained

on the filter through a microscope. The weekly TSP samples were collected directly onto

membrane filters by the Partisol™ sampler.

The particle composition analysis was conducted by the University of Queensland Materials

Performance (UQMP) laboratory. The UQMP procedure can distinguish between a range of black-

coloured particles (coal, soot and rubber dust), inorganic and mineral dust particles (e.g. soil, rock,


44

cement, glass), particles of biological origin (e.g. insect and plant fragments) and other general

organic particles (e.g. wood, fibres and plastics). The reported proportions of the different particles

in each dust sample are based on the surface area coverage of each particle type on the

membrane filter. The technique can resolve the surface area coverage of the different particle type

to a typical accuracy of ± 5 per cent.

As the microscopic examination is based on surface area coverage, the measured proportions

cannot be directly applied to the overall dust deposition rate to give a mass deposition rate for

individual particle types. Instead, the particle composition analysis results can only provide a

qualitative measure of particle mass composition.

Deposited dust

The results of the particle composition analysis for the monthly deposited dust samples collected at

the Jondaryan monitoring site between March 2014 and April 2015 are summarised in Table 9 and

displayed graphically in Figure 16. In Figure 16 the proportions of the different particle types (coal

dust, other black particles, inorganic and mineral particles and biological particles) are indicated by

the divisions within each column, with the dust deposition rate and the proportion of winds blowing

from the direction of the rail loading facility and coal stockpile during each sampling period overlaid

as a solid line and a dotted line respectively. Details of the individual monthly dust deposition

particle composition results can be found in Table 12 in the Appendix to this report.

Soil and rock particles were by far the largest type of particles found in the deposited dust samples

collected at the Jondaryan monitoring site. On a projected area basis, soil and rock dust made up

between 50 and 85 per cent of all particle types. As previously highlighted, there are many

potential sources of soil and rock dust in the vicinity of the monitoring site, especially during dry

conditions, and it is clear that these sources make the greatest contribution to the dust settling out

at the monitoring site.

Coal dust was present at levels between 2 and 30 per cent on a projected area basis in the

monthly deposited dust samples. Figure 16 shows that the trend in coal dust content of the

deposited dust sample generally aligns with the proportion of winds blowing from the direction of

the rail loading facility and coal stockpile during the sampling period. This indicates that particle

emissions from the rail loading facility and coal stockpile do impact on the monitoring station under

favourable meteorological conditions. However, not all the coal dust in the deposited dust samples

may have been directly emitted from the rail loading facility during the sampling period. Surface

dust in the vicinity of the monitoring station is likely to already contain some coal dust and

re-suspension of this dust (e.g. by vehicles travelling on the nearby unpaved road) will contribute to

the coal content found in the deposited dust samples. The microscope analysis technique is not

able to distinguish between fresh and aged coal dust.

Figure 16 shows no obvious relationship between the amount of coal dust present in the deposited

dust sample and the overall dust deposition rate. As identified in the previous section, it appears

that other dust sources have a greater influence on the amount of dust on a mass basis being

deposited at the monitoring station than the rail loading facility.


45

Table 9. Deposited dust particle composition analysis results for Jondaryan from March 2014 to April 2015

Month

Dust

deposition

rate

(mg/m2/day)

Surface coverage (%)a Winds

from

direction

of

rail

loading

facility

(%)

Rainfall

(mm) Coal

dust

Other

black

particles

Inorganic

and

mineral

Biological

Other

particle

types

March 2014 60 10 0 80 10 0 14.6 92.0

April 2014 49 30 0 70 trace 0 14.7 23.2

May 2014 43 30 0 70 trace trace 23.0 0.0

June 2014 65 20 trace 80 trace 0 10.0 14.4

July 2014 47 20 trace 80 trace 0 11.2 2.7

August 2014 74 20 5 65 10 0 17.6 10.6

September 2014 60 10 10 80 trace trace 13.0 24.1

October 2014 146 5 5 90 trace 0 9.3 33.1

November 2014 96 5 trace 70 25 0 6.7 10.4

December 2014 92 2 0 83 15 trace 11.4 76.4

January 2015 60 10 0 80 10 trace 13.7 53.0

February 2015 65 20 trace 50 30 0 35.6 38.9

March 2015 52 10 trace 85 5 trace 13.4 41.6

April 2015 62 20 trace 80 trace 0 10.9 81.0

a the uncertainty in the measurement of surface coverage is typically ±5 per cent.

