TERI Bangalore Air Quality Study

February 2010
Air quality assessment, emission inventory and

source apportionment study for Bangalore city
Final report
Supported by
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., R&D Centre, Faridabad

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.
Reliance Industries Ltd.
&
Central Pollution Control Board
Project Report No.2004EE28

www.teriin.org
The Energy and Resources Institute
Suggested format for citation
!
$ %&
)
* +
"#
"
'(
$
'-
For more information

* + .
& 0 1 ! 2
4/ /
56
$ %&
8
9
T E R I Report No. 2004EE28
,('
,('
3
,(' ,,
,(' ,7
%%%
:; < &
=>
Project team
11
&
1* %
1
?4
1
?
@
+@
A
1*
1
?B
1
?
*4 %
$
?
2#
?
.
%
#
B 1
2 1
*A1
1
+ ?!
1
.
1 2 #
&
21
C
#
%
*
/ 2
A
?
@&
0
6 2
1
A
#
%
%
#
Acknowledgements
=
2 %
=
4
/
*
0
6 = E&/
6 !
*
6 >
/
2
D /
/
*
6
/
5
1
0
>
>
0
#
=
/
>
*
0
=
.
/
!
>
1
/
+
0
2 %
F
0
!
&
&
&
1
&
&
* 2 !
.
/
/
!
/
21
2 %
F
!
&
E/
=
!
1
=
!
>?
/
6
?
!
!
!
C
?
21
.
*
2
2 %
0
>
2
2
Table of contents
!"
&
'
&
!
"
+%,
+ -
./
*
$
$$
#
!!
$"
$)
%
.
3
$ 6
&
) 7
8
1.23
7
3
4
!
%
9
.
!
3'
$1
$1
&2
&2
&2
&&
&&
&8
&1
)2
)
*
6
:
7
6
7
;
;
4
;
)
)
)
)$
)$
))
))
)8
)8
8
8
8
3
<
8&
+%,
+
&
1
%&
'!
($
'
=
>
8 >
*
'
'
7* 2
7* $
>'
$ )!
$
*
$
$
$
*
?(
: >*
$$
$
$
)
8
8
=
:
$
$
1$
1$
2
2$
3
3
4@
22)
>6
$
$
!!
!!
%$
&
&
$
=
&
&
&
#
9
%
7
$
&
$2
$
3
3%
3%
&
$
"
#
)
)
)
)
7
)
)
,
6
7* 2 %A
7* 2
A
B %
.
2
2
Bibliography
Annexure - I
2 )
$"
$)
$)
&
&)
)
)8
)8
)1
C
C
2 )
2 )
2 )
)
)
8
8
List of tables
:!
$
:!
!
:!
&
!:
C
)
8
:!
:!
?#
!!
2
:!
:!
% /
@
:!
&
7* 2
$
:!
:!
:!
:!
6
7
-< ,
60
@< D
-< ,
60
0
# ?#
$
&
=
6
:!
?#
:!
:!
8
1
-!
$1
:!
:!
-!
22)0
&2
&
DC
&
&
-:, 0
@C
&
:!
-:, 0
'
7* 2
@< D
2 6
&$
&&
-:,0
-:,
60
&8
)2
:!
:!
-< , 0
)
C
)2
-< , 0
6
:!
:!
4
4
)
-:, 0
6
-< , 0
)
)
6
C
)
:!
:!
$ 4
& 4
:!
:!
:!
:!
:!
8 ;
1 :
2 :
4
-:,
60
-< ,
60
)$
@ < DC
:!
:!
:!
)$
!
)8
82
8
8
!
!
!
-:, 0
?#
.
97
22)
-:, 0
4
:
8
8
8)
-:, 0
?#
7* 2
-:, 0
@@
C
:!
81
?#
:!
:!
:!
:!
:!
:!
:!
:!
C
=
=
=
=
$ =
& =
) =
8 (
:!
-:, 0
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
@@
81
1)
18
11
11
22
2
2
6
7
;
'
<
( (5
%
2
+
7* 2
)
2
:!
2 %
:!
:!
%
!
7* 2
!
:! $
:! $
:! $
7*
7*
!
:
)
)
-:, 0
?#
7* 2
-:, 0
@@
C
:! $
8
?#
-:, 0
@@
8
:! $ $
. @
1
:! $ &
. @
:! $ )
:! $ 8
. @
7* 2
-E , 0
:! $ 1
:! &
:! &
-E , 0
/
&
?
2
$
#
'
7* 2
)
:! &
'
1
:! &
/
$
:! )
:! )
:! )
7* 2
%A 2
%A 2 )
&2
%A 2
%A 2 )
7
7* 2
2 )
List of figures
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
(
(
6
<
;
$
&
)
8
1
2
$
&
)
( (5
7
(
<
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
6
<
$
& :
0
-'
-'
0
;
-< !
( (5-5
0
7
-(
0
<
7*.' 7*.7* 2.7* $
0
0
$
&
)
8
1
2
2
%
%
8- 0%
7* 2
8 -!0 %
7*
1
2
)
8
1
-< !
! .
=
$
8
1
2
! .
.?
.! C
7%5
)
$
7%5
)
C
F 7* 2 -6
0
C
F 7* 2 -<
C
F 7* 2 0
C
F 7* 2 -;
'
C
F 7* 2 -( (50
C
F 7* 2 -7
0
C
F 7* 2 -E , G0
4,
C
C
C
F 7*
F 7*
F 7*
$
$
$
-6
-<
0
8
1
2
0
0
0
7* 2
0
0
$
)
8
1
=
=
=
=
=
C
F 7*
C
F 7*
C
F 7*
C
F 7*
-E , G0
-;
'
0
-( (50
0
$ -7
0
$ 4,
7*
$2
$
$
$
$
$
$
=
$ *
7* 2
$$
& *
7*
$$
$8
=
=
=
=
:
9
!
- *7
A%0
&
&
&
&$
=
=
=
=
=
=
&
7* 2
- @
9
)
8
1
- ,0
D
0
&$
'
?#
?#
!
"
=
=
=
6
7
7
=
=
$
&
@ /< C
!
%
!
8 .
!. =
&)
&)
-:, 0
7* 2
7* 2
<7
22
<7
6
#
)
)
)&
!
!
)&
))
- ,0
#
&1
)
)1
?
82
.;<:.
,
=
1 7
2 7
8
;<:
-!
#
!
8
7*
8$
?#
7*
B
8$
7*
- ,0
8&
=
=
=
=
=
=
:
7
$ 7
& 7
)
8
-:, 0
8)
8)
88
88
88
7* 2
B
?# 7*
?# 7* 2
- ,0
#
@@
@@
81
?#
12
!
7*
&
12
=
=
7
7*
!7
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
7* 2
7* 2
7* 2
7* 2
$
7* 2
& 7* 2
)
7* 2
8 7* $
1 7* $
2 7* $
7* $
7* $
7* $
7* $
$
=
=
=
=
$
$
$
$$
I
I
I
!
!
@@
DC
@ @ DC
!
6
!
<
!
!
;
!
( (5
!
7
!
<
!
6
!
<
!
!
;
!
( (5
!
7
!
<
7* 2
7* $
!
0
H /<
2 $H
2 $ /<
2 $H
2$ /
1
2$
2&
2)
28
21
2
0
$
&
)
8
#
&
2
7* 2
)
=
=
$&
?
.
?
$)
7* 2
$8
$1
?
.
!
8
7* 2
.
=
-E , 0
22)
-E , 0
22)
8
7* 2
-E , 0
22)
1
B
=
=
$ 2
?
.
?
.
=
=
-E , 0
-E , 0
-E , 0
22)
?
.
!
22)
22)
7* 2 !
22)
=
22)
=
&
7* 2
%A
22)? 2 )
=
&
&
%A
22)? 2 )
=
&
&
7* 2
!
8
&
1
=
=
=
=
=
&$
&&
&)
&8
&1
7* 2 3
%9:
7* 2 3
%9:
7* 2
%9:
7* 2 3
%9:
4
%A
$2
6
%A
$
?
%A
$
%A
$
7* 2
%A
$$
=
=
)
)
)$
)&
7
?
7* 2
-E , 0
!
- 22)0
%A - 2 . 2 )0
7
. @
7* 2
!
- 22)0
%A- 2 . 2 )0
-E , 0
$2
0
7
?
7* 2
-E , 0
!
- 22)0
%A- 2 . 2 )0
@ /
$8
$8
$8
?
7* 2
-E , 0
7* 2
-E , 0
%A 2
$1
%A 2 )
?
%
=
))
$1
7* 2
F(
(
.%
F(
(
(
2
2 )
-E , 0
%
F(
;
&
?
-E , 0
F(
.
F(
.%
7* 2
F(
(
.
F(
(
(
F(
;
2 )
=
)8
%
)1
%
) 2
%
)
-E ,
)
%
)
%
)
%
) $
%
=
=
) &
) )
) 8
) 1
) 2
7
!
7
-E ,
7
!
&
?
7* 2
-E , 0
?(
2
?
7* 2
-E , 0
F(
(
2
-E , 0
?
7* 2
F(
(
(
2
?
7* 2
0
%
F(
;
2
?
7* 2
-E , 0
F(
2 )
-E , 0
?
7* 2
?(
(
2 )
?
7* 2
-E , 0
?(
(
(
2 )
?
7* 2
-E , 0
?(
;
2 )
?
-E , 0
B
- 22)0
%A - 2 . 2 )0
. @
B
0
!
- 22)0
%A- 2 . 2 )0
$2
0
?
-E , 0
B
- 22)0
%A- 2 . 2 )0
@ /
&
&
&
&$
&$
&&
&&
&)
&8
&8
&1
?
-E , 0
-E , 0
%A 2
&1
%A 2 )
?
%
=
F(
(
.%
2
)
)
%
) $
%
) &
%
-E , 0
F(
(
(
%
2 )
?
?(
?
F(
(
?
F(
(
(
?
F(
;
F(
.
)
%
=
F(
(
(
-E , 0
%
F(
;
2 )
7
%
2
)2
B
F(
.%
F(
(
.
F(
;
)
B
-E , 0
)
B
-E , 0
)
B
-E , 0
)$
B
-E , 0
)$
) )
%
) 8
%
) 1
%
) 2
%
?
F(
?
?(
(
?
?(
(
(
?
?(
;
)&
B
-E , 0
2 )
)&
B
-E , 0
2 )
))
B
2 )
7* 2
%
%A
7* 2
%A
-E , 0
2 )
-E , 0
))
82
3 2 )
Executive summary
Background
!
"
%!#!$&
!
()
'
*
$
%
')&
'+
$
About Bangalore sources of air pollution

,
$
/
01
$
34
5663
57
5663
8
&
8
.
*
'
!
*
2
+
%2 &
$
(#
ii Executive summary
,
!
Objectives
.
98
*
/
$
5
;
$
.
<
7
Approach to the study

!#!$
:
Monitored
ambient
concentrations
Onsite meteorological
conditions
Emission inventorisation
(present and future)
Air dispersion
modelling
Chemical
characterization
of PM10
samples
Interpretation of model
outputs
(dispersion/receptor
models)
Receptor
modelling
Source
profiles
Source
apportionment
PM10 and (PM2.5
limited)
Figure 1 Overall approach for the source apportionment study

T E R I Report No. 2004 EE 28
Air quality
management
plan
iii Executive summary
Air quality status

%
#
:6 # 5 7&
%'! ,!&
@,! %$ A
:8; $
%
5&
$
%=# +=#
>,5 =,5 !, ,; &
%
!>
!&
%>,?
&
#
&
!#!$
=#
%!=$
%#
+=#
%@
&
%"
& #
%!=$
@
%
!#!$
&
%"
&%
;&
*
&
%!=$&
%#
&
*
57
&
& ) 2
<& =,5
>,5
!=$
>,5
,;
2
!,
&
! %
*
!
A
# :6
%!=$
!=$
> ) !
C
#
@
&
!#!$
!,
,;
57
&
'!B
,!
!
iv Executive summary
!
Vegetation
Residential
Roads
Monitoring station
1. CSB (Kerbside)
1. 2. IGICH
CSB (Kerbside)
(Residential)
2.
IGICH (Residential)
3. Domlur
(Residential)
3.
Domlur (Residential)
4.
Victoria
4.
Victoria(Kerbside)
(Kerbside)
5. 5. Kammanahalli
Kammanahalli (Residential)
(Residential)
6.
Peenya (Industrial)
6. Peenya
(Industrial)
7.
Kanamangala (Background)
7. Kanamangala (Background)
321
261
257
226
164
135
117
9593
SPM
137
95
109
62
47
IG
IC
H
45
35
23
9089
43
CS
B
75
54
RSPM
PM10
24
92
24
73
38 26
Pe
en
ya
Ba
ck
gr
ou
nd
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Do
ml
ur
Ka
mm
an
ah
al
i
Vi
cto
r ia
Concentration ( g/m)
Figure 2 Study domain showing the location of the air quality monitoring locations
PM2.5
Figure 3 Average concentration of SPM, RSPM, PM10, PM2.5 during three seasons
10000
2077
1210
2027
3188
2083
2017
1349
1000
100
77
33 41
13
31 33
13
10
66
28
11
57
44 42
25
9
10
51 40
34
10
IG
IC
H
Pe
en
ya
SO2
CO
Ba
ck
gr
ou
nd
CS
B
ia
cto
r
O3 (ppb)
Vi
an
ah
al
i
NO2
Ka
mm
Do
m
lur
Figure 4 Average concentration of gaseous pollutants during three seasons
v Executive summary
Emission inventory
$
5665&
5*5
D'
5*5
DA
#
2
2
57
)
8
*
+
'
!#!$'
5663 '
=
$
5663
7< < B
# :6
5:3 < B
>,?
:< 4 B
=,5
.
# :6
%<5E&
8
%56E&
%:<E&
%:<E&
2
%3E&
%;E& %
7& F
%4GE& 2
.
>,?
%5;E&
%GE&
%:E& %
4&
=,5
%74E& 2
%5;E&
%:4E&
.
:
Table 1 Total emission loads (T/d) in Bangalore
PM10
NOX
Transport
22.4
146.36
2.31
Road Dust
10.9
0.00
0.00
Domestic
1.8
2.73
0.68
DG Set
3.6
50.96
3.35
Industry
7.8
17.19
8.21
Hotel
0.1
0.20
0.02
Construction
7.7
0.00
0.00
54.4
217.4
14.6
Total
SO2
vi Executive summary
PM10
Construction
14%
Hotel
0%
Transport
42%
Industry
14%
DG Set
7%
Domestic
3%
Road Dust
20%
Figure 5 Percentage share of different sources in total PM10 emission loads

NOx
Industry
8%
Hotel
0%
DG Set
23%
Domestic
1%
Transport
68%
Figure 6 Percentage share of different sources in total NOX emission loads
Receptor modelling and source apportionment

'
%
#
&
10
+
*
vii Executive summary
! $ %!
&
# :6
5
Table 2 Indicative sources based on Factor Analysis for the different sites
S. No.
Site
Site description
Indicative sources
Silk Board
Traffic location
Motor vehicle exhaust, secondary particulate matter, construction activities, natural
Victoria road
Traffic location
Motor vehicle exhaust, natural soil, road dust, biomass burning, secondary particle
Peenya
Industrial
Road dust, residual oil burning, crustal soil dust, industrial sources, metal industries,
Domlur
Residential
soil, road dust

formation
motor vehicle exhaust, construction activities
Soil and road dust, secondary particle formation, motor vehicle exhaust, storm water
drain, biomass burning
5
Kammanahalli
Residential
Road dust, coal combustion, vegetative burning, secondary particle formation,

resuspended soil, motor vehicle exhaust
IGICH
Kanamangala/
Hospital
Road dust, natural soil, secondary particle formation, construction activities, motor
/Residential
vehicle exhaust, incinerator combustion
Background
Natural soil, crustal source, road dust, vehicular sources, biomass burning,
Background
secondary particle formation
%
&
! $
! $
! $
*
! $G5
#
#
:6
8
3
:6
,
#
H
2
F
:6
H2
H
#
57
viii Executive summary

.
57
2
!
)
#
#
! $G5
57
:6
9
=
76E
:IE
#
:6
57
*
=
#
:6
57
:6
2
:;E(57E
#
!
57
$
A
%#
&
,
#
:6
57
#
#
PM10
Secondary
8.7%
57
:6
PM2.5
Paved road
& Soil dust
Transport
19.0%
3.5%
Domestic
Secondary
12.7%
5.8%
Paved road
& Soil dust
50.6%
DG sets
13.0%
Industrial
4.5%
Industrial
3.5%
Domestic
4.2%
Transport
49.9%
DG sets
24.7%
Figure 7 Comparison of PM10 and PM2.5 source contribution in Bangalore city (average of 3 seasons)
Dispersion modelling : existing scenario

=
*=
% =!= ;&
ix Executive summary
!#!$&
#
>,?
:6
5J
5
*
)
45< "
5J
5 "
6 7J
67
Existing Scenario: PM10 and NOX

2
>,?
:6
*
#
%#
:6
&
%)
5<8
G&
>,?
2
%)
I&
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
400 g/m3
375 g/m3
18000
350 g/m3
325 g/m3
16000
300 g/m3
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
6000
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Figure 8 Contours for 24-hourly average PM10 concentration ( g/m3) for first (winter)
season during 2007
x Executive summary
26000
24000
22000
300 g/m3
20000
280 g/m3
260 g/m3
18000
240 g/m3
220 g/m3
16000
200 g/m3
180 g/m3
14000
160 g/m3
12000
140 g/m3
120 g/m3
10000
100 g/m3
80 g/m3
8000
60 g/m3
40 g/m3
6000
20 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Figure 9 Contours for 24-hourly averaged NOX concentration ( g/m3) for first (winter)
season during 2007
=
$ K
%
&
Emission control options and analysis

)
56:5
56:3
98
&$
&
%$ K&
%
&
BAU - Business as usual scenario

$ K
2
*
$=8 @
Growth patterns
=
%5663&
;
.
56:5
56:3
xi Executive summary
Table 3 Growth rates of different sectors
S.No
Sector
Description of growth
Domestic
Population growth rate of 3.1% as listed in Master
Transport
Vehicle-wise growth rates were calculated using the
Plan - 2015
last five years data (2002-2007). BS-IV norms are
taken into account from 2010.
3
Industrial
5.85% as depicted in Industrial development plan
DG sets
Based on population growth rates for domestic sets

and based on energy consumption for commercial
DG sets.
Construction
Based on population growth rates
Road dust
Based on increase in VKT ( from transport sector)
Eating joints
$ K
# :6
>,?
# :6
56:3 F
>,?
5:3 B <46 B
)
:6
::
7< < B 5663 I7 G B
95.8
90
80
71.9
70
60
54.4
50
30.4
26.4
22.4
26.4
13.7
10.3
7.8
12.2
6.6
10.5
7.7 9.0
l
ot
e
H
us
try
In
d
t
Se
G
D
es
tic
om
oa
d
sp
o
rt
Du
st
2007
2012
2017
Figure 10 Sectoral and total PM10 emission load under BAU scenario during 2007-2017
ta
l
0.1 0.1 0.2
To
3.6
1.8 2.1 2.4
20
10
ct
io
17.2
10.9
on
st
ru
40
30
Tr
an
PM10 Emission Load (T/d)
100
460.2
321.4
252.9
217.4
201.4
172.9
146.4
93.8
on
st
0.0 0.0 0.0
ot
el
ry
In
du
st
Se
t
G
D
0.2 0.2 0.3
To
ta
17.222.830.3
2.7 3.2 3.7
0.0 0.0 0.0
ru
ct
io
51.0
D
om
es
tic
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Tr
an
sp
or
t
R
oa
d
D
us
t
Nox Emission Load (T/d)
xii Executive summary
2007
2012
2017
Figure 11 Sectoral and total NOX emission load under BAU scenario during 2007-2017
Dispersion modelling - BAU Scenarios 2012 and 2017

$ K
$
)
:5
5<8
5663 56:5
# :6
$ K
56:3
*
374
89
BAU 2012
ia
al
li
r
om
lu
D
106
79
60
oa
d
67
Ka
Vi
ct
or
Year 2007
121
105
PM 10 2 4 - Hr St and ar d
H
IG
96
m
an
h
72
55
50
0
205
155
Pe
en
y
202
150
112
100
276
239
IC
200
150
SB
PM10 Conc (g/m 3)
400
350
300
250
BAU 2017
Figure 12 Predicted 24-hourly average PM10 concentrations ( g/m3) for base year (2007)
and BAU (2012, 2017)
:6
5<
56:5
xiii Executive summary

56:3
$ K
:;
:<
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
400 g/m3
18000
375 g/m3
350 g/m3
325 g/m3
16000
300 g/m3
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
6000
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Figure 13 Contours for 24-hourly average PM10 concentration ( g/m3) for BAU 2012
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
18000
400 g/m3
375 g/m3
350 g/m3
325 g/m3
300 g/m3
16000
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
200 g/m3
12000
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
25 g/m3
6000
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Figure 14 Contours for 24-hourly average PM10 concentration ( g/m3) for BAU 2017
xiv Executive summary

5663
*
#
5663
$ K56:5
56:3
Line source control options & analysis

$
<&
#
>,? %
:6
7&
!#!$
Table 4 Reduction in PM10 emission loads due to various technological interventions in transport sector in Bangalore
S.No
Strategy
BAU
2007
22.4
2012
26.4
2017
% reduction
% reduction
2012
2017
Remarks
30.4
CAGR 2002-2007, BS-IV from 2010, No biodiesel ,Ethanol, or ban
BS-V
22.4
26.4
30.1
0%
-1%
BAU + BS -V has been applied from 2015
BS-VI
22.4
26.4
30.0
0%
-1%
BAU + BS -VI has been applied from 2015
ELECTRIC
22.4
25.8
29.1
-2%
-4%
BAU + Introduction of electric vehicle as per
Hybrid
22.4
26.4
30.4
0%
0%
BAU + 1% hybrid cars in 2012 & 2% in 2017
CNG
22.4
25.4
26.6
-4%
-12%
BAU+ commercial vehicles (Bus/Car/3w)-
Ethanol
22.4
26.4
30.4
0%
0%
BAU + 10% Ethanol introduced in 2012-2017
Bio-diesel
22.4
26.3
30.2
-0.4%
-1%
BAU + 5% Biodiesel introduced in 2012 and
chart provided by CPCB
25% conversion in 2012 and 100% in 2017
10% in 2017
9
H2/CNG
22.4
26.4
30.4
0%
0%
10% Vehicles in 2017
10
Diesel
22.4
26.1
29.9
-1.0%
-1.7%
50% conversion of BS-II buses in 2012, and
oxidation
100% in 2017
catalyst (DOC)
11
22.4
26.2
30.1
-0.6%
-1.2%
50% conversion of BS-III buses in 2012, and
Diesel
100% in 2017
particulate
filter (DPF)
#
$ K
:6
&
)
:7
xv Executive summary
2012
0%
-2%
0%
0%
-1%
0% 0%
2017
0% 0%
0% 0%
-0.4%
-1%
-1%
-1.0%
-1.7%
% Reduction (wrt BAU)
-2%
-4%
-0.6%
-1.2%
-4%
-4%
-6%
-8%
-10%
-12%
-12%
-14%
BS-V
BS-VI
ELECTRIC
Hybrid
CNG
Ethanol
Bio-diesel
H2/CNG
DOC
DPF
Figure 15 Percentage reduction achieved in PM10 emissions by implementing various strategies

in the transport sector
$=8@
$=8@
# :6
56:7
*
#
:6
6 <8:E
F
$
8
56:5
56:3
2,! $=8
2#) $=8
!>
#
; (<8
<E
:6
56:5
:5E
56:3
>,?
7
Table 5 Reduction in NOX emission loads due to various technological interventions in transport sector in Bangalore
S.No
1
Strategy
BAU
2007
146.4
2012
201.4
2017
% reduction
% reduction
2012
2017
252.9
Description
CAGR 2002-2007, BS-IV from 2010,
No bio-diesel ,Ethanol, or ban
BS-V
146.4
201.4
248.0
0%
-1.9%
BAU + BS -V has been applied from

2015
BS-VI
146.4
201.4
243.5
0%
-3.7%
ELECTRIC
146.4
196.3
241.4
-2.5%
-5%
BAU + BS -VI has been applied from

2015
BAU + Introduction of electric
vehicles as per chart provided by
CPCB.
Hybrid
146.4
201.3
252.8
-0.02%
-0.04%
BAU + 1% hybrid cars in 2012 & 2%

in 2017
CNG
146.4
199.0
241.5
-1%
-4%
BAU+ commercial vehicles

(Bus/Car/3w) - 25% conversion in
2012 and 100% in 2017
xvi Executive summary

S.No
7
Strategy
2007
Ethanol
2012
146.4
2017
201.1
252.6
% reduction
% reduction
2012
2017
-0.1%
-0.1%
Description
BAU + 10% Ethanol introduced in
2012-2017
Bio-diesel
146.4
201.6
253.4
0.1%
0.2%
BAU + 5% Biodiesel introduced in

2012 and 10% in 2017
9
10
H2/CNG
146.4
201.4
240.6
0.0%
-4.9%
Diesel
146.4
201.4
252.9
0.0%
0.0%

50% conversion of BS-II buses in
oxidization
2012, and 100% in 2017
catalyst
(DOC)
Diesel
146.4
201.4
252.9
0.0%
0.0%
50% conversion of BS-III buses in
particulate
2012, and 100% in 2017
filter (DPF)
>,?
$ K
&
)
2012
:4
2017
1%
0%
% reduction (wrt BAU)
0%
0%
0.1%0.2% 0.0%
-0.02%
0.0%0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
-0.1%-0.1%
-0.04%
-1%
-1%
-2%
-1.9%
-2.5%
-3%
-4%
-3.7%
-4%
-5%
-5%
-4.9%
PF
D
O
C
D
G
2/
CN
H
es
el
ol
Bi
odi
Et
ha
n
NG
C
yb
rid
H
TR
IC
EC
EL
BS
-V
I
-6%
BS
-V
11
Figure 16 Percentage reduction achieved in NOX emissions by implementing various strategies

$=8@
$=8@
>,?
56:7
# :6
7E
56:3
>,?
$=8
!>
$
6 :86 5E 56:5
2,! $=8
>,?
%
8
56:3
2#)
; &
xviiExecutive summary
>,?
:E
56:5
>,?
<E 56:3
# :6
Dispersion modelling impact of interventions in transport sector

*
%
*
&
5<
:6
$ K
56:5
56:3
!>
56:3
6 58: 3 E
6 387 4 E
!>
*
Other sectors control options and analysis

)
56:5
F= = 56:5
F= =B =2
56:3
5<E
<;E #
$ K
56:5
56:3
>,?
56:3
$ K # :6
57E
GIE
#
56:3
:6
F
56:5
73E
56:5
2
G6E
>,?
56:3
:7E
>,?
:6
=
8
::E 56:5
76E
55E
56:3
:6
Scenario analysis
)
%
8
8@
$ K
$=8 @
56:6&
98
Sectors
Description
Transport
Industries
Alternate-I
Scenario with certain
strategies to reduce the air
pollution loads across various
sectors.
Introduction of BS-V in 2015
Ban on 10 year old
commercial vehicles in 2012
and 2017
Introduction of Metro in 2011
Enhancement of public
transport system based on
diesel (shift of PKT from
private vehicles to public
transport i.e. 10% in 2012
and 20% in 2017)
Improvement in inspection
and maintenance
Introduction of DOC in BS-II
buses and DPF in BS-III
buses
Ban on any new air polluting

industries in city limits
Alternate-II
Stringent scenario with many more strategies
to reduce the air pollution load across various
sectors as compared to Alternate- I scenario.
Introduction of BS-VI in 2015
Ban on 10-yr old commercial vehicles and
15-yr old private vehicles both in 2012
and 2017
Enhancement of public transport system
based on CNG (shift of PKT from private
vehicles to public transport i.e. 10 % in
2012 and 20% in 2017)
Introduction of electric vehicles (12% 2w,
5-10% 3w and taxis, 510% buses in
2012 and 2017, respectively)
Improvement in inspection and
maintenance
Conversion of public transport
(commercial 3 & 4 w) to CNG (25% in
2012 and 100 % in 2017)
Ban on any new air polluting industries in

city limits
Shift from solid fuel to liquid fuel (LSHS) in
2012 & NG in 2017 in existing industries
Inspection and maintenance
Alternate-III
Scenario that contains additional set of measures that are not a part
of the common control options as per the chart suggested by CPCB
(for example, introduction of fuel efficiency standards, installation of
control devices (DOC/DPF) on all diesel vehicles and DG sets).
Ban on 15 yr old commercial vehicles in 2012 and 10 yr old
Enhancement of public transport system based on diesel (shift
of PKT from private vehicles to public transport i.e. 10 % in 2012
and 20% in 2017)
Introduction of electric vehicles (1 2% 2w, 5 - 10% 3w and
taxis, 5 10% buses in 2012 and 2017, respectively)
Improvement in inspection and maintenance
Application of DOC/DPF after introduction of BS- IV fuel in 2010
to:
Old Buses and Trucks (pre BS-IV):reduction in PM10 - DOC :
22.5%, DPF : 70%
Old Diesel Cars pre BS-IV (about half of PM reduction is
assumed as compared to that for buses/trucks) : reduction
in PM10-DOC: 10%, DPF : 35%

Ban on 10 yr old commercial vehicles in 2012 and 2017
Enhancement of public transport system based on CNG
(shift of PKT from private vehicles to public transport i.e.
10 % in 2012 and 20% in 2017)
Introduction of electric vehicles (1 2% 2w, 5 - 10% 3w
and taxis, 5 10% buses in 2012 and 2017,
respectively)
Conversion of public transport (commercial 3 & 4 w) to
CNG (25% in 2012 and 100 % in 2017)
By-passing of trucks on the proposed peripheral ring
road around Bangalore (which is broadly outside the
study domain- assumed only 10% truck traffic within the
city)
Introduction of fuel efficiency standards (considering reduction

of fuel consumption)
Light passenger vehicles : 10% between (2012-15) and 15%

between (2015-17), Light duty Passenger cars : 20% between (2012-15)
and 30% between (2015-17), Heavy duty vehicles : 20% between (2012-15)
and 30% between (2015-17)
Ban on any new air polluting industries in city limits

Shift from solid fuel to liquid fuel (LSHS) in existing industries in
both 2012 and 2017

Shift from solid fuel to liquid fuel (LSHS) in 2012 and to
NG in 2017 in existing industries
No power cuts i.e. no usage of DG sets in the city
Road dust resuspension
Wall to wall paving

DOC and DPF applied to commercial DG sets (>12 kVA) in
2010. Reduction in PM10 :DOC : 22.5%, DPF : 70% (reductions
taken same as those in the case of buses)
Wall to wall paving
Construction
Better construction practices
DG sets
Alternate-IV
Scenario with measures that are more oriented towards
meeting the air quality standards in future
Wall to wall paving

Reduction of road dust re-suspension due to by-passing
of trucks
xix Executive summary
PM emission loads (T/d)
100
:6
>,?
95.8
75
74.5
71.9
57.2
54.4
50
53.2
45.1
42.4
43.5
34.6
32.9
25
0
2007
BAU
2012
ALT-I
ALT-II
$ K
NOx emission loads (T/d)
500
460
400
300
217
200
100
ALT-IV
Figure 17 Estimated emissions loads for PM10 and NOX under the BAU and four alternate scenarios
321
350
254
258
299
275
227
122
131
2017
ALT-III
:3
2007
BAU
ALT-I
2012
ALT-II
2017
ALT-III
ALT-IV
PM10 emission load

F8
56E
%PM reduction w.r.t. BAU
Scenario
2012
ALT-I
-20%
ALT-II
-37%
ALT-III
-41%
ALT-IV
-54%
2017
-22%
-44%
-55%
-64%
56:5
<<E
55E
56:5
56:3
F8
;3E
56:3
F8
2,!B
2#)
2
<:E
56:3
77E
56:5
F8 @
7<E
4<E
%
&
8
,
56:3
8@
:IE(5 : E
L
;3 E
:6
L
&
%;4E
5663
5663
56:3
$ K
34 E
5663
NOX emission load

F8
5:E 56:5
<6E
% NOx reduction wrt BAU
Scenario
ALT-I
ALT-II
ALT-III
ALT-IV
2012
-21%
-29%
-20%
-59%
2017
-24%
-40%
-35%
-73%
5<E
56:5
:3E
F8 @
56:3
56:3
;;E
>,?
F8
5IE
56:5
$ K
F8
56:3
*
7IE
3;E
2
8
>,?
56:3
56:3
8
5663
$ K
::5 E
L
L
4:E 54E
8@
5663
>,?
;GE
5663
,
<<E>,?
Model performance
%
)
:G
L
MB
L @
56:5
<5 L :66 M B
&
5<8
L
*
7I L 5:; M B
;6 8G: M B ;
#
L
;
7: L ::I
F
:6
xxi Executive summary

56:3
<5 L :6< M B ;
L
3I L 5<: M B
;5 L 37 M B ;
L @
47 L :G5 M B ;
L
L
300
241
250
PM10 Conc (g/m3)
218
200
213
182
162
150
100
140
128
119
103
94
P M 10 24-hr standard
97
59
50
51
42
30
73
63
66
65
42
111
100
99
81
79
75
68
119
47
41
32
83
79
53
55
40
62
43
54 51
39
119
104
81
66
51
42
0
CSB
Alt I 2012
IGICH
Alt II 2012
Domlur
Alt III 2012
Alt IV 2012
Victoria Road
Alt I 2017
Alt II 2017
Kammanhalli
Alt III 2017
Peenya
Alt IV 2017
Figure 18 24-hourly average PM10 concentrations ( g/m3) for Alternate I, Alternate II,
Alternate III and Alternate IV scenarios for the year 2012 and 2017
5<8
L
#
L
:6
L
L @
*
56:5
:66 L 543 M B ; G3 L :45 M B ; 33 L :<GM B ;
77 L :63 M B ;
F
56:3
:;7 L 5I< M B ; :63 L 55I M B ; 3GL :7; M B ;
46 L ::I M B ;
L
L
L
L @
)
:I
5<8
$
# :6
L
L
L
L
@
$ K
56:5
56:3
# :6
:<85;
E 56:5
:;8;3 E 56:3
L
$ K
# :6
L
5384; E 56:5
5G835 E 56:3
$ K
F
# :6
L
;G844 E
56:5
7583< E 56:3
$ K
K
L@
# :6
77 8 35 E 56:5
45 8 G: E
56:3
$ K
74
xxiiExecutive summary
PM10 % reduction wrt BAU
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
CSB
Alt I 2012
Alt II 2012
IGICH
Alt III 2012
Domlur
Alt IV 2012
Victoria Road
Alt I 2017
Kammanhalli
Peenya
Alt III 2017
Alt IV 2017
Alt II 2017
Figure 19 Percent reduction of predicted 24-hourly highest PM10 concentration ( g/m3) for Alternate I, Alternate
II, Alternate III and Alternate IV scenarios for the years 2012 and 2017
Concentration contours for alternate scenarios

