Jump to main content or area navigation.

Contact Us

Air Trends

2003 Air Trends Report - Download Graphics

Figure Description
  Chapter 1 - Executive Summary
  Comparison of Growth Areas and Emissions
  Comparison of 1970 and 2002 Emissions
  Air Quality and Emissions Trends
  Chapter 2 - Criteria Pollutants — National Trends
2-1 Number of people living in counties with air quality concentrations above the level of NAAQS in 2002.
2-2 Figure 2-2. CO air quality, 1983–2002, based on annual second maximum 8-hour average.
2-3 Figure 2-3. Trend in second maximum nonoverlapping 8-hour average CO concentrations by type of location, 1982–2001.
2-4 Figure 2-4. Trend in CO second maximum nonoverlapping 8-hour concentrations by EPA Region, 1982–2001.
2-5 CO emissions by source
category, 2002.
2-6 Figure 2-6. Density map of 2001 CO emissions, by county.
2-7 CO emissions, 1983–2002.
2-8 Highest second maximum nonoverlapping 8-hour average CO concentration by county, 2001.
2-9 Pb air quality, 1983–2002, based on annual maximum quarterly average.
2-10 Maximum quarterly mean Pb concentration trends by location
(excluding sites designated as point-source oriented), 1982–2001.
2-11 Pb emissions, 1982–2002.
2-12 Pb emissions by source
category, 2001.
2-13 Trend in Pb maximum quarterly mean concentration by EPA Region, 1982–2001.
2-14 Highest Pb maximum quarterly mean by county, 2001.
2-15 NO2 air quality, 1982–2001, based on annual arithmetic average.
2-16 Trend in annual mean NO2 concentrations by type of location, 1982–2001.
2-17 Trend in NO2 maximum quarterly mean concentration by EPA Region, 1982–2001.
2-18 NOx emissions, 1983–2002.
2-19 NOx emissions by source category, 2002.
2-20 Figure 2-20. Density map of 2001 NO2 emissions, by county.
2-21 Highest NO2 maximum quarterly mean by county, 2001.
2-22 O3 air quality, 1983–2002, based on annual second maximum 1-hour average.
2-23 O3 air quality, 1983–2002, based on annual fourth maximum 8-hour average.
2-24 Trend in 1-hour O3 levels, 1983–2002, averaged across EPA Regions, based on annual second highest daily maximum.
2-25 Trend in 8-hour O3 levels, 1983–2002, averaged across EPA Regions, based on annual fourth maximum 8-hour average.
2-26 Trend in annual second-highest daily maximum 1-hour O3 concentrations by location, 1983–2002.
2-27 Comparison of actual and meteorologically adjusted 8-hour O3 trends, 1993–2002.
2-28 1-Hour O3 trends for 1991–2000 and 1992–2001.
2-29 8-Hour O3 trends for 1991–2000 and 1992–2001.
2-30 Median percent change for the period 1995–2001 at PAMS monitors for selected species.
2-31 Annual 1-hour and 8-hour composite O3 design values in the Atlanta and Chicago-Gary lake county nonattainment areas.
2-32 June-August weekday morning average NOx and TNMOC at PAMS Type 2 trend sites (June 1–September 1, 6:00–9:00 a.m.).
2-33 Trends in fourth highest daily 8-hour O3 concentrations for 34 rural sites from CASTNet, 1990–2001.
2-34 Trend in annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour O3 concentrations in National Parks, 1992–2001.
2-35 VOC emissions, 1983–2002.
2-36 Anthropogenic VOC emissions by source category, 2002.
2-37 Density map of 2001 anthropogenic VOC emissions, by county.
2-38 PM10 air quality, 1993–2002, based on seasonally weighted annual average.
2-39 PM10 annual mean concentration trends by location, 1992–2001.
2-40 Trend in PM10 annual mean concentration by EPA Region, 1992–2001.
2-41 Highest second maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration by county, 2001.
2-42 National direct PM10 emissions, 1993–2002 (traditionally inventoried sources only).
2-43 National direct PM10 emissions by source category, 2002.
Direct PM10 emissions density by county, 2001.
National direct PM2.5 emissions, 1993–2002 (traditionally inventoried sources only).
2-46 Annual average PM2.5 concentrations (µg/m3) and particle type in rural areas, 2002.
2-47 Annual average PM2.5 concentrations (µg/m3) and particle type in urban areas, 2002.
2-48 Annual average PM2.5 concentrations in rural areas.
2-49 Annual average PM2.5 concentrations by county, 2001.
2-50 Annual average PM2.5 concentrations (µg/m3), 2002 (based on seasonally weighted annual average).
2-51 SO2 air quality, 1983–2002, based on annual arithmetic average.
2-52 Annual mean SO2 concentration by trend location, 1982–2001.
2-53 SO2 emissions, 1983–2002.
2-54 SO2 emissions by source
category, 2002.
2-55 Direct SO2 emissions density by county, 2001.
2-56 National SO2 emissions trend for all Title IV affected units.
2-57 Long-term ambient SO2 trend, 1982-2001.
2-58 Trend in SO2 annual arithmetic mean concentration by EPA Region, 1982–2001.
2-59 Highest SO2 annual mean concentration by county, 2001.
  Chapter 3 - Criteria Pollutants — Metropolitan Area Trends