Figure 16. Deposited dust composition at the Jondaryan monitoring station from March 2014 to April 2015


46

TSP

The results of the particle composition analysis for the weekly TSP samples collected at the

Jondaryan monitoring site between August 2014 and April 2015 are summarised in Table 10 and

displayed graphically in Figure 17. In Figure 17 the proportions of the different particle types (coal

dust, other black particles, inorganic and mineral particles and biological particles) are indicated by

the divisions within each column. The average TSP concentration measured by the TEOM™

instrument when the Partisol™ sampler was operating and the proportion of winds blowing from the

direction of the rail loading facility and coal stockpile during each sampling period are overlaid on

Figure 16 as a solid line and a dotted line respectively. Details of the individual weekly TSP particle

composition results can be found in Table 13 in the Appendix to this report.

As with the monthly deposited dust samples, the weekly TSP samples are dominated by soil and

rock particles. On a projected area basis, soil and rock dust made up between 60 and 100 per cent

of all particle types.

Coal dust was present at levels up to 20 per cent on a projected area basis in the weekly TSP

samples. Figure 17 shows that the trend in coal dust content of the TSP sample generally aligns

with the proportion of winds blowing from the direction of the rail loading facility and coal stockpile

during the sampling period, although this relationship is more variable than is seen for the monthly

deposited dust samples. This variability could be due in part to the shorter sampling period. A

shorter sampling period could result in less particles being collected and make it more difficult to

accurately assign surface coverage for the different particle types. Meteorological conditions which

influence airborne dust levels would also display greater variability over weekly periods than over

monthly periods (e.g. the impact of dust suppression by isolated rainfall events will be more evident

in a weekly sample than a monthly sample).

The coal content results for the TSP particle samples provide evidence that particle emissions from

the rail loading facility and coal stockpile do impact on the monitoring station under favourable

meteorological conditions. Some of the coal dust content in the TSP samples is however likely to

have resulted from re-suspension of surface dust containing coal dust in the vicinity of the

monitoring station.

Figure 17 shows that there is no obvious relationship between the amount of coal dust present in

the TSP sample and the TSP mass concentration. The higher TSP mass concentration values

observed between August and November 2014 when Warrego Highway road works were taking

place suggests that windblown dust is the main influence on measured TSP concentrations.


47

Table 10. TSP composition analysis results for Jondaryan from August 2014 to April 2015

Week

commencing

TSP

concentration

(µg/m3)b


from

direction

of

rail

loading

facility

(%)