#
5<
:6
L
L
56:3
L @
56 5: 55
5;
L
L
L @
$ K
56:3
L
8
2,!B
2#)
&
L @
8
%
8
8
L
*
#
5<8
8
:6
*
*
$
#
L@
56:3 ,
D
$
+
&
:7
xxiiiExecutive summary
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
400 g/m3
18000
375 g/m3
350 g/m3
16000
325 g/m3
300 g/m3
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
6000
50 g/m3
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Figure 20 Contours for 24-hourly average PM10 concentration ( g/m3) for

Alternate I scenario in 2017
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
400 g/m3
375 g/m3
18000
350 g/m3
325 g/m3
16000
300 g/m3
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
6000
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000

Alternate - II scenario in 2017
xxivExecutive summary
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
18000
375 g/m3
16000
325 g/m3
400 g/m3
350 g/m3
300 g/m3
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
6000
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000

Alternate - III scenario in 2017
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
400 g/m3
18000
375 g/m3
350 g/m3
325 g/m3
300 g/m3
16000
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
6000
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000

Alternate - IV scenario in 2017
xxvExecutive summary
Prioritized list of management/control options

$
.
:6
2
.
$
$
8
! $G5
=,5
>,?
Prioritization of control options

)
B
$ K
56:3 %)
56:5
8
9
%:4 GE&
%:4 :E&
56:5 9
56:3 9
K
5<&
%; 4E&
%4 5E&
8
9
56:5 9
%4 ;E&
56:3 9
%4 5E&
%:G3E&
%G;E&
%5 4E&
2
%: <E&
%:I <E&
%:: 7E&
%7 7E&
2
%: IE&
8
9
%:4 <E&
%4 ;E&
%5; 6E& 2
%4 5E&
%G;E& 2
%5 4E&
%:6 5E&
%7 7E&
9
%:I 4E&
%G;E&
%:I <E& 2
%:< 3E&
%:6 GE& 2
%4 ;E&
%:5 GE&
%7 7E&
56:5 9
%3 <E&
56:3 9
%I GE&
K
8@
56:5 9
%I 5E&
56:3 9
%:: 7E&
% reduction wrt BAU (total PM10 emission

load)
xxviExecutive summary
25
20
15
10
5
2012 Alt I
Transport
2017 Alt I
Road dust
2012 Alt II
DG Sets
2017 Alt II
Industries
2012 Alt-III
2017 Alt-III
Construction
2012 Alt-IV
2017 Alt-IV
Figure 24 Percent PM10 emission load reduction in different sectors under Alternate scenarios as
compared to the total pollution load under BAU scenario
)
56:5
$ K
56:5 9
*
%:7E&
9
8
8
%:5 5E&
856:6
2,!82#)
%I :E&
B
%: 7E&
%: <E&
%: <E&
%: 5E&
!>
!>
%6 IE&
2,!82#)
%6 <E&
F
56:3
9
56:3 9 8
*
%:; GE&
%:;E&
%:5 7E&
%<E&
8
8
2,!82#)
!>
B
%5 7E&
!> %: 3E&
%: 7E&
%: <E&
%: ;E&
=
#
856:6
:6
xxviiExecutive summary
> 2
%
:5 GE # :6
2,!(2#)
G;E 56:3
&
56:3
2
(
: IE
2
1
45E
7 7E
56:3
$
4 5E
56:3 )
7 ;E
F= =
; 4E
56:3
56:3
)
57
:6
% reduction w rt total PM10 BAU load

0
BS-V
0.3
0.0
BS-VI
0.0
0.4
Bio-diesel
Ethanol
Metro
10
12
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
12.2
12.5
0.1
0.8
CNG (Com. vehicles)
1.4
Electric Vehicles
0.9
1.4
1.5
I&M (Vehicles)
Sy nchronisation_signals
0.1
4.0
2.5
1.3
1.4
1.7
Enhance PTS (CNG)
1.21.5
Enhance PTS (Diesel)

DOC-DPF (BS-II,III Buses)
0.4
0.5
DOC-DPF (All diesel vehicles)
9.1
13.0
Bye Passing Trucks

Fuel Efficiency stds.
13.8
9.2
6.0
2.6
5.5
3.6
Fuel Shift-Ind.(CNG)
Fuel Shift-Ind.(LSHS)
8.3
6.2
Better Construction
Ban Industries
12.8
1.4
1.9
DOC/DPF (DG sets)

WTW (Road dust)
15.0
0.0
0.4
No power cuts
I&M (DG sets)
16
0.0
0.0
BAN (Com. vehicles)

BAN (Pvt. vehicles)
14
6.3
6.2
4.7
5.3
3.6
4.7
w rt BAU 2012
w rt BAU 2017
Figure 25 Percent PM10 emission load reduction due to various individual interventions as compared to the
total pollution load under BAU scenario in the years 2012 & 2017
xxviiiExecutive summary
Table 6 Prioritised list of key interventions in terms of reduction in total PM10 emission loads in 2017
S.No
Strategy
% reduction in total
PM10 emission loads
in 2017
By-passing of trucks through the proposed peripheral ring road around
13.8%
Bangalore
2
Installation of DOC and DPF devices in all pre-2010 diesel vehicles
13.0%
No power cuts leading to zero usage of DG sets
12.8%
Ban on 10 year old commercial vehicles in 2012 and 2017
12.5%
Ban on any new industries in city limits(6.2%) and fuel shift towards cleaner
11.5 %
fuel NG (5.3%) in existing industries

6
Installation of DOC and DPF devices in DG sets
8.3%
Wall to wall paving for reduction of road dust
6.2%
5.5%
Conversion of public transport (commercial 3 & 4 w) to CNG (25% in 2012
4.0%
and 100 % in 2017)

10
Improvement in inspection and maintenance for vehicles
2.5%
11
Inspection and maintenance for DG sets
1.9%
Enhancement of public transport system based on CNG (shift of PKT from
1.7%
12
private vehicles to public transport i.e. 10% in 2012 and 20% in 2017)
13
Enhancement of public transport system based on diesel (shift of PKT from
1.5%
$
A
)
*
,
=
#
:6
Action plan
S.No
1
Sector
Transport
Strategy
Strengthening of Public
transport system
Metro
implementation on
schedule
Enhance share of
public mass
transport system
on diesel
Conversion/
enhancement of
public transport to
CNG
Impact*
Ban on old commercial

vehicles (10 year) in the city
High
Transport department - Bangalore
Short-term
By-passing of trucks through

the proposed peripheral ring
road around Bangalore
Progressive improvement of
vehicular emissions norms
(BS-V, BS-VI)
High
Traffic Police, Transport department
Short-term
Low
MoRTH, MoPNG, Ministry of Heavy

Industry and Public Enterprises, MoEF, Oil
companies, Automobile manufacturers
Medium to
Long term
High
Transport department
Medium
Low
BEE, Ministry of Power, Ministry of Heavy

Industry and Public Enterprises, MoRTH,
Automobile manufacturers
Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Heavy
Industry and Public Enterprises,
Automobile manufacturers, State
Medium
Installation of pollution
control devices (DOC/DPF)
in all pre-2010 diesel
vehicles
Introduction of fuel efficiency
standards
Introduction of hybrid
vehicles/ electric vehicles
High
Responsible Agency / agencies

Govt of India, State Government, BMRCL
(Bangalore Metro rail Corporation Ltd.),
Transport Department- Bangalore, BMTC
(Bangalore Metropolitan Transport
Corporation), GAIL
Time frame
Medium term
Remarks
Leveraging the JNNURM funding mechanism for public transportation
improvement
Public-private partnership models to be explored
The metro network needs to be progressively expanded.
Bangalore currently does not have a CNG network. There are plans to
set up such a network in future. ULSD would also be available by April
2010 in Bangalore.
Low medium
Short-Medium
Retro-fitted 2-stroke three wheelers on LPG in Bangalore have higher

PM emissions compared to OE 2-stroke/ 4-stroke LPG/Petrol. Thus
retro-fitment of 2-stroke 3-wheelers is not an effective control option.
Fiscal incentives/ subsidies for new vehicle buyers
A plan should be devised for gradual phase out with due advance
notice. Careful evaluation of socio-economic impact of banning
required.
In the long run, a ban/ higher tax on private vehicles (> 15 years) could
be looked into.
Has high potential in reducing the pollutant load in the city
Auto-fuel road map should be developed well in advance to plan the
progressive improvement of emissions norms and corresponding fuel
quality norms.
Though the impact is low, its potential is high in the long term when
gradually fleet renewal takes place.
Technical feasibility and implementation plan of this strategy needs to
be carefully evaluated, though it has potential for emission load
reduction. Retro-fitment of DOC in BS-II buses and DPF in BS-III buses
is technically feasible.
Impact is low since it is applied only to new vehicles registered after
2012. However, its potential is high in the long term when gradually
fleet renewal takes place.
Appropriate fiscal incentives need to provided; Electric vehicles would
be especially effective in high pollution zones. Impact determined by
the extent of switchover to hybrid/ electric vehicles.
xxxExecutive summary
Road dust
Industries
Power/ DG
sets
Effective Inspection and

maintenance regime for
vehicles
Medium
Alternative fuels such as

ethanol, bio-diesel
Reduction in private vehicle
usage/ ownership
Low
Improve traffic flow
Medium
Fuel adulteration
n.a
-Construction of better
quality roads
-Regular maintenance and
cleaning/sweeping of roads
-Reduction in
vehicular fleet
and trips
Wall to wall paving for
reduction of road dust
n.a
government,
Transport Department, Traffic police
MNRE, MoRD, MoPNG, MoA, Oil

companies,
Min. of Finance, State Government
NGOs
General public
Traffic police, Bangalore Development
Authority (BDA), Bruhat Bengaluru
Mahanagara Palike (BBMP),
Govt. of India, Oil companies, Food and
civil supplies department- Bangalore
Bangalore Development Authority (BDA),
Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike
(BBMP), NHAI
Short to
Medium
Short Mediumterm
Initial focus could be on commercial vehicles; Capacity development in

terms of infrastructure for fully computerized testing/certification and
training of personnel. Linkage of all PUC centres for better data
capture.
There are operational issues regarding availability and pricing that
need to be sorted.
A pre-requisite for curbing the growth of private vehicles is the
provision of an effective mass based transport system. Strategies such
as costlier parking, higher excise duties/sales tax on private vehicles,
car pooling would be helpful.
Synchronization of signals, one way roads, flyovers, widening of roads,
removal of encroachments, staggering of office timings to reduce peak
flow and congestion. Application of IT tools for traffic management
(Intelligent transport system)
Re-assess subsidy on kerosene, strict vigilance and surveillance
actions, better infrastructure in terms of testing laboratories
Effective enforcement of road quality norms is required. Landscaping/
greening of areas adjacent to roads
ongoing
Medium term
Short
Short
High

(BBMP)
Short term
Interlocking tiles may be used so that water percolation takes place.
Fuel shift towards cleaner

fuels
High
Short-Medium
term
Shift from solid fuels to liquid fuels (LSHS) and subsequently to

gaseous fuels (CNG)

industry in city limits
High
Short term
Industrial estates/zones may be developed well outside the city
Strengthening of
enforcement
mechanism for
pollution control
No power cuts leading to
zero usage of DG sets
n.a
KSPCB, Directorate of Industries and

Commerce, Industry associations, GAIL,
Oil companies
KSPCB, Department of Forest, Ecology
and Environment, Department of
Industries and Commerce, Karnataka
Industrial Area Development Board
KSPCB, Industry associations,
Short term
This would ensure greater compliance with standards. In addition,

cleaner technology options need to be promoted and appropriate
incentives to be defined. Voluntary measures such as ISO certifications
to be encouraged.
Adequate tie-ups need to be ensured
High
Bangalore Electricity Supply Company,

Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd.
Medium term
xxxiExecutive summary
Construction
Other
sectors
in DG sets
large DG sets
Better enforcement of
construction guidelines
(which should reflect Green
Building concepts)
Integrated land-use
development of Bangalore
taking environmental factors
into consideration
Open burning/ Waste
burning to be discouraged
Domestic sector biomass
burning to be reduced
Virtual mobility- using ICT
information and
communication technology
Strengthening of air quality
monitoring mechanism in
terms of number of stations
as well as pollutants
monitored. Capacity building
of KSPCB staff.
Environmental education
and awareness activities
High
KSPCB, DG set manufacturers
Medium
Medium
KSPCB, Chief Electrical inspectorate
Short to
Medium
High
KSPCB, SEAC (State expert appraisal

committee), Bruhat Bengaluru
Short term
n.a.
Bangalore Metropolitan Region

Development Authority, Bangalore
Development Authority, Bruhat Bengaluru
Mahanagara Palike (BBMP)
(BBMP), KSPCB
Food and civil supplies department, Oil
companies
Department of Information Technology&
Biotechnology, Government of Karnataka;
Medium term
Holistic development of the entire region including peripheral areas.
Short term
Organic matter could be used for compost formation and methane gas
generation
Rural areas should be encouraged to shift to cleaner fuels
n.a
Low
n.a
Medium
Technical feasibility and implementation plan of this strategy needs to

be carefully evaluated, though it has potential for emission load
reduction
Short-Medium
term
Reduced number of trips.
n.a
KSPCB
Short
Good quality data is an important input in assessing the change in air

quality and the impact of policy interventions. Continuous monitoring
stations to be promoted.
n.a
Education department, Schools/Colleges,

CBOs, NGOs
Short
Also, sensitization programmes for policy makers.
* Impact is determined in terms of percent reduction in total emission load for PM10 for the study period upto 2017 subject to the assumptions listed in chapter 6 (High impact > 5% reduction; medium impact 1-5%
reduction; low impact < 1% reduction; n.a = not quantified or not quantifiable). Time frame: Short (upto 2012), Medium (2012-2017)
CHAPTER
1.1
1 Introduction
Background of the study
!"
$ %
$
&
$
'
%
+
#
%
,-
(
)
% %(*
) +-*
+% %(
%
.
+/
#
(
1.2
General description of city

(
(
&
0
!2'!3$ 4
! !)
-
$ 1
$
*
-
Air quality assessment, emission inventory and source apportionment study
Figure 1.1 Survey of India map for Bangalore city
Introduction
Vegetation
Residential
Roads
Monitoring station
1. CSB (Kerbside)
1. 2. IGICH
CSB (Kerbside)
(Residential)
2.
IGICH (Residential)
3.
Domlur
(Residential)
3.
4. 4. Victoria
Victoria(Kerbside)
(Kerbside)
5. 5. Kammanahalli
(Residential)
6.
Peenya (Industrial)
6.
Peenya
(Industrial)
7.
Kanamangala (Background)
7. Kanamangala (Background)
Figure 1.2 GIS representation of Bangalore city
1.2.1Climate
5
68 *
5
)6" 7
1
'9
(
!"7:2 ;
%
'
"7! ;
%
6<
3
<7 2 $ =
1.2.2 Source activities

(
)
%
(
&
!
$
"<
*
5
>
"?
$
! $
.
/
>%@
(
'
>
/
+
%
$
#
5
(
B
$
1.3
Need for the study

(
&
&
"
7
$ B
$
A
1 #
D
$
(
'
+/
1.4
Introduction
Objectives and scope of work

.
E
7
'
F
$
!
:
(
.
2
"
1.5
Approach to the Study

1
% %(
'
3
#
$
#
#
$
1
Monitored
ambient
concentrations
Onsite meteorological
conditions
(present and future)
Air dispersion
modelling
Chemical
characterization
of PM10
samples
Interpretation of model
outputs
(dispersion/receptor
models)
Receptor
modelling
Source
profiles
Source
apportionment
PM10 and
(PM2.5 limited)
Figure 1.3 Overall approach for the source apportionment study

Air quality
management
plan
1.6
Report structure
<
)
(
#
<
! G! $
H
%
"
2
'
3
%
<
=
CHAPTER
2.1
2 Air Quality Status
Introduction
!
"
#
$%
&
'
()*
()*
+
/
,-.
2.2
(-
Methodology
Profiling of seven sites
)
"
'
0!1
0
0
1)
23 + 4
0 5
'6 1
"
'
&
TERI, Domlur (Residential location)

2
7 !8 8
8
7
$
!! 9:8
7 8
8
< 8
8 Air quality assessment, emission inventory and source apportionment study

12O5808.45 N
77 O3731.98 E
Elevation 2941 ft
12 O5832.37 N
77 O3834.19 E
Elevation 2978 ft
12O5749.86 N
77 O3815.41 E
Elevation 2910 ft
12O5708.23 N
77 O3756.82 E
Elevation 2926 ft
12 O5729.75 N
77 O3859.62 E
Elevation 2945 ft
Figure 2.1 Sampling location at Domlur
$
5
=)=
+
5
? >
'
5
>
"
7
2
5
"
+
2
'
+
2
$%
$
9?>
?!>
#
&
7@>
9>
5
#
&
Air Quality Status
Kammanahalli (Residential location namely R1)

2
6
2
79
!! 9!8
?@8
8
< 78
88
8
13O0043.80 N
77 O3703.09 E
Elevation 3010 ft
13O0106.39 N
77 O3806.11 E
Elevation 2979 ft
13O0024.78 N
77 O3746.33 E
Elevation 2987 ft
12O5942.90 N
77 O3727.82 E
Elevation 2984 ft
13O0005.80 N
77 O3829.64 E
Elevation 2993 ft
Figure 2.2 Sampling location at Kammanahalli
2
2
:>
A >
2
7 >
"
$%
4
4
$%
!>
7:>
>
+
>
;
5
&
&
'
Victoria road (Traffic location namely T1)

(
2
:8 8
8
!! 9@8
??8
8
<278
12 O5818.80 N
77 O3601.94 E
Elevation 3009 ft
12O5841.71 N
77 O3704.63 E
Elevation 2973 ft
12O5800.32 N
77 O3644.31 E
Elevation 2963 ft
12 O5718.30 N
77 O3626.12 E
Elevation 2951 ft
12 O5739.83 N
77 O3729.80 E
Elevation 2970 ft
Figure 2.3 Sampling location at Victoria Road
?:>
>
B
2
5
4
*%
4
/
#
$%
#
2
:>
77
7A>
"
$
A>
"
2
! >
"
?!>
#
/
&
> *
&
CSB (Traffic location namely T)

2
2
!! 9!8
7:8
8
8 8
8
?
12 O5518.20 N
77 O3636.26 E
Elevation 2949 ft
<28
12 O5541.57 N
77 O3738.41 E
Elevation 2939 ft
12O5500.30 N
77 O3718.41 E
Elevation 2912 ft
12O5418.62 N
77 O3701.11 E
Elevation 2907 ft
12O5441.62 N
77 O3803.78 E
Elevation 2894 ft
Figure 2.4 Sampling location at CSB
@@>
(
+
2
;
"
(
$%
+
2
* "
! >
5 '
0/$$1
&
/
/
$
7?>
?@>
#
&
0
/
&
&
79>
!>
1
IGICH (Hospital/Residential location namely S)

+
0+
%+
=/1
B
7
@898
8
2
!! 9 8
?@8
8
<(8
12O5641.23 N
77 O3502.02 E
Elevation 2996 ft
12O5703.65 N
77 O3604.58 E
Elevation 2920 ft
12O5622.74 N
77 O3545.52 E
Elevation 3006 ft
12O5541.09 N
77 O3528.52 E
Elevation 3016 ft
12O5603.21 N
77 O3630.01 E
Elevation 2991 ft
Figure 2.5 Sampling location at IGICH
+
@@>
/
(
;
+
2
$%
2
;
4
9>
!!>
9>
#
&
@> 2
$
&
7A>
>
/
Peenya Industrial Area (Industrial location namely I)

)
+
!! 9 8
? 8
8
79 78:8
8
@
<+
8
13O0148.47 N
77 O2957.69 E
Elevation 2955 ft
13 O0210.68 N
77 O3058.95 E
Elevation 2969 ft
13 O0128.15 N
77 O3039.92 E
Elevation 2975 ft
13 O0045.75 N
77 O3020.03 E
Elevation 3014 ft
13O0107.97 N
77 O3122.61 E
Elevation 2991
Figure 2.6 Sampling location at Peenya Industrial Area
,
5
'
: >
)
0)+
#1
2
: >
/
4
2
+
$%
,
"
"
/
! >
'
97 9>
4
@: :>
"
4
7?>
7:>
#
!>
&
&
77>
;
)
+
+
Kanamangala, Whitefield (Background location namely B)

2
9
898
8
79
!! ?@8 8
8
< 8
13 O0220.58 N
77 O4519.39 E
Elevation 2911 ft
13 O0243.28 N
77 O4622.28 E
Elevation 2848 ft
13O0203.17 N
77 O4604.93 E
Elevation 2865 ft
13 O0120.11 N
77 O4543.56 E
Elevation 2888 ft
13 O0143.33 N
77 O4647.01 E
Elevation 2821 ft
Figure 2.7 Sampling location at Kanamangala (Background location)
2
+
;
"
B
3
! >
4
7 >
;
2
'
"
*
0/$$1
5
;
6
#
2
'
Table 2.1 Summary descriptions of the seven sampling sites in terms of the predominant activities
S.No
Site
Site Description
Domlur
Residential
Predominant activity levels

-
High and medium income category population
Shops, showrooms and IT companies
Number of restaurants, bakeries and few big hotels
Vehicular distribution shows 47% 2-wheelers, 34% cars, 16% auto-rickshaws and
Low and medium income category population
Shops of medium scale
Restaurants, bakeries, dhabas and hotels
3% heavy vehicles.
2
Kammanahalli
Residential
5% heavy vehicles.
Victoria Road
Kerbside
Medium and low income category population
Heavy commercial activity zone, many commercial complexes
Restaurants, bakeries, and number of big hotels.
5% heavy vehicles.
CSB
Kerbside
Mixed Population of all income groups
Shops and IT companies
Few, restaurants, bakeries and eating joints
High volume of heavy-duty diesel (HDD) vehicles
14% heavy vehicles.
IGICH
Hospital
(Residential)
Many hospitals and educational institutions
Shops of small and medium scale
Mixed Population of all income groups
6% heavy vehicles.
Peenya
Industrial
Only one residential colony with medium and low income group population
Industries falling in the region include engineering, machine tools, metal smelting,
chemical, and pharmaceuticals
High volume of heavy-duty diesel (HDD) vehicles
Plantation in 70% area of zone of influence
18% heavy vehicles.

7
Kanamangala,
Whitefield
Background
10 % of area covered by about 200 medium income group houses.
Some bio-fuels usage for cooking
Movements of tractors and plying of very few public transport buses and HDD
vehicles.
Monitoring Parameters & Framework

*
'
2
Table 2.2a Sampling and analytical protocol for source apportionment study being conducted at Bangalore
Particulars
SPM
RSPM
PM 2.5
NO2
Multichannel
(3 channel)
Speciation
Sampler
FRM
Partisol
(PM2.5)
sampler
Impingers
attached
to RDS
Sampling
Instrument
High Volume
Sampler
Sampling
Principle
Filtration of Filtration of Filtration of Filtration of

aerodynamic aerodynamic aerodynamic aerodynamic
sizes
sizes
sizes with a sizes with a
size cut by size cut by
impaction
impaction
followed by
cyclone
separation
0.8-1.2
0.8-1.2
16.7 LPM
16.7 LPM
m3/min
m3/min
Flow rate
Sampling
Period
8 hourly
change of
filter,
24 Hourly
Reporting
Respirable
Dust
Sampler
(High
Volume
Sampler)
PM10
8 hourly
change of
filter,
24 Hourly
Reporting
24 hourly
24 hourly
Chemical
absorption
in suitable
media
SO2
CO
Parameters
OC/EC
Ions
VOC
O3
(Benzene and
1,3 Butadiene,
Alkanes)
Impingers
Online CO
PM10
PM10 Sampler Low volume
Automatic
attached to analyzer/Low Sampler
Particulate
sampling
analyser
RDS
volume
Particulate
collected on
pump
sampling collected on
Teflon filter
connected to
pump
Quartz filter
Adsorption
connected to
Tube
Tedler bags
Chemical
Suction by Filtration of
Filtration of
Active
Suction by
absorption in
Pump
aerodynami aerodynamic
pressurised
Pump
suitable
As per
c sizes with
sizes with a
sampling /
media
instrument a size cut by
size cut by
Adsorption
specification impaction
impaction
Aldehyde
NMHC
PAHs
(Included in
organic
Markers)
Impingers Low volume Low volume
PM 10
attached to sampling
sampling
Sampler
HVS / RDS
pump
pump
connected to connected to
Tedlar bags Tedlar bags
Chemical
Absorption
Or
Active
pressurised
sampling
Suction by
Pump
HC
Auto suction Filtration of

by pump aerodynami
c sizes
0.5 LPM/
1 LPM
0.5 LPM/ 1
LPM
1.3 LPM
16.7 LPM
16.7 LPM
0.2 - 0.5 LPM
0.7 LPM
0.5 LPM
0.2 lpm
0.2 lpm
16.7 LPM
8 hourly/4
hourly
change of
absorbing
media, 24
Hourly
Reporting
8 hourly/4
hourly
change of
absorbing
media, 24
Hourly
Reporting
Continuous
sampling
24 hourly
24 hourly
8 Hourly
sampling and
24 Hourly
Reporting
One week
continuous
8 Hourly
sampling
and 24
Hourly
Reporting
Intermittent
sampling in
24 hour
Intermittent
sampling in
24 hour
Weekly
composite
of left over
Quartz filter
after OC/Ec
analysis
Particulars
SPM
RSPM
Sampling
frequency
PM10
PM 2.5
NO2
20 Days
20 Days
20 Days
One week 20 Days
continuous in continuous in continuous in continuous. continuou
each season, each season,
each
4 days
s in each
for three
for three
season, for
Teflon, 3
season,
seasons at
seasons
three
days quartz for three
One location
seasons
seasons
only
Analytical
Electronic
Electronic
Electronic
Electronic Spectroph
instrument
Balance
Balance
Balance
Micro
otometer
Balance
Analytical Gravimetric Gravimetric Gravimetric Gravimetric Colorimetr
method
ic
Improved
Jacob&Ho
chheiser
method
Minimum
5 g/m3
5 g/m3
5 g/m3
5 g/m3
9 g/m3
Reportable
value
SO2
CO
Parameters
OC/EC
20 Days
One week
20 Days
continuous in continuous continuous
each season, during 20
in each
for three
days of
season, for
seasons
monitoring in
three
each season seasons
Spectrophoto NDIR based
-meter
continuous
analyser
Colorimetric IR absorption
Modified
according to
west&Gake
Beer &
method
Lamberts law
4 g/m3
0.05 ppm
Ions
VOC
O3
Aldehyde NMHC
HC
(Benzene and
1,3 Butadiene,
Alkanes)
20 Days
Once during
One week Once in 20 One week
One week
continuous in
20 days of
continuous
days of
continuous continuous
each season, monitoring in
during 20
monitoring
during 20
during 20
for three
each season
days of
in each
days of
days of
seasons
monitoring in season monitoring in monitoring in
each season
each season each season
OC/EC
Analyser
Ion
Chromatograph
TOR
Method
Ion
USEPA
UVChromatograph method TO-1/ Photometry
y
TO-2 / TO-4 /
TO-10 / TO-14
0.5 cm2
punch
GC-FID
Automatic
analyser
0.1 ppb
2 ppb
Spectropho GC - FID with

tometer
Methaniser
GC - FID
with
Methaniser
Colorimetri FID Analysis FID Analysis
c (MBTH
method)
1.0 g/m3
0.05 ppm
0.05 ppm
PAHs
(Included in
organic
Markers)
03 weekly
composite
samples
per season
GC-MS
GC-MS
1 ng/m3
Notes: 1. Benzene & 1,3 Butadiene being done by Charcoal adsorption followed by desorbtion in CS2 and GC-FID Analysis. 2. Methodology for molecular marker has been provided
separately
3. To suitably split background monitoring into 3 periods so as to correspond to monitoring at other sites 4. CO and O3 monitoring for about 1 week per season
Table 2.2b Target physical and chemical components (groups) for characterization of particulate matter for source apportionment studies at Bangalore
Components
PM10 / PM2.5
Elements (Na, Mg, Al, Si, P, S, Cl, Ca, Br, V, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, As, Ti, Ga, Rb, Y, Zr, Pd, Ag, In, Sn, La Se, Sr, Mo, Cr, Cd,
Sb, Ba, Hg, and Pb)
Ions (F-, Cl-, Br-, NO2-, NO3-, SO4-2, K+, NH4+, Na+, Ca++, Mg++)
Required filter matrix

Teflon filter paper. Pre and post exposure
conditioning of filter paper is mandatory
Teflon filter paper
Teflon filter paper
Analytical methods
Gravimetric
Flame AAS and GT-AAS and Hydride
generation for As and Hg, ICP-MS
Ion chromatography with conductivity
detector
Components
Carbon Analysis (OC, EC and Total Carbon)
Alkanes
Hopanes
Alkanoic
acid
PAHs
Others
Molecular markers*
n- Hentriacontane
n-Tritriacontane
n- Pentatriacontane
22, 29, 30 Trisnorneohopane
17 (H), 21 (H)-29 Norhopane
17 (H), 21 (H) Norhopane
Hexadecanamide
Octadecanamide
Benzo[b]fluoranthene
Benzo[k]fluoranthene
Benzo[e]pyrene
Indeno[1,2,3-cd]fluoranthene
Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene Phenylenepyrene
Picene
Coronene
Stigmasterol
Levoglucosan
Required filter matrix

Quartz filter. Prebaking of quartz filter
paper at 600 C is essential
Analytical methods
TOR method
The left over quartz filter paper after

OC/EC analysis. Pool of 20 days sample
as the dust concentration in the filters at
some locations were very low.
Extraction, followed by GC-MS/ GCFID analysis with and without

derivatization
* Few molecular markers such as Indeno[1,2,3-cd]fluoranthene, Picene, Hopanes(above 3), Hexadecanamide could not be analysed. 17 (H), 21 (H)-Hopane was analysed instead.
Table 2.2c Other pollutants and their methods of analysis

Pollutants
SO2
NO2
CO
O3
Aldehydes
Benzene
1,3 Butadiene
HC
NMHC
Methods
Spectrophotometric measurement, Improved West & Gaeke Method
Spectrophotometric measurement, Jacobs & Hochheiser Method
GC FID with methaniser / NDIR based continuous analyzer
Automatic Analyzer, UV Photometric Method
Spectrophotometric measurement
Active sampling in charcoal adsorption, desorption in CS2 and GC-FID
determination
GC - FID Method with suitable sorbent
Sampling in Tedlar Bag followed by GC - FID
By difference THC Methane by GC FID with methaniser
2.3
QA/QC (Calibration, coding, quality checks, etc.)