3-1 Air Quality Index logo
3-2 Number of days with AQI values >100,as a percentage of 1990 value
3-3 Percent of days over 100 due to ozone
  Chapter 4 - Criteria Pollutants — Nonattainment Areas
4-1 Location of nonattainment areas for criteria pollutants,September 2000
Classified ozone nonattainment areas
  Chapter 5 - Air Toxics
Map of 10 cities in monitoring pilot project.
5-2 National air toxics emissions, 1996.
5-3 National air toxics emissions.
Ambient benzene, annual average urban concentrations, nationwide, 1994–2000.
  Chapter 6 - Special Studies Summary
Urban PM2.5 increments.
Monitoring stations showing upward CO trends.
Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Atlanta) compared to 2002 data and southeast region average.
Variance of the difference vs. distance.
CPA vs. distance (km).
Comparison of mean CPA vs. distance (km).
  Special Studies: Impact of April 2001 Asian Dust Event on Particulate Matter Concentrations in the United States
Figure 1 Map of Mongolia and northern China, highlighting the Gobi Desert region.
Figure 2 April 6, 2001, surface windspeeds (color-shaded regions in m/s) overlaid with sea level pressure contours (mb) over the Mongolia and northern China region.
Figure 3 NOAA-16 AVHRR image of the dust storm over Mongolia for April 6, 2001
Figure 4 Path of the dust cloud from Asia to the United States, April 6 through April 14, 2001.
Figure 5 Peak PM2.5 estimated soil mass from IMPROVE and STN monitoring networks (a–c). NCEP/NCAR reanalysis data for ù (color-shaded regions in pascal/s),
overlaid with 700-mb heights (d–f).
Figure 6 Haze over Glen Canyon National Recreation Area (UT, AZ) on April 16, 2001.
Figure 7 Three-day backward ensemble trajectories originating from Okefenokee, FL (30.74 N 82.13 W), Cape Romain, SC (32.94 N 79.66 W), Great Smoky Mountains, TN (35.63 N 83.94 W), and Gulfport, MS (30.39 N 89.05 W) and ending at 15 UTC (11:00 a.m. EDT) on April 19, 2001.
Figure 8 The SeaWiFS image taken on April 17, 2001, shows dust over the Great Lakes region. The eclipsed area in the image is a result of areas not covered during the SeaWiFS overpass on this day. The inset shows that TOMS Aerosol Index for April 17 also captures the dust cloud over the Great Lakes region, extending down into the southeastern United States.
Figure 9 Historical PM2.5 soil concentrations at Canyonlands National Park.
Figure 10 Historical PM2.5 soil concentrations at Sula Wilderness Area.
Figure 11 Historical PM2.5 soil concentrations at Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge.
Figure 12 Historical PM2.5 soil concentrations at Brigantine National Wildlife Refuge.
Figure 13 PM2.5 soil concentrations, April 2001 vs. typical April days, at Brigantine National Wildlife Refuge.
Figure 14 Summary of PM2.5 soil composition on April 2001 peak days vs. typical April days, by region.
Figure 15 Daily PM10, PM2.5, and soil (PM2.5) concentrations at Salt Lake City, UT.
Figure 16 Daily PM10, PM2.5, and soil (PM2.5) concentrations at Acadia National Park, ME.
  Special Studies: Chemical Speciation of PM2.5 in Urban and Rural Areas
Figure 1 35 STN locations.
Figure 2 98 IMPROVE locations.
Figure 3 Spatial averaging of rural sulfate concentrations.
Figure 4 Spatial averaging of rural nitrate concentrations.
Figure 5 Spatial averaging of rural TCM (k=1,8) concentrations.
Figure 6 Thirteen urban/rural site paintings.
Figure 7 Effect of evaluation on rural sulfate concentrations.
Figure 8 Effect of evaluation on rural ammonium concentration.
Figure 9 Effect of evaluation on rural nitrate concentration.
Figure 10 Effect of elevation on rural TCM (k=1.8) concentrations.
Figure 11 Effect of elevation on rural crustal concentrations.
Figure 12 Urban excess for total PM2.5 gravimetric mass.
Figure 13 Urban excess at Fresno, CA.
Figure 14 Urban excess at Charlotte, NC.
Figure 15 Urban excess at St. Louis, MO.
Figure 16 Urban excess at New York City, NY.
Figure 17 Comparison of mass urban increment to chemical species.
Figure 18 National map depicting urban excess by component for 13 example areas.
  Special Studies: Trends in Monitored Concentrations of Carbon Monoxide
Figure 1 Examples of trends A through E.
Figure 2 Locations of monitoring sites in the coterminous United States with at least one statistical model showing a significant upward trend. Circles represent sites that have stopped an oxygenated gasoline requirement. Diamonds represent other sites.
Figure 3 Example of a site screened out by the combined statistical models.
Figure 4 Example of a site with increasing trend. This site did not have data for the years 1990 through 1992.
Figure 5 Example of a site with increasing trend in recent years.