Rainfall

(mm) Coal

dust

Other

black

particles

Inorganic

and

mineral

Biological

Other

particle

types

29 August 2014 89.5 5 trace 95 trace trace 4.5 0.0

5 September 2014 41.6 trace trace 100 trace 0 10.2 0.0

12 September 2014 67.7 20 5 75 trace 0 8.0 6.9

19 September 2014 58.0 10 5 90 trace trace 14.2 17.2

26 September 2014 79.4 trace trace 95 5 0 9.0 0.0

3 October 2014 102.9 5 trace 95 trace 0 6.4 0.0

10 October 2014 117.5 10 10 80 trace 0 3.4 18.0

17 October 2014 60.4 5 trace 95 trace 0 12.3 0.0

24 October 2014 91.8 10 trace 90 0 0 4.4 10.3

31 October 2014 50.1 5 trace 95 0 0 3.9 11.7

7 November 2014 67.2 5 5 90 0 0 4.5 0.4

14 November 2014 69.4 10 trace 90 0 0 3.1 0.0

21 November 2014 142.6 10 5 80 5 0 5.6 2.8

28 November 2014 45.4 5 trace 95 trace 0 8.1 0.6

5 December 2014 16.5 0 trace 100 trace 0 3.6 45.0

12 December 2014 34.0 10 trace 90 trace 0 13.9 7.9

19 December 2014 41.4 10 5 85 trace 0 6.2 12.5

26 December 2014 23.8 10 2 88 trace 0 11.3 10.3

2 January 2015 34.0 10 5 75 10 0 13.8 0.4

9 January 2015 28.9 5 trace 85 10 0 5.2 13.7

16 January 2015 54.0 5 10 65 20 0 6.7 11.1

23 January 2015 30.9 5 trace 85 10 0 20.5 27.9

30 January 2015 78.4 15 2 63 20 0 21.7 0.3

6 February 2015 43.0 20 trace 60 20 0 33.0 0.0

13 February 2015 46.7 10 5 75 10 0 34.8 1.8

20 February 2015 25.2 2 0 78 20 0 30.1 13.5

27 February 2015 52.1 5 2 83 10 0 10.4 23.6

6 March 2015 55.6 15 trace 75 10 0 11.4 0.0

13 March 2015 64.4 2 trace 93 5 0 10.7 0.7

20 March 2015 47.6 10 trace 85 5 trace 6.9 39.2

27 March 2015 21.8 5 trace 85 10 0 10.9 0.4

a the uncertainty in the measurement of surface coverage is typically ±5 per cent. b average TEOM™ TSP concentration during winds between 100 degrees and 120 degrees.


48

Table 10 (continued). TSP particle composition analysis results for Jondaryan from August 2014 to April 2015

Week

commencing

TSP

concentration

(µg/m3)b


from

direction

of

rail

loading

facility

(%)

Rainfall

(mm) Coal

dust

Other

black

particles

Inorganic

and

mineral

Biological

Other

particle

types

3 April 2015 26.3 5 trace 95 trace trace 6.5 1.3

10 April 2015 53.2 5 2 88 5 0 11.8 0.0

17 April 2015 40.6 trace trace 95 5 0 3.2 0.6

24 April 2015 29.4 10 trace 90 trace 0 10.4 9.5

a the uncertainty in the measurement of surface coverage is typically ±5 per cent. b average TEOM™ TSP concentration during winds between 100 degrees and 120 degrees.

Figure 17. TSP composition at the Jondaryan monitoring station from August 2014 to April 2015


49

Conclusions

This report presents the results of the Jondaryan dust monitoring program from March 2014 to

April 2015. Particle concentrations and dust levels were monitored in the Jondaryan community

and compared with air quality criteria based on human health protection and amenity. Analysis of

continuous particle measurements from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015 has found that ambient

PM2.5 concentrations comply with the EPP Air objectives, while TSP and PM10 concentrations

exceeded dust nuisance and human health protection guidelines a number of times over this

period. Levels of deposited dust exceeded the dust nuisance guideline for one sample in the

reporting period.

Daily TSP concentrations at Jondaryan exceeded the NZ MfE dust trigger level of 80 µg/m3 on 36

days from 12 March 2014 to 30 April 2015, with the maximum daily TSP concentration recorded

being 199.8 µg/m3. Twelve-month average TSP concentrations complied with the EPP Air annual

objective of 90 µg/m3, with the maximum 12-month average TSP concentration being 47.6 µg/m3.

Time-series analysis of hourly and rolling 24-hour average TSP concentrations identified that

periods when 24-hour TSP concentrations exceeded the dust nuisance trigger level were often

caused by short periods of very high TSP concentrations. For every episode where rolling 24-hour

average TSP concentrations exceeded the dust trigger level, the TSP pollution rose showed

contributions from multiple dust sources. Contributions from the direction of the rail loading facility

during these episodes ranged from 0.0 to 46.8 per cent.

Daily PM10 concentrations at Jondaryan exceeded the EPP Air 24-hour objective of 50 µg/m3 on

nine days between 12 March 2014 and 30 April 2015, with the maximum daily PM10 concentration

recorded being 103.5 µg/m3. The frequency of PM10 exceedences was greater than the five days in

a 12-month period permitted under the EPP Air. On each of the nine days that the EPP Air

objective was exceeded, the TSP dust nuisance trigger level value was also exceeded, indicating

that the same dust sources were responsible for both the PM10 and TSP guideline exceedences.

The amount of PM10 associated with winds from the direction of the rail loading facility during

periods when the EPP Air 24-hour objective was exceeded ranged from 4.0 to 44.1 per cent of the

total PM10 measured at the monitoring station.

Daily PM2.5 concentrations at Jondaryan did not exceed the EPP Air 24-hour objective of 25 µg/m3

between 12 March 2014 and 30 April 2014. The maximum daily PM2.5 concentration recorded was

19.9 µg/m3. The maximum 12-month average PM2.5 concentration over the reporting period was

6.1 µg/m3, less than the EPP Air annual objective of 8 µg/m3. Emissions from particle sources in

the Jondaryan area do not result in ambient PM2.5 concentrations above guidelines for protection of

human health in the Jondaryan community.