Development of standard operating procedures and QA/QC plan
)
07
$
$
@1
4
Quality Assurance and Quality Control

# '
'
'
(
E
'
+
=
41
=
(-
0(- ,- =- -9 %=
'
,-
35
4
@
=077
'
-4
4
F3 -
=-
/
3
(
;*
0
1
H
#
(
%=
*

2
7
+
$
;
2
=
J
I#B
I=
7
Table 2.3 Difference (mg) in post and pre-weights of lab blanks for different
batches of filters used in the 1st season
S.No
Lab blanks
1
0.00027
0.00086
0.00431
0.00078
0.00037
0.01057
0.01013
0.00234
0.00107
2.4
Monitoring results
*
;
()*
/
(-
()*
)*
()*B ()*
,=-9
=)=
1 =-
-9
()*
()*
)*
(,=-9
=)=
=-
D
-9
;
CSB (Kerbside)
#
()*
()*
()*
()*
)*
)*
=)=
(,=-9
=)=
=-
-9
Victoria road (Kerbside)

()*
()*
)*
=)=

(,=-9
=)=
=-
-9
;
77
IGICH (Hospital/ Residential)

;
()*
/
0()*
()*
)*
(,=#
0
-9
#
=)=
=-
-9
Peenya (Industrial)
()*
()*
'
)*
(,=-9
-9
=-
-9
;
79
Kanamangala(Background)
#
7? ()*
()*
)*
(,=-9
=-
-9
Concentration
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
15
THC (ppm)
2 1
First
12 11
Ist
IInd
3500
100
3000
40
20
Second
Third
30 31
13 11
9
Methane (ppm) NMHC (ppm)

15
Aldehydes
(ug/m)
IIIrd

10.0
th
Me
0.1
an
15 15
46
SO2
O3 (ppb)
Ist
First
1.61.5 1.7
0.9
0.4 0.4
a
Eth
ne
0.4
ta
Bu
ne
Ist
PM10 (avg.)
Ist
IInd
1000
29 22
26
NOx
O3 (ppb)
IInd
Second
100.0
0.0
0.5
n
Pe
t an
IInd
He
n
xa
n
Be
IIIrd
ze
(
ne
1-
pp
b)
d
uta
3B
ie
(
ne
1/7/2007
60
10
RSPM
pp
2/7/2007
Third
18.12.06
21.12.06
24.12.06
27.12.06
30.12.06
2.01.07
5.1.07
8.1.07
11.4.07
14.4.07
17.4.07
20.4.07
23.4.07
26.4.07
29.4.07
2.5.07
5.5.07
24.6.07
27.6.07
30.6.07
3.7.07
6.7.07
9.7.07
12.7.07
24
29/6/2007
30/6/2007
80
100
69
27/6/2007
28/6/2007
1
67 72
26/6/2007
10
120
25/6/2007
CO
PM2.5
27/1/2007
28/1/2007
100
40
26/1/2007
Second
SPM
24/1/2007
25/1/2007
1000
71
22/1/2007
23/1/2007
10000
21/1/2007
NOx
PM10
80
18/1/2007
20/1/2007
First
Third
16/1/2007
17/1/2007
SO2
RSPM
160
15/1/2007
SPM
Second
13/1/2007
14/1/2007
120
CO concentration ( g/m)
18.12.06
21.12.06
24.12.06
27.12.06
30.12.06
2.01.07
5.1.07
8.1.07
11.4.07
14.4.07
17.4.07
20.4.07
23.4.07
26.4.07
29.4.07
2.5.07
5.5.07
24.6.07
27.6.07
30.6.07
3.7.07
6.7.07
9.7.07
12.7.07
First
12/1/2007
Ozone (ppb)
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Concentration (ppm)
12
/2
12 3/20
/2 0
12 4/20 6
/2 0
12 6/20 6
/2 0
12 7/20 6
/2 0
12 8/20 6
/2 0
12 9/20 6
/31 0 6
/20
06
26
/4/
27 07
/4
28 /07
/4
30 /07
1/5 /4/07
/
2/5 2007
/
3/5 2007
/ 20
07
8/7
/
10 200
/7 7
11 /200
/7 7
12 /200
/7/ 7
2
13 007
/7/
07
Figure 2.8 : Air quality monitoring results for Domlur (Residential)
* NO2 reported as NOx

200
126
152
93
63
25 25 19
0
PM2.5
IIIrd
10000
1492 1551
586
55 43
1
CO
IIIrd
For uniform depiction purpose 8-hourly O3 values are averaged for each day
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
Third
25.7 28.3 28.0
1.0
1.3 1.2
1.2
0.40.4 0.4 0.40.3 0.4
b)
Figure 2.9: Air quality monitoring results for Kammanahalli (Residential)

500
300
200
100
First
6.5.07
9.5.07
12.5.07
15.5.07
18.5.07
21.5.07
24.5.07
10/8/2007
13/8/2007
16/8/2007
19/8/2007
22/8/2007
25/8/2007
28/8/2007
31/8/2007
Second
RSPM
SPM
6.5.07
9.5.07
12.5.07
15.5.07
18.5.07
21.5.07
24.5.07
10/8/2007
13/8/2007
16/8/2007
19/8/2007
22/8/2007
25/8/2007
28/8/2007
31/8/2007
NOx
10
SO2
53
RSPM
34 41 29
PM10 (avg.)
IInd
PM2.5
IIIrd
10000
3322
1689
1220
1000
100
49
26 19
10 11
10
42 39
18
Third
CO
92
61
Ist
100
Second
133
115 109
PM2.5
1000
First
177
100
50
0
Third
PM10
294 301
300
250
200
150
10000
13.01.07
16.01.07
19.01.07
22.01.07
25.01.07
28.01.07
31.01.07
03.02.07
06.02.07
SPM
350
400
13.01.07
16.01.07
19.01.07
22.01.07
25.01.07
28.01.07
31.01.07
03.02.07
06.02.07
SO2
NOx
O3 (ppb)
O3 (ppb)
Ist
IInd
CO
IIIrd
Second
Third
First
19/08/07
18/08/07
17/08/07
15/08/07
12/8/07
13/08/07
7/2/07
4/2/07
5/2/07
3/2/07
1/2/07
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
31/01/2007
CO Concentration ( g/m)
8/11/07
8/13/07
8/14/07
8/14/07
8/15/07
8/16/07
8/17/07
8/18/07
First
5/11/07
5/13/07
5/14/07
5/15/07
5/17/07
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/31/07
2/3/07
2/4/07
2/4/07
2/5/07
2/6/07
2/6/07
Ozone Concentration (ppb)
Third
20
15
15
17
12
10
10
5
12 13
14 14
10
3 3
0
THC (ppm)
Ist
IInd
Aldehydes
(ug/m)
IIIrd
Concentration (ppm)
Concentration
Second season continuous data for CO not available
63.1
59.7 66.1
100.0
10.0
3.9
3.3 3.9
3.42.7 3.1
1.81.51.9 1.2
0.9
1.0
th
Me
0.70.6 0.8 0.50.6 0.5
0.9
0.1
e
an
E th
e
an
e
tan
Bu
n ta
Pe
Ist
ne
IInd
x
He
b)
b)
( pp
(p p
e
e
n
en
d ie
nz
uta
Be
B
1 -3
IIIrd
e
an
Concentration
20
First
10
THC (ppm)
Ist
Second
40
16
14 14
IInd
35 36 34
30
11 12 12
3 2 3
Aldehydes
(ug/m)
IIIrdT E R I Report No. 2004EE28

100
Third
10.0
Me
94
Third
SO2
O3 (ppb)
2.82.3 3.4 2.0

1.8 1.8
1.0
ne
th a
Eth
e
an
tan
Bu
PM10 (avg.)
IInd
10000
1000
1180
14 10
10
58 47
12
NOx
Ist
Ist
O3 (ppb)
IInd
First
100.0
1.11.0 0.91.1 0.9

0.9
0.1
n ta
Pe
ne
IInd
x
He
e
an
b)
b)
pp
(p p
e(
n
ie
n
tad
Be
Bu
3
1-
IIIrd
e
zen
6/8/07
Ist
62
5/8/07
Second
10
RSPM
73
3/8/07
CO
PM2.5
98 96
2/8/07
1
91 76 102
31/7/07
10
SPM
7/1/07
100
100
6/1/07
1000
3/1/07
10000
500
4/1/07
Third
1/1/07
PM10
Second
200
31/12/06
NOx
19/7/2007
22/7/2007
25/7/2007
28/7/2007
31/7/2007
3/8/2007
6/8/2007
9/8/2007
12/8/2007
13.4.07
16.4.07
19.4.07
22.4.07
25.4.07
28.4.07
1.5.07
15.12.06
18.12.06
21.12.06
24.12.06
27.12.06
30.12.06
02.01.07
05.01.07
08.01.07
100
0
29/12/06
SO2
RSPM
19/7/2007
22/7/2007
25/7/2007
28/7/2007
31/7/2007
3/8/2007
6/8/2007
9/8/2007
12/8/2007
SPM
13.4.07
16.4.07
19.4.07
22.4.07
25.4.07
28.4.07
1.5.07
15.12.06
18.12.06
21.12.06
24.12.06
27.12.06
30.12.06
02.01.07
05.01.07
08.01.07
First
7 /3 1 /0 7
8 /1 /0 7
8 /1 /0 7
8 /2 /0 7
8 /3 /0 7
8 /4 /0 7
8 /5 /0 7
8 /6 /0 7
8 /6 /0 7
First
4 /2 6 /0 7
4 /2 7 /0 7
4 /2 8 /0 7
4 /2 9 /0 7
4 /2 9 /0 7
4 /3 0 /0 7
5 /1 /0 7
5 /2 /0 7
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 2 /2 7 /0 6
1 2 /2 8 /0 6
1 2 /2 8 /0 6
1 2 /2 9 /0 6
1 2 /3 0 /0 6
1 2 /3 1 /0 6
1 /1 /0 7
1 /2 /0 7
600
500
400
300
200
Concentration (ppm)
O zo n e C o n cen tratio n (p p b )
Figure 2.10: Air quality monitoring results for CSB (Kerbside)
400
411
300
181 191
31 38
0
PM2.5
IIIrd
3636
1234
27 37
1
CO
IIIrd
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Third
76.9 65.7 80.0
3.1 2.8 3.4
0.70.7 0.7
Figure 2.11: Air quality monitoring results for Victoria Road (Kerbside)
First
Second
RSPM
369
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
306
PM10
287
199 184
191
115
SPM
Third
109
100
64
RSPM
PM2.5
PM10 (avg.)
Ist
IInd
43
27
PM2.5
IIIrd
1000
100
10
1
First
Second
SO2
NOx
10000
2/16/07
2/19/07
2/22/07
2/25/07
2/28/07
3/3/07
3/6/07
3/9/07
3/12/07
3/15/07
3/18/07
18.6.07
21.6.07
24.6.07
27.6.07
30.6.07
3.7.07
6.7.07
9.7.07
3/9/07
6/9/07
9/9/07
12/9/07
15/9/2007
18/9/2007
21/9/2007
SPM
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
2/16/07
2/19/07
2/22/07
2/25/07
2/28/07
3/3/07
3/6/07
3/9/07
3/12/07
3/15/07
3/18/07
18.6.07
21.6.07
24.6.07
27.6.07
30.6.07
3.7.07
6.7.07
9.7.07
3/9/07
6/9/07
9/9/07
12/9/07
15/9/2007
18/9/2007
21/9/2007
10000
3338
1183 1560
1000
60
100
19
7
10
66
35 37
12
12
1
SO2
Third
CO
105
NOx
O3 (ppb)
O3 (ppb)
Ist
IInd
CO
IIIrd
Concentration
36 37
40
30
20
17
12 11 13
10
10 9 11
2 3
0
THC (ppm)
Methane
(ppm)
Ist
NMHC (ppm)
IInd
Aldehydes
(ug/m)
IIIrd
15000
10000
5000
4/7/07
5/7/07
7/7/07
8/7/07
First
First
4/9/07
5/9/07
7/9/07
9/9/07
0
5/3/07
7/3/07
8/3/07
10/3/07
12/3/07
Third
20000
Concentration (ppm)
9/4/07
9/5/07
9/6/07
9/7/07
9/8/07
Second
First
7/5/07
7/6/07
7/7/07
7/8/07
7/9/07
7/10/07
7/11/07
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
3/12/07
3/13/07
3/14/07
3/15/07
3/16/07
3/17/07
3/18/07
3/19/07
O zone Concentration (ppb)
Second
Second
Third
Third
100.0
10.0
15.6 12.6
2.12.7 2.5
1.11.2
1.21.31.3 1.2
0.0
1.81.6 1.9
1.0
0.60.6 0.6 0.50.5 0.5
0.1
th
Me
e
an
E th
e
an
tan
Bu
n ta
Pe
Ist
ne
IInd
x
He
b)
b)
pp
(pp
e(
n
ie
n
tad
Be
Bu
3
1
e
an
IIIrd
e
zen
Figure 2.12: Air quality monitoring results for IGICH (Hospital/Residential)

250
150
100
50
First
Second
SPM
RSPM
197
200
150
100
52
50
37
23
69
36
34
15 22
0
SPM
Third
PM10
85
81
79
RSPM
PM10 (avg.)
Ist
PM2.5
IInd
PM2.5
IIIrd
10000
100
10
First
10/8/07
13/8/2007
16/8/2007
19/8/2007
22/8/2007
25/8/2007
28/8/2007
31/08/07
4/16/07
4/19/07
4/22/07
28.5.07
31.5.07
3.6.07
6.6.07
9.6.7
12.6.07
15.6.07
Second
SO2
NOx
CO
10000
1000
2.3.07
8.3.07
11.3.07
14.3.07
17.3.07
20.3.07
23.3.07
10/8/07
13/8/2007
16/8/2007
19/8/2007
22/8/2007
25/8/2007
28/8/2007
31/08/07
4/16/07
4/19/07
4/22/07
28.5.07
31.5.07
3.6.07
6.6.07
9.6.7
12.6.07
15.6.07
250
200
2.3.07
8.3.07
11.3.07
14.3.07
17.3.07
20.3.07
23.3.07
300
3750
1000
2016
483
90
100
6
10
13
37 51 37
23 18
1
SO2
Third
NOx
O3 (ppb)
O3 (ppb)
Ist
IInd
CO
IIIrd
Third
20
15
16
11 11
13
10 10
10
5
2 1
12
8 7
0
THC (ppm)
Ist
IInd
Aldehydes
(ug/m)
IIIrd
First
24/08/07
26/08/07
27/08/07
31/05/07
1/6/07
3/6/07
4/6/07
6/6/07
7/6/07
15/03/07
17/03/07
18/03/07
20/03/07
21/03/07
Second
Concentration (ppm)
Concentration
First
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
8/21/07
8/22/07
8/23/07
8/24/07
6/1/07
6/3/07
6/3/07
6/4/07
6/5/07
6/6/07
6/7/07
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
4/13/07
4/15/07
4/17/07
4/18/07
4/19/07
4/20/07
4/21/07
4/22/07
Second
100.0
Third
18.8 23.1 19.6
10.0
2.1
2.0
1.2
0.9
1.0
0.1
0.6
0.4 0.5 0.50.60.5
ne
tha
Me
e
an
Eth
0.80.8
ne
uta
0.20.2 0.2 0.20.3 0.3
n ta
Pe
Ist
ne
x
He
IInd
e
an
n
Be
IIIrd
ne
ze
b)
(p p
1 -3
(
ne
d ie
a
t
u
b)
pp
Figure 2.13: Air quality monitoring results for Peenya (Industrial)

300
400
300
200
100
First
Second
SPM
RSPM
18/7/2007
21/7/2007
24/7/2007
27/7/2007
30/7/2007
2/8/07
5/8/07
5.5.07
8.5.07
11.5.07
14.5.07
17.5.07
20.5.07
23.5.07
3/24/07
3/27/07
2/14/07
2/17/07
2/20/07
2/23/07
2/26/07
3/1/07
3/4/07
3/7/07
500
262
250
200
171
150
171 171
143
84
100
69
58
30 21 22
50
0
SPM
Third
PM10
245
RSPM
PM2.5
PM10 (avg.)
Ist
IInd
PM2.5
IIIrd
1000
100
10
First
18/7/2007
21/7/2007
24/7/2007
27/7/2007
30/7/2007
2/8/07
5/8/07
5.5.07
8.5.07
11.5.07
14.5.07
17.5.07
20.5.07
23.5.07
3/24/07
3/27/07
2/14/07
2/17/07
2/20/07
2/23/07
2/26/07
3/1/07
3/4/07
3/7/07
Second
SO2
NOx
10000
10000
4411 3373
1780
1000
53
100
26
9 10 10
10
39 36
Third
CO
89
30
SO2
NOx
O3 (ppb)
Ist
O3 (ppb)
IInd
CO
IIIrd
Third
24/07/07
22/07/07
20/07/07
5/3/07
4/3/07
2/3/07
1/3/07
27/02/07
First
19/07/2007
Second
6000
3000
0
17/07/2007
First
7/17/07
7/18/07
7/19/07
7/20/07
7/21/07
7/22/07
7/23/07
5/19/07
5/21/07
5/22/07
5/24/07
20
24/02/07
40
15000
12000
9000
26/02/2007
60
80
3/21/07
3/22/07
3/23/07
3/24/07
3/25/07
3/26/07
3/27/07
3/28/07
Third
22
25
20
15
10
15
19
12
9
2
5
0
THC (ppm)
12
15
19 18
3 4
Ist
IInd
Aldehydes
(ug/m)
TIIIrd
E R I Report No. 2004EE28
Concentration (ppm)
Concentration

66.0 61.7 66.1
100.0
10.0
3.13.5 3.7
3.33.23.4
1.61.71.8 1.3
1.11.1
1.0
0.70.9 0.8 0.50.6 0.7
0.1
th
Me
e
an
E th
e
an
e
b)
e
b)
ne
tan
( pp
(p p
xan
nta
e
e
e
e
Bu
n
P
H
en
d ie
nz
uta
Be
B
1-3
Ist IInd IIIrd
Third
PM2.5
Third
Third
9
8
32 31
IInd
RSPM
51
Ist
91
47
105
PM10
(avg.)
IIIrd
66
54 44
27 23 27
PM2.5
1723 1399
925
CO
20/09/2007
21
O3 (ppb)
IIIrd
Third
0.5
0.3 0.4
3.6
3.3
0.0
15/09/2007
17/09/2007
45
IInd
0.00.1 0.1
11/09/2007
NOx
ne
b)
b)
ne
pp
pp
xa
e(
e(
He
ien
en
nz
tad
Be
Bu
1 -3
IIIrd
29/01/2007
Ist
n ta
Pe
26/01/2007
18
22/01/2007
200
0.0
IInd
0.1 0.1 0.10.1 0.1
tan
Bu
19/01/2007
24/01/2007
110
14
17/01/2007
82 83
SPM
e
an
SO2
14/01/2007
160
120
80
40
10000
1000
100
10
12000
9000
6000
3000
First
Eth
0.30.3 0.2 0.2 0.2

0.1
e
an
Ist
10.0
1.0
0.1
0.0
th
Me
12/01/2007
PM10
Second
RSPM
O3 (ppb)
8
6
Concentration (g/m)
Figure 2.14: Air quality monitoring results for Kanamangala (Background)
SPM
Second
CO
11
7
12/15/2006
12/25/2006
1/4/2007
1/14/2007
1/24/2007
2/3/2007
2/13/2007
2/23/2007
3/5/2007
3/15/2007
3/25/2007
16/04/2007
26/04/2007
06/05/2007
16/05/2007
26/05/2007
5/06/2007
15/06/2007
25/06/2007
5/07/2007
28/6/07
8/7/2007
18/7/2007
28/7/2007
7/8/2007
17/8/2007
27/8/2007
6/9/2007
16/9/2007
26/9/2007
First
NOx
Second
Aldehydes
(ug/m)
12/15/2006
12/25/2006
1/4/2007
1/14/2007
1/24/2007
2/3/2007
2/13/2007
2/23/2007
3/5/2007
3/15/2007
3/25/2007
16/04/2007
26/04/2007
06/05/2007
16/05/2007
26/05/2007
5/06/2007
15/06/2007
25/06/2007
5/07/2007
28/6/07
8/7/2007
18/7/2007
28/7/2007
7/8/2007
17/8/2007
27/8/2007
6/9/2007
16/9/2007
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1000
100
First
SO2
IIIrd
NM HC (ppm)
IInd
Concentration (ppm)
9/12/07
9/13/07
9/15/07
9/16/07
9/17/07
9/18/07
9/19/07
9/20/07
9/21/07
9/22/07
9/23/07
9/24/07
10
100
80
60
40
20
0
First
12
7
2
Methane
(ppm)
Ist
5/4/07
5/5/07
5/6/07
5/7/07
5/8/07
5/9/07
5/10/07
15
10
0
THC (ppm)
1/19/07
1/20/07
1/21/07
1/22/07
1/23/07
1/24/07
1/25/07
1/26/07
1/27/07
10000
Concentration
Summary 3 season results

#
;
=(
/
7
5
()*
)
()*
321
261
257
226
164
135
117
23
Do
m
SPM
62
47
IG
IC
H
45
35
137
95
109
9089
43
CS
B
75
54
9593
RSPM
PM10
24
92
24
73
38 26
Pe
en
ya
Ba
ck
gr
ou
nd
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
lur
Ka
mm
an
ah
al
i
Vi
cto
r ia
PM2.5
Figure 2.15 Average concentration of SPM, RSPM, PM10, PM2.5 during three seasons
(-
K,-9
=)=
=-
5
;
10000
2077
1210
2027
7@
3188
2083
2017
1349
1000
100
77
33 41
13
31 33
13
10
66
28
11
57
44 42
25
9
51 40
34
10
10
SO2
NO2
O3 (ppb)
Ba
ck
gr
ou
nd
Pe
en
ya
IC
H
IG
CS
B
ia
cto
r
Vi
i
an
ah
al
Ka
mm
Do
m
lur
CO
Figure 2.16 Average concentration of gaseous pollutants during three seasons

?&
B: &
Table 2.4 Air quality summary for compliance and exceedence

Pollutant Domlur
Kammanahalli
Residential Residential
Victoria
CSB
IGICH
Peenya
Kanamangla
Traffic
Traffic
Hospital/ Industrial
Residential
Background
SPM
RSPM
PM2.5
NO2
SO2
CO
O3
* 8 hourly CO/ O3 concentrations were compared against corresponding standards.
Violation
Close to Standard
;
Compliance
7!
&
4
7 9&
/
5
#
=( 0
4
0
60
25
50
20
40
15
30
10
20
10
0
ou
n
a
en
y
ck
gr
Pe
B
CS
Vi
c to
all
i
Ba
Ka
m
ma
nh
Benzene & 1-3-Butadiene concentration
30
70
IG
IC
H
80
35
ria
40
Do
ml
ur
THC, NMHC & Aldehyde Concentration
THC(ppm)
Benzene(ppb)
NMHC(ppm)
1-3-Butadiene (ppb)
Aldehy de (ug/m)
Figure 2.17 Average concentration of total hydrocarbon, non-methane hydrocarbon,

aldehydes, benzene and 1,3-Butadiene during three seasons
)#/
;
)*7
7: 0 1
7: 0 1
)*
40 1
0
)*7
/
1 (
0 5
1
H
25
500
20
400
15
300
10
200
Ba
ck
In
d)
a(
Pe
en
y
(R
es
3/
Ho
s
b2
)
(K
er
CS
B
(K
Ro
ad
ria
Vi
cto
IG
IC
H
)
(R
es
2
ma
na
ha
lli
Ka
m
Benzo b Fluoranthene
Hentriacontane
Octadecanamide
Levoglucosan
gr
ou
nd
0
p.)
0
er
b1
)
(R
es
1)
100
Benzo k Fluoranthene
Hopane
Pentatriacontane
Stigmasterol
Coronene
Indeno[1,2,3-cd] Pyrene
Tritriacontane
Benzo(e) pyrene
Figure 2.18 (a) Average concentration of PAHs and other molecular markers in PM10
samples at 7 monitoring locations during three seasons
Benzo[e]pyrene concentration
(ng/m)
600
Do
ml
ur
Concentration (ng/m)

+
)
)*
40 1
=( 0
=
0 5
)
=(
+
%+
=/
/
)*
Benzo b Fluoranthene
Hentriacontane
Octadecanamide
Levoglucosan
Ba
ck
gro
un
d
Pe
en
ya
IG
IC
H
CS
B
Vi
cto
ri
Ka
ma
Do
aR
oa
d
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
na
ha
li
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
ml
ur
Concentration (ng/m)
560
Benzo k Fluoranthene
Hopane
Pentatriacontane
Stigmasterol
Coronene
Indeno[1,2,3-cd] Pyrene
Tritriacontane
Benzo(e) pyrene
Figure 2.18 (b) Average concentration of PAHs and other molecular markers in PM2.5
samples at 7 monitoring locations during three seasons
Correlation: Particulate matter 3 seasons

(
)* 1
0()*
5 02
L
1 )*7
$
()* )*7
)*
=(
()*
()*
Benzo[e]pyrene concentration
(ng/m)
)*7
Table 2.5 Correlation matrix of four dust parameters at all sampling sites during each of the three seasons
Location
Parameters
First season
SPM
Domlur
Kammanahalli
CSB
Victoria road
IGICH
Peenya
Background
RSPM
Second season
PM10
PM2.5
SPM
1.000
RSPM
0.704
1.000
PM10
0.635
0.840
1.000
PM2.5
0.664
0.355
0.591
SPM
1.000
RSPM
0.575
1.000
PM10
0.350
0.383
1.000
PM2.5
-0.921
-0.506
-0.410
SPM
1.000
RSPM
0.796
1.000
PM10
0.538
0.698
1.000
PM2.5
0.467
0.893
0.719
SPM
1.000
RSPM
0.773
1.000
PM10
0.331
0.219
1.000
PM2.5
0.905
0.921
0.776
SPM
1.000
RSPM
0.225
1.000
PM10
0.004
0.413
1.000
PM2.5
0.819
0.006
-0.768
SPM
1.000
RSPM
0.266
1.000
PM10
0.306
0.549
1.000
PM2.5
-0.319
0.735
SPM
RSPM
Third season
PM10
PM2.5
1.000
1.000
0.742
1.000
0.561
0.217
1.000
0.523
-0.479
-0.492
0.769
1.000
0.679
1.000
-0.161
-0.114
1.000
-0.995
0.137
-0.651
1.000
0.645
1.000
-0.022
0.242
1.000
1.000
0.350
1.000
-0.353
0.109
1.000
-0.914
1.000
SPM
1.000
RSPM
0.529
1.000
PM10
0.710
0.839
1.000
PM2.5
0.183
0.410
-0.832
0.327
1.000
0.345
0.424
1.000
1.000
0.266
0.733
1.000
0.361
0.302
1.000
0.904
0.999
0.449
1.000
0.326
0.333
1.000
-0.881
-0.450
0.201
0.065
1.000
0.438
-0.452
1.000
-0.307
-0.954
0.679
0.190
1.000
0.218
1.000
-0.084
0.453
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.167
0.093
1.000
0.921
0.157
1.000
-0.939
0.282
1.000
0.752
0.019
1.000
-0.261
-0.398
0.183
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.354
-0.086
1.000
0.218
0.591
-0.788
&
5
,/?L -= 3=
2=1
)*7
-=
L
'
=(
L
0,-9&
1.000
1.000
0.613
@
0)*7 (- ,- ,-9& (-?
3=
1.000
1.000
0.254
* Cannot be computed because at least one of the variables is constant
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.239
-0.907
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
-0.105
1.000
1.000
1.000
PM2.5
1.000
1.000
1.000
PM10
1.000
1.000
1.000
RSPM
1.000
1.000
1.000
SPM
(-?
&
,/?L1
0 5
(
L
)
1.000
Table 2.6 Correlation matrix of various chemical species in PM10 samples at all monitoring sites during each of the three seasons
Domlur
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
Kammanahalli
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
CSB
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
Victoria
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
IGICH
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
Peenya
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
Backgroun
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
NO2
Ist Season
NO3SO42-
PM10
1
0.32
-0.3
0.59
0.6
0.45
0.55
0.49
0.55
SO2
1
-0.4
0.37
0.49
0.33
0.32
-0.01
0.23
1
-0.7
-0.6
0.16
0.03
0.17
0.08
1
0.93
0.03
0.25
0.18
0.24
1
0.22
0.44
0.32
0.42
1
0.79
0.74
0.81
1
0.8
0.98
1
0.9
PM10
1
0.01
-0.1
-0.02
-0.5
0.19
0.33
-0.2
0.22
PM10
1
0.4
-0.1
0.1
0.05
0.07
0.19
-0.1
0.17
PM10
1
-0.1
-0.1
0.09
0.3
-0.6
0.06
0.12
0.08
PM10
1
0.48
0.46
0.44
0.39
0.1
0.67
0.66
0.69
PM10
1
-0.3
-0.3
-0
0.04
0.11
-0.1
0.21
-0.01
PM10
1
*
-0.1
0.76
0.66
0.73
0.56
0.54
0.59
SO2
NO2
NO3-
SO42-
NH4+
OC
EC
TC
1
-0
*
*
*
-0.3
-0.3
-0.3
SO2
1
0.38
0.58
-0.1
0.3
0.26
0.32
NO2
1
0.33
0.26
0.46
0.56
0.52
NO3-
1
-0.3
-0.2
-0.2
-0.1
-0.3
-0.1
-0.4
SO2
1
0.29
0.22
0.2
0.33
-0.2
0.26
NO2
1
0.96
0.93
0.87
0.46
0.88
NO3-
1
0.09
0.3
-0.1
-0.2
-0
-0.5
-0.2
SO2
1
0.14
-0.1
-0.4
0.37
0.11
0.32
NO2
1
0.84
0.15
-0.4
-0.8
-0.5
NO3-
1
0.42
0.33
0.16
0.04
0.22
0.27
0.24
SO2
1
0.38
0.34
0
0.49
0.52
0.51
NO2
1
0.51
0.28
0.35
0.38
0.37
NO3-
1
-0.2
-0.4
-0.4
-0.1
0.38
0.14
0.37
SO2
1
-0.3
-0.1
-0.3
0.05
-0.2
0.01
NO2
1
0.43
-0.4
0.32
0.15
0.32
NO3-
1
-0.2
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
0.16
-0.3
-0.2
-0.5
-0.5
-0.5
1
0.58
0.7
0.42
0.51
0.49
1
0.66
0.07
0.55
0.22
SO42-
1
0.93
0.82
0.51
0.84
SO42-
1
0.1
-0.4
-0.6
-0.5
SO42-
1
0.7
0.18
0.21
0.19
SO42-
1
0.39
-0.2
0.13
-0.2
SO42-
1
0.94
0.49
0.42
0.48
NH4+
1
0.48
0.8
0.61
NH4+
1
0.73
0.52
0.72
NH4+
1
-0.8
-0.3
-0.7
NH4+
1
0.05
0.16
0.08
NH4+
1
-0.6
-0.4
-0.6
NH4+
1
0.51
0.53
0.54
OC
1
0.7
0.99
OC
1
0.14
0.98
OC
1
0.65
0.98
OC
1
0.87
0.99
OC
1
0.4
0.98
OC
1
0.93
0.99
EC
1
0.78
EC
1
0.29
EC
1
0.8
EC
1
0.93
EC
1
0.56
EC
1
0.97
TC
1
TC
1
TC
1
TC
1
TC
1
TC
Domlur
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
Kammanahalli
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
CSB
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
Victoria
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
IGICH
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
Peenya
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
Backgroun
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
* Cannot be computed because at least one of the variables is constant

NO2
IInd Season
NO3SO42-
PM10
1
0.08
-0.6
0.12
0.23
0.14
0.33
-0.1
0.19
SO2
1
-0.03
-0.3
0.03
0.12
0.06
-0.1
0.05
1
-0.2
0.02
0.05
0.09
0.42
0.22
1
0.35
0.49
0.43
0.36
0.45
1
0.75
0.44
0.43
0.52
1
0.16
0.3
0.26
1
0.73
0.97
1
0.86
PM10
1
0.33
0.18
0.12
0.21
0.21
0.25
0.52
0.21
PM10
1
0.33
-0.01
0.32
0.07
-0.3
0.25
0.32
0.3
PM10
1
0.07
0.17
-0.2
0.16
-0.2
0.49
0.27
0.39
PM10
1
-0.1
0.12
0.57
0.57
0.76
0.47
0.79
0.6
PM10
1
0.13
-0.1
0.51
0.53
-0.4
0.59
0.58
0.61
PM10
1
-0.4
-0.2
-0.5
-0.5
-0.4
-0.5
-0.5
0.33
SO2
NO2
NO3-
SO42-
NH4+
OC
EC
TC
1
-0.4
0.33
0.08
0.02
0.57
0.59
0.54
SO2
1
0.01
0.17
0.08
0.2
0.22
0.23
NO2
1
0.86
0.29
0.51
0.41
0.55
NO3-
1
0.55
0.4
0.31
0.45
SO42-
1
-0.1
0.13
0.07
-0.3
0.12
0.33
0.19
SO2
1
-0.01
-0.2
-0.3
0.05
0.35
0.12
NO2
1
0.85
0.51
0.19
0.22
0.23
NO3-
1
0.61
0.2
0.06
0.21
SO42-
1
-0.02
-0.1
0.05
0.16
-0.2
-0.1
-0.2
SO2
1
-0.03
0.28
0.19
0.45
0.2
0.55
NO2
1
0.24
0.34
0.03
0.03
0.02
NO3-
1
0.7
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.2
-0.2
-0.2
SO2
1
0.21
0.1
-0.01
-0.1
-0.04
-0.1
NO2
1
0.9
0.66
0.59
0.63
0.62
NO3-
1
-0.2
0.27
0.2
0.01
-0.02
0.1
0.01
SO2
1
0.21
-0.1
0.09
0.15
0.22
0.18
NO2
1
0.88
-0.3
0.36
0.5
0.42
NO3-
1
0.78
0.4
0.84
0.78
-0.1
0.74
0.91
1
0.45
0.74
0.48
-0.2
0.3
0.68
1
0.76
0.93
0.06
0.88
0.34
1
-0
0.47
0.32
0.7
SO42-
1
0.64
0.59
0.63
0.62
SO42-
1
-0.3
0.27
0.37
0.31
SO42-
1
0.97
0.65
0.85
0.39
NH4+
1
0.13
0.12
0.16
NH4+
1
-0.3
-0.1
-0.3
NH4+
1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.2
NH4+
1
0.49
0.74
0.58
NH4+
1
-0.1
-0
-0.1
NH4+
1
0.48
0.98
0.38
OC
1
0.84
0.98
OC
1
0.6
0.98
OC
1
0.31
0.75
OC
1
0.89
0.99
OC
1
0.84
0.99
OC
1
0.11
0.01
EC
1
0.85
EC
1
0.69
EC
1
0.44
EC
1
0.94
EC
1
0.92
EC
1
0.97
TC
1
TC
1
TC
1
TC
1
TC
1
TC
Domlur
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
Kammanahalli
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
CSB
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
Victoria road
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
IGICH
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
Peenya
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
Background
PM10
SO2
NO2
NO3SO42NH4+
OC
EC
TC
PM10
1
0.15
0.45
-0.1
-0.2
0.52
-0.2
0.0
-0.1
SO2
IIIrd season
NO2
NO3-
SO42-
NH4+
OC
EC
1
-0.4
-0.6
-0.5
-0.4
0.34
0.65
0.46
1
0.39
0.27
0.02
-0.1
-0.5
-0.3
1
0.79
-0.2
-0.2
-0.3
-0.2
1
0.42
-0.1
-0.2
-0.1
1
-0.1
-0.2
-0.1
1
0.28
0.97
1
0.4
PM10
1
-0.5
-0.4
0.23
0.45
-0.2
-0.1
-0.4
-0.1
PM10
1
0.16
0.09
-0
0.09
0.02
0.38
0.1
0.32
PM10
1
-0.3
-0.5
0.84
0.75
0.38
0.87
-0.8
0.81
PM10
1
-0.1
-0.1
0.63
0.67
-0.03
0.37
0.55
0.48
PM10
1
-0.2
-0.5
0.1
0.3
0.07
-0.0
0.1
0.31
PM10
1
-0.3
-0.1
0.08
0
0.24
-0.04
-0.2
-0.1
SO2
NO2
NO3-
SO42-
NH4+
OC
EC
TC
1
0.51
-0.1
-0.2
-0.2
0.12
0.48
0.2
SO2
1
-0.3
-0.3
0.01
-0.0
0.12
0.04
NO2
1
0.91
0.22
0.11
0.15
0.03
NO3-
1
0.03
0.19
0.0
0.11
SO42-
1
0.04
0.11
0.01
NH4+
1
0.11
0.96
OC
1
EC
1
TC
0.14
0.08
0.19
0.05
0.02
0.39
0.21
SO2
1
0.78
0.21
0.81
0.4
-0.0
0.35
NO2
1
0.62
0.5
0.4
0.12
0.39
NO3-
1
-0
0.22
0.3
0.5
SO42-
1
0.61
0.21
0.52
NH4+
1
0.27
0.83
OC
1
0.6
EC
1
TC
1
0.48
-0.4
-0.3
-0.3
-0.4
0.33
-0.4
SO2
1
-0.4
-0.5
-0.2
-0.5
0.51
-0.4
NO2
1
0.93
0.61
0.94
-0.7
0.91
NO3-
1
0.71
0.84
-0.6
0.82
SO42-
1
0.41
-0.2
0.44
NH4+
1
-0.7
0.99
OC
1
EC
1
TC
1
-0.5
-0.1
0.07
-0.03
0.01
-0.03
0.09
SO2
1
0.03
-0.2
0.44
-0.3
-0.3
-0.3
NO2
1
0.68
0.27
0.61
0.72
0.72
NO3-
1
0.44
0.52
0.64
0.62
SO42-
1
-0.01
0.2
0.04
NH4+
1
0.84
0.95
OC
1
0.8
EC
1
TC
1
0.58
0.09
0.18
-0.6
0.01
0.02
0.17
SO2
1
-0.4
-0.5
-0.3
0.28
-0.0
-0.4
NO2
1
0.8
0.22
-0.4
-0.1
0.13
NO3-
1
0.28
-0.3
0.03
0.25
SO42-
1
-0.05
0.1
0.02
NH4+
1
0.78
0.01
OC
1
0.5
EC
1
TC
1
0.12
-0.1
0.32
0.31
0.36
0.64
0.49
1
0.09
0.17
0.34
0.08
0.1
0.1
1
0.84
0.07
*
*
*
1
0.08
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
1
0.97
1
1
0.9
TC
Chemical Speciation (PM10)