Figure 6 Example of a site with increasing trend in recent years. The vertical line indicates the year that the oxygenated gasoline requirement ended.
  Special Studies: Cumulative Ozone Exceedances — A Measure of Current Year Ozone Levels Compared to Historical Trends
Figure 1 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Atlanta) compared to 2002 data and SE region average.
Figure 2 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Charlotte) compared to 2002 data and SE region average.
Figure 3 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Memphis) compared to 2002 data and SE region average.
Figure 4 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Nashville) compared to 2002 data and SE region average.
Figure 5 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (New Orleans) compared to 2002 data and SE region average.
Figure 6 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Miami) compared to 2002 data and SE region average.
Figure 7 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Orlando) compared to 2002 data and SE region average.
Figure 8 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Tampa) compared to 2002 data and SE region average.
Figure 9 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Boston) compared to 2002 data and NE region average.
Figure 10 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (New York) compared to 2002 data and NE region average.
Figure 11 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Philadelphia) compared to 2002 data and NE region average.
Figure 12 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Baltimore) compared to 2002 data and NE region average.
Figure 13 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Washington, DC) compared to 2002 data and NE region average.
Figure 14 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Chicago) compared to 2002 data and MW region average.
Figure 15 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Cleveland) compared to 2002 data and MW region average.
Figure 16 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Cincinnati) compared to 2002 data and MW region average.
Figure 17 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Columbus) compared to 2002 data and MW region average.
Figure 18 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Detroit) compared to 2002 data and MW region average.
Figure 19 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Indianapolis) compared to 2002 data and MW region average.
Figure 20 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Pittsburgh) compared to 2002 data and MW region average.
Figure 21 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (St. Louis) compared to 2002 data and MW region average.
Figure 22 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Kansas City) compared to 2002 data and MW region average.
Figure 23 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Minneapolis) compared to 2002 data and MW region average.
Figure 24 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Las Vegas) compared to 2002 data and SW region average.
Figure 25 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (San Diego) compared to 2002 data and SW region average.
Figure 26 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Sacramento) compared to 2002 data and SW region average.
Figure 27 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Phoenix) compared to 2002 data and SW region average.
Figure 28 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Dallas) compared to 2002 data.
Figure 29 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Houston) compared to 2002 data.
Figure 30 Cumulative exceedances — 5-year average (97–01) (Los Angeles) compared to 2002 data.
  Special Studies: Characterization of National Spatial Variation
Figure 1 PM10 annual averages (county maximum).
Figure 2 Example of a kriged surface.
Figure 3 Schematic of a variogram.
Figure 4 Variance of the difference vs. distance.
Figure 5 Correlation (r) vs. distance for PM2.5.
Figure 6 Box plot of correlation vs. distance.
Figure 7 CPA vs distance (km).
Figure 8 Coefficient of perfect agreement vs distance (km).
Figure 9 Comparison of mean CPA vs distance (km).
  Spatial Variation Equations
  Special Studies: Development of a New Reporting Technique for Air Quality
Figure 1 Interpreting the symbols in the new display technique
  Appendices
A-1 (Multiple NA areas within a larger NA area) Two SO2 areas inside the Pittsburgh–Beaver Valley ozone NA. Counted as one NA area.
A-2 (Overlapping NA areas) Searles Valley PM10 NA partially overlaps the San Joaquin Valley ozone NA. Counted as two NA areas.
Class I Areas in the IMPROVE Network meeting data completeness criteria.

Related Links | Acronyms | Hardcopies

Jump to main content.