Dust deposition rates at the Jondaryan monitoring site were generally around half the EHP dust

nuisance assessment value of 120 mg/m2/day. Higher deposition rates were measured in August

2014 and October to December 2014, although only the October 2014 deposition rate of 146

mg/m2/day exceeded the EHP guideline value. The higher deposited dust levels coincided with the

period when major Warrego Highway road works were taking place which resulted in increased

dust emissions in the vicinity of the monitoring station.

Soil and rock particles have been found to be the major particle type present in deposited dust and

TSP collected at the monitoring site. Soil and rock dust made up between 50 and 80 per cent of all

particles in deposited dust samples and 60 to 100 per cent of the TSP samples. Coal dust was

present at levels between 2 and 30 per cent in deposited dust samples and up to 20 per cent in

TSP samples. The coal dust content was found to generally align with the proportion of winds


50

coming from the direction of the rail loading facility and coal stockpile during the sampling period,

indicating that particle emissions from these sources do impact on the monitoring station under

favourable meteorological conditions. However, it is likely that some of the coal identified in the

particle samples would have originated from re-suspension of surface dust containing coal located

between the rail loading facility and the monitoring station rather than all the coal present coming

wholly from the rail loading facility or coal stockpile.

The monitoring results obtained between March 2014 and April 2015 identified windblown dust

from bare or sparsely vegetated ground, unsealed local roads and other activities involving ground

disturbance as the main contributor to episodes when particle levels exceeded guidelines for

protection of human health or avoidance of dust nuisance. Dust emissions from Warrego Highway

road works appear to have been a significant contributor to a number of the particle guideline

exceedences recorded between July and December 2014. While particle composition analysis

confirms that emissions from the rail loading facility and coal stockpile do impact on the monitoring

station, the conclusion drawn from analysis of the monitoring results is that emissions from coal

handling operations are not of sufficient magnitude to result in exceedences of guidelines for

protection of human health protection and avoidance of dust nuisance in the Jondaryan community

in the absence of emissions from other dust sources at the same time.

As the monitoring results were affected by additional dust emissions from road works on the

Warrego Highway between Jondaryan and the rail loading facility from July to December 2014, the

monitoring program timeframe has been extended until December 2015 to obtain more

representative particle concentration data for the period from July to December.


51

Appendix

Table 11. Monthly deposited dust sampling results for the Jondaryan monitoring site from March

2014 to April 2015

Date deployed

Date collected

Days sampled

Deposition rate (mg/m2/day)

Winds from rail

loading facility

(%)

Rainfall (mm)

To

tal so

lid

s

Inso

lub

le

so

lid

sa

Ash

(min

era

l)

Co

mb

usti

ble

(org

an

ic)

matt

er

So

lub

le

so

lid

s

13/03/14 04/04/14 22 65 60 38 22 5 14.6 92.0

04/04/14 05/05/14 31 64 49 35 14 15 14.7 23.2

05/05/04 02/06/14 28 47 43 29 14 4 23.0 0.0

02/06/14 02/07/14 30 83 65 45 20 18 10.0 14.4

02/07/14 04/08/14 33 58 47 35 12 11 11.2 2.7

04/08/14 01/09/14 28 189 74 63 11 115 17.6 10.6

01/09/14 07/10/14 36 70 60 46 14 10 13.0 24.1

07/10/14 05/11/14 29 154 146 96 50 8 9.3 33.1

05/11/14 03/12/14 28 113 96 63 33 17 6.7 10.4

03/12/14 06/01/15 34 146 92 82 10 54 11.4 76.4

06/01/15 03/02/15 28 96 60 39 21 36 13.7 53.0

03/02/15 04/03/15 29 100 65 38 27 35 35.6 38.9

04/03/15 08/04/15 35 55 52 41 10 3 13.4 41.6

08/04/15 06/05/15 28 110 62 38 24 48 10.9 81.0

a the EHP Air Impacts Guideline recommends that the insoluble solids deposition rate not exceed 120 mg/m2/day

(averaged over a normalised 30-day period) to minimise dust nuisance impacts.