=
4
)*7
7A M
'
First season
2
2
+
3=
(
)
=(
5
+
=
(
'
(-?&
2
5
,-9
)
)
/
# =
5
5
, *
; (
=
)
;
/
/
4
'
Second season
/
)*7
=( /
+
%+
=/
+
3=
=(
=
/
'
/
5
&
+
%+
=/
(
/
* (
, ; =
F
/
'
2
)
'
Third Season
/
)*7
=( /
+
%+
=/ 6
3=
=(
+
/
3=B
-=
=(
=
/
'
/
(
= ; *
,
/
'
2
4 ;
'

PM10
Figure:2.19 Chemical
characterization PM10
(Domlur)
-2%
42%
0%
20%
-20%
First Season
22%
40%
60%
100%
Carbon
Molecular Markers
10
5
0
Ca
Mg
NH4
Na
NO3
Cl
NO2
Br
PO4
OC
EC
21%
23%
10
5
0
Ions
SO4
Cl
Br
Ca
NH4
NO2
Na
K
F
20
15
10
PM10
EC
17%
0%
25%
20%
40%
8
6
4
2
0
Ions
Cl
K
NO2
SO4
Mg
PO4
12
10
8
6
4
2
0.00
Carbon
OC
Molecular Markers
HOMC
PCMC
ODMC
INMC
CNMC
BbMC
BkMC
HCMC
TCMC
BPMC
0.40
25
20
15
10
5
0
Ca
Zn
Sn
Sr
Mo
60%
Si
P
Ti
Ag
Pd
Mg
Ni
Ba
Cd
Sb
EC
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Hg
Mn
Pb
Co
Se
Molecular Markers
Fe
As
Cr
In
Zr
Hcmc
Pcmc
Tcmc
Cnmc
Odmc
Homc
BbMC
BkMC
Inmc
Bpmc
46%
80%
100%
10
8
6
4
2
0
Elements
0
Na
NH4
Br
0.10
Carbon
Molecular Markers
10
16
14
0.20
100%
12% 0.7%
Ions
Elements
Unidentified
18
0.30
Zn
Cu
Zr
Hg
Sn
Elements
OC
12
Elements
K
Fe
Al
Mo Cl
Pb
Co
Ti
Ag
As
Ba
Ga
Ni
Pd
Sb
Se
Cr
Cd
Ca
La
Va
30
Na
Al
Cu
V
La
Carbon
Third Season
5
0
NO3
Mg
PO4
0.40
Carbon
Molecular Markers
15
10
50%
25
20
15
0.50
26%0.4% 30%
0%
25
20
SO4
25
Na
Si
Mn
Mg
In
Sr
Carbon
15
0.60
30
Ions
20
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Unidentified (Over estimated)
Ions
Elements
Unidentified
80%
Elements
Second Season
0.7%
Ions
PM10
Ca
NO3
F
38%
Sb
Pb
In
Ni
Co
K
Fe
Zr
Sr
Mn
Cd
Cl
Ca
Zn
Ga
La
Ba
Mg
Ti
Va
Hg
As
Al
Mo
Sn
Cu
Ag
Si
Se
Pd
Cr
Na
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Molecular Markers
Cnmc
Hcmc
Odmc
Homc
Bkmc
Pcmc
Bbmc
Bpmc
Inmc
Tcmc
19%
0%
First Season
Ions
20%
Carbon
25% 0.3% 17%
40%
60%
Elements
20
15
10
5
0
Ions
SO4
K
NO2
Ca
Mg
Br
25
50
40
30
20
0.45
30
0.40
25
20
15
10
5
Elem ents
Al
Se
TI
GA
SN
Carbon
OC
PM10
EC
12% 15%
0%
Na
Cr
AG
HG
SR
15%
0.1%
25%
50%
10
14
6
4
2
0
12
10
8
6
OC
0%
20%
20%
EC
14% 1.0%
40%
5
4
3
2
1
0
Ions
Cl
NO3
NO2
Ca
K
F
SO4
NH4
PO4
10
8
6
4
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Hg
Zn
Sr
Ti
Mo
Si
Sn
Mn
Ag
Pd
Na
Pb
As
Cd
Sb
Fe
P
Ni
Co
Se
80%
HO
Bb
OD
BP
IN
TC
Carbon
EC
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
Molecular Markers
Mg
Ba
Cu
In
Zr
Cnmc
Odmc
Homc
Bpmc
BkMC
BbMC
Hcmc
Inmc
Pcmc
Tcmc
0.60
Ca
Na
Sr
Cd
K
Sn
Mg
Zn
Mo
Cl
La
Va
Fe
Sb
Zr
Co
Mn
Al
In
Ag
Cr
Ni
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Elements
OC
HC
Bk
100%
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
2
0
Na
Mg
Br
PC
Carbon
Molecular Markers
12
CN
52%
60%
Ions
Elements
Unidentified
0.05
16
Ca
Al
Cr
V
La
Carbon
PM10 12%
Third Season
0.10
Molecular Markers
Zn
CO
CU
SB
Elements
Na
NH4
PO4
0.15
100%
2
0
SO4
Mg
F
0.25
0.20
0.00
Mg
CD
BA
PD
Cl
K
NO2
Si
MN
AS
PB
75%
Ions
Ca
NO3
Br
Fe
MO
Ca
NI
ZR
0.30
Carbon
Molecular Markers
16
Concentration ( g/m )
12
K
CL
LA
IN
VA
0.35
57%
Ions
Elements
Unidentified
Unidentified
Cl
NH4
PO4
Second Season
100%
35
10
0
NO3
Na
F
80%
Molecular Markers
60
30
38%
PM10
Figure :2.20 Chemical

Kammanhalli
Molecular Markers
Pb
Ti
As
Cu
Pd
Si
Ga
Ba
Hg
Se
Cnmc
Tcmc
Homc
Bkmc
Bbmc
Pcmc
Bpmc
Odmc
Inmc
Hcmc

characterization
PM10 (CSB)
-8%
PM10
-20%
24%
0%
51%
20%
33%
40%
60%
0.4%
80%
100%
First Season
15
10
5
0
Ions
SO4
Ca
NO3
NH4
Mg
Cl
Na
NO2
Br
PO4
Molecular Markers
60
50
40
30
20
10
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Molecular Markers
Elements
0
Carbon
OC
Na
Zn
Cu
Ca
La
Sr
EC
0% 18%
PM10
-20%
Second Season
Unidentified(Over estimated)
20
Elements
25
Carbon
Ions
0%
K
Cl
Cd
As
Ni
Va
Al
Mo
Ti
Ba
Pd
Fe
Cr
Pb
Ga
Sb
Si
Mn
Ag
Hg
Se
45%
20%
40%
60%
Mg
Co
Zr
In
Sn
0.2%
80%
100%
Carbon
Elements
Molecular Markers
CNMC
TCMC
HCMC
HOMC
ODMC
BkMC
BbMC
BPMC
INMC
37%
Ions
PCMC
5
0
Ions
SO4
Na
Br
Ca
K
NO2
NO3
NH4
PO4
Ca
Al
Cu
Sn
La
Carbon
OC
PM10
EC
13%
0%
46%
20%
40%
Ions
Elements
Unidentified
4
2
0
Ions
Ca
Na
NO2
Cl
K
F
NO3
Mg
Br
Fe
Pb
Ni
Cd
Sb
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
Molecular Markers
Hg
P
Mn
Co
Se
Mg
Cr
Ti
In
Zr
Pcmc
Cnmc
Tcmc
Hcmc
Odmc
BbMC
BkMC
Inmc
Bpmc
Homc
60%
80%
100%
35
30
25
20
15
10
0.60
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Carbon
OC
EC
Fe
Zn
Mo
Ni
Cr
As
Mg
Ti
Zr
Na
Co
Ag
Al
In
Va
Mn
Cl
Si
Hg
Sn
La
Cd
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Elements
5
0
SO4
NH4
PO4
Si
As
Sr
Ag
Pd
0.12
0.10
8% 0.7% 32%
Na
Zn
Ba
V
Mo
0.14
Carbon
Molecular Markers
40
10
8
10
5
0
Elements
Cl
Mg
F
Third Season
0.16
35
30
25
20
15
10
40
15
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
20
Unidentified (Over estimated)
Molecular Markers
Pb
Sr
Se
K
Ca
Sb
Ga
Pd
Cu
Ba
Cnmc
Hcmc
Pcmc
Bbmc
Bkmc
Tcmc
Odmc
Bpmc
Homc
Inmc
PM10
39%
Ions
Ca
SO4
NO3
Cl
Na
Mg
NO2
NH4
Br
PO4
60%
100
80
60
40
20
80%
100%
Carbon
Molecular Markers
1.20
50
40
30
20
10
0
Elements
PM10
EC
9%
23%
0%
15%
Fe
Cl
Cd
Ba
Pb
Ti
25%
40
35
30
25
20
15
OC
9%
6
4
2
0
Ions
Ca
Na
F
SO4
K
NO2
Cl
NH4
PO4
NO3
Mg
Br
HOMC
HCMC
BbMC
TCMC
25%
CNMC
ODMC
BkMC
0.16
25
0.14
20
15
10
5
Zn
Ba
Mn
V
Mo
Fe
Mg
Ti
Ag
Pd
11% 0.3%
50%
Ions
Carbon
Molecular Markers
Unidentified
0.12
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
Al
P
As
Cd
Sb
Hg
Cu
Sr
Co
Se
Ca
Pb
Ni
In
Zr
Molecular Markers
CnMC
BkMC
Hcmc
Odmc
Homc
Bpmc
BbMC
Inmc
40%
75%
100%
Elements
14
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0.40
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
OC
EC
Fe
Pb
Sr
Ca
Cr
Pd
Al
Sb
Ga
Ag
Cu
Sn
Na
Si
Hg
As
K
Ba
Zr
Mo
Cd
La
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Elements
Carbon
PCMC
BPMC
INMC
100%
EC
40%
0%
10
0.20
30
Na
Si
Cr
Sn
La
Carbon
PM10
0.40
Molecular Markers
K
Cr
Ca
In
Sn
Elem ents
Na
Br
F
Third Season
Zn
Mn
Zr
Hg
Se
Cl
Mg
NO2
Mg
Mo
La
Ga
Sb
75%
10
5
SO4
K
PO4
0.60
Carbon
Molecular Markers
Ca
NO3
NH4
0.80
52%
50%
45
Ions
Al
Co
Ag
Cu
Pd
0.1%
Ions
Elements
Unidentified
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1.00
0.00
Na
Si
Va
As
Ni
Sr
Carbon
OC
Second Season
40%
22%
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
20% 0.5%
0%
20%
Ions
Elements
Unidentified
First Season
18%

characterization
PM10 (Victoria Road)
Molecular Markers
Zn
Ti
Va
Cl
Mn
Mg
In
Se
Co
Ni
Hcmc
Cnmc
Tcmc
Homc
Odmc
Bbmc
Bkmc
Bpmc
Inmc
Pcmc
PM10
32%
0%
First Season
25
20
15
10
5
0
20%
Carbon
40%
Elements
20
15
10
5
0
Cl
Mg
Na
NO3
NH4
Br
NO2
PO4
OC
Second Season
EC
0%
20%
Cl
K
NO2
SO4
Mg
PO4
60%
4
2
0
Ions
Cl
K
F
Ca
NH4
Br
EC
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Molecular Markers
Al
Ag
As
In
Se
Zn
Mo
Ba
La
Sr
CNMC
HCMC
PCMC
HOMC
BbMC
BkMC
TCMC
INMC
BPMC
ODMC
14%
80%
100%
0.12
10
8
6
4
2
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
20%
40%
Carbon
Molecular Markers
Unidentified
8
6
4
Hg
Ba
P
Ag
Pd
Al
As
Sn
Cd
Sb
Molecular Markers
Na
Cr
V
Co
Se
80%
EC
Hpmc
Odmc
BbMC
Bpmc
BkMC
Inmc
Pcmc
Tcmc
0.20
5
4
3
2
1
0
Ca
Sb
Sn
Ba
Hg
Se
Si
Ti
Zr
Cd
K
Al
In
Va
Cl
La
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Elements
OC
Cnmc
Elements
Fe
Zn
Ga
As
Cu
Pd
Hcmc
100%
2
Carbon
Sr
Pb
Si
In
Zr
58%
60%
Ions
10
Fe
Cu
Ti
Ca
Mo
8% 0.3%
17%
0
NO3
Mg
PO4
0.3%
Si
Cd
Mg
Hg
Sb
12
Mg
Ni
Mn
Zn
La
SO4
Na
NO2
16%
0%
Third Season
K
Cr
Ca
Ga
Pd
Elem ents
PM10
12
Fe
Mn
Zr
Cu
Pb
Va
OC
10
0.50
14
Carbon
14
0.60
Carbon
Molecular Markers
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Na
Br
F
12
Ca
NO3
NH4
10
35%
40%
Ions
15
28%
Ions
Elements
Unidentified
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Unidentified
20
Na
Cl
Sn
Co
Ni
Ti
23%
PM10
100%
Elements
Carbon
Ca
80%
Molecular Markers
30
25
Ions
SO4
60%
30
Ions
17%0.6% 18%
32%

characterization
PM10 (IGICH)
Molecular Markers
Pb
Mo
Na
Co
Mn
Mg
Sr
Ag
Cr
Ni
Cnmc
Hcmc
Odmc
Bkmc
Tcmc
Bpmc
Bbmc
Homc
Inmc
Pcmc

23%
PM10
0%
20%
50
Ions
40
30
20
10
0
SO4
Ions
Ca
Cl
NO3
Mg
Na
NH4
NO2
Br
PO4
40%
Carbon
60%
Elements
40
30
20
10
0
Carbon
0%
Unidentified
0.30
50
40
30
20
10
0
Na
Zn
Ti
Sn
Hg
Sr
EC
25%
100%
Elements
0.3%
PM10 11% 13% 13%
Second season
80%
Molecular Markers
50
OC
26%
23% 0.2%
First season
27%

Peenya
Mg
Cl
Co
Ca
In
Zr
Fe
Mo
Pb
As
Ni
Al
Mn
Cd
Ba
Pd
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
K
Cr
Ag
Cu
Sb
Si
Va
La
Ga
Se
Molecular Marker
CN
TC
HC
HO
Bb
Bk
PC
IN
OD
BP
63%
50%
75%
100%
Ions
Carbon
Elements
Molecular Markers
Unidentified
15
10
5
0
Ions
Ca
Na
Br
SO4
K
NO2
Cl
Mg
F
20
15
10
25
0.50
20
25
25
20
15
10
5
0
Fe
Mg
Cu
V
La
0
NO3
NH4
PO4
Carbon
OC
PM10
EC
13%
0%
Third Season
28%
20%
Si
Zn
Ti
Sr
Mo
Al
Pb
Cr
Ag
Pd
10%0.3%
40%
2
0
Ions
SO4
Na
NO2
Cl
K
F
Ca
NH4
PO4
20
15
10
80%
Hcmc
BkMC
Tcmc
Pcmc
Odmc
Homc
BbMC
Bpmc
Inmc
100%
0.25
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Carbon
OC
EC
Fe
Zn
In
Ag
Cr
Pd
Mg
Sn
Ga
As
Cu
Se
Al
Sb
Mo
Ba
K
Na
Hg
Ca
Cd
La
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Elements
0
NO3
Mg
Br
Cnmc
Molecular Markers
Hg
Mn
Ba
In
Zr
Carbon
Molecular Markers
0.10
25
Ca
As
Sn
Co
Se
0.20
48%
60%
Ions
Elements
Unidentified
10
Na
P
Ni
Cd
Sb
0.30
0.00
Elements
0.40
Pb
Ti
Zr
Cl
Mn
Si
Sr
Va
Co
Ni
Molecular Marker
Cnmc
Tcmc
Homc
Pcmc
Bkmc
Bpmc
Odmc
Bbmc
Hcmc
Inmc
-20%
46%
0%
20%
20
15
10
5
0
40%
NO3
K
PO4
10
5
Carbon
OC
Second season
0%
25
10
5
0
Ions
Ca
Na
NO2
NH4
K
F
15
10
5
0
K
Cr
Co
Ba
Ni
Va
20%
40%
60%
Ions
Carbon
Molecular Markers
Unidentified
14
12
10
8
6
4
Elements
Si
Fe
Al
Mg Mo
Cl
Cd
Ti
Ag
Ca
Ga
Hg
Pb
Pd
Sb
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Molecular Markers
Zn
Mn
Zr
In
Sn
CNMC
TCMC
ODMC
BPMC
HCMC
PCMC
BkMC
HOMC
BbMC
INMC
59%
80%
100%
Elements
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
15
0.35
14% 8% 0.3%
16
20
100%
20
Na
Se
Cu
As
La
Sr
EC
19%
80%
25
Ca
Mg
Br
0.6%
Carbon
Molecular Markers
15
PM 10
SO4
NO3
Br
60%
20
Ions
NH4
Na
F
49%
25
SO4
Cl
NO2
32%
Ions
Elements
Unidentified (over estimated)
First season
-28%
0.35
PM10
characterization
PM10 Background
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Molecular Markers
Elements
0
Cl
Mg
PO4
Hg
Cr
Mn
Ca
Mg
Carbon
OC
EC
14%
PM10
0%
22%
20%
12%
Fe
P
Ti
Na
Mo
Al
Ni
Sn
Ag
Pd
0.1%
40%
Si
Pb
Sr
Co
Sb
Zn
Ba
V
In
Se
Cu
As
Cd
La
Zr
Cnmc
Tcmc
Hcmc
Pcmc
BbMC
BkMC
Odmc
Homc
Bpmc
Inmc
51%
60%
80%
100%
Carbon
Molecular Markers
Unidentified
6
4
2
0
Ions
SO4
K
F
Ca
NH4
PO4
14
12
10
8
6
4
10
0.07
8
6
4
2
0
2
Carbon
OC
EC
Ca
Si
Ga
Ba
Hg
Se
Na
Zn
Sr
Cd
K
Sn
Mg
Sb
Zr
Cl
La
Fe
In
Va
Co
Mn
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
Elements
0
Na
Mg
Br
Elements
16
Cl
NO3
NO2
Ions
10
Third Season
Pb
Mo
Ag
Cr
Ni
Al
Ti
As
Cu
Pd
Molecular Markers
Cnmc
Homc
Odmc
Bbmc
Hcmc
Bpmc
Bkmc
Inmc
Pcmc
Tcmc
Total carbon and EC/ OC ratio for 3 seasons for PM10 samples
(
0
1
3=B
-=
)*7
;
=(
)
3=B
-=
1
=(
55
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
42
29
25
17
TC
15
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Pe
en
ya
Ba
ck
gr
ou
nd
IG
IC
H
Do
m
CS
B
16
Ka
lur
mm
an
ah
al
i
Vi
cto
r ia
EC/OC
Figure 2.26 Total carbon content ( g/m) and EC/OC ratios in PM10 samples at various
locations in Bangalore during three seasons
Chemical Speciation (PM2.5)

=
4
)*
'
2
'
!M
99
First season
+
0=(
)*
1 2
+
3=
=(
High calcium and sodium concentration is observed at Peenya

location. H

1
/
, (
= ; *
#
/
)
Second season
/
)*
=(
H
3=
0=(
=(
1 /
3=B
-=
)
=
/
/
* (
, ; =
2
'
Third season
/
)*
=(
H
$
3=
0=(
/
)
3=B
-=
1
=(
=
/
5
= ; *
,
/
'
3
)*
-40% -20%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Ions
Carbon
Elements
Molecular Markers
10
5
0
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
SO4
NH4
Ca
Na
NO2
NO3
Cl
Mg
Br
PO4
Second Season
0
Carbon
Carbon
0%
Elements
Ca
K
PO4
Cl
NO3
NO2
-40%
-20%
Ca
Zn
Se
Ag
Cu
S
NH4
Mg
F
-57%
PM2.5
33%
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0%
20%
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
Fe
Ti
Hg
Cu
Sn
Pb
Ln
Ag
La
Y
Molecular Markers
Al
Se
As
Mn
60%
HOMC
BbMC
INMC
BPMC
BkMC
PCMC
80%
Unidentified (Overestimated)
15
10
5
0
Na
Zr
Ga
As
La
Sn
CNMC
ODMC
HCMC
TCMC
Zn
Ga
Ba
Ni
Mg
Sr
V
Ba
Mn
Y
Fe
Mo
Si
Cd
Ni
0.14
0.12
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
Molecular Markers
Pb
Ti
Hg
Co
P
Al
Ln
Sb
Cr
Rb
TCMC
HOMC
HCMC
ODMC
BkMC
BbMC
BPMC
CNMC
INMC
PCMC
70%
10.4%
60%
80%
Carbon
Molecular Markers
Ions
0.0
0.08
64% 0.5%
40%
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0.5
Carbon
Cl
Na
SO4
Ca
NO3
OC
Mg
NH4
Br
NO2
PO4
EC
Mg
Mo
Sb
Cr
S
20
3.0
Na
Sr
Si
Co
Rb
40%
43%
Ions
Elements
4.0
Elements
SO4
Na
Br
3.5
56%
Molecular Markers
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
EC
Ca
Zr
V
Cd
P
20%
Ions
Third Season
10
Ca
Zr
V
Cd
P
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
56%
10
Ions
15
-76%
-40% -20%
15
PM2.5
20
Elements
Ions
EC
15
OC
0%
75% 0.3%
57%
20
Carbon
53%
First Season
OC
-85%
PM2.5
characterization PM2.5
Domlur
Elem ents
Na
Sr
Si
Co
Rb
Mg
Mo
Sb
Cr
S
Fe
Ti
Hg
Cu
Sn
Pb
Ln
Ag
La
Y
Al
Se
As
Mn
Zn
Ga
Ba
Ni
2.00
1.90
1.80
1.70
1.60
1.50
1.40
Molecular Markers
CNMC
HOMC
INMC
PCMC
ODMC
BkMC
BPMC
BbMC
HCMC
TCMC

PM2.5
characterization PM2.5
-40%
Kammanhalli
First Season
38%
-20%
0%
92%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Ions
Carbon
Elements
Molecular Markers
20
15
10
5
20
15
10
5
0
Ions
SO4
NO3
NO2
Carbon
EC
NH4
Cl
Br
Second Season
K
Na
F
-20%
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Molecular Markers
Elem ents
Ca
Zn
V
Co
Rb
Ca
Mg
PO4
-29% 19%
PM2.5
25
25
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
30
OC
57%0.6%
35
-88%
Fe
Sr
Si
Cr
S
Na
Ti
Hg
Cu
Se
50%
0%
20%
Al
Ln
Ag
La
Sn
60%
40%
Sb
Zr
As
Mn
Y
Pb
Mo
Ba
Ni
Mg
Ga
Cd
P
PCMC
TCMC
CNMC
HOMC
ODMC
BPMC
BkMC
BbMC
HCMC
INMC
0.4%
60%
80%
Ions
Carbon
Elements
Molecular Markers
100%
15
10
5
0
Carbon
OC
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
15
10
5
Elements
SO4
K
Mg
Ca
Na
NO2
Cl
NO3
F
NH4
Br
PO4
-61% 18%
PM2.5
Third Season
20
0
Ions
EC
25
20
30
25
-50%
-25%
0%
Ca
Pb
Zr
As
La
Na
Hg
Mo
Ba
Mn
Fe
Zn
Ga
Cd
Ni
85%
Al
Sr
V
Co
P
Mg
Ti
Si
Cr
Rb
0.20
0.18
0.16
0.14
0.12
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
Molecular Markers
Sb
Ln
Ag
Cu
S
TCMC
CNMC
HCMC
HOMC
BbMC
ODMC
BPMC
BkMC
INMC
PCMC
57%1.7%
25%
50%
Ions
Carbon
Elements
Molecular Markers
75%
20
15
10
5
5
4
3
2
1
0
0
OC
EC
SO4
T
K
F
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Molecular Markers
Elements
Ions
Carbon
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
25
30
NaNo.
RCa
I Report
NO3
NH4
Mg
NO2
Cl
2004EE28
Br
PO4
Ca
Zn
V
Co
Rb
Fe
Sr
Si
Cr
S
Al
Ti
Hg
Cu
Se
Na
Ln
Ag
La
Sn
Mg
Zr
As
Mn
Y
Sb
Mo
Ba
Ni
Pb
Ga
Cd
P
PCMC
HOMC
CNMC
BbMC
BPMC
ODMC
BkMC
HCMC
INMC
TCMC
-20%
0%
91%
Carbon
OC
EC
PM2.5
15
10
5
0
SO4
Ions
NH4 Ca
Cl
Mg
NO3
NO2
Na
Br
PO4
-41%
-40%
Second Season
20
-20%
0%
2
2
1
1
0
Fe
Ln
Na
Co
Ni
Y
97%
20%
40%
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Molecular Markers
Elements
Pb
Sn
Si
Cd
Mn
V
40%
80% 100%
Carbon
Molecular Markers
25
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.3%
3%
20% 40% 60%
Ions
Elements
First Season
38%
-32%
PM2.5
characterization
PM2.5 CSB
Ca
Ti
Mg
Cr
P
Zr
Al
Ga
Ag
Cu
Rb
Sb
Zn
As
Hg
S
Sr
Mo
Ba
La
Se
CNMC
HOMC
BPMC
ODMC
BbMC
BkMC
HCMC
INMC
PCMC
TCMC
0.7%
3%
60%
Ions
Carbon
Elements
Molecular Markers
80%
25
20
15
10
5
0
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
SO4
Na
Mg
EC
Ca
K
NO2
PM2.5
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
NH4
NO3
PO4
Pb
Sn
Si
Cd
Mn
V
Cl
Br
F
-10%19%
-20%
Third Season
0.8
Elements
Ions
Carbon
OC
1.0
30
35
0%
Fe
Ln
Ca
Co
Ni
Y
Mg
Ti
Na
Cr
P
Zr
40%
60%
Sb
Zn
As
Hg
S
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
CNMC
Sr
Mo
Ba
La
Se
Molecular Markers
HCMC
PCMC
HOMC
ODMC
BPMC
BbMC
BkMC
INMC
TCMC
2%
0.9%
88%
20%
Al
Ga
Ag
Cu
Rb
0.25
80%
100%
Ions
Carbon
Elements
Molecular Markers
30
25
20
15
10
5
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Carbon
OC
EC
1
1
0
0
0
Elements
Ions
35
Ca
SO4
K
Cl
I ReportNH4
No. 2004EE28
Na T E RNO3
F
Br
Mg
NO2
PO4
Pb
Ti
Mg
Cu
S
Fe
Ga
Ag
Hg
Se
Al
Zn
As
La
V
Sb
Mo
Ba
Mn
Y
Sr
Si
Cd
Ni
Zr
Sn
Ca
Co
P
Ln
Na
Cr
Rb
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Molecular Markers
PCMC
ODMC
INMC
BPMC
BbMC
BkMC
CNMC
HCMC
HOMC
TCMC

PM2.5
characterization
PM2.5 Victoria Road
-40% -20%
0%
86%
20%
40%
60%
Ions
Carbon
Elements
Molecular Markers
80%
15
10
30
20
10
0
Carbon
OC
EC
5
0
Ions
SO4
NH4
Ca
Cl
Na
NO3
NO2
Br
Mg
PO4
0%
Second Season
20
15
10
5
Carbon
Elements
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
EC
Na
Sr
Ga
Cd
Mn
Fe
Zn
V
Co
Ni
60%
Mg
Ti
Si
Cr
P
Pb
Ln
Ag
Cu
Rb
80%
SO4
NO3
NO2
Cl
NH4
PO4
PM2.5
Third Season
Na
Mg
F
-44%
Ions
-40% -20%
Elements
0%
0.20
0.10
0.00
Sb
Zr
As
Hg
S
M olecular
M arkers
PCMC
HOMC
ODMC
INMC
TCMC
CNMC
BPMC
HCMC
BbMC
BkMC
Unidentified
0.08
10
8
6
4
2
0
25%
0.30
100%
Molecular Markers
Ca
Al
Mo
Ba
La
Ions
Ca
K
Br
0.40
Elements
Na
Sr
Ga
Cd
Mn
Fe
Zn
V
Co
Ni
99%
Mg
Ti
Si
Cr
P
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
Elements
0
Carbon
0.50
18%0.2%
13%
40%
25
50%
20%
Ions
10
Ca
Al
Mo
Ba
La
19%
PM2.5
15
60
50
40
20
OC
21%
0.6%
Concentration (g/m)
Concentration (g/m)
First Season
-37% 29%
Molecular Markers
Pb
Ln
Ag
Cu
Rb
Sb
Zr
As
Hg
S
CNMC
BbMC
BkMC
ODMC
BPMC
HCMC
HOMC
INMC
PCMC
TCMC
HDMC
PIMC
18% 2.7%
20% Carbon
40% 60% 80%
Molecular Markers
20
15
10
5
0
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
OC
EC
SO4
K
Br
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
Molecular Markers
Elements
Ions
Carbon
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
25
30

Ca
F
NO2
Cl
NO3
Mg
Na
NH4
PO4
Ca
Al
Mo
Ba
La
Se
Fe
Sr
Ga
Cd
Mn
Sn
Mg
Zn
V
Co
Ni
Y
Na
Ti
Si
Cr
P
Pb
Ln
Ag
Cu
Rb
Sb
Zr
As
Hg
S
CNMC
BbMC
TCMC
HOMC
ODMC
BkMC
BPMC
HCMC
INMC
PCMC

PM2.5
-25%
-20%
First Season
20%
40%
15
10
5
0
Carbon
25
20
15
10
5
0
EC
Ca
Cl
NH4
Na
NO3
Br
NO2
PO4
-46%
41%
PM2.5
-40%
Second Season
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
0
-20%
0%
Elements
Ca
Ti
Na
Co
Ni
V
Mg
80% 100%
Carbon
Molecular Markers
Ions
SO4
9%
0.7%
60%
20
0%
59%
Ions
Elements
25
OC
56%
characterization
PM2.5 IGICH
Pb
Ln
Mg
Cr
P
Y
Fe
Ga
Ag
Cu
Rb
Zr
Al
Zn
As
Hg
S
94%
20%
40%
Sr
Mo
Ba
La
Se
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Molecular Markers
Sb
Si
Cd
Mn
Sn
TCMC
CNMC
HCMC
HOMC
BbMC
ODMC
BkMC
BPMC
INMC
PCMC
10%
1.6%
60%
80%
Ions
Carbon
Elements
Molecular Markers
Unidentified (Overestimation)
10
8
6
4
2
SO4
Carbon
OC
Na
NH4
EC
Br
0%
Third Season
NO3
NO2
PO4
6
4
2
Carbon
OC
EC
0.2
Mg
F
20%
40%
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Molecular Markers
Na
Pb
Fe
Mg
Al
Sr
Sb
Ti
Ln
Ga
Zn
Mo
Si
Ag
As
HCMC
PCMC
CNMC
BkMC
Ba
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Hg
La
Mn
HOMC
ODMC
BPMC
BbMC
Ni
Rb
Se
Sn
INMC
TCMC
12%
1.1%
60%
80%
18%
100%
Carbon
Molecular Markers
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
3
3
2
2
1
1
0
Elem ents
Ions
0.4
0.6
0.20
Ca
45%
Ions
Elements
Unidentified
10
0.8
Elem ents
23%
PM2.5
12
0.25
1.0
0.0
Ions
0.30
1.2
12
1.4
14
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
0
16
SO4T E RClI Report

CaNo. 2004EE28
Na
K
NH4
F
NO3
Br
NO2
Mg
PO4
Ca
Ti
Ag
Hg
Se
Pb
Na
As
La
Sn
Fe
Ln
Ba
Mn
V
Mg
Ga
Cd
Ni
Y
Al
Zn
Co
P
Zr
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Molecular Markers
Sr
Mo
Cr
Rb
Sb
Si
Cu
S
ODMC
HOMC
BPMC
BbMC
BkMC
CNMC
HCMC
INMC
PCMC
TCMC
PM2.5
characterization
PM2.5 Peenya
-81%
-40% -20%
69%
0%
20%
Ions
Elements
First season
8%
1.0%
103%
40% 60%
80%
Carbon
Molecular Markers
15
10
5
0
20
15
10
5
OC
EC
3
2
2
1
1
0
SO4
Ca
Na
Mg
NO3
Cl
NH4
NO2
Br
PO4
-53%
PM2.5
Second season
-40%
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Molecular Marker
Elem ents
Ions
Carbon
25
20
25
35
30
-20%
Pb
Ti
Si
Fe
Ln
Ca
Mg
Ga
Na
Zn
Sn
Hg
Al
Mo
Ag
Sb
Zr
As
Sr
V
Ba
Cd
P
Co
Rb
Cr
S
Cu
Se
La
Y
Mn
Ni
55%
0%
83%
20%
40%
PCMC
HCMC
CNMC
HOMC
BPMC
ODMC
BbMC
BkMC
INMC
TCMC
14%
1.0%
60%
80%
Ions
Carbon
Elements
Molecular Markers
10
8
6
4
2
Ca
NO3
Mg
EC
SO4
K
NO2
Cl
Br
F
PM2.5
Mg
Sb
Mo
Ag
Cu
S
Na
NH4
PO4
37%
-22%
-20%
Third Season
0%
20%
40%
10
8
6
4
2
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
14
12
Carbon
OC
EC
Pb
Sr
Zr
As
La
Se
60%
Ca
Ti
V
Ba
Mn
Y
Fe
Ln
Si
Cd
Ni
Zn
Ga
Na
Co
P
Al
Sn
Hg
Cr
Rb
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
M olecular Markers
CNMC
PCMC
BbMC
ODMC
BPMC
BkMC
HCMC
HOMC
INMC
TCMC
11%
2.6%
80% 100%
Carbon
Molecular Markers
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
0
Mg
T E R I Report No. 2004EE28Sb

Ca
K
F
0.25
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Molecular Marker
Elements
Ions
1
1
71%
Ions
Elements
18
16
2
2
0
Ions
OC
3
3
Elements
0
Carbon
10
12
15
14
20
SO4
NH4
Br
Cl
Mg
NO2
Na
NO3
PO4
Zr
Cd
P
Ca
Sr
V
Co
Rb
Pb
Ti
Si
Cr
S
Fe
Ln
Hg
Cu
Se
Zn
Ga
Ag
La
Y
Al
Sn
As
Mn
Na
Mo
Ba
Ni
CNMC
PCMC
HOMC
BPMC
ODMC
BbMC
BkMC
HCMC
INMC
TCMC
characterization
PM2.5 Background
-20%
56%
0%
43%
20%
40%
18%
0.5%
60%
80%
Io ns
Carbo n
Elements
M o lecular M arkers
100%
Carbon
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
EC
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Elements
Ca
Sr
Ag
Hg
Se
Ions
SO4
K
NO2
First season
OC
-17%
PM2.5
NH4
NO3
F
Cl
Ca
PO4
Na
Mg
Br
-19%
PM2.5
-20%
Second season
Pb
Sb
As
La
Sn
Fe
Ti
Ba
Mn
V
Mg
Ln
Cd
Ni
Y
68%
0%
20%
Na
Ga
Co
P
Zr
43%
40%
Al
Mo
Cr
Rb
0.14
0.12
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
Molecular Markers
Zn
Si
Cu
S
CNMC
ODMC
BbMC
TCMC
HCMC
BkMC
INMC
8%
0.6%
60%
80%
Ions
Carbon
Elements
Molecular Markers
100%
8
6
4
2
OC
EC
Ca
Na
NO2
NH4
K
PO4
PM2.5
OC
EC
31%
20%
0.0
Na
Sr
Si
Cr
P
4
3
2
1
0
SO4
Na
Mg
Pb
Sb
Ag
Cu
Rb
Mg
Ti
As
Hg
S
0.16
0.14
0.12
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
Molecular Markers
Fe
Ln
Ba
La
Se
Al
Ga
Cd
Mn
Sn
CNMC
HCMC
BkMC
HOMC
BbMC
ODMC
BPMC
INMC
PCMC
TCMC
22% 0.1% 31%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Carbon
Molecular Markers
Ions
Carbon
0.5
Ions
Elements
Unidentified
Third season
Cl
NO3
F
15%
0%
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1.0
Ca
Zn
Mo
Co
Ni
Ions
Carbon
1.5
Elem ents
0
SO4
Mg
Br
2.0
10
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
7
6
12
5
4
3
2
1
0
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.00
Elements
Ca
NH4
Ca
Cl
Zn
T E R I Report
No.
NO3
K
F 2004EE28
Mo
Br
NO2
PO4
Co
Molecular Markers
Na
Pb
Mg
Fe
Al
Sr
Sb
Ti
Ln
Ga
Si
Cr
Ag
Cu
As
Hg
Ba
La
Cd
ODMC
BbMC
BkMC
BPMC
CNMC
HCMC
HOMC
INMC
PCMC
TCMC
HOMC
BPMC
PCMC
Total carbon and EC/ OC ratio for 3 seasons for PM2.5 samples
(
0
1
3=B
-=
)*
;
9?
=(
$
*
)*7
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
=(
40
35
25
10
CS
B
IG
IC
H
Pe
en
ya
Ba
ck
gr
ou
nd
12
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
21
15
Do
Ka
m
mm lur
an
ah
al
i
Vi
cto
ria
3=B
-=
TC
EC/OC
Figure 2.34 Total carbon content ( g/m) and EC/OC ratios in PM2.5 samples at various
locations in Bangalore during three seasons
Mass distribution of chemical species in PM10 and PM2.5 samples

;
9@
0
)*7
1
)*
2
)*7
)*
0=(
$
)*
6
)*7
2
5
)*
#
)*7
2
)*
)*7
31%
43%
55%
52%
35%
25%
19%
20%
36%
42%
32%
34%
29%
36%
ya
en
Pe
IG
ct
o
Vi
ah
32%
Ba
Ka
m
an
28%
IC
CS
B
ria
li
al
m
lu
Do
29%
un
d
28%
ro
25%
ck
g
31%
34%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Ions
Carbon
Elements
Molecular Marker
Figure 2.35 Mass distribution of chemical species in PM10 samples averaged

across the three seasons
72%
56%
56%
38%
25%
34%
35%
45%
ct
or
ia
a
Ba
ck
gr
ou
nd
20%
Vi
an
ah
al
li
64%
Ka
m
Do
m
lu
16%
16%
Pe
en
y
27%
7%
47%
9%
IG
IC
30%
2%
16%
CS
B
36%
40%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Ions
Carbon
Elements
Molecular Marker
Figure 2.36 Mass distribution of chemical species in PM2.5 samples averaged

across the three seasons
2.5
Conclusions
# '
'
06
1
0
06
0)
()*
1
0=( 1
1 )*
0=(
=)=
()*
0=(
1
1
5
0)
1
5
1
1 ; $
('
,=(
,-9
$
0
1
$
+
%+
=/
==)=
=-
5
-9
4
)*7
)*
2
0=(
1 #
=(
#
3=B
-=
=
'
/
#
, ; =
/
*
F
#
/
# (
=
CHAPTER
3.0
3 Emission Inventory
Introduction
"
#
General methodology
$
%
)
&' (
(
+
(
+
,+
.(./0
1223
141 5 6)
/
1221
#
+
14
15 6
+
!
+
Identification
of sources
Point
Area
Line
Secondary
data
Primary Surveys
approach for various sources
Point and Area
(Secondary data)
Line (Primary and
secondary data)
Collection of
activity data for
each type of
source
Data gaps
QA/QC
Data handling
and compilation
Source wise
emission
inventorisation
for 7 (2x2km2)
Emission Factors
Point & Area : (as
suggested by CPCB)
Line : (ARAI, Pune)
Mapping of total emission

inventory (grid-wise) based
on landuse and population
density of each grid
Figure 3.1 Overall approach for emission inventorisation
3)
4
*
'89
5
!
3.1
Area sources
3.1.1 Bakery, hotel & restaurants
5
5
.(./
"
;
!
+
+
.
141 #5 )
5
*(
5
5
5
+
/
;
( 5 //;(
5
<%
Emission estimations
/
5
41 #5
3
&'
141 #=
Table 3.1 Emission load (Kg/D) from cooking centers (bakery, hotel and restaurants) in 2x2 Km area around
each sampling location
Location
Background
Central Silk
Kannamangala
Board
Domlur
Kammanahalli
Peenya
Victoria
IGICH
Road
(HOSPITAL)
PM10
0.003
1.35
1.98
1.16
0.614
2.84
2.09
SO2
0.001
0.26
0.38
0.27
0.12
0.54
0.60
NOX
0.005
2.31
3.39
1.85
1.05
4.87
2.67
'89 141
3)
Fuel
consumption
pattern (primary
surveys)
Landuse
Population
density
Selection of grid
out of the 7
locations which
is similar to the
current grid
No. of eating
joints (primary
survey)
Emission
Factors
Application of
emissions patterns
of the selected grid
Emission
Loads
/
&1.
Table 3.2 Emission load (Kg/D) from cooking centers (bakery, hotel
and
restaurants) at the City level
Location
PM10
SO2
NOX
City level
121.8
24.9
202.2
3.1.2 Crematoria
+/
1 41 #=
3.1.3 & 3.1.4 Open eat outs and hotel & restaurants
.
&''
3.1.5 Domestic sector
Population and study area

/
+
.
=
+
122'
5
83
122'
1>

'?@2 8 3
122'
+
/
'?3' .
/A
/
.;.
/
/
A
-
122'
3
(
;
B
=
5
'
=
5 9.
5 =
;
;.
Domestic sector in Bangalore

C
.
'22
/
1229"23
&&
Table 3.3 Distribution of ward-wise population (estimated for 2007)
Name
Population Name
Population
Name
Population Name
Ward No.1
36827
Ward No.26
49979
Ward No.51
52613
Ward No.76
48590
Ward No.2
48137
Ward No.27
43718
Ward No.52
47517
Ward No.77
43241
Ward No.3
62198
Ward No.28
42442
Ward No.53
82833
Ward No.78
49340
Ward No.4
72894
Ward No.29
54239
Ward No.54
110106
Ward No.79
46622
Ward No.5
48353
Ward No.30
52662
Ward No.55
149784
Ward No.80
47545
Ward No.6
51599
Ward No.31
37402
Ward No.56
116338
Ward No.81
52859
Ward No.7
50316
Ward No.32
53363
Ward No.57
85156
Ward No.82
44451
Ward No.8
54197
Ward No.33
54456
Ward No.58
53874
Ward No.83
66967
Ward No.9
51841
Ward No.34
59121
Ward No.59
46122
Ward No.84
42620
Ward No.10
46241
Ward No.35
53475
Ward No.60
52378
Ward No.85
46562
Ward No.11
47175
Ward No.36
75074
Ward No.61
52641
Ward No.86
52749
Ward No.12
57891
Ward No.37
29177
Ward No.62
71868
Ward No.87
75327
Ward No.13
51626
Ward No.38
20783
Ward No.63
65265
Ward No.88
34783
Ward No.14
49194
Ward No.39
53937
Ward No.64
84096
Ward No.89
43825
Ward No.15
49310
Ward No.40
34138
Ward No.65
68684
Ward No.90
57874
Ward No.16
81702
Ward No.41
68952
Ward No.66
87706
Ward No.91
56070
Ward No.17
39009
Ward No.42
57595
Ward No.67
61201
Ward No.92
52852
Ward No.18
34302
Ward No.43
79862
Ward No.68
54614
Ward No.93
68728
Ward No.19
30952
Ward No.44
58487
Ward No.69
69396
Ward No.94
81145
Ward No.20
37472
Ward No.45
54395
Ward No.70
46214
Ward No.95
112545
Ward No.21
63537
Ward No.46
54267
Ward No.71
53021
Ward No.96
98774
Ward No.22
55261
Ward No.47
43890
Ward No.72
59106
Ward No.97
50691
Ward No.23
47258
Ward No.48
57190
Ward No.73
56349
Ward No.98
70018
Ward No.24
46098
Ward No.49
54733
Ward No.74
53061
Ward No.99
43387
Ward No.25
47186
Ward No.50
42498
Ward No.75
48017
Ward No.100
Outside BMP*
1865679
Total
* Outside BMP is the area in the study domain outside the BMP limits
Population
69641
7597256
+
!
1 41 #5
9)
&>
Table 3.4 Population estimates for 2x2 km zones of influence around the
monitoring stations
Location
Population
CSB
68794
IGICH
110794
Domlur
59429
Victoria
105222
Kammanahalli
112180
Peenya
23109
4
/
122'
5
A
/;(
%
&1
/A
No cooking
100%
Any other
80%
Biogas
52%
55%
Electricity
60%
LPG
Kerosene
40%
20%
0%
Coal, Lignite,
40%
39%
3%
5%
BMP
BUA
Cowdung
Crop residue
Firewood
Figure 3.2 Percentage distribution of households by type of fuel used for cooking
in Bangalore (BMP and BUA)
S O U R C E Census, 2001
*(
81"88D
5
&?">2D
&"8D
5
,
#
Primary survey
+
(
1E1 # 5

" "
)
F
982
'?82
5
(
&
+
"
%
*(
25
20
15
10
Kerosene (L)
LPG (Kg)
CS
B
ml
ur
Do
all
i
na
h
Ka
mm
a
Vi
cto
ri
al
ay
ou
t
H
IG
IC
ya
Pe
en
nd
5
0
Ba
ck
gro
u
Monthly fuel consumption per HH
5
&&
/
Firewood (kg)
Figure 3.3 Average consumption of different fuels across different locations in Bangalore city
&&
*(
++
.5
1'
'>"'9 5
5
=
%
/;(
/;(
7
"
%
4
<(
4D (
Daily Fuel Consumption
&>
800
679
600
400
200
124
27
0
Firewood (T)
Kerosene (KL)
LPG (T)
Figure 3.4 Total domestic fuel consumption in the study domain
Emission factors
&8
Table 3.5 Fuel based emission factors for domestic sector
Pollutant
Firewood(g/ kg)
Kerosene
LPG (kg/ t)
PM10
6.3
1.95 (g/ litre)
2.1
NOX
1.4
2.5 (g/ kg)
3.6
0.48
4 (g/ litre)
0.4
SO2
SOURCE
Reddy and Venkatraman, AP-42, USEPA 2000 (as suggested by CPCB)
Domestic emissions
7"
3)
&9
Table 3.6 Domestic emissions (T/d) from six zones of influences around the monitoring stations in Bangalore
PM10
CSB
Domlur
IGICH
Kammanahalli
Peenya
Victoria
Background
0.014
0.014
0.027
0.028
0.004
0.020
0.002
NOX
0.023
0.024
0.046
0.045
0.007
0.035
SO2
0.004
0.003
0.005
0.018
0.001
0.004
&
3
(
+
!
#

%
&8
Landuse
Population
density
Population
Selection of grid
out of the 7
locations which
is similar to the
current grid
Application of fuel
consumption
patterns of the
selected grid
Emission
Loads
Emission
Factors
Figure 3.5 Landuse and population density approach for domestic emissions estimation
/
/
&3
Table 3.7 Fuel-wise emissions (T/d) of different pollutant from domestic sector
Firewood
Kerosene
LPG
Total
PM10
0.17
0.19
1.43
1.79
NOX
SO2
0.04
0.01
0.25
0.40
2.45
0.27
2.73
0.68
"
%
&9
Figure 3.6 PM10 emissions (g/s) from domestic sector in various grids (2x2 km)
across the study domain
%
&9
3.1.6 Open burning

G
3.1.7 Paved road dust

A! (
(">1 7
"
<H= 4 %
EF = { K (SL/2)0.65. (W/3)1.5 C} (1-P/4N)

%<
5
5<
*<
C<
.<
(<
G<
I J
/
A! (
!
F6
/
2&9 F 6
H
4 /
K
C0
(;'2 > 9 G
8? @
&@
Table 3.8 Road dust emissions (T/d) for different locations
Road dust
CSB
Domlur
IGICH
Kammanahalli
Peenya
Victoria
Background
0.42
0.06
0.07
0.05
0.07
0.08
0.012
,
3)
FF
5
&

,
Silt
loading
s
;
+
!
Emission
Factor
VKT estimated
using traffic surveys
Emission load and

intensities for 7 zones
of influences
Population
density
Road length
Selection of grid
out of the 7
locations which
is similar to the
current grid
Application of
road dust emission
intensities (g/s/km)
Emission
Loads
Figure 3.7 Landuse and population density approach for road dust emissions estimation
The emission estimated using the above approach are

presented in Figure 3.8 .
Emission Loads (T/d)
Landuse
10.9
12
9.1
10
8
6
4
1.8
2
0
Major
Minor
Total
Figure 3.8 Road dust emission loads (T/d) for the study domain
&@
'2?
(;'2
$
@&D
'3D
3.1.8 Construction activities

/
.(./
"
:
;
!
+
+
K
3)
.
0
(; <
Emission estimations
/
1 41 #5
&?
(;'2
Table 3.9 PM10 emission load (T/D) due to construction activities in 2x2 Km area around each
sampling location
Location
PM10
Kammanahalli
0.05
IGICH
0.04
Victoria
0.04
CSB
0.05
Domlur
0.03
Peenya
0.02
BG
0.01
Whitefield
0.31
)
L
4
C
)

%
C
)
3 3& F
"
&?
Figure 3.9 Grid-wise distribution of the PM10 load from construction activities
3.1.9,10 & 11 Locomotive, aircraft

!
(;'2
22?D
228 F
(;'2
*5
2'3 F 2&D
(;'2
3.1.12 Other sources as per local inventory

DG sets (Domestic)
+
5"
3
9D
& '2
Table 3.10 DG sets information collected during primary survey at seven sampling locations
Kammanhalli
IGICH
Victoria
CSB
Domlur
Peenya
5%
6%
4%
18%
6%
0%
Capacity (KVA)
1.08
1.27
1.20
1.15
1.10
1.16
Working Hours
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.16
1.00
1.03
% DG sets
BG
Average
0%
5
7
"
= "
<
<+
= "
4
& ''
.(./
4C 5
%
=F
= "
Table 3.11 Emission (Kg/d) of domestic DG sets in zones of influences around

the 7 monitoring grids
Location
PM10
NOX
SO2
Domlur
0.38
5.73
0.31
Kammanahalli
0.58
8.85
0.48
Victoria Road
0.48
7.38
0.40
CSB
1.58
24.13
1.30
IGICH
0.81
12.33
0.66
Peenya
0.00
0.00
0.00
Background
0.00
0.00
0.00
6%
%
'89 141
Landuse
Population
density
Population
Selection of grid
out of the 7
locations which
is similar to the
current grid
Application of DG
set usage patterns
Emission
Loads
Emission
Factors
* DG set usage patterns include a) % households using DG sets, b) capacity of DG sets , and c) working hours
& '1
Table 3.12 Estimated total emissions (Kg/d) for various pollutants from domestic DG
sets for city level
Emission Factor
Kg/Kwhr
0.000438
0.006688
0.000359
PM10
NOX
SO2
Emissions
(Kg/d)
58.5
892.6
48.0
DG sets (Commercial)
'1 =H
5
'89
&122;H
5
5
'
.(./
= " F <+
4C 5
F
=F <
=F
= "
& '&
= " F 4
Table 3.13 Estimated total emissions (T/d) for various pollutants from commercial
DG sets for city level
PM10
NOX
SO2
3.54
50.07
3.30
=F
3
)
& '>
Table 3.14 Emission (Kg/d) of commercial DG sets in zones of influences around the 7 monitoring grids
CSB
IGICH
Domlur
Victoria
Kammanahalli
Peenya
Whitefield
PM10
20.4
136.0
217.7
82.8
12.9
59.9
0.0
SO2
19.0
126.8
202.9
77.2
12.0
55.8
0.0
NOX
287.8
1922.5
3076.8
1170.5
181.9
846.1
0.0
"
& '2
Figure 3.10 Grid-wise distribution of the PM10 emission load from DG Sets
3.1.13 Percentage distribution of area sources

! !
3.2
&>
Point sources
+
=
5!
=!(./
#
=!(./
,
=!(./
%
& ''
Figure 3.11 Map indicating jurisdiction of KSPCB regional offices* within Bangalore
agglomeration area in 2001
*KSPCB regional offices: BC-I- Bangalore City 1, BC-II- Bangalore city-2, BC-III- Bangalore city-3, P- Peenya, N-INorth-1, E-I- East-1, W- West, N-II- North-2, S-I- South-1
3.2.1 Methodology
5
F
F
=!(./
%
=!(./
+
122
=!(./
/
=!(./
.
'9@
'9@
%
& '1
35
Number of Industries
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Bangalore Bangalore Bangalore Peenya

City I
City II
City III
East-I
North-I
North-II
South-I
West
KSPCB Regional Office
Figure 3.12 Distribution of industries from nine KSPCB regional offices
'
7! 5
=!(./
<%
1 %
4(
<%
%
! =F
= "- <
C 5 4
& (
4(
<(
3.2.2 Data analysis

.(./
:
+
+
!
+
"
;
!
C-$ '??&
.(./
3.2.3 Total emission estimation

City level
5
'8= F
,
(;'2
3 3@ F
& '8
2x2 Sq Km Area
/
? =!(./
4
)
141
#= )
+(
M
(
+
$
'>@
1 41 #= )
4
21? F
(;'2
& '9
Table 3.15 Emission load (T/D) from industries at City level

Pollutant
Number of Industries
SO2
PM10
NOX
8.21
7.78
17.18
Source Type
City Level considering all
industries
168
26
Point Source
2.71
2.48
13.43
142
Area Source
5.50
5.30
3.76
Table 3.16 Emission load (Kg/D) from industries in 2x2 Km zone of influence
at Peenya
Pollutant
SO2
PM10
NOX
123.72
289.86
819.13
Total
Emissions
(Kg/D)
3.2.4 Percentage distribution of pollutants

%
& '&
SO2
25%
NOX
52%
PM10
23%
Figure 3.13 Percentage distribution of pollutants from industries at city level
141 #=
& '>
SO2
10%
PM10
24%
NOX
66%
Figure 3.14 Percentage distribution of pollutants from industries falling in 2 x2 sq Km

zone of influence
!
& '8
Figure 3.15 Spatial distribution of emissions (g/s) from industrial sector
3.2.5 Data constraints

'
&
=!(./
3.3
Line sources
H
A 5
"
H
4
=
,
/
A
'?@2 1228
5
$
,$
& '3
Table 3.17 Number of registered vehicles in Bangalore during various years
(Figures in lakhs, as on 31 March each year)
Year
2-Wheelers
M/Cars
3-Wheelers/Cabs
Others
Total
1980
0.97
0.3
0.1
0.31
1.68
1985
1.89
0.47
0.11
0.3
2.77
1990
4.01
0.71
0.15
1.41
6.28
1995
5.94
1.07
0.34
0.62
7.97
1996
6.69
1.21
0.39
0.71
9.00
1997
7.58
1.38
0.47
0.8
10.23
1998
8.39
1.52
0.54
0.84
11.29
1999
9.1
1.64
0.55
0.94
12.23
2000
9.94
1.84
0.58
1.01
13.37
2001
10.92
2.07
0.62
1.12
14.73
2002
11.83
2.26
0.64
1.23
15.96
2003
13.23
2.53
0.69
1.37
17.83
2004
14.44
2.77
0.76
1.53
19.5
2005
15.7
3.18
0.75
1.67
21.3
SOURCE
http://rto.kar.nic.in/bng-veh-stat.htm
3)
141
"
18
4
)
3.3.1 Primary data collection elements and methodology

5
18
5
"
3.3.2 Vehicle counts & parking lot surveys

18
/
1223
%
& '9
1.9
Vehicles (Lacs)
1.6
1.2
1.3
1.1
0.7
0.8
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.2
0
WD
WE
WD
Arterial
WE
WD
Sub Arterial
WE
WD
Others
WE
Total
Figure 3.16 Average number of vehicles passing through different categories of

roads during a typical weekday and weekend.
WD:
WE:
weekday
weekend
& '9
1>
/
&2D
5
5
4
23"'
"
5
2>"28
21"2&
-
5
M
"
Distribution of vehicles
(
5"
7"
18
& '3
38D
"
82D
(
/
Vehicles
100%
80%
27%
60%
17%
17%
3%
40%
75%
50%
20%
0%
Survey
Registration
Two wheelers
Buses
Three wheelers
Goods vehicles
Cars & Taxi

Tractors
Figure 3.17 Percentage break-up of surveyed vehicles and registered vehicles

in the study domain
Parking lot survey

!
7
"
H
4
% "
5
;
$
"
"
8222
>"
5
"
"
3@D
H
"
1@D
31D
& '@
"1222
"
/
Table 3.18 Vintage distribution of various vehicles on road in Bangalore
2w
Car
3w
Bus
Truck
LCV
<1995
6%
4%
12%
5%
14%
13%
1995-2000
22%
20%
40%
41%
46%
27%
2000-2005
50%
53%
38%
47%
30%
38%
>2005
22%
23%
10%
7%
9%
22%
"1222
& '?
>"
5
1"
1"
5 +
>"
5
'22"122.. N@2
&>D
>3D
5
1"
Table 3.19 Technological distribution of 2-wheelers

2-stroke
Percentage share
4-Stroke
Percentage share
Moped <80cc
28%
Scooter >100cc
10%
Scooter <80cc
8%
M.cycle <100cc
38%
Scooter >80cc
34%
M.cycle 100-200cc
47%
M.Cycle <80cc
1%
M.cycle >200cc
5%
M.Cycle >80cc
29%
Total
100%
Total
100%
'122
93D
1?D -
8'D
&@D
*(
'1D
H
39D
"1222
1>D
"1222
& 12
*(
Table 3.20 Technological distribution of petrol, diesel and LPG cars
Petrol
Percentage share
Diesel
Percentage share
LPG
Percentage share
<1000 CC
36%
<1600 cc
50%
<1000 CC
83%
1000-1400 CC
38%
>1600 CC
50%
1000-1400 CC
11%
>1400 cc
26%
>1400 cc
6%
Total
100%
Total
100%
Total
100%
822
''D
*(
>@D
"1222
!
@8
" #$
'?2
"
3@D
H
81D
H
>2D *.H
F
"1222
'?2*.H
>9D
92D
1222 $
'2222
5
/
%
& '@
5
5
Mileage
60
50
49
Km/l
40
30
22
20
14
14
CAR
TAXI
10
BUS
TRUCK
LCV
44
44
TRUCK
LCV
2.0
2.0
TRUCK
LCV
0
2W
3W
Km/d
VKT
150
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
100
83
40
33
2W
3W
CAR
TAXI
BUS
No. of person
Occupancy
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
40.2
1.9
3.5
5.4
5.8
2W
3W
CAR
TAXI
BUS
Figure 3.18a,b,c Fuel efficiency, VKT, and occupancy estimated based on parking lot/fuel pump survey for
different vehicles
3.3.3 Vehicle kilometer travelled

H
5
7
"
H=
18
/
&>D
/
H=
&>D
"
/
(
5"
5
& '?
VKT
100%
3%
21%
80%
8%
18%
7%
18%
60%
40%
64%
55%
20%
0%
Survey
Two wheelers
Buses
Registration
Three wheelers
Goods vehicles
Cars & Taxi

Tractors
Figures 3.19 Percentage share of different vehicles in total VKT for Bangalore city (based
on two methodologies)
(
%
H=
& '?
5
!
.
9>D
"
'@"1'D
88"
3"'@D !
H=
3.3.4 Emission factors

,+
3.3.5 Vehicle emission inventory

H=
18
/
7
"
<
E ,
7
7
,+
H
& 1'
Table 3.21 Emission loads (T/d) from transport sector in Bangalore city for the year 2007
Pollutants
CSB
IGICH
Domlur
Victoria
Kammanahalli
Peenya
BG
PM10
0.56
0.29
0.11
0.17
0.27
0.09
0.01
NOX
4.36
1.66
0.70
1.09
1.76
0.65
0.07
SO2
0.06
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.01
0.00
.!/
4
141
"
Emission
Factor
VKT estimated
using traffic surveys
Emission load and

intensities for 7 zones
of influences
Landuse
Population
density
Road length
Selection of grid
out of the 7
locations which
is similar to the
current grid
Application of
emission Intensities
(g/s/km) of the
selected grid
Emission
Loads
& 11
Table 3.22 Emissions (T/d) from the transport sector in Bangalore city
PM
22.4
& 11
/
%
(;
NOX
146.4
11 >
SO2
2.3
(;
& 12
.!/ (

/ 5
(;
5 %
14%
9%
10%
17%
20%
24%
28%
80%
11%
60%
33%
40%
25%
19%
28%
31%
20%
13%
11%
4%
10%
18%
15%
Bus
Car
31%
9%
om
lu
r
Vi
ct
or
ia
m
an
ah
al
li
Pe
en
ya
16%
18%
3W
6%
2%
6%
2W
Ka
m
IG
IC
SB
10%
0%
65%
54%
15%
20%
Truck
22%
38%
12%
Tractor
12%
BG
100%
& 12
Figures 3.20 Percentage distribution of vehicular PM emissions from various

monitoring locations
H
/
"
(;
G$E
%
& 1'
Tra nsport NOx
Tra nsport -P M
2%
13%
20%
24%
2%
15%
2%
21%
13%
27%
2W
3W
12%
Car
Bus
49%
Truc k
Trac tor
2W
3W
Car
Bus
Truc k
Trac tor
Figure 3.21 Vehicle-wise distribution of PM and NOX emission loads in Bangalore city
Note: High PM emissions from 3-Wheelers because of high emission factor for LPG autos.
Presently, emissions factor is used for post 2000 retrofication of LPG autos
& 1'
5
8'D
1'D
'&D
/
(;
G$E
"
'&D *5
5
9?D
"
%
(;
& 11
Figure 3.22 Spatial distribution of PM emissions (g/s) from transport sector

across the study domain
& 11
3.4
Emission inventory summary

City Level
+
(
5
%
& 1&
& 1&

Table 3.23 Total emission loads (T/d) in Bangalore
PM10
NOX
SO2
Transport
22.4
146.36
2.31
Road Dust
10.9
0.00
0.00
Domestic
1.8
2.73
0.68
DG Set
3.6
50.96
3.35
Industry
7.8
17.19
8.21
Hotel
0.1
0.20
0.02
7.7
0.00
0.00
54.4
217.4
14.6
Construction
Total
250
Emissions (T/d)
200
150
100
50
0
PM10
NOx
SO2
Transport
Road Dust
Domestic
Industry
Hotel
Construction
DG Set
Figure 3.23 Total emission loads (T/d) in Bangalore
+
>1D
(;
3D
& 1&
%
& 1>
12D
'>D
'>D
(;
G$E
%
& 18 !$1
%
& 19
PM10
Construction
14%
Hotel
0%
Transport
42%
Industry
14%
DG Set
7%
Domestic
3%
Road Dust
20%
Figure 3.24 Percentage share of different sources in total PM10 emission loads
NOx
Industry
8%
Hotel
0%
DG Set
23%
Domestic
1%
Transport
68%
Figure 3.25 Percentage share of different sources in total NOX emission loads
SO2
Hotel
0%
Transport
16%
Domestic
5%
Industry
56%
DG Set
23%
Figure 3.26 Percentage share of different sources in total SO2 emission loads
"
%
(;
& 13
Figure 3.27 Grid-wise PM emission inventory (g/s) for the whole study domain
Total emission inventory for the 2 x 2 km2 zones of influence

!
"
& 1>
4141 )
& 18O
& 1@
& 1?
Table 3.24 Sector-wise PM10 emission inventory (T/d) for the six 2x2 km2 zones of influence
CSB
Domlur
IGICH
Kammanahalli
Peenya
Victoria
Background
0.56
0.11
0.29
0.27
0.09
0.17
Industries
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.29
0.00
0.00
Domestic
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.03
0.00
0.02
0.002
DG sets
0.02
0.22
0.14
0.01
0.06
0.08
0.00
Road dust
0.42
0.06
0.07
0.05
0.07
0.08
0.012
Hotels
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000003
ConstructIon
0.05
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.02
0.04
0.0067
Total
1.07
0.43
0.56
0.42
0.54
0.40
0.031
0.010
DG sets
un
d
ck
gr
o
ria
Ba
Ka
Transport
Vi
ct
o
al
li
en
ya
Pe
Domestic
ah
H
IC
Industries
m
m
an
IG
om
D
lu
r
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
SB
PM10 Emission (T/d)
Transport
Road dust
Hotels
ConstructIon
Figure 3.28 Sector-wise PM10 emission inventory for the six 2x2 km2 zones of influence
Table 3.25 Sector-wise NOX emission inventory (T/d) for the six 2x2 km2 zones of influence
CSB
Domlur
IGICH
Kamman
Peenya
Victoria
BG
Transport
4.34
0.71
1.66
1.76
0.66
1.11
0.07
Industries
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.82
0.00
Domestic
0.0231
0.024
0.046
0.045
0.007
0.035
0.0020718
DG sets
0.31
3.08
1.93
0.19
0.85
1.18
Road dust
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0023
0.0034
0.0027
0.0018
0.0011
0.0049
0.0000048
Construction
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total
4.68
3.82
3.64
2.00
2.33
2.33
0.07
Hotels
6.0
4.0
2.0
Hotels
un
d
Vi
ct
or
ia
Road dust
Ka
m
m
an
a
DG sets
Ba
ck
gr
o
Pe
en
ya
Domestic
li
IG
Industries
ha
l
om
lu
D
Transport
IC
0.0
SB
NOx Emission (T/d)
ConstructIon
Figure 3.29 Sector-wise NOX emission inventory for the six 2x2 km2 zones of influence
(;
%
9
& &2
Figure 3.30 Spatial distribution of PM emissions in 6 monitoring grids falling in the city
(
(;
G$E
4141 5 6)
%
& &'

Line
26%
Domlur
(PM emissions)
0% 6%
26%
14%
Point
0%
0%
Line
66%
12%
3%
3%
6%
Transport
Industries
Domestic
Road dust
Hotels
Construciton
Area
47%
Domestic
Hotels
Construciton
Line
42%
39%
Victoria
1%
Industries
Hotels
Line
51%
Point
0%
42%
21%
0%
Domestic
DG sets
Construciton
(PM emissions)
0% 7%
Industries
Domestic
Road dust
Hotels
Construciton
Line
26%
Peenya
14%
13%
DG sets
(PM emissions)
0% 4% 17%
11%
Point
32%
51%
0%
5%
Transport
Area
42%
DG sets
(PM emissions)
10%
21%
Point
0%
53%
IGICH
Area
49%
Industries
Road dust
(PM emissions)
2%
1%
Road dust
Transport
Area
58%
Point
0%
Transport
DG sets
0% 5%
Line
53%
66%
0%
51%
CSB
(PM emissions)
13%
Point
0%
0%
Area
74%
Kammanahalli
Area
34%
1%
24%
53%
5%
0%
Transport
Industries
Domestic
DG sets
Road dust
Hotels
Construciton
Transport
Industries
Domestic
Road dust
Hotels
Construciton
Figure 3.31a Percentage distribution of different sources contributing to the PM emission inventory of six 2x2 km
zones of influence
DG sets
Line
18%
Point
0%
Area
Point12%
0%
Domlur (NOx emissions)

0% 0%
18%
0%
Kammanahalli (NOx emissions)

0% 0%
0%
2%10%
0%
0%
1%
Area
82%
Line
88%
81%
88%
Transport
Industries
Domestic
Road dust
Hotels
Construciton
Point
0%
CSB
Area
7%
Transport
Road dust
DG sets
Industries
Hotels
0%
Area
53%
0%
0% 0% 0%
Line
47%
Point
0%
Line
93%
47%
51%
2%
93%
Transport
Road dust
Industries
Hotels
Domestic
Construciton
DG sets
IGICH (NOx emissions)

Area
54%
0% 0%
Line
46%
Point
0%
Industries
Domestic
Road dust
Hotels
Construciton
Area
37%
0%
0% 0%
Domestic
Construciton
0%
28%
Point
35%
0%
Industries
Hotels
DG sets
Peenya (NOx emissions)
Line
28%
37%
46%
53%
0%
Transport
0%
1%
Transport
Road dust
DG sets
Victoria (NOx emissions)
(NOx emissions)
0% 0%
0% 7%
Domestic
Construciton
DG sets
Transport
Road dust
Industries
Hotels
35%
Domestic
Construciton
Figure 3.31b Percentage distribution of different sources contributing to the NOX emission inventory of six
2x2km zones of influence
%
)
F
5
(;'2
(
19"99D *5
'1"&?D
(;'2
8&D
+
(;
4 141 5 6 )
14
1
DG sets

"
/;(
(;'2
%
)
3.5
(
141 5 6)
Emission inventory QA/QC

%
: F
:.
5
7"
'
141
(
#
1
)
;
5
+
&
57,
5
>
.(./
%
"
;
8
+
!7
"
5
3.6
Conclusions
8> > F
/
(;'2 1'3 > F
>1D
'>D
G$E
(;'2
12D
3D
1223
'> 9
'>D
&D *5
G$E
1&D
@D
89D
'9D
!$1
9@D
'D +
1&D
!$1
CHAPTER
4.1
4 Receptor modelling & Source Apportionment
Receptor modelling
!10"
$
%!& %
&
"
4.1.1
Factor analysis: methodology & results

'
!
*
+
()
+
%*" !
#
!+"
+
*
!
!)*"
*
+*"
! "
%
!
,
*
*
$
+
+*

.
/012"
3"
+*
)75"89
$
)
+
34567
*
#
.
(!
('
:!'"
- -+
;
416;
4/ 6 )
8
6 <" &
,
%!&
Domlur
+
*
2 /" +
=
/
!/6
* !
+
9
3'5
-'2
&
+
'% %
5
>
%
(
3.2
+
<
:
% 3
?
!
%
3
&