52

Table 12. Deposited dust particle composition analysis results for Jondaryan from March 2014 to April 2015

Sampling period

March 2014 to September 2014

March 2014

(13/03/14 to

04/04/14)

April 2014

(04/04/14 to

02/05/14)

May 2014

(02/05/14 to

03/06/14)

June 2014

(03/06/14 to

02/07/14)

July 2014

(02/07/14 to

04/08/14)

August 2014

(04/08/14 to

01/09/14)

September 2014

(01/09/14 to

07/10/14)


(mg/m2/day) 60 49 43 65 47 74 60

Winds from rail loading

facility (%) 14.6 14.7 23.0 10.0 11.2 17.6 13.0

Rainfall (mm) 92.0 23.2 0.0 14.4 2.7 10.6 24.1

Particle composition (% projected area basis)

Black

Coal 10 30 30 20 20 20 10

Soot n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. 5 trace

Black rubber dust n.d. n.d. n.d. trace trace n.d. 10

Inorganics and minerals

Soil or rock dust 80 70 70 75 80 65 80

Fly ash n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Cement dust n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Other mineral dust n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Glass fragments n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Copper sludge n.d. n.d. n.d. 5 n.d. trace trace

Biological

P/S slime and fungi n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Insect debris trace trace trace trace trace trace trace

Plant debris (general) 10 trace trace n.d. trace 10 trace

Plant debris (plant char) n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Plant debris (other) n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

General organic types

Wood dust n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Fibres (miscellaneous) n.d. n.d. trace n.d. n.d. n.d. trace

Starch n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Paint n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Plastic fragments n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Red rubber dust n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d. = not detected


53

Table 12 (continued). Deposited dust particle composition analysis results for Jondaryan from March 2014 to April 2015

Sampling period

October 2014 to April 2015

October 2014

(07/10/14 to

05/11/14)

November 2014

(05/11/14 to

03/12/14)

December 2014

(03/12/14 to

06/01/15)

January 2015

(06/01/15 to

02/02/15)

February 2015

(03/02/15 to

04/03/15)

March 2015

(04/03/15 to

08/04/15)

April 2014

(08/04/15 to

06/05/15)


(mg/m2/day) 146 96 92 60 65 52 62

Winds from rail loading

facility (%) 9.3 6.7 11.4 13.7 35.6 13.4 10.9

Rainfall (mm) 33.1 10.4 76.4 53.0 38.9 41.6 81.0


Black

Coal 5 5 2 10 20 10 20

Soot trace trace n.d. n.d. n.d. trace trace

Black rubber dust 5 n.d. n.d. n.d. trace n.d. trace


Soil or rock dust 85 70 83 80 50 85 80

Fly ash n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Cement dust n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Other mineral dust n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Glass fragments n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Copper sludge 5 trace n.d. n.d. trace n.d. n.d.

Biological

P/S slime and fungi n.d. 15 n.d. 10 n.d. n.d. n.d.

Insect debris trace 5 10 trace 10 n.d. trace

Plant debris (general) trace 5 5 trace 20 5 trace

Plant debris (plant char) n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Plant debris (other) n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.


Wood dust n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Fibres (miscellaneous) n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. trace n.d.

Starch n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Paint n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Plastic fragments n.d. n.d. trace trace n.d. n.d. n.d.

Red rubber dust n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d. = not detected


54

Table 13. Weekly TSP particle composition analysis results for Jondaryan from 29 August 2014 to 01 May 2015

Sampling period

29 August 2014 to 30 October 2014

29/8/14 to

4/9/14

5/9/14 to

11/9/14

12/9/14 to

18/9/14

19/9/14 to

25/9/14

26/9/14 to

2/10/14

3/10/14 to

9/10/14

10/10/14 to

16/10/14

17/10/14 to

23/10/14

24/10/14 to

30/10/14

Run time

Total hours sampled 7.5 17.0 13.5 23.7 13.2 10.8 5.4 20.6 7.4

Fraction of sample

period (%) 4.5 10.2 8.0 14.2 9.0 6.4 3.4 12.3 4.4

Rainfall (mm) 0.0 0.0 6.9 17.2 0.0 0.0 18.0 0.0 10.3


Black

Coal 5 trace 20 10 trace 5 10 5 10

Soot trace trace trace trace n.d. n.d. trace n.d. n.d.

Black rubber dust trace trace 5 5 trace trace 10 trace trace


Soil or rock dust 95 100 75 85 95 95 80 95 90

Fly ash n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Cement dust n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Other mineral dust n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Glass fragments n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Copper sludge n.d. n.d. n.d. 5 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Biological

P/S slime and fungi n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Insect debris trace trace trace trace n.d. trace trace trace n.d.

Plant debris (general) trace trace trace trace 5 trace trace trace n.d.

Plant debris (plant

char) n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Plant debris (other) n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.