Table 4.1 Factor loadings of different variables at Domlur
Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 3
Factor 4
Factor 5
Factor 6
Communalities
PM10
0.30
0.25
-0.26
0.67
0.02
-0.14
0.69
Na Ions
-0.08
-0.27
-0.27
0.21
-0.49
0.60
0.79
NH4 Ions
-0.06
0.08
-0.23
0.86
0.04
0.08
0.81
K Ions
0.29
0.23
-0.53
0.12
0.67
-0.04
0.88
Ca Ions
0.02
-0.07
0.09
0.82
-0.18
0.41
0.88
Mg Ions
0.29
0.01
-0.21
0.20
0.57
0.64
0.90
Cl Ions
-0.12
0.29
-0.11
0.07
0.00
0.86
0.86
Br Ions
-0.26
0.79
-0.02
0.07
0.34
0.13
0.84
NO3 Ions
-0.10
0.97
0.01
0.02
-0.13
-0.01
0.96
SO4 Ions
-0.05
0.94
-0.11
0.11
0.02
0.09
0.91
OC
0.12
-0.01
0.84
-0.22
-0.03
-0.17
0.79
EC
0.27
-0.25
0.85
0.08
0.03
-0.22
0.92
Fe
0.34
0.06
-0.05
0.09
-0.83
0.02
0.81
Cr
0.82
-0.24
0.09
0.05
-0.03
-0.08
0.75
Zn
0.44
0.29
0.66
-0.18
-0.16
0.05
0.78
Si
-0.41
0.02
0.38
0.52
0.30
0.04
0.67
Al
0.92
-0.16
0.15
0.18
-0.05
-0.05
0.92
Mn
0.67
0.30
-0.23
0.23
-0.02
-0.17
0.68
0.90
-0.08
0.22
-0.12
-0.01
0.14
0.90
Na
-0.81
0.20
-0.32
0.26
0.01
-0.01
0.87
Total
5.18
3.53
2.67
2.01
1.77
1.46
% of Variance
25.92
17.66
13.35
10.07
8.83
7.29
Cumulative %
25.92
43.59
56.93
67.00
75.84
83.12
- &
/
!/6
Silk board
+
*
2 9" +
3'5 -'2
*
3.2
%
3'5 -'2
9
> :
.
3.2
& 3'9
+
%
% 3
!
+
5 +
2
*
!
+
'%
<
%
+
+

Table 4.2 Factor loadings of different variables at Silk Board
Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 3
Factor 4
Factor 5
Factor 6
Communalities
PM10
0.12
0.21
0.08
-0.27
-0.82
0.20
0.85
Na Ions
-0.10
-0.30
0.86
-0.11
0.28
-0.10
0.93
NH4 Ions
0.95
0.05
0.03
-0.02
0.01
0.07
0.92
K Ions
0.75
-0.18
0.43
-0.03
-0.01
-0.21
0.82
Ca Ions
0.72
-0.24
0.34
0.27
-0.27
-0.20
0.87
Mg Ions
0.42
-0.41
0.76
-0.13
-0.03
0.01
0.94
Cl Ions
0.04
-0.33
0.75
-0.07
-0.10
-0.16
0.71
0.75
NO2 Ions
0.77
-0.22
-0.28
-0.06
-0.09
-0.14
Br Ions
0.84
0.06
-0.29
0.22
0.00
-0.21
0.89
NO3 Ions
0.95
-0.05
0.19
0.06
-0.02
0.03
0.94
SO4 Ions
0.96
0.05
0.18
0.08
0.07
-0.03
0.96
OC
-0.42
-0.09
0.23
-0.13
0.69
0.20
0.77
EC
0.30
0.15
0.05
-0.04
0.81
0.29
0.85
Fe
-0.22
0.11
-0.37
0.20
-0.12
0.80
0.89
Cr
-0.16
0.65
-0.41
0.19
-0.10
0.54
0.94
Zn
0.06
0.92
-0.25
0.08
0.08
-0.16
0.95
Mo
0.04
-0.08
-0.06
0.02
-0.36
-0.77
0.74
Si
-0.10
0.59
-0.17
0.56
-0.09
0.19
0.74
Al
0.44
0.29
-0.20
0.78
-0.08
0.08
0.95
Mn
0.06
0.05
-0.02
0.96
0.17
0.02
0.96
-0.24
0.73
-0.36
-0.09
-0.07
0.41
0.91
Na
0.04
-0.73
0.42
-0.37
0.18
-0.20
0.92
Total
7.34
5.46
2.39
1.65
1.34
1.02
% of Variance
33.38
24.80
10.88
7.48
6.11
4.62
Cumulative %
33.38
58.18
69.06
76.54
82.65
87.27
Peenya
+
*
2 5" + +
!/6
/
.
+
+%
3'5
9
3
+ * !
5
+
%
+
<
%
+
>
?
%
'%

Table 4.3 Factor loadings of different variables at Peenya
Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 3
Factor 4
Factor 5
Factor 6
Factor 7
Communalities
PM10
Na Ions
0.33
0.09
-0.06
0.96
0.01
-0.01
-0.02
0.02
0.90
0.04
0.10
0.03
-0.02
-0.12
0.93
0.96
K Ions
Ca Ions
0.55
0.91
0.34
0.04
0.32
0.13
0.45
-0.01
0.11
0.16
0.26
-0.16
0.03
-0.10
0.80
0.90
Mg Ions
F Ions
0.87
0.04
0.20
0.90
0.21
-0.02
-0.06
0.03
-0.19
0.18
-0.02
-0.10
-0.09
0.16
0.89
0.89
Cl Ions
NO3 Ions
0.49
0.94
0.74
0.05
0.30
-0.08
0.20
-0.02
0.08
0.25
-0.05
-0.10
-0.13
-0.02
0.95
0.96
SO4 Ions
OC
0.37
-0.14
0.45
-0.07
-0.71
0.08
-0.09
0.05
0.03
-0.09
0.29
0.06
0.05
0.89
0.94
0.83
EC
Fe
-0.11
0.37
0.11
0.17
0.07
0.83
-0.34
0.07
0.27
0.02
0.67
0.25
0.46
0.24
0.88
0.98
Cr
Cd
-0.33
-0.16
0.50
-0.14
0.00
0.05
-0.16
0.19
0.70
-0.01
-0.18
0.86
-0.11
-0.05
0.91
0.83
Co
Pb
-0.43
0.00
0.04
-0.34
-0.03
-0.24
0.54
0.58
-0.34
0.17
-0.01
0.02
-0.04
-0.35
0.60
0.66
Zn
Si
0.11
0.38
0.47
-0.13
0.11
0.32
-0.14
0.67
0.67
-0.08
0.17
-0.11
-0.04
0.36
0.75
0.86
Al
Mn
0.13
0.25
0.19
0.15
0.74
0.78
0.49
0.02
0.14
0.28
0.08
0.28
0.22
0.20
0.90
0.88
K
Na
0.00
0.11
-0.06
-0.23
0.72
-0.18
-0.08
-0.88
-0.23
0.18
-0.21
-0.11
-0.36
-0.03
0.77
0.91
Total
% of Variance
5.81
26.40
3.65
16.60
2.81
12.76
2.34
10.64
1.82
8.26
1.52
6.89
1.04
4.74
Cumulative %
26.40
43.00
55.76
66.40
74.66
81.54
86.29
Background
+
&
2 2" +
!/6
/
% '%
:
>
+
% * !
9
+
-
5 +
2
3'5 -'2
3.2
Table 4.4 Factor loadings of different variables at Background

PM10
Na Ions
NH4 Ions
K Ions
Ca Ions
Mg Ions
Cl Ions
NO3 Ions
SO4 Ions
OC
Factor 1
-0.65
0.14
-0.33
-0.08
-0.18
0.07
0.18
0.05
-0.52
0.06
Factor 2
0.41
-0.83
0.15
0.00
-0.81
-0.85
-0.81
0.04
0.15
0.42
Factor 3
0.16
-0.22
0.18
0.77
0.12
-0.23
0.43
0.14
0.23
0.70
Factor 4
0.22
-0.22
0.84
0.35
-0.03
-0.13
0.04
0.89
0.72
0.32
Communalities
0.66
0.80
0.87
0.72
0.71
0.80
0.87
0.82
0.87
0.77

EC
Fe
Cr
Zn
Mo
Si
Al
Mn
K
Na
Total
% of Variance
Cumulative %
0.01
0.36
0.88
0.48
0.21
-0.34
0.79
0.69
0.81
-0.65
6.64
33.18
33.18
0.68
0.39
-0.11
0.75
-0.78
0.17
0.25
0.41
-0.07
0.24
2.88
14.38
70.33
0.50
0.55
-0.15
0.05
0.11
0.49
0.19
0.12
0.04
0.25
4.55
22.77
55.95
0.35
-0.35
0.04
-0.37
-0.08
0.02
-0.36
0.16
-0.48
0.54
1.42
7.10
77.43
0.84
0.70
0.82
0.92
0.67
0.39
0.85
0.68
0.89
0.83
Victoria road
+
!/6
2 <" +
% - 3 3'5
-'2
+
% 3
9 +
5
3'9 '%
*
+
+ > !
+
<
!
%
* :
2
&
3.2
?
!/6
-
3.2
Table 4.5 Factor loadings of different variables at Victoria Road

Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 3
Factor 4
Factor 5
Factor 6
Communalities
PM10
0.12
0.11
0.10
0.17
-0.03
0.82
0.74
Na Ions
-0.01
0.81
-0.17
-0.08
0.29
0.36
0.90
NH4 Ions
0.08
-0.09
-0.34
-0.16
0.59
0.51
0.77
K Ions
0.46
0.30
-0.12
0.23
0.59
0.07
0.72
Ca Ions
0.71
0.41
0.33
0.28
-0.14
-0.24
0.93
Mg Ions
0.12
0.71
-0.59
0.14
-0.06
0.02
0.88
Cl Ions
0.07
0.88
0.16
0.09
0.05
-0.01
0.81
NO2 Ions
0.40
-0.21
0.69
-0.08
-0.30
-0.04
0.79
0.85
Br Ions
0.15
0.61
-0.05
0.64
0.18
-0.09
NO3 Ions
0.90
0.25
-0.08
0.06
0.20
0.22
0.97
SO4 Ions
0.81
0.04
0.18
-0.12
0.14
0.15
0.74
OC
-0.19
-0.54
0.57
-0.01
-0.02
0.33
0.76
EC
-0.23
-0.54
0.41
0.30
-0.09
0.39
0.76
Fe
0.11
-0.17
0.09
0.85
0.11
0.12
0.80
Cr
-0.57
-0.32
-0.10
-0.28
0.41
0.18
0.72
Zn
-0.13
0.12
-0.20
0.88
-0.06
0.21
0.90
Mo
0.29
-0.21
-0.02
-0.08
-0.81
0.13
Si
0.80
-0.12
0.07
-0.02
-0.28
-0.12
0.75
Al
0.07
0.07
0.91
-0.05
0.01
-0.11
0.85
0.81
Mn
0.28
0.19
0.04
0.71
-0.17
-0.51
0.90
0.22
-0.03
0.77
0.05
-0.09
0.11
0.66
Na
0.61
-0.01
0.23
0.32
-0.43
-0.03
0.72
5.48
4.68
2.49
2.25
1.72
1.12
% of Variance
Total
24.90
21.29
11.31
10.25
7.80
5.08
Cumulative %
24.90
46.19
57.50
67.75
75.55
80.64
Kammanahalli
+
:
2 ?" +
!/6
3'5 %
+
+
:
5
3.2
+ +
3
<
!
(
+
?
'% %
-'2
Table 4.6 Factor loadings of different variables at Kammanahalli

Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 3
Factor 4
Factor 5
Factor 6
Communalities
PM10
0.26
0.45
0.64
-0.16
0.42
-0.31
0.98
Na Ions
0.40
0.41
0.18
0.19
0.73
-0.09
0.94
NH4 Ions
0.39
-0.33
-0.11
0.74
0.35
0.01
0.94
K Ions
0.32
0.15
0.64
0.51
-0.19
0.24
0.89
Ca Ions
0.97
-0.07
0.06
-0.02
-0.11
-0.08
0.96
Mg Ions
-0.07
0.07
0.04
0.17
0.90
0.18
0.89
Cl Ions
0.82
0.09
-0.03
-0.11
0.36
-0.20
0.86
NO3 Ions
0.75
0.42
0.16
0.15
0.07
0.12
0.81
SO4 Ions
0.42
-0.21
-0.50
0.45
0.11
0.53
0.97
OC
0.04
-0.45
0.44
-0.08
-0.48
0.56
0.95
EC
-0.38
0.27
0.12
0.18
-0.55
0.59
0.92
Fe
0.11
-0.81
0.09
-0.39
-0.02
0.21
0.87
Cr
-0.45
0.22
-0.74
0.34
-0.07
0.12
0.94
Zn
0.36
0.39
-0.13
0.48
0.33
-0.41
0.80
Se
0.18
0.75
0.21
-0.22
0.05
0.50
0.94
Si
0.11
0.06
-0.03
0.02
-0.12
-0.87
0.79
Al
-0.11
-0.86
0.12
0.12
-0.14
0.08
0.81
Mn
0.18
0.12
-0.91
0.00
-0.04
-0.20
0.92
-0.27
0.10
-0.04
0.92
0.07
-0.01
0.93
1.44
Total
5.06
3.37
2.77
2.66
1.79
% of Variance
26.65
17.72
14.60
14.00
9.44
7.58
Cumulative %
26.65
44.37
58.97
72.97
82.42
89.99
IGICH
+
*
!/6
$
2 A" +
'% % 3'5
*
3
.
/
% !
3 :
5
-'2
3.2
*
!
+
-
%
>
+
+
<
Table 4.7 Factor loadings of different variables at IGICH

Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 3
Factor 4
Factor 5
Factor 6
Communalities
PM10
0.81
0.25
0.10
-0.12
-0.05
0.05
0.74
Na Ions
-0.06
0.96
0.08
0.09
0.13
-0.01
0.95
NH4 Ions
0.15
-0.04
0.87
0.29
-0.11
-0.22
0.92
K Ions
Ca Ions
0.24
0.40
0.66
0.82
0.60
0.18
-0.03
-0.11
-0.29
0.02
-0.14
0.14
0.94
0.90
Mg Ions
0.04
0.94
0.04
0.02
-0.03
-0.05
0.90
Cl Ions
-0.03
0.95
0.04
0.12
0.11
-0.09
0.94
NO3 Ions
SO4 Ions
0.57
0.18
0.45
0.26
0.42
0.87
-0.13
-0.14
0.03
-0.18
0.15
0.17
0.75
0.94
OC
0.85
0.01
0.04
-0.03
-0.21
0.17
0.80
EC
0.85
0.01
0.00
0.19
-0.27
0.20
0.87
Fe
Cr
0.20
-0.43
-0.03
0.03
0.01
0.40
-0.06
0.64
0.05
-0.04
0.81
0.23
0.71
0.81
Zn
-0.12
0.14
-0.10
0.14
0.83
0.08
0.76
Si
0.24
0.13
-0.12
0.79
0.18
-0.24
0.81
Al
Mn
0.60
-0.28
0.00
0.11
-0.26
0.70
0.42
-0.19
0.10
0.39
0.13
0.02
0.63
0.77
0.74
-0.22
0.05
0.09
0.42
-0.21
0.83
Na
0.63
0.29
0.24
0.01
-0.04
-0.42
0.71
Total
% of Variance
5.84
30.73
3.63
19.12
2.30
12.11
1.65
8.67
1.19
6.28
1.09
5.75
Cumulative %
30.73
49.85
61.96
70.63
76.91
82.66
+
21
Table 4.8 Indicative sources based on Factor Analysis for the different sites
S. No.
Site
Site description
Indicative sources
Silk Board
Traffic location
Motor vehicle exhaust, secondary particulate matter, construction activities, natural
Victoria road
Traffic location
Motor vehicle exhaust, natural soil, road dust, biomass burning, secondary particle
soil, road dust

formation
3
Peenya
Industrial
Road dust, residual oil burning, crustal soil dust, industrial sources, metal industries,
Domlur
Residential
Soil and road dust, secondary particle formation, motor vehicle exhaust, storm water
Kammanahalli
Residential
Road dust, coal combustion, vegetative burning, secondary particle formation, re-
IGICH
Hospital/
Road dust, natural soil, secondary particle formation, construction activities, motor
Residential
vehicle exhaust, incinerator combustion
Kanamangala/
Background
Natural soil, crustal source, road dust, vehicular sources, biomass burning,
motor vehicle exhaust, construction activities

drain, biomass burning
suspended soil, motor vehicle exhaust
Background
secondary particle formation
+
,
%!&
4.1.2
CMB model 8.2 : methodology & results

%
&
%!&"
%!& %
&
"
"
%!&
%!&
%!&1 9
%!&1 9
!/6
A
8
*
"
!/6
'%8 %"
%!&
+'
=@
" C@
"
D
%!&1 9
,
9 9"
%!&
B(
;!
(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
B$
$
% (
B% (
B$
"
(
%!&
;!
%!&
(
(
(
% (
=@
%!&1 9
B
4.1.3
Receptor modelling PM10
Domlur (residential)
%!&1 9
51; 9/;
!/6
=@
5<;
=@
"
1;
A; ?;
=
(
5<(?9 ;
0(/0;
Ist Season
FO
Sec 0.0%
19.1%
DV
6.0%
Wood
0.8%
!/6
=
2 /"
IIIrd Season
IInd Season
FO Wood
Sec
Kero
DV 10.9% 0.0% 0.2%
0.0%
3.2%
Kero
0.2%
DG
38.2%
DG
20.5%
PV
2.8%
FO Wood
Sec
DV 9.5% 0.0% 1.5% Kero
0.0%
5.5%
PV
2.9%
DG
35.1%
PV
0.5%
Paved &
Soil
35.3%
Paved &
Soil
62.4%
Mass: 81%
Mass: 95%
Paved &
Soil
45.5%
Figure 4.1 PM10 source contribution at Domlur
Note Above analysis does not include the unaccounted mass fraction which includes both the unaccounted mass fraction in the
source profiles and unidentified sources itself.
PV: Petrol vehicles, DV : Diesel vehicles, Sec : Secondary particulates, FO : Fuel oil burning, Wood : Domestic wood burning, DG:
Diesel generator set, Kero: Kerosene generator set, Paved: Paved road dust re-suspension, Soil : Soil dust
Mass: 53%
Kammanahalli (residential)
-
!/6
%!&1 9
+
2 9"
51; 2/;
=@
<; =
Wood
3.5%
Sec
15.4%
PV
1.8%
5(
IInd Season
Kero
0.0%
DG
4.9%
Sec
7.0%
FO
0.0%
Wood
7.0%
Kero
0.0%
DG
4.7%
Paved &
Soil
38.0%
DV
36.4%
"
(
51(?9;
Ist Season
FO
0.0%
E
9?;
DV
35.5%
Paved &
Soil
40.4%
PV
5.3%
Mass: 60%
Mass: 37%
IIIrd Season
Sec
0.6%
FO
Wood Kero
0.0%
8.3% 0.0%
DV
23.8%
DG
3.2%
PV
2.2%
Mass: 47%
Paved &
Soil
61.9%
Figure 4.2 PM10 source contribution at Kammanahalli

CSB (kerbside)
+
25
!/6
%-&
%!&1 9
/2(<2;" =
(
9?(A9; =@
-
5;"
/(
A( /A;
IInd Season
Ist Season
Sec
12.9%
FO Wood
0.0% 1.5%
Kero
2.6%
DG
2.9%
Paved &
Soil
25.9%
DV
46.6%
Mass: 101%
PV
7.6%
Sec
16.5%
FO Wood
0.0% 0.3%
IIIrd Season
Sec
6.6%
Kero
0.0%
DG
1.6%
DV
25.4%
Mass: 58%
Paved &
Soil
51.5%
PV
4.6%
DV
12.6%
FO
0.0%
Wood
6.9%
DG
0.8%
PV
1.5%
Paved &
Soil
71.7%
Mass: 47%
Figure 4.3 PM10 source contribution at CSB

Kero
0.0%
Victoria Road (kerbside)

-
!/6
%!&1 9
1(/<;" =@
1(/0;
?(/?;
(
<9(A5; +
2 2"
IInd Season
Ist Season
FO
0%
Sec
16%
Wood
2%
Kero
0%
DG
15%
DV
10%
PV
5%
Sec
6%
Paved &
Soil
52%
Mass: 60%
FO
0%
Wood
1%
DV
14%
IIIrd Season
Sec
8.7%
Kero
0%
DG
19%
PV
0.4%
Paved &
Soil
60%
Mass: 62%
FO
0.0%
Wood
2.7%
DV
5.5%
PV
2.1%
DG
7.8%
Paved &
Soil
73.1%
Figure 4.4 PM10 source contribution at Victoria road

Kero
0.0%
Mass: 54%
IGICH (Hospital/Residential)
%!&1 9
A(99;" D
9(0;
!/6
$
@$
%.
?2; 21;
/(/2;
$
@$
%.
DV
5.6%
FO
0.0%
Wood
7.0%
Sec
5.7%
DV
11.2%
Kero
0.0%
PV
0.9%
DG
8.7%
Mass: 68%
!/6
+
2 <"
IInd Season
Is t Se ason
Sec
13.5%
22;
Paved &
Soil
64.2%
FO
0.0%
Wood
8.9%
IIIrd Se ason
Kero
0.1%
PV
8.8%
DG
17.3%
Mass: 110%
Paved &
Soil
48.1%
DV
20.6%
FO
Sec 0.0%
0.6%
Wood
2.2%
PV
1.0%
DG
31.6%
Paved &
Soil
44.1%
Figure 4.5 PM10 source contribution at IGICH

Kero
0.0%
Mass: 60%
Peenya (Industrial)
%!&1 9
!/6
+'
/A;(29;"
2(/1;
/(
/?;
5/(<?;
=
+
Ist Season
Sec
5.8%
DV
14.2%
PV
3.9%
2 ?"
IIIrd Season
IInd Season
FO
17.1%
Wood
15.7%
PV
0.8%
DV
9.9%
Sec
0.1%
DG
11.8%
Mass: 59%
DV
FO
22.7%
Kero
0.1%
Paved &
Soil
31.3%
Paved &
Soil
56.1%
Wood
2.2%
Kero
0.0%
DG
8.2%
Mass: 73%
PV 3.0%
0.9%
Sec
1.1%
FO
41.7%
Paved &
Soil
49.6%
Mass: 105%
DG
2.5%
Wood
Kero 1.2%
0.0%
Figure 4.6 PM10 source contribution at Peenya
Kanamangla (Background)
-
!/6
%!&1 9
:
,
-
/5(26;
"
(
92(<<;
/?(9<;
<(
//;
IInd Season
Ist Season
FO
0.0%
Wood
11.0%
DG
0.0%
FO
Sec 0.0%
18.6%
Wood
11.3%
Kero
0.0%
Sec
40.2%
Paved &
Soil
23.9%
DV
23.7%
PV
1.2%
2 A"
Mass : 63%
IIIrd Season
DG
0.0%
FO
Sec 0.0%
12.7%
Wood
4.9%
Kero
0.0%
Kero
0.0%
DV
13.0%
PV
2.5%
DV
21.6%
Paved &
Soil
54.5%
Mass: 59%
PV
3.7%
Figure 4.7 PM10 source contribution at Kanamangala (Background)

* Third season results are obtained using average of all the samples during the season
DG
0.0%
Paved &
Soil
57.1%
Mass: 36%
4.1.4
Receptor modelling PM2.5
!9 <
%!&1 9
5A(20;"
/5(21;" 50; /<;
2;
&
+
2 1"
!9 <
Ist Season
FO
0.0%
Wood
9.9%
Sec
39.4%
DV
5.7%
Mass: 88%
=@
IInd Season
Kero
0.7%
Sec
15.3%
DG
36.6%
PV
7.2%
Paved &
Soil
0.5%
IIIrd Se as on
FO Wood
0.0% 1.2%
Kero
0.1%
DV
7.0%
PV
26.6%
Mass: 93%
DG
44.7%
Paved &
Soil
5.2%
Sec
4.2%
DV
7.6%
FO
Wood
0.0% 0.0% Kero
0.0%
Mass: 97%
Figure 4.8 PM2.5 source contribution at Domlur

Note: Above analysis does not include the unaccounted mass fraction which includes both the unaccounted mass fraction in the
Petrol: Petrol vehicles, Diesel : Diesel vehicles, Secondary : Secondary particulates, FO : Fuel oil burning, Wood : Domestic wood
burning, DG: Diesel generator set, Kero: Kerosene generator set, Paved: Paved road dust re-suspension, Soil : Soil dust
DG
48.5%
PV
39.7%
Paved &
Soil
0.0%
-
!9 <
%!&1 9
:
,
7
"
<A; 16;
16;
A(95; A(0;
!9 <
=@
9(5; &
!9 <
Ist Season
FO
0.0%
Wood
2.3%
Sec
23.5%
Kero
0.0%
DG
6.9%
Paved &
Soil
10.1%
FO
0.0%
Wood Kero
3.0% 0.1%
Sec
6.6%
DV
65.7%
2 0"
IIIrd Season
IInd Season
PV
5.6%
DV
51.6%
DG
8.8%
Paved &
Soil
PV 1.8%
FO
Sec 0.0%
7.9%
Wood
3.2%
Kero
0.1%
14.1%
Figure 4.9 PM2.5 source contribution at Kammanahalli

Paved &
Soil
PV 0.1%
12.9%
DV
66.9%
Mass: 106%
Mass: 94%
DG
8.9%
Mass: 94%
CSB (Kerbside)
-
!9 <
%!&1 9
7
"
"
-
5(<; =
+
!9 <
Ist Season
FO
0%
Wood
3%
Sec
12%
DV
72%
%-&
,
?6(12;"
/9; 91;
<;
=@
F
2 /6"
IIIrd Season
IInd Season
Kero
DG Paved &
0%
5%
Soil
5%
PV
3%
Mass: 106%
FO
0.0%
Sec
28.2%
Wood
8.1%
DG
Kero
3.0%
0.2%
Paved &
Soil
1.1%
PV
11.5%
DV
47.9%
Mass: 76%
FO
0.0%
Wood
0.0%
Kero
0.0%
Sec
5.2%
DV
69.4%
Figure 4.10 PM2.5 source contribution at CSB

DG
4.3%
Paved &
Soil
6.4%
PV
14.7%
Mass: 67%
Victoria Road (Kerbside)

-
!9 <
%!&1 9
26(<<;"
=@
5<(2A;
!/6
2(/5;
F
2 //"
IInd Season
Ist Season
FO Wood
0.0% 0.0%
Sec
12.7%
DV
32.9%
PV
Mass: 104% 7.1%
=
!9 <
Kero
0.0%
Sec
3.5%
DG
46.7%
Paved &
Soil
0.6%
FO Wood
0.0% 2.5%
DV
24.8%
PV
30.3%
Mass: 67%
IIIrd Season
Kero
0.2%
DG
35.3%
Paved &
Soil
3.4%
Sec
4.7%
FO
0.0%
Wood
1.0%
DV
31.8%
PV
16.8%
Mass: 90%
Figure 4.11 PM2.5 source contribution at Victoria road

Kero
0.0%
DG
45.2%
Paved &
Soil
0.5%
IGICH (Hospital/Residential)
%!&1 9
!9 <
$
@$
%.
5A(25;
9<(51;" =
"
Ist Season
Sec
10.0%
DV
23.9%
FO
0.0%
PV
13.3%
Paved &
Soil
3.8%
Wood
12.0%
=@
/1; D
0(/5; /6; A;
0;
2 /9"
IInd Season
Kero
0.2%
DG
36.8%
FO Wood
Sec 0.0% 12.8%
7.1%
DV
15.9%
PV
21.8%
Mass: 81%
Mass: 82%
IIIrd Season
FO
Sec 0.0%
8.7%
DV
24.4%
Kero
0.0%
DG
24.5%
Paved &
Soil
17.9%
Wood
9.1%
PV
18.6%
Mass: 68%
Figure 4.12 PM2.5 source contribution at IGICH

Kero
1.7%
DG
37.6%
Paved &
Soil
0.0%
Peenya (Industrial)
!9 <
+'
/2;(9<;"
E
96; 2/;
"
22;
=@
/5(
A(/<;
1(
95; D
95; +
IInd Season
Ist Season
Sec
22.5%
FO
25.3%
DV
19.7%
PV
0.1%
Wood
15.1%
Paved &
Soil
0.5%
2 /5"
DG
16.4%
Kero
0.3%
Mass: 83%
DV
15.4%
PV
26.0%
Mass: 98%
Sec
7.8%
IIIrd Season
FO
23.4%
Sec
8.9%
Wood
7.2%
Kero
0.1%
DG
Paved &
12.8%
Soil
7.2%
FO
14.3%
DV
27.1%
PV
16.7%
Mass: 74%
Figure 4.13 PM2.5 source contribution at Peenya

Wood
10.5%
Paved &
Soil
0.0%
Kero
0.0%
DG
22.5%
Kanamangla (Background)
-
!9 <
%!&1 9
55; 56;
$
0;
,
7
"
</(A6;
&
"
9(/2;" *
9(/0; +
2 /2"
IInd Season
Ist Season
FO
0.0%
Sec
32.8%
DV
27.9%
Wood
13.5%
DG
0.0%
Kero
0.1%
Paved &
Soil
2.4%
PV
23.3%
Mass: 102%
FO
0.0%
Wood
9.9%
Sec
29.5%
Paved &
Soil
2.2%
PV
21.4%
DV
37.0%
IIIrd Season
DG
0.0% Kero
0.0%
Mass: 99%
FO
0.0%
Wood
2.0%
DG
0.0%
Sec
9.3%
Paved &
Soil
19.0%
DV
50.6%
Mass: 62%
Figure 4.14 PM2.5 source contribution at Kanamangala (Background)

Note : Above analysis does not include the unaccounted mass fraction which includes both the unaccounted mass fraction in the
Kero
0.0%
PV
19.1%
4.1.5
Conclusions : Receptor modelling

%!&1 9
!/6
!9 <
A
&
PM10
%!&1 9
!/6
&
!/6
20
!/6
$
&
G
=
!/6
G=@
A
,
G
&
B
"
(
(
" *
" *
+'"
iv) *
"G
%-&"
"
:
"
Table 4.9 Quantification of PM10 sources at 7 monitoring locations in Bangalore
Sector
Ist
IInd
IIIrd
Ist
IInd
IIIrd
Ist
IInd
IIIrd
Ist
IInd
IIIrd
Ist
Background
Peenya
IGICH
Victoria road
CSB
Kammanhalli
Domlur
IInd
IIIrd
Ist
IInd
IIIrd
Ist
IInd
IIIrd
Transport
6%
6%
8%
38%
41%
26%
54%
30%
14%
16%
14%
8%
7%
20%
22%
18%
11%
4%
25%
15%
DG sets
38%
20%
35%
5%
5%
3%
3%
2%
1%
15%
19%
8%
9%
17%
32%
12%
8%
2%
0%
0%
0%
Industrial
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
17%
23%
42%
0%
0%
0%
Domestic
Paved road &
Soil dust
Secondary
particulates
1%
0%
2%
4%
7%
8%
4%
0%
7%
2%
1%
3%
7%
9%
2%
16%
2%
1%
11%
11%
5%
35%
62%
45%
38%
40%
62%
26%
52%
72%
52%
60%
73%
64%
48%
44%
31%
56%
50%
24%
55%
57%
19%
11%
9%
15%
7%
1%
13%
17%
7%
16%
6%
9%
14%
6%
1%
6%
0%
1%
40%
19%
13%
25%

!/6
&
?
2 /6
"
Table 4.10 Average sectoral share to PM10 concentration in Bangalore based on

receptor modelling
Sector/
Transport (Fuel combustion Petrol & Diesel

vehicles)
DG sets
Industrial (FO combustion)
Domestic (Wood, LPG, Kerosene)
Paved road & Soil dust
Secondary Particulates
Seasonal average of 6
sites
Average of all
seasons
Ist
23.2%
IInd
20.3%
IIIrd
13.6%
19.0%
13.5%
11.9%
13.5%
13.0%
2.9%
5.6%
3.8%
3.3%
7.0%
3.8%
4.5%
4.2%
41.1%
53.0%
57.6%
50.6%
13.8%
7.7%
4.5%
8.7%
2 /6
!/6
/2(95; =@
5(A;
/9(/2;
,
2/(<1; <(/2;
PM2.5
2 //
%!&1 9
!9 <
A
&
,
$
!9 <
=@
"
"
"
"
"
!9 <
*
+'"
=
!9 <
&
"
Table 4.11 Quantification of PM2.5 sources at 7 monitoring locations in Bangalore
Domlur
Sector
Transport (Fuel combustion
Petrol & Diesel vehicles)
DG sets
Domestic (Wood, LPG,
Kerosene)
Ist
Kammanhalli
IInd
IIIrd
13%
37%
0%
34%
45%
0%
47%
49%
0%
11%
1%
39%
1%
5%
15%
0%
0%
4%
Ist
Victoria road
CSB
IInd
IIIrd
Ist
IInd
IIIrd
57%
7%
0%
80%
9%
0%
80%
9%
0%
40%
47%
0%
55%
35%
0%
49%
45%
0%
2%
10%
23%
3%
2%
7%
3%
0%
8%
0%
1%
13%
3%
3%
3%
1%
1%
5%
Ist
IGICH
Peenya
IInd
IIIrd
Ist
IInd
IIIrd
76%
5%
0%
59%
3%
0%
84%
4%
0%
37%
37%
0%
38%
24%
0%
43%
38%
0%
3%
5%
12%
8%
1%
28%
0%
6%
5%
12%
4%
10%
13%
18%
7%
11%
0%
9%
Ist
Background
IInd
IIIrd
Ist
IInd
IIIrd
20%
16%
25%
41%
13%
23%
44%
22%
14%
51%
0%
0%
58%
0%
0%
70%
0%
0%
15%
0%
23%
7%
7%
8%
10%
0%
9%
14%
2%
33%
10%
2%
30%
2%
19%
9%

!9 <
&
?
2 /9
"
Table 4.12 Average sectoral share to PM2.5 concentration in Bangalore based on receptor modelling
Sector
Seasonal average of 6 sites
Average
of all
Ist
IInd
IIIrd
seasons
Transport (Fuel combustion

Petrol & Diesel vehicles)
40.6%
51.2%
57.8%
49.9%
DG sets
24.6%
4.2%
21.5%
3.9%
27.8%
2.4%
24.7%
3.5%
7.2%
5.9%
4.2%
5.8%

Domestic (Wood, LPG,
Kerosene)
3.4%
6.1%
1.2%
3.5%
20.0%
11.4%
6.6%
12.7%
2 /9
!9 <
2/(<1;
A(96; =
2(A;
9(2; &
!9 <
Conclusions of PM10 & PM2.5 receptor modelling

+
2 /<
!9 <
!/6
%!&1 9
B
<6;
/0;
!/6
!9 <
!/6 .
!9 <
=@
/5; E9<;
!/6
!9 <
%
&
.
#
"
'
!/6
!9 < .
!9 <
!/6
PM2.5
PM10
Secondary
8.7%
Paved road
& Soil dust
Transport
19.0%
Domestic
3.5%
Secondary
12.7%
5.8%
Paved road
& Soil dust
50.6%
DG sets
13.0%
Industrial
4.5%
Domestic
4.2%
Industrial
3.5%
Transport
49.9%
DG sets
24.7%
Figure 4.15 Comparison of PM10 and PM2.5 source contribution in Bangalore city (average of 3 seasons)
CHAPTER
5.1
5 Dispersion modelling: Existing scenario
Dispersion modelling - ISCST3 : Methodology
!
"
"
"
#$%&
'()
"
" #$%&
*
'()
"
+
"
,
*
*#
*-
"
* /0
"
1
%
2/0 34
/5
/ 34
6
3
/5
/ 3!
"
8
,"
&75
&7 3
*
%9&
:2
"
"
&75
&7 34
%25
2
+
7%
!
"
&7 &7 ! ;
3
/ /! /
"
" "
"
*
&7 &7 4
/ /4
"
/
/
3
*
!
0
"
3
!
"
!
7
"
!
*
&7 &7 ! /
7%
Figure 5.1 City level map of 2*2 sq Km and 0.5*0.5 sq Km grids with illustration of line sources at one
0.5*0.5 sq km level
127 Dispersion Modelling: Existing Scenario

Table 5.1 Summary of type and number of sources
Emission Sources
Modelled Source Type
Number of
Transport
AREA (line sources on major roads at 0.5*0.5 sq Km resolution that are within
Sources
1
372
2*2 sq Km area around each monitoring site)

AREA (on minor roads within 2*2 sq Km area around each monitoring site)
2
Road Dust
96
AREA (on major and minor roads in rest of the city)
180
AREA (line sources on major roads at 0.5*0.5 sq Km resolution that are within
372
2*2 sq Km area around each monitoring site)

AREA (on minor roads within 2*2 sq Km area around each monitoring site)
3
Industries
96
AREA (on major and minor roads in rest of the city)
180
POINT (City level including those located at Peenya)
158
AREA (at 0.5*0.5 sq Km resolution of 2*2 sq Km area in Peenya)
16
AREA (rest of the city at resolution of 2*2 sq Km)

4
Domestic
AREA (at 0.5*0.5 sq Km resolution of 2*2 sq Km area)
DG sets (Domestic
180
96
180
96
and Commercial)
6
180
Construction
96

7
180
Eating joints
96
180
Total
5.2
2754
Emission loads
City level
*
"
#
"
!
"
<
7/
Table 5.2 Total emission loads (T/d) in Bangalore
Transport
Road Dust
Domestic
DG Set
Industry
Hotel
Construction
Total
PM10
22.4
10.9
1.8
3.6
7.8
0.1
7.7
54.4
NOX
146.36
0.00
2.73
50.96
17.19
0.20
0.00
217.4
SO2
2.31
0.00
0.68
3.35
8.21
0.02
0.00
14.6
Total emission inventory for the 2 x 2 km2 zones of influence

"
/ /!
=
7
70
Table 5.3 Sector-wise PM10 emission inventory (T/d) for the six 2x2 km2 zones of influence
CSB
Domlur
IGICH
Kammanahalli
Peenya
Victoria
Transport
0.56
0.11
0.29
0.27
0.09
0.17
Industries
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.29
0.00
Domestic
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.03
0.00
0.02
DG sets
0.02
0.22
0.14
0.01
0.06
0.08
Road dust
0.42
0.06
0.07
0.05
0.07
0.08
Hotels
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ConstructIon
0.05
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.02
0.04
Total
1.07
0.43
0.56
0.42
0.54
0.40
Table 5.4 Sector-wise NOX emission inventory (T/d) for the six 2x2 km2 zones of influence
CSB
Domlur
IGICH
Kammanahalli
Peenya
Victoria
Transport
4.34
0.71
1.66
1.76
0.66
1.11
Industries
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.82
0.00
Domestic
0.0231
0.024
0.046
0.045
0.007
0.035
0.31
3.08
1.93
0.19
0.85
1.18
DG sets
Road dust
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0023
0.0034
0.0027
0.0018
0.0011
0.0049
Construction
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total
4.68
3.82
3.64
2.00
2.33
2.33
Hotels
5.3
Meteorological data
5.3.1 First season
%
/0
%9>? />2?
"
0% 2
27
%9 0 ! A
B
"
,',
,
"
"
"
@
"
77
"
!
7/
3
"
/ 94 A
4 A
0 9C
%9

Table 5.5 Summary of 24 hours* average, maximum and minimum values of primary meteorological parameters at various locations during the first season
Location
Wind Direction (degrees)

Min
Max
Average
Wind Speed (Km/h)

Min
Max
Average
Domlur
18 Dec 2006
to 07 Jan
2007
97.4
196.8
147.9
0.0
10.5
Kammanahalli
14 Jan to 02
Feb 2007
0.7
359.3
233.0
0.0
Victoria Road
6 to 26
March 2007
13.2
356.5
131.8
Central Silk
Board
18 Dec 2006
to 07 Jan
2007
126.1
166.5
Peenya
15 Feb to 6
March 2007
1.4
16 March to
4 April 2007
6 to 8 Jan,
17 Jan & 29
Jan to 13
Feb 2007
IGICH
Background
Sampling
Dates
Min
Temp (OC)
Max
Average
4.3
10.5
28.2
18.7
26.9
99.0
63.5
6.4
2.6
9.8
32.4
20.1
18.0
99.0
59.6
0.0
10.1
4.3
18.5
34.6
25.7
28.9
80.0
51.8
148.2
0.0
10.5
4.1
12.8
25.5
18.6
40.6
88.1
63.5
359.8
162.9
0.0
5.0
1.8
9.7
34.6
23.3
13.4
91.0
48.8
4.8
356.9
140.9
0.0
5.4
2.8
15.0
38.8
27.6
16.9
88.2
41.6
0.0
359.5
138.4
0.0
13.6
2.8
11.5
30.0
21.4
17.8
92.6
57.4
*Meteorological parameters recorded as 60min average values for 24 hours
Relative Humidity (%RH)

Min
Max
Average
Background
Silk Board
Victoria Road
IGICH
Kammanahalli
Peenya
Domlur
Figure 5.2 Wind rose diagram at various locations during the first season
5.3.2 Second season

/
*
/0
/0 ? />?
79>9C @
"
/
+ D
"
"
"
"
0! A
!<
< !
@ @
@@
" @
@
"
!<
#
,,
,*
@
*
3
6
"
7
3
72
"
Table 5.6 Summary of 24-hr average, maximum and minimum values of primary meteorological parameters at
various locations during the second season
Location
Domlur*
Kammanhalli*
Wind Speed (Km/h)
Sampling Dates
Min
Max
Average
Min
Max
Average
Min
Max
Average
13 April to 4th May 2007
0.00
7.10
2.30
14.60
37.40
26.84
28.80
99.00
58.72
5 May to 27 May 2007
0.00
7.00
2.25
18.00
38.00
27.29
24.70
96.00
58.62
Victoria Road
Central Silk
Board*
Temp (OC)
Data not available due to instrument failure

11 April to 27 April 2007
0.20
14.30
4.17
18.00
34.00
26.13
41.00
82.00
65.21
Peenya*
6 May to 25 May 2007
0.00
5.60
2.98
20.50
35.00
26.34
47.50
99.00
78.58
IGICH*
29 May to 8 June and 12

June to 20 June 2007
0.00
8.70
4.44
17.20
36.90
24.63
34.40
99.00
70.56
4 May to 28 June 2007
0.00
33.48
3.97
19.00
35.10
25.76
20.20
95.00
67.95
Background**
*Meteorological parameters recorded as 60min average values for 24 hours

**Meteorological parameters recorded as 10min average values
Wind Rose Pattern at Domlur location
Wind Rose Pattern at IGICH location
Wind Rose Pattern at Peenya location
Wind Rose Pattern at Silk Board location
Wind Rose Pattern at Kammanahalli location
Wind Rose Pattern at Background location
Figure 5.3 Wind rose pattern at various locations during the second season
5.3.3 Third season

/0
"
"
"
/% &? // :?
2 :9 >
C @
/ & 9&! A
"
<
*
!
@ @ ' '@
4
<
6
70
3
7>
"
"
"
"
B
@
Table 5.7 Summary of 24-hr average, maximum and minimum values of primary meteorological parameters at
various locations during the third season
Sampling Dates
Location
Domlur*
Kammanahalli*
Victoria road*
CSB*
27 June to 17 July 2007

12 August to 1 September
2007
4 September to 27
September 2007
20 July to 5 August 2007
Wind Speed (Km/h)
Temp (OC)
Min
Max
Average
Min
Max
Average
Min
Max
Average
2.9
13.3
8.0
17.4
28.7
21.7
51.8
99.0
77.8
0.0
5.2
2.0
16.9
32.2
22.9
37.3
99.0
74.9
0.0
10.4
4.9
16.2
31.7
22.2
45.9
99.0
80.6
1.4
10.3
5.7
16.8
28.9
21.0
55.0
99.0
83.7
23.3
43.4
95.0
79.1
IGICH
NA, due to instrument failure
Peenya
NA, due to instrument failure
Background**
8 July to 1 September 2007
0.0
19.4
2.8
18.8
30.7
Meteorological parameters recorded as 60min average values for 24 hours

**Meteorological parameters recorded as 10min average values
Domlur
Kammanahalli
Victoria Road
Background
Figure 5.4 Wind rose pattern at various locations during the third season
CSB
5.4
Concentration profiles
5.4.1 Existing Scenario 2007
5.4.1.1 Existing Scenario: PM10
Model simulations
-
#$%&
!
$
*
-,
E
*
"
* %:2:
@ !
@
"
<
#<
F
* /&&/ & G
<
*
*
*%:>2
"
$
3
%/
"
/0
"
&
Model performance
79
"
%::I A
"
#$%&
2:H
"
H / % IA
2% H /
72
.!
IA
*
"
: %9% I A
*
"
70 %&:I A
"
3
"
*
"
3
"
0 H %2>I A
*
"
"
79
* %0
"
"
%9 >9C "
/
6- / "
3
"
"
&7 H / &
*
3
!
6- /
!
3
6- /
*
!
("
!
6- / "
- *
"
6- /
%%
%0
%9
%9
*
<-J
!
-
7 7*
*
!
*
"
"
Table 5.8 Seasonal PM10 average concentration ( g/m3) of the 24-hourly model
simulations at each of the air quality stations
Season
FIRST
SECOND
Location
Observed
ISCST3 Predicted
Conc.
Conc.
CSB
98
108
IGICH
85
61
Domlur
69
80
Victoria Road
199
72
Kammanhalli
133
56
Peenya
171
231
CSB
96
130
IGICH
39
62
Domlur
94
128
Victoria Road*
181
61
Kammanhalli
91
62
Peenya
THIRD
171
233
CSB
73
167
IGICH*
69
34
Domlur
64
77
Victoria Road
109
87
Kammanhalli
54
75
Peenya*
69
69
*Predicted values using Background meteorology as onsite meteorology was not available due to
instrument failure
Ist Season
PM10 Conc (g/m3)
250
205
199
200
150
112
100
98
171
133
105
85
69
55
67
60
50
YA
EN
M
M
AN
KA
TO
VI
C
Observed
PE
R
IA
O
D
Predicted
AL
LI
AD
O
LU
R
M
IG
IC
SB
IInd Season
PM10 Conc (g/m3)
250
181
200
150
108 96
100
171
135
97 94
61
50
91
61
39
41
YA
PE
H
AN
M
M
KA
VI
C
Observed
EN
O
R
R
IA
TO
Predicted
AL
LI
AD
R
M
LU
O
IG
IC
SB
IIIrd Season
PM10 Conc (g/m3)
250
200
150
109
100
58
73
69
50
34
50
64
69 69
54
32
22
YA
EN
PE
AN
KA
M
M
R
IA
TO
VI
C
M
LU
O
D
Predicted
AL
LI
AD
H
IC
IG
SB
Observed
Figure 5.5 Observed and predicted concentrations of PM10 during different seasons
Concentration contours
"
"
#$%&
*
*
!
"
#$%&
/&&>
"
K
72
"
"
>
7>
7 9*
#
6
* #$%&
6
"
"
"
*
"
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
18000
375 g/m3
16000
325 g/m3
400 g/m3
350 g/m3
300 g/m3
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
6000
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Figure 5.6 Contours for 24-hourly average PM10 concentration ( g/m3) for first
season, year 2007
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
400 g/m3
375 g/m3
18000
350 g/m3
325 g/m3
16000
300 g/m3
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
6000
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Figure 5.7 Contours for 24-hourly average PM10 concentration ( g/m3) for
second season, year 2007

26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
400 g/m3
375 g/m3
18000
350 g/m3
325 g/m3
16000
300 g/m3
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
6000
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Figure 5.8 Contours for 24-hourly average PM10 concentration ( g/m3) for third
season, year 2007
5.4.1.2
Existing Scenario :NOX
#$%&*
'()
!
*
<
*
*
'()
$
3
%/
"
7:
"
3
:0 I A * %>%&7 I A *
*
"
/0
"
'()
/ H
:&I A
*
"
" "
3
"
/7 99I A * /:%/% I A
%0 :2I A
*
"
"
7:
6- /
*
6
"
!
7:
3
!
6- /
3
#$%&*
- *
D
*
<-J
!
'()
3
Table 5.9 Seasonal NOX average concentration ( g/m3) of the 24-hourly model
simulations at each of the air quality stations
Season
Location
Observed
ISCST3
Conc.
predicted
Conc.
FIRST
SECOND
THIRD
CSB
94
64
IGICH
23
41
Domlur
46
88
Victoria Road
60
42
Kammanhalli
26
25
Peenya
53
51
CSB
58
73
IGICH
17
30
Domlur
29
121
Victoria Road*
105
36
Kammanhalli
19
29
Peenya
30
32
CSB
47
96
IGICH*
90
21
Domlur
23
66
Victoria Road
66
48
Kammanhalli
49
36
Peenya*
90
14
* Predicted values using background meteorology as onsite meteorology was not available

Ist Season
NOx Conc (g/m3)
120
101
94
100
80
66
60
60
46
37
40
53
38
34
23
39
26
20
Ka
m
Pe
en
ya
m
an
ha
lli
ro
ad
om
lu
r
D
Observed
Vi
ct
or
ia
Predicted
IG
IC
SB
IInd Season
NOx Conc (g/m3)
120
105
100
80
60
87
61 58
40
40
20
36
29
17
27 30
21 19
Ka
m
Pe
en
ya
m
an
ha
lli
ro
ad
om
lu
r
D
Observed
Vi
ct
or
ia
Predicted
IG
IC
SB
IIIrd Season
NOx Conc (g/m3)
120
90
100
90
80
66
60
40
47
49
43
31
23
21
18
20
14
11
Predicted
Pe
en
ya
m
an
ha
l li
Ka
m
ro
ad
Vi
ct
or
ia
om
lu
r
D
IG
IC
SB
Observed
Figure 5.9 Observed and predicted concentrations of NOX during different seasons
Concentration contours
/0
"
"
'()
*
*
'()
/&&>
!
"
6
K
7 %&
'() "
"
=
=
"
+
'()
7 %%
7 %/*
"
"
"
"
26000
24000
22000
300 g/m3
20000
280 g/m3
260 g/m3
18000
240 g/m3
220 g/m3
16000
200 g/m3
180 g/m3
14000
160 g/m3
12000
140 g/m3
120 g/m3
10000
100 g/m3
80 g/m3
8000
60 g/m3
40 g/m3
6000
20 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Figure 5.10 Contours for 24-hourly averaged NOX concentration ( g/m3) for first
season, year 2007
26000
24000
22000
300 g/m3
20000
280 g/m3
260 g/m3
18000
240 g/m3
220 g/m3
16000
200 g/m3
180 g/m3
14000
160 g/m3
12000
140 g/m3
120 g/m3
10000
100 g/m3
80 g/m3
8000
60 g/m3
40 g/m3
6000
20 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Figure 5.11 Contours for 24-hourly averaged NOX concentration ( g/m3) for
second season, year 2007

26000
24000
22000
300 g/m3
20000
280 g/m3
260 g/m3
18000
240 g/m3
220 g/m3
16000
200 g/m3
180 g/m3
14000
160 g/m3
12000
140 g/m3
120 g/m3
10000
100 g/m3
80 g/m3
8000
60 g/m3
40 g/m3
6000
20 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Figure 5.12 Contours for 24-hourly averaged NOX concentration ( g/m3) for third
season, year 2007
5.4.1.3 Sectoral contribution: PM10 and NOX

3
#$%&
*
7% *
3
'()
6
#$%&
2
"
% 70C
//CL
>/:C *
" *
"
/&CL
2 7C *
% >0C
.!
*
'( 6
2
*
+
"
"
0CL
*
+
%0CL
7 %0 *
"
/ >C *
/2>
>C
00CL
"
7&CL
"
02CL
&%:C
Others
20%
Transport
44%
Industries
14%
Road dust
22%
Transport
Road dust
Industries
Others
Figure 5.13 Sectoral distribution of PM10 based on dispersion modelling in

the year 2007
Industries
4%
Others
46%
Transport
50%
Industries
Transport
Others
Figure 5.14 Sectoral distribution of NOx based on dispersion modelling in the

year 2007
5.5
Conclusions: Dispersion modelling

#$%&
"
'()
3
#$%&
6- /
!
"
#$%&
"
"
"
/0
!
"
"
+
<-J
/&&>
"
! "
3
.!
*
"
'()
CHAPTER
6.1
6 Emission control options and analysis
Summary of prominent Sources

!
!"
#
$ %&"
# ' #
$ %&"
$ %&" # $ %&
()
$%&
$
*+%&"(
)
$,%&
# $
+%&
6.2
#
#
$
()&
Future growth scenario

-
#
& /#
&0
#
##
# .'
$
/01&
$
2
&
BAU - Business as usual scenario

/01
#
3 2
" #
"
#
"
#
/-'5
6
# 3 2
"()
Growth patterns
$
3 2
&
*
Table 6.1 Growth rates of different sectors

S.No
Sector
Description of growth
Domestic
Population growth rate of 3.1% as listed in Master Plan - 2015
Transport
Vehicle-wise growth rates were calculate using the last five years data (20022007). BS-IV norms are taken into account from 2010.
Industrial
5.85% as depicted in Industrial development plan
DG sets
Based on population growth rates for domestic and based on energy

consumption for commercial DG sets.
Construction
Road dust
Based on increase in VKT ( from transport sector)
Eating joints
"
/01
83
#
!
# 3
:;2 "
!
*
9+ !
95.8
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
71.9
54.4
30.4
26.4
22.4
26.4
10.5
7.7 9.0
To
ct
io
tru
C
on
s
In
d
ta
l
l
ot
e
t
Se
G
0.1 0.1 0.2
om
es
tic
Du
st
R
oa
d
sp
o
Tr
an
13.7
10.3
7.8
12.2
6.6
3.6
us
try
17.2
10.9
1.8 2.1 2.4
rt
PM10 Emission Load (T/d)
2007
2012
2017
460.2
321.4
252.9
217.4
201.4
172.9
146.4
93.8
0.0 0.0 0.0
on
st
ru
ct
io
ry
ot
el
0.2 0.2 0.3
To
ta
17.222.830.3
Se
t
2.7 3.2 3.7
0.0 0.0 0.0
In
du
st
51.0
D
om
es
tic
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Tr
an
sp
or
t
R
oa
d
D
us
t
Nox Emission Load (T/d)
Figure 6.1 Sectoral and total PM10 emission load under BAU scenario during 2007-2017
2007
2012
2017
Figure 6.2 Sectoral and total NOX emission load under BAU scenario during 2007-2017
Alternate scenarios
0
#
#
3
#
/ 3
6.2.1 Line source control options & analysis

#
/ 3
#
"
#
3
2.
5
5
/-< 6
/-< 65

5
5
?
#
#
=
>
$ ,
'2
? )
=
3$
= < %
&
/ '
$
/!
/ . < %
&
>
3 <? )
$
> !
> .
@
(
4
?
2
#
@
(
# 8
#
<
&
%
$
( ?&
&
'
'2
@ #
? ?/
=
Table 6.2 Reduction in PM10 emission loads due to various technological interventions in transport sector in Bangalore
S.No
Strategy
BAU
2007
22.4
2012
26.4
2017
% reduction
% reduction
2012
2017
30.4
Remarks
CAGR 2002-2007, BS-IV from 2010, No

BD,Ethanol, ban or attrition
BS-V
22.4
26.4
30.1
0%
-1%
BAU + BS -V has been applied from 2015
BS-VI
22.4
26.4
30.0
0%
-1%
BAU + BS -VI has been applied from 2015
ELECTRIC
22.4
25.8
29.1
-2%
-4%
BAU + Introduction of EV as per chart

provided by CPCB
Hybrid
22.4
26.4
30.4
0%
0%
BAU + 1% hybrid cars in 2012 & 2% in 2017
CNG
22.4
25.4
26.6
-4%
-12%
BAU+ commercial vehicles (Bus/Car/3w)-
Ethanol
22.4
26.4
30.4
0%
0%
BAU + 10% Ethanol introduced in 2012-2017
Bio-diesel
22.4
26.3
30.2
-0.4%
-1%
BAU + 5-10% Biodiesel introduced in 2012-
H2/CNG
22.4
26.4
30.4
0%
0%
10
DOC
22.4
26.1
29.9
-1.0%
-1.7%
25% conversion in 2012 and 100% in 2017
2017
50% conversion of BS-II buses in 2012, and
100% in 2017
11
DPF
22.4
26.2
30.1
-0.6%
-1.2%
50% conversion of BS-III buses in 2012, and

100% in 2017
3
#
83
# *,
2012
0%
-2%
0%
0%
-1%
0% 0%
2017
0% 0%
0% 0%
-0.4%
-1%
-1%
-1.0%
-1.7%
% Reduction (wrt BAU)
-2%
-4%
-0.6%
-1.2%
-4%
-4%
-6%
-8%
-10%
-12%
-12%
-14%
BS-V
BS-VI
ELECTRIC
Hybrid
CNG
Ethanol
Bio-diesel
H2/CNG
DOC
DPF
Figure 6.3 Percentage reduction achieved in PM10 emissions by implementing various strategies
5
4
5
/-'6
#
/-'65
#
#
#
3
/-'5
5#
3
5
#
#
#
3
>
# #
'
#
"
:;2 "
( 8 /-'5
5
5#
#
?)
>2
3
#
3
"
' %
( ?
,A '2
%
%
#
*,

Table 6.3 Reduction in NOX emission loads due to various technological interventions in transport sector in Bangalore
S.No
Strategy
2007
BAU
2012
146.4
2017
201.4
% reduction
% reduction
2012
2017
Description
252.9
CAGR 2002-2007, BS-IV from 2010,

No BD,Ethanol, ban or attrition
BS-V
146.4
201.4
248.0
0%
-1.9%
BAU + BS -V has been applied from

2015
BS-VI
146.4
201.4
243.5
0%
-3.7%
ELECTRIC
146.4
196.3
241.4
-2.5%
-5%
BAU + BS -VI has been applied from

2015
BAU + Introduction of EV as per chart
provided by CPCB.
Hybrid
146.4
201.3
252.8
-0.02%
-0.04%
BAU + 1% hybrid cars in 2012 & 2%

in 2017
CNG
146.4
199.0
241.5
-1%
-4%
BAU+ commercial vehicles

(Bus/Car/3w) - 25% conversion in
2012 and 100% in 2017
Ethanol
146.4
201.1
252.6
-0.1%
-0.1%
BAU + 10% Ethanol introduced in
Bio-diesel
146.4
201.6
253.4
0.1%
0.2%
BAU + 5-10% Biodiesel introduced in
2012-2017
2012-2017
9
H2/CNG
146.4
201.4
240.6
0.0%
-4.9%
10
DOC
146.4
201.4
252.9
0.0%
0.0%

50% conversion of BS-II buses in
2012, and 100% in 2017
11
DPF
146.4
201.4
252.9
0.0%
0.0%
50% conversion of BS-III buses in

2012, and 100% in 2017
#
3
#
83# *
2012
2017
1%
% reduction (wrt BAU)
0%
0%
0%
0.1%0.2% 0.0%
-0.02%
0.0%0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
-0.1%-0.1%
-0.04%
-1%
-1%
-2%
-1.9%
-2.5%
-3%
-4%
-3.7%
-4%
-5%
-5%
-4.9%
PF
D
O
C
D
G
2/
CN
H
Bi
odi
es
el
ol
Et
ha
n
NG
C
yb
rid
H
TR
IC
EC
EL
BS
-V
I
BS
-V
-6%
Figure 6.4 Percentage reduction achieved in NOX emissions by implementing various strategies in the transport sector
5
/-'6
#
/-'65
#
>2
3
5
"
# #
>
3
/
%
'
( ? /-'5
5#
5
#
?)
3
'
"
( 8 /-'5
5
5#
$#" ",2&"
%
%
2
6.2.2 Area Source Control Options & Analysis

Domestic
3 !: )
;
" %
# 3
5
" %
#
#
3 >2
"
:)
$3
# *&
#
#
: )"
2
4.5
Domestic Emission loads (T/d)
4.0
3.7
3.5
3.2
3.0
2.7
3.3
2.8
2.7
2.4
2.5
2.1
2.0
3.9
1.8
2.2
1.8
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
2007
2012
PM- BAU
PM- ALT
NOX- BAU
2017
NOX-ALT
Figure 6.5 PM10 & NOX emission loads from domestic sector in BAU and ALT scenarios
DG sets
2
#
3
2
#
" 3# **
()
%
DG set emission loads (T/d)
DG Sets
200
172.9
147.0
150
93.8
100
79.7
51.0 51.0
50
12.2 10.4
6.6 5.6
3.6 3.6
2007
2012
PM- BAU
PM- ALT
2017
NOX- BAU
NOX-ALT
Figure 6.6 PM10 & NOX emission loads from DG sets in BAU and ALT scenarios
Road dust re-suspension

-
#
%
#
3"
2
7
#
83
#
Road dust emission loads (T/d)
Road dust
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
26.4
20.5
17.2
10.9
15.4
10.9
2007
2012
PM- BAU
2017
PM- ALT
Figure 6.7 PM10 emission loads from road dust re-suspension in BAU and ALT scenarios
2 #
Construction
%
2
3
#
3!
#
#
"
2
3
3"
Hotels
#
#
#
37
"
: )"
"
6.2.3 Point Source Control Options & Analysis

Two strategies were evaluated for industrial sector:
& /
2
# 3
#
& 8#
.0
:->#
2
"
#
>-(!
:->-
#
)
3
83# *+
Industrial emission load (T/d)
PM10
16
14
13.7
12
10.3
10
8
7.8
7.8
7.8
6
4.4
2.7
2
0
2007
2012
BAU
BAN
2017
Ban + Fuel Shift
NOx
Industrial emission load (T/d)
Industries
35
30.3
30
25
22.8
20
17.2
15
17.2
17.2
16.9
10
5
3.2
0
2007
2012
BAU
BAN
2017
Ban + Fuel Shift
Figure 6.8 PM10 & NOX emission loads from industrial sector in BAU and ALT scenarios
3
#
/01
%
#
3 2
,%
"
#
# 3
#
:;2 "
#
3
#
#
%
3
#
+%
"
3
#
/01
+9%
6.3
Scenario Analysis
8#
0
'5
5
5
" 0
#
$ # 3
#
2 3
$
@
* &.'
$
0
'5
6&
<5
"0
#
#
/-'5
6
<5
5
"
/01
&
3
Sectors
Description
Transport
Industries
Table 6.4 Description of alternate scenarios for future air quality management in Bangalore
Alternate-I
Scenario with certain
strategies to reduce the air
pollution loads across various
sectors.
Ban on 10 year old
and 2017
Enhancement of public
transport system based on
diesel (shift of PKT from
private vehicles to public
transport i.e. 10% in 2012
and 20% in 2017)
Improvement in inspection
and maintenance
Introduction of DOC in BS-II
buses and DPF in BS-III
buses

industries in city limits
Alternate-II
Stringent scenario with many more strategies
to reduce the air pollution load across various
sectors as compared to Alternate- I scenario.

Ban on 10-yr old commercial vehicles and
15-yr old private vehicles both in 2012
and 2017
Enhancement of public transport system
based on CNG (shift of PKT from private
vehicles to public transport i.e. 10 % in
2012 and 20% in 2017)
Introduction of electric vehicles (12% 2w,
5-10% 3w and taxis, 510% buses in
2012 and 2017, respectively)
Improvement in inspection and
maintenance
Conversion of public transport
(commercial 3 & 4 w) to CNG (25% in
2012 and 100 % in 2017)
Ban on any new air polluting industries in

city limits
Shift from solid fuel to liquid fuel (LSHS) in
2012 & NG in 2017 in existing industries
Alternate-III
Scenario that contains additional set of measures that are not a part
of the common control options as per the chart suggested by CPCB
(for example, introduction of fuel efficiency standards, installation of
control devices (DOC/DPF) on all diesel vehicles and DG sets).
Ban on 15 yr old commercial vehicles in 2012 and 10 yr old
Enhancement of public transport system based on diesel (shift
of PKT from private vehicles to public transport i.e. 10 % in 2012
and 20% in 2017)
Introduction of electric vehicles (1 2% 2w, 5 - 10% 3w and
taxis, 5 10% buses in 2012 and 2017, respectively)
Application of DOC/DPF after introduction of BS- IV fuel in 2010
to:
Old Buses and Trucks (pre BS-IV):reduction in PM10 - DOC :
22.5%, DPF : 70%
Old Diesel Cars pre BS-IV (about half of PM reduction is
assumed as compared to that for buses/trucks) : reduction
in PM10-DOC: 10%, DPF : 35%
Light passenger vehicles : 10% between (2012-15) and 15%

between (2015-17), Light duty Passenger cars : 20% between (2012-15)
and 30% between (2015-17), Heavy duty vehicles : 20% between (2012-15)
and 30% between (2015-17)

Ban on 10 yr old commercial vehicles in 2012 and 2017
Enhancement of public transport system based on CNG
(shift of PKT from private vehicles to public transport i.e.
10 % in 2012 and 20% in 2017)
Introduction of electric vehicles (1 2% 2w, 5 - 10% 3w
and taxis, 5 10% buses in 2012 and 2017,
respectively)
Conversion of public transport (commercial 3 & 4 w) to
CNG (25% in 2012 and 100 % in 2017)
By-passing of trucks on the proposed peripheral ring
road around Bangalore (which is broadly outside the
study domain- assumed only 10% truck traffic within the
city)

Shift from solid fuel to liquid fuel (LSHS) in existing industries in
both 2012 and 2017

Shift from solid fuel to liquid fuel (LSHS) in 2012 and to
NG in 2017 in existing industries
No power cuts i.e. no usage of DG sets in the city
Road dust resuspension
Wall to wall paving
Construction
Introduction of fuel efficiency standards (considering reduction

of fuel consumption)

DOC and DPF applied to commercial DG sets (>12 kVA) in
2010. Reduction in PM10 :DOC : 22.5%, DPF : 70% (reductions
taken same as those in the case of buses)
Wall to wall paving
DG sets
Alternate-IV
Scenario with measures that are more oriented towards
meeting the air quality standards in future
Wall to wall paving

Reduction of road dust re-suspension due to by-passing
of trucks
/01
PM emission loads (T/d)
100
95.8
75
74.5
71.9
57.2
54.4
50
53.2
45.1
42.4
43.5
34.6
32.9
25
0
2007
BAU
2012
ALT-I
ALT-II
NOx emission loads (T/d)
83# *9
500
460
400
300
217
200
100
ALT-IV
254
258
275
227
122
0
2007
BAU
ALT-I
Figure 6.9 Estimated emissions loads for PM10 and NOX under the BAU and four alternate scenarios
350
299
131
2017
ALT-III
321
2012
ALT-II
2017
ALT-III
ALT-IV
PM10 emission load

0: '5
%
%PM reduction w.r.t. BAU
Scenario
2012
ALT-I
-20%
ALT-II
-37%
ALT-III
-41%
ALT-IV
-54%
2
%"
2017
-22%
-44%
-55%
-64%
3
"
2
#
>2
"
0: '5
5
3
#
2 #
,%
"
0: '5
5
5
#
# 3
( ?!
(8
2
()
#
#
%
%
0: '5
6
3 #
2 3
%
*%
2 # $
#
()
&
3
#;
%
#
#
"
#
#
'
"
0
'5
6"
0
9% A %"
<5 ,% 3
"
'5
5
5
&
"
0
<5
5
"
2
>2
"#
2
2 $
,*%"
0
/01
*%
NOX emission load

0: '5
%
% NOx reduction wrt BAU

Scenario
ALT-I
ALT-II
ALT-III
ALT-IV
2012
-21%
-29%
-20%
-59%
2017
-24%
-40%
-35%
-73%
3
"
2
#
>2
"0: '5
5
2
3
#
2 #
9%
%"
"
0: '5
5
5
2
#
%
,,%"
"
>
3 "
0: '5
6
2
4 #
#
2
/01
9%
,%"
#
#
# 3 ()
'
3
#; 2
3
#
%
"
"#
/01
2
0
"
'5
"
0
<5
5
,+%
"
2
"
%
0
%
<5
5
5
*%" *%
'5
6
CHAPTER
7.1
7 Prioritization of management/ Control options
Citywise Dispersion modelling for Select Options for future scenarios

7.1.1 PM10 BAU Scenarios for 2012 and 2017
!" "#$
%&'
(
(
% (
+(
,
(
-,
Model performance
(
-,
. /
00 1 0 2(3 $ #
.
%&'
4 , $ - 2(3 $
2(3 $
(
(
(
1
(
(
(
-
,
(
(
#
$ 1 $0 2(3
%&'
4 2(3 $
(
(
(
$ $ 1 - 4 2(3
(
.
#
-$ ,
/
(
(
-,
.
1
2(3
%&'
2(3 $
(
(
40
(
(
0 1 $-4 2(3
,-
276
239
205
155
105
al
li
oa
d
r
lu
om
IC
ia
Ka
m
ct
or
BAU 2012
106
79
60
Vi
Year 2007
121
67
IG
89
an
h
55
96
72
Pe
en
ya
202
150
112
150
100
50
0
374
400
350
300
250
200
SB
PM10 Conc (g/m 3)
BAU 2017
Figure 7.1 Predicted 24-hourly average PM10 concentrations ( g/m3) for base year (2007) and BAU (2012, 2017)
700
629
PM10 Conc (g/m 3)
600
490
469
500
400
364
351
272
300
437
323
236
200
100
0
Year 07
Average
Max
BAU 2012
BAU 2017
Min
470
321
260
238
177
349
320
132
100
178
219
154
125
95
167
132
99
179
en
ya
Pe
an
h
m
Ka
BAU 2017
R
ia
ct
or
BAU 2012
Vi
Year 2007
al
li
oa
d
r
om
lu
D
IG
IC
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
SB
PM10 Conc (g/m 3)
Figure 7.2 Predicted average, maximum and minimum PM10 concentrations ( g/m3) for base year (2007) and
BAU (2012, 2017) at city level (considering the highest 150 concentration values in the study domain)
Figure 7.3 Predicted 24-hourly highest PM10 concentrations ( g/m3) for base year (2007) and
BAU (2012, 2017) at six air quality monitoring stations
Concentration contours for BAU 2012 and 2017