Wood dust n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Fibres (miscellaneous) n.d. n.d. n.d. trace n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Starch n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Paint trace n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Plastic fragments n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Red rubber dust n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d. = not detected


55

Table 13 (continued). Weekly TSP particle composition analysis results for Jondaryan from 29 August 2014 to 01 May 2015

Sampling period

31 October 2014 to 2 January 2015

31/10/14 to

6/11/14

7/11/14 to

13/11/14

14/11/14 to

20/11/14

21/11/14 to

27/11/14

28/11/14 to

4/12/14

5/12/14 to

11/12/14

12/12/14 to

18/12/14

19/12/14 to

25/12/14

26/12/14 to

2/1/15

Run time


Fraction of sample

period (%) 3.9 4.5 3.1 5.6 8.1 3.6 13.9 6.2 11.3

Rainfall (mm) 11.7 0.4 0.0 2.8 0.6 45.0 7.9 12.5 10.3


Black

Coal 5 5 10 10 5 n.d. 10 10 10

Soot n.d. n.d. n.d. trace n.d. n.d. trace n.d. n.d.

Black rubber dust trace 5 trace 5 trace trace trace 5 2


Soil or rock dust 95 90 90 80 95 100 90 85 88

Fly ash n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.




Copper sludge n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Biological


Insect debris n.d. n.d. n.d. trace n.d. trace trace trace trace

Plant debris (general) n.d. n.d. n.d. 5 trace trace trace trace trace

Plant debris (plant





Fibres (miscellaneous) n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.


Paint n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.



n.d. = not detected


56


Sampling period

2 January 2015 to 6 March 2015

2/1/15 to

9/1/15

9/1/15 to

16/1/15

16/1/15 to

23/1/15

23/1/15 to

30/1/15

30/1/15 to

6/2/15

6/2/15 to

13/2/15

13/2/15 to

20/2/15

20/2/15 to

27/2/15

27/2/15 to

6/3/15

Run time


Fraction of sample

period (%) 13.8 5.2 6.7 20.5 21.7 33.0 34.8 30.1 10.4

Rainfall (mm) 0.4 13.7 11.1 27.9 0.3 0.0 1.8 13.5 23.6


Black

Coal 10 5 5 5 15 20 10 2 5

Soot n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. trace n.d. trace

Black rubber dust 5 trace 10 trace 2 trace 5 n.d. 2


Soil or rock dust 75 85 65 85 63 60 75 78 83

Fly ash n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. trace n.d. n.d. n.d.




Copper sludge n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Biological


Insect debris trace n.d. n.d. n.d. trace n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Plant debris (general) 10 10 20 10 20 20 10 20 10

Plant debris (plant





Fibres (miscellaneous) n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.


Paint n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.



n.d. = not detected


57


Sampling period

6 March 2015 to 1 May 2015

6/3/15 to

13/3/15

13/3/15 to

20/3/15

20/3/15 to

27/3/15

27/3/15 to

3/4/15

3/4/15 to

10/4/15

10/4/15 to

17/4/15

17/4/15 to

24/4/15

24/4/15 to

1/5/15

Run time

Total hours sampled 19.1 18.0 11.6 18.3 10.9 19.8 5.4 17.5

Fraction of sample

period (%) 11.4 10.7 6.9 10.9 6.5 11.8 3.2 10.4

Rainfall (mm) 0.0 0.7 39.2 0.4 1.3 0.0 0.6 9.5


Black

Coal 15 2 10 5 5 5 trace 10

Soot trace trace trace trace trace 2 trace trace

Black rubber dust trace trace trace trace trace trace trace trace


Soil or rock dust 75 93 85 85 95 88 95 90

Fly ash n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Cement dust n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Other mineral dust n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Glass fragments n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Copper sludge n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Biological

P/S slime and fungi n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. 5 n.d. n.d.

Insect debris n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. trace trace n.d. n.d.

Plant debris (general) 10 5 5 10 trace trace trace trace

Plant debris (plant

char) n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. 5 trace

Plant debris (other) n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.


Wood dust n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Fibres (miscellaneous) n.d. n.d. trace n.d. trace n.d. n.d. n.d.

Starch n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Paint n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Plastic fragments n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

Red rubber dust n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.

n.d. = not detected

Date post:	24-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Jondaryan Dust Monitoring Program - Queensland€¦ · March 2014 to April 2015 monitoring report...

Documents