&
(
%&'
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
400 g/m3
18000
375 g/m3
350 g/m3
325 g/m3
16000
300 g/m3
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
6000
50 g/m3
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Figure 7.4 Contours for 24-hourly average PM10 concentration ( g/m3) for BAU 2012
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
18000
375 g/m3
16000
325 g/m3
400 g/m3
350 g/m3
300 g/m3
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
6000
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Figure 7.5 Contours for 24-hourly average PM10 concentration ( g/m3) for BAU 2017
&
&
%&'
(
7.1.1.1
Transport control options

!
(
(.
/
/
)(
(
/
.
#
-
(
*
%&'
)
#
!
/
56
!
,
56
.
,0
Table 7.1 Percent change in PM10 concentrations due to different control options in the transport
sector w.r.t. BAU 2012 and BAU 2017
w.r.t. BAU 2012
Euro V
Euro VI
Electric
Bio
Vehicle
diesel
CNG
DOC
DPF
CSB
-1.06
-0.20
-1.91
-0.53
-0.40
IGICH
-1.02
-0.14
-1.50
-0.41
-0.31
-0.68
-0.09
-1.23
-0.31
-0.25
Domlur
Victoria Road
NA
NA
-1.08
-0.14
-1.62
-0.44
-0.31
Kammanhalli
-1.05
-0.13
-1.74
-0.46
-0.39
Peenya
-0.14
-0.03
-0.24
-0.06
-0.03
w.r.t. BAU 2017

CSB
-0.35
-0.46
-1.64
-0.26
-5.58
-0.93
-0.44
IGICH
-0.34
-0.43
-1.63
-0.23
-4.34
-0.72
-0.36
Domlur
-0.23
-0.30
-1.03
-0.12
-3.28
-0.43
-0.26
Victoria Road
-0.36
-0.49
-1.70
-0.25
-4.72
-0.78
-0.43
Kammanhalli
-0.37
-0.45
-1.67
-0.19
-4.97
-0.83
-0.36
Peenya
-0.05
-0.08
-0.22
-0.05
-0.71
-0.11
-0.06
7.1.2
PM10 alternate scenarios for 2012 and 2017

&
&
&
1 !!!
1! &
&
1 !!
1 !8
.
( 9
!" "#$
(
(
,
&
-,
1 !! &
1! &
1 !!!
&
1 !8
Model performance
(
-,
&
&
2(3
- 1
!! &
1! &
1 !! &
. /
(
04 1 $ 2(3 $ 0 1
$
- 1
2(3
$ ,: 2(3 $
(
4 1 - 2(3 $ 0 1 :
$
- 2(3
$ 1 0 2(3 $
&
1! &
1 !!!
&
1 !8
1 !8
1 !!!
(
4
;+
2(3
300
241
250
PM10 Conc (g/m3)
218
200
213
182
162
150
100
140
128
119
103
94
P M 10 24-hr standard
97
59
50
51
42
81
42
73
63
66
65
30
111
100
99
79
75
68
119
47
41
32
83
79
53
55
40
62
43
54 51
39
119
104
81
66
51
42
0
CSB
Alt I 2012
IGICH
Alt II 2012
Alt III 2012
Domlur
Alt IV 2012
Alt I 2017
Victoria Road
Alt II 2017
Kammanhalli
Alt III 2017
Alt IV 2017
Figure 7.6 24-hourly average PM10 concentrations ( g/m3) for Alternate I, Alternate II,
Alternate III and Alternate IV scenarios for the year 2012 and 2017
#
&
-,
1! &
(
00 1
(
(
1 !! &
1 !!!
&
1 !8
. /
(
1
2(3 $ : 1
2(3 $
1 -: 2(3 $
2(3 $
;+
$
$0 1 4- 2(
3
1 4 2(3 $ : 1 0$ 2(3 $
Peenya
74
1 4 2(3 $
&
&
1 !8
!!!
1! &
1 !! &
(
(
&
!8
1! &
%&'
-,
% (
1 !!!
&
1 !! &
$,$ 7
%&'
&
'
:, 7
;+
&
0 , -7
&
1
!
-, $
1!
#
&
, $7
1 !!
%&'
1 !!!
$:,
%&'
1!8
00 ,
%&'
,: 7
90
PM10 % reduction wrt BAU
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
CSB
Alt I 2012
IGICH
Alt II 2012
Alt III 2012
Domlur
Alt IV 2012
Victoria Road
Alt I 2017
Kammanhalli
Peenya
Alt III 2017
Alt IV 2017
Alt II 2017
Figure 7.7 Percent reduction of predicted 24-hourly highest PM10 concentration ( g/m3) for Alternate I,
Alternate II, Alternate III and Alternate IV scenarios for the years 2012 and 2017

&
&
(
1 !!!
1 !! &
$
&
&
&
&
1 !8
%&'
1 !!!
,!
&
&
0
1! &
1 !8
(
: 4
!
(
1 !! &
(
1!
1 !!!
,!!
)
#
(
&
+
(
&
<= 3
<
*
1 !8
<6
(
(
/
+
!
&
/
,!
&
1!!
.
>
-,
&
,!!!
(.
+
.
% (
/
/
)
&
1!8
=
0+ ?
%(
(
(
@
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
400 g/m3
375 g/m3
18000
350 g/m3
325 g/m3
16000
300 g/m3
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
6000
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Alternate - I scenario in 2012
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
400 g/m3
375 g/m3
18000
350 g/m3
325 g/m3
16000
300 g/m3
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
6000
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Alternate II scenario in 2012
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
400 g/m3
375 g/m3
18000
350 g/m3
325 g/m3
16000
300 g/m3
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
6000
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Alternate III scenario in 2012

26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
400 g/m3
18000
375 g/m3
350 g/m3
16000
325 g/m3
300 g/m3
14000
275 g/m3
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
6000
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Alternate IV scenario in 2012
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
400 g/m3
18000
375 g/m3
350 g/m3
16000
325 g/m3
300 g/m3
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
6000
50 g/m3
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
400 g/m3
375 g/m3
18000
350 g/m3
16000
325 g/m3
14000
275 g/m3
250 g/m3
300 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
6000
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
400 g/m3
18000
375 g/m3
350 g/m3
325 g/m3
300 g/m3
16000
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
6000
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000

26000
24000
22000
450 g/m3
20000
425 g/m3
400 g/m3
375 g/m3
18000
350 g/m3
325 g/m3
16000
300 g/m3
275 g/m3
14000
250 g/m3
225 g/m3
12000
200 g/m3
175 g/m3
10000
150 g/m3
125 g/m3
8000
100 g/m3
75 g/m3
50 g/m3
6000
25 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
7.1.3 NOX BAU Scenarios for 2012 and 2017

5=A
!" "#$
%&'
(
(
% (
+(
,
(
-,
+
(
(
%&'
Model performance
(
(
(
$- 1
- ,
0
(
2(3
-,
. /
2(3 $ #
.
%&'
0 , 0 2(3 $
,
(
( 5=A
(
#
1 0 2(3
%&'
$0: 2(3 $
1 $ 2(
3
(
(
(
.
#
/
(
(
-,
.
1
2(3
%&'
-:
(
(
300
NOx Conc (g/m3)
(
5=A
(
4 1 40 2(3
$ , $ 4 2(3
265
250
200
100
161
131
150
66
91
53
37
50
74
101
61
N Ox 2 4 - Hr St and ar d
38
87
46
65
34
93
62
39
BAU 2012
al
li
Pe
en
y
Ka
m
m
ia
ct
or
Vi
Year 2007
an
h
oa
d
r
lu
om
D
IG
IC
SB
BAU 2017
Figure 7.16 Predicted 24-hourly average NOX concentrations ( g/m3) for base year (2007) and BAU (2012, 2017)
400
358
NOx Conc (g/m3)
350
302
300
250
192
200
150
272
236
126
150
170
116
100
50
0
Year 07
Average
Max
BAU 2012
BAU 2017
Min
Figure 7.17 Predicted average, maximum and minimum NOX concentrations ( g/m3) for base year (2007) and
BAU (2012, 2017) at city level (considering the highest 150 concentration values in the study domain)

350
319
NOx Conc (g/m3)
300
250
207
200
150
100
195
144
133
126
93
97
79
56
50
121
113
83
50
53
48
81
118
N Ox2 4 - Hr St and ar d
BAU 2017
a
Pe
en
y
m
m
an
Ka
R
ia
to
r
BAU 2012
Vi
c
Year 2007
ha
l li
oa
d
r
om
lu
D
IG
IC
SB
Figure 7.18 Predicted 24-hourly highest NOX concentrations ( g/m3) for base year (2007) and
BAU (2012, 2017) at six air quality monitoring stations
Concentration contours for BAU 2012 and 2017

&
5=A
(
%&'
26000
24000
22000
300 g/m3
20000
280 g/m3
260 g/m3
18000
240 g/m3
220 g/m3
16000
200 g/m3
180 g/m3
14000
160 g/m3
12000
140 g/m3
120 g/m3
10000
100 g/m3
80 g/m3
8000
60 g/m3
40 g/m3
6000
20 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Figure 7.19 Contours for 24-hourly average NOX concentration ( g/m3) for BAU 2012
26000
24000
22000
300 g/m3
20000
280 g/m3
260 g/m3
18000
240 g/m3
220 g/m3
16000
200 g/m3
180 g/m3
14000
160 g/m3
12000
140 g/m3
120 g/m3
10000
100 g/m3
80 g/m3
8000
60 g/m3
40 g/m3
6000
20 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Figure 7.20 Contours for 24-hourly average NOX concentration ( g/m3) for BAU 2017
&
.
B
(
( ( <6
B
&
%&'
7.1.3.1
Transport control options

!
(
(.
/
/
*
/
)(
.
#
(
(
5=A
%&'
)
#
!
/
56
> , 56
:,
7
. /
:1
56
(
!
47

Table 7.2 Percent change in NOX concentrations due to different control options in the transport
sector w.r.t. BAU 2012 and BAU 2017
NOX w.r.t. BAU 2012
Euro V
Euro VI
Bio diesel
Ethanol
CNG
Hybrid
Electric
H2-CNG
Vehicle
CSB
0.07
-0.04
-0.91
-0.02
-1.73
IGICH
0.04
-0.05
-0.66
0.00
-1.25
0.01
-0.02
-0.27
0.00
-0.56
0.05
-0.05
-0.77
-0.01
-1.51
Domlur
Victoria Road
NA
NA
Kammanhalli
0.05
-0.08
-0.81
-0.01
-1.61
Peenya
0.05
-0.04
-0.51
-0.01
-1.04
0.09
-0.05
-2.71
-0.01
-2.68
NA
NOX w.r.t. BAU 2017

CSB
-1.04
-2.09
-2.96
IGICH
-0.88
-1.60
0.04
-0.08
-2.05
-0.01
-2.09
-2.22
Domlur
-0.29
-0.57
0.02
-0.03
-0.71
-0.01
-0.76
-0.78
Victoria Road
-0.82
-1.54
0.05
-0.07
-1.97
-0.03
-2.05
-2.16
Kammanhalli
-0.91
-1.67
0.08
-0.07
-2.16
-0.03
-2.28
-2.41
Peenya
-0.82
-1.55
0.06
-0.07
-1.58
-0.01
-1.61
-1.72
7.1.4
NOX alternate scenarios for 2012 and 2017

&
&
&
1 !!!
&
1! &
1 !!
1 !8
.
( 9
!" "#$
(
(
,
&
(
-,
1 !! &
1! &
1 !!!
&
1 !8
Model performance
(
-,
( 5=A
1 !! &
1 !!!
&
1 !8
. /
(
(
$ 1 0 2(3 $ $$ 1 $2(3 $ $: 1 $: 2(3 $
- 1 $$ 2(3 $
;+
(
0 1 0 2(3 $ - 1 0 2(3 $
-$ 1
2(3 $
- 1 $$ 2(3 $
&
1! &
1
!! &
1 !!!
&
1 !8
&
1! &
300
256
NOx Conc (g/m3)
250
215
217
200
156
150
100
138
134
NOx 24-hr standard
102
73
50
74
65
8386
33
33
48 45
42
74
65
5456
14
53
14
4751
19
18
19
77
6163
20
50
4143
373338
18
53 4751
19
66
65
19
0
CSB
Alt I 2012
Alt II 2012
IGICH
Alt III 2012
Domlur
Alt IV 2012
Victoria Road
Alt I 2017
Alt II 2017
Kammanhalli
Alt III 2017
Peenya
Alt IV 2017
Figure 7.21 24-hourly average NOX concentrations ( g/m3) for Alternate I, Alternate II, Alternate III
and Alternate IV scenarios for the year 2012 and 2017
#
&
-,
1! &
(
5=A
1 !! &
1 !!!
&
1 !8
. /
(
(
: 1 : 2(3 $ 04 1
2(3 $ 0 1
2(3 $
$
1 0 2(3
;+
(
4 1 $ 0 2(3 $ 4 1 0 2(3 $ : 1 04 2(3 $
1 0$ 2(3 $
&
1! &
1 !! &
1
!!!
&
1 !8
(
-,
(
5=A
% (
&
1! &
1 !! &
1 !!!
&
1
!8
%&'
!
-,
5=A
7
0,
7
&
1!
%&'
#
5=A
&
1 !!
:, 47
,$ 7
%&'
;+
5=A
&
1 !!!
-, 47
4 , $- 7
%&'
'
&
1!8
5=A
- , :- 7
-,4 7
%&'
21

100
NOx % reduction wrt BAU
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Alt I 2012
CSB
Alt II 2012
IGICH
Alt III 2012
Domlur
Victoria Road Kammanhalli
Alt IV 2012 Alt I 2017 Alt II 2017 Alt III 2017
Peenya
Alt IV 2017
Figure 7.22 Percent reduction of predicted 24-hourly highest NOX concentration ( g/m3) for
Alternate I, Alternate II, Alternate III and Alternate IV scenarios for the years
2012 and 2017

&
5=A
&
(
1 !!!
1 !! &
:
!!!
&
4
&
1 !8
%&'
(
&
(
(
1!
1 !8
(
$
0
$
!
(
1! &
1 !! &
1
(
#
1 !8
&
/
+ !
!!!
(
,
!,
(
&
(
5=A
(.
!8
26000
24000
22000
300 g/m3
20000
280 g/m3
260 g/m3
18000
240 g/m3
220 g/m3
16000
200 g/m3
180 g/m3
14000
160 g/m3
12000
140 g/m3
120 g/m3
10000
100 g/m3
80 g/m3
8000
60 g/m3
40 g/m3
6000
20 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Figure 7.23 Contours for 24-hourly average NOX concentration ( g/m3) for
Alternate - I scenario in 2012
26000
24000
22000
300 g/m3
20000
280 g/m3
260 g/m3
18000
240 g/m3
220 g/m3
16000
200 g/m3
180 g/m3
14000
160 g/m3
12000
140 g/m3
120 g/m3
10000
100 g/m3
80 g/m3
8000
60 g/m3
40 g/m3
6000
20 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Alternate II scenario in 2012

26000
24000
22000
300 g/m3
20000
280 g/m3
260 g/m3
18000
240 g/m3
220 g/m3
16000
200 g/m3
180 g/m3
14000
160 g/m3
12000
140 g/m3
120 g/m3
10000
100 g/m3
80 g/m3
8000
60 g/m3
40 g/m3
6000
20 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Alternate III scenario in 2012
26000
24000
22000
300 g/m3
20000
280 g/m3
260 g/m3
18000
240 g/m3
220 g/m3
16000
200 g/m3
180 g/m3
14000
160 g/m3
12000
140 g/m3
120 g/m3
10000
100 g/m3
80 g/m3
8000
60 g/m3
40 g/m3
6000
20 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
Alternate IV scenario in 2012
26000
24000
22000
300 g/m3
20000
280 g/m3
260 g/m3
18000
240 g/m3
220 g/m3
16000
200 g/m3
180 g/m3
14000
160 g/m3
12000
140 g/m3
120 g/m3
10000
100 g/m3
80 g/m3
8000
60 g/m3
40 g/m3
6000
20 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
26000
24000
22000
220 g/m3
20000
200 g/m3
18000
180 g/m3
16000
160 g/m3
140 g/m3
14000
120 g/m3
12000
100 g/m3
80 g/m3
10000
60 g/m3
8000
40 g/m3
6000
20 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000

26000
24000
22000
300 g/m3
20000
280 g/m3
260 g/m3
18000
240 g/m3
220 g/m3
16000
200 g/m3
180 g/m3
14000
160 g/m3
12000
140 g/m3
120 g/m3
10000
100 g/m3
80 g/m3
8000
60 g/m3
40 g/m3
6000
20 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
26000
24000
22000
300 g/m3
20000
280 g/m3
260 g/m3
18000
240 g/m3
220 g/m3
16000
200 g/m3
180 g/m3
14000
160 g/m3
12000
140 g/m3
120 g/m3
10000
100 g/m3
80 g/m3
8000
60 g/m3
40 g/m3
6000
20 g/m3
0 g/m3
4000
2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000
7.2
Prioritized list of management/control options

%
(
C
<6
(
!
( ( % (
C
#
% (
(
,
<6
%:
+ "=
#
5=A
7.2.1 Sectoral control options

"
% (
.
<
5=A
%
&
%",8
%",8!
0
!
(
(
!
>
(
>
(
%",!!
(
(
;+
%",!!!
56
<
!
-, 7
<=
$ D-,
-7
7
8
5=A
%",8!
0 !
07
!
%",
(
>
5=A
(
<=
,
!
%",!!!
!
56
7
5=A
#
5=A
#
(
(
%
, 7
%",!!
5=A
)
-7
(
(
<
$ *

;">"
>"<
(
(
-$7
-7
%&'
(
;+
5=A
#
(
(
: 7
5=A
07
%&'
:47
0 7
<6
07
!
5=A
"
(
,
7
(
7
0 7
(
(3
(
(
7.2.2 Prioritization of control options

&
! &
#
)
&
1 !! &
,!!!
&
%&'
B(
(
(
%&'
)(
'
&
&
$ *
(
,!
E
) :7*
) 7*
E#
E#
'
,!8*
,!!
)
$ 7*
) 7*
(
E
E#
) $7*
E#
) 7*
'
&
): 7*
)
: $7*
) 7*
<6
) -7*
)4 -7*
) 07*
)
0 07*
<6
) 47*
,!!!
E#
) -7*
E#
)
4 :7*
'
&
(
E
) -7*
) $7*
)$ 7* <6
) 7*
,!8
(
E
)
: $7* <6
) 7*
) 7*
)
0 07*
% reduction wrt BAU (total PM10 emission

load)
E#
)
4 7*
E#
) 07*
)4 7*
)
: $7*
)4 -7* <6
)- 7*
) :7* <6
) $7*
) :7*
)
0 07*
25
20
15
10
5
0
Transport
2012 Alt I
2017 Alt I
Road dust
2012 Alt II
DG Sets
2017 Alt II
Industries
2012 Alt-III
2017 Alt-III
Construction
2012 Alt-IV
2017 Alt-IV
Figure 7.31 Percent PM10 emission load reduction in different sectors under Alternate scenarios as
compared to the total pollution load under BAU scenario
E ,
.
)07*
%&'
+,
E
(
,
(
<= ,<
)
4 7*
)
,
3
) 07*
) -7*
) -7*
) 7*
7*
(
56
56
) 47*
<= ,<
) -7*
;+
(
E
E ,
(
.
)$ :7*
)$7*
) 07*
)
-7*
3
+,
,
<= ,<
(
56
) 07*
56) 7*
) 07*

) -7*
) $7*
(
"
5 <6
!
()
:7
<= D<
: $7
*
<6
!D
47
<6
F
(
7
0 07
;">"
#
7
(
$ 7
0 $7
+
(
(
Table 7.3 Prioritised list of key interventions in terms of reduction in total PM10 emission loads in 2017
S.No
Strategy
% reduction in total
PM10 emission loads
in 2017
By-passing of trucks through the proposed peripheral ring road around
13.8%
Bangalore
2
Installation of DOC and DPF devices in all pre-2010 diesel vehicles
13.0%
No power cuts leading to zero usage of DG sets
12.8%
Ban on 10 year old commercial vehicles in 2012 and 2017
12.5%
Ban on any new industries in city limits(6.2%) and fuel shift towards cleaner
11.5 %
fuel natural gas(5.3%) in existing industries

6
Installation of DOC and DPF devices in DG sets
8.3%
Wall to wall paving for reduction of road dust
6.2%
5.5%
Conversion of public transport (commercial 3 & 4 w) to CNG (25% in 2012
4.0%
and 100 % in 2017)

10
Improvement in inspection and maintenance for vehicles
2.5%
11
Inspection and maintenance for DG sets
1.9%
12
Enhancement of public transport system based on CNG (shift of PKT from
1.7%
13
Enhancement of public transport system based on diesel (shift of PKT from

1.5%
% reduction w rt total PM10 BAU load

0
BS-V
0.3
0.0
BS-VI
0.0
0.4
Bio-diesel
Ethanol
10
12
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
BAN (Com. vehicles)
12.2
12.5
0.1
0.8
CNG (Com. vehicles)
1.4
Electric Vehicles
0.9
1.4
1.5
I&M (Vehicles)
Sy nchronisation_signals
0.1
4.0
2.5
1.3
1.4
1.7
Enhance PTS (CNG)
1.21.5
Enhance PTS (Diesel)

DOC-DPF (BS-II,III Buses)
0.4
0.5
DOC-DPF (All diesel vehicles)
9.1
13.0
Bye Passing Trucks

Fuel Efficiency stds.
16
0.0
0.0
Metro
BAN (Pvt. vehicles)
14
13.8
15.0
0.0
0.4
9.2
No power cuts
12.8
1.4
1.9
I&M (DG sets)
6.0
DOC/DPF (DG sets)

2.6
WTW (Road dust)

Better Construction
5.5
Ban Industries
8.3
6.2
3.6
Fuel Shift-Ind.(CNG)
6.3
6.2
4.7
5.3
Fuel Shift-Ind.(LSHS)
3.6
4.7
w rt BAU 2012
w rt BAU 2017
Figure 7.32 Percent PM10 emission load reduction due to various individual interventions as compared to the
total pollution load under BAU scenario in the years 2012 & 2017
7.3
Benefits anticipated from prioritized management/control options

"
(
#
/
.
/
(
(
3
/
)
*
-,
(
/
&
(
1 !! &
%&'
% (
1 !!!
&
&
1 !8
1!

#
-, $ 7
$,$ 7
%&'
&
1!
#
&
$7
:,
;+
1 !!
%&'
&
0 , -7
'
&
1 !!!
$:,
%&'
1!8
.
,: 7
"
00 ,
%&'
5=A
0,
7
%&'
7
5=A
:, 47
-,
&
1!
#
&
,$ 7
;+
&
4 , $- 7
'
1 !!
%&'
5=A
1 !!!
-, 47
%&'
&
1!8
- , :- 7
5=A
-,4 7
%&'
(
%
(
(
(
(
((
B
/
+ (
(
.
(
(
(
/
>
(
=
(
(
/
7.4
S.No
1
Sector
Transport
Action plan
Strategy
Strengthening of Public
transport system
Metro
implementation on
schedule
Enhance share of
public mass
transport system
on diesel
Conversion/
enhancement of
public transport to
CNG
Impact*
Ban on old commercial

vehicles (10 year) in the city
High
Transport department - Bangalore
Short-term
By-passing of trucks through

the proposed peripheral ring
road around Bangalore
Progressive improvement of
vehicular emissions norms
(BS-V, BS-VI)
High
Traffic Police, Transport department
Short-term
Low
MoRTH, MoPNG, Ministry of Heavy

Industry and Public Enterprises, MoEF, Oil
companies, Automobile manufacturers
Medium to
Long term
High
Transport department
Medium
Low
BEE, Ministry of Power, Ministry of Heavy

Industry and Public Enterprises, MoRTH,
Automobile manufacturers
Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Heavy
Industry and Public Enterprises,
Medium
in all pre-2010 diesel
vehicles
Introduction of fuel efficiency
standards
Introduction of hybrid
vehicles/ electric vehicles
High
Responsible Agency / agencies

Govt of India, State Government, BMRCL
(Bangalore Metro rail Corporation Ltd.),
Transport Department- Bangalore, BMTC
(Bangalore Metropolitan Transport
Corporation), GAIL
Time frame
Medium term
Remarks
Leveraging the JNNURM funding mechanism for public transportation
improvement
Public-private partnership models to be explored
The metro network needs to be progressively expanded.
Bangalore currently does not have a CNG network. There are plans to set up
such a network in future. ULSD would also be available by April 2010 in
Bangalore.
Low medium
Short-Medium
Retro-fitted 2-stroke three wheelers on LPG in Bangalore have higher PM

emissions compared to OE 2-stroke/ 4-stroke LPG/Petrol. Thus retro-fitment
of 2-stroke 3-wheelers is not an effective control option.
Fiscal incentives/ subsidies for new vehicle buyers
A plan should be devised for gradual phase out with due advance notice.
Careful evaluation of socio-economic impact of banning required.
In the long run, a ban/ higher tax on private vehicles (> 15 years) could be
looked into.
Has high potential in reducing the pollutant load in the city
Auto-fuel road map should be developed well in advance to plan the
progressive improvement of emissions norms and corresponding fuel quality
norms.
Though the impact is low, its potential is high in the long term when gradually
fleet renewal takes place.
Technical feasibility and implementation plan of this strategy needs to be
carefully evaluated, though it has potential for emission load reduction. Retrofitment of DOC in BS-II buses and DPF in BS-III buses is technically feasible.
Impact is low since it is applied only to new vehicles registered after 2012.
However, its potential is high in the long term when gradually fleet renewal
takes place.
Appropriate fiscal incentives need to provided; Electric vehicles would be
especially effective in high pollution zones. Impact determined by the extent
Road dust
Industries

vehicles
Alternative fuels such as
ethanol, bio-diesel
Reduction in private vehicle
usage/ ownership
Medium
Low
Improve traffic flow
Medium
Fuel adulteration
n.a
-Construction of better
quality roads
-Regular maintenance and
cleaning/sweeping of roads
-Reduction in
vehicular fleet
and trips
Wall to wall paving for
reduction of road dust
n.a
Automobile manufacturers, State

government,
Transport Department, Traffic police
MNRE, MoRD, MoPNG, MoA, Oil
companies,
Min. of Finance, State Government
NGOs
General public
Traffic police, Bangalore Development
Authority (BDA), Bruhat Bengaluru
Govt. of India, Oil companies, Food and
civil supplies department- Bangalore
(BBMP), NHAI
of switchover to hybrid/ electric vehicles.

Short to
Medium
Short Mediumterm
Initial focus could be on commercial vehicles; Capacity development in terms

of infrastructure for fully computerized testing/certification and training of
personnel. Linkage of all PUC centres for better data capture.
There are operational issues regarding availability and pricing that need to be
sorted.
A pre-requisite for curbing the growth of private vehicles is the provision of an
effective mass based transport system. Strategies such as costlier parking,
higher excise duties/sales tax on private vehicles, car pooling would be
helpful.
Synchronization of signals, one way roads, flyovers, widening of roads,
removal of encroachments, staggering of office timings to reduce peak flow
and congestion. Application of IT tools for traffic management (Intelligent
transport system)
Re-assess subsidy on kerosene, strict vigilance and surveillance actions,
better infrastructure in terms of testing laboratories
Effective enforcement of road quality norms is required. Landscaping/
greening of areas adjacent to roads
ongoing
Medium term
Short
Short
High

(BBMP)
Short term
Interlocking tiles may be used so that water percolation takes place.
Fuel shift towards cleaner

fuels
High
Short-Medium
term
Shift from solid fuels to liquid fuels (LSHS) and subsequently to gaseous fuels
(CNG)

industry in city limits
High
KSPCB, Directorate of Industries and

Commerce, Industry associations, GAIL,
Oil companies
KSPCB, Department of Forest, Ecology
and Environment, Department of
Industries and Commerce, Karnataka
Industrial Area Development Board
KSPCB, Industry associations,
Short term
Industrial estates/zones may be developed well outside the city
Short term
This would ensure greater compliance with standards. In addition, cleaner

technology options need to be promoted and appropriate incentives to be
defined. Voluntary measures such as ISO certifications to be encouraged.
Strengthening of
enforcement
mechanism for
pollution control
n.a
Power/ DG
sets
Construction
Other
sectors
No power cuts leading to

zero usage of DG sets
in DG sets
large DG sets
Better enforcement of
construction guidelines
(which should reflect Green
Building concepts)
Integrated land-use
development of Bangalore
taking environmental factors
into consideration
Open burning/ Waste
burning to be discouraged
Domestic sector biomass
burning to be reduced
Virtual mobility- using ICT
information and
communication technology
Strengthening of air quality
monitoring mechanism in
terms of number of stations
as well as pollutants
monitored. Capacity building
of KSPCB staff.
Environmental education
and awareness activities
High
Medium term
Adequate tie-ups need to be ensured
High
Bangalore Electricity Supply Company,

Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd.
KSPCB, DG set manufacturers
Medium
Technical feasibility and implementation plan of this strategy needs to be

carefully evaluated, though it has potential for emission load reduction
Medium
KSPCB, Chief Electrical inspectorate
Short to
Medium
High
KSPCB, SEAC (State expert appraisal

committee), Bruhat Bengaluru
Short term
n.a.
Bangalore Metropolitan Region

Development Authority, Bangalore
Development Authority, Bruhat Bengaluru
Mahanagara Palike (BBMP)
(BBMP), KSPCB
Food and civil supplies department, Oil
companies
Department of Information Technology&
Biotechnology, Government of Karnataka;
Medium term
Holistic development of the entire region including peripheral areas.
Short term
Organic matter could be used for compost formation and methane gas
generation
Rural areas should be encouraged to shift to cleaner fuels
n.a
Low
n.a
Medium
Short-Medium
term
Reduced number of trips.
n.a
KSPCB
Short
Good quality data is an important input in assessing the change in air quality
and the impact of policy interventions. Continuous monitoring stations to be
promoted.
n.a
Education department, Schools/Colleges,

CBOs, NGOs
Short
Also, sensitization programmes for policy makers.
* Impact is determined in terms of percent reduction in total emission load for PM10 for the study period upto 2017 subject to the assumptions listed in chapter 6 (High impact > 5% reduction; medium impact 1-5%
reduction; low impact < 1% reduction; n.a = not quantified or not quantifiable). Time frame: Short (upto 2012), Medium (2012-2017)
Bibliography
!"
$
"
!!
&
!
"
# '#
!
!!
)
!
#$
%
#
&'
(& )(!*+(,( (,- & (,.

/0.
!
#$
!!
2
+
,# (
. '# (/
0" 3
!
!
!!
+ 2
!
3
# (
#
)
-"+
.
+..'/) 0
1 %
12
#$
#
!
#$
! 4 $ !5 3 6 7
5
#
(
8
08
: 18
:8
:
3)8
/09
8
///
4
56 "!
&
"4
7#
#$
" 5! 2
"06
b
)#;
4 (
)$
2
#
$
$
#,,&
8
4
#
" 5552
#
,
)
"
,
&
4
-1 8
!!
- 10!
,
<
'
9
;
;"
=
*
>
1
21
8
8
,,
8
:1 :
;"
=
9
4
>
1
,
(
21
8
8
+ 6
.
$
(
!
)# # : *
4
#
"
%2=
9>2//1 8
*
4
" ./
.# #
'!!8
//8
4 #
'
'!!
4 #
21%
.#
; " 56
#
' '
55 7
!
# 7
("
#$
#
!
#$
8
'
<!
7
!
;, (
#
#$
#!
;,(
4
<
8
//:
#
,#
.7- "
"<
;,( 8
//:
= >?#
:
/
3 % @
;
,
(
#!
"
#
#
)#
4
*8)43@
8 7.2-!- $25!2
#!
c
;,(
?
:
9 #
/
?
:
)
&
;
;,(
4
)
2)
4
#
4#
7
."
7
$(+
A
(
7 ;"+ 00
(
%
. 7 #
".7- "
# )#
"
3
7
,
(
/
)
;
"
"4
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch13/index.html
;,(
4
?
;, (
5 67
4/$6
'
#!
!@ 8
/2
# $A 6-3
53&8
//%
.
)#
7 #
. #
,#
*
(
5
&
"
. "B
#
#
"
'
A
(
Annexure I Emission Factors for Area source
S. No. (as
per list
given by
CPCB)
1
Source/Activity
Common Emission Factor
Reference/Remarks
Fuel Oil Combustion
TSP = {9.19(S) + 3.22} * 0.120

SO2 = 18.84S
NOx = 6.6
CO = 0.6
CH4 = 0.0336
TOC = 0.1248
NMTOC = 0.091
TSP May Be Considered As PM10.
Natural Gas Combustion
Liquified Petroleum Gas

Combustion
(Unit: Kg/103 L)
TSP = 121.6
SO2 = 9.6
NOx = 1600
CO = 1344
CO2 =1,920,000
CH4 = 36.8
VOC =88
TOC = 176
NMTOC = 0.091
(Unit: Kg/106 m3)
PM= 2.1
SO2 = 0.4
(Unit: Gm/Kg)
NOx = 1.8
CO = 0.252
CO2 =1716
CH4 = 0.024
VOC =88
TOC = 0.072
NMTOC = 0.091
TOC Is Total Organic Compound Including VOC.

EPA-42: Table 1.3 1 And Table 1.3 3; S Sulphur Content In Fuel (For 1%
Sulphur S=1); Gm/Lit Oil, Fuel Oil Combustion, Normal Firing.

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch01/Final/C01s04.Pdf
Reddy And Venkatraman

Http://Www.Epa.Gov/Ttn/Chief/Ap42/Ch01/Final/C01s05.Pdf
(Commercial Boilers)
we have used 3.6 Kg/T for NOx and 0.504 Kg/T for CO
S. No. (as
per list
given by
CPCB)
Source/Activity
Reference/Remarks
Kerosene
Domestic
(Unit: Kg/106 M3)

PM=1.95
SO2=4
PM & SO2 Reddy And Venkatraman
Combustion
(Unit: G/Lit)
TSP=0.61
CO=62
NOx=2.5
CH4=1
TNMOC=19

USEPA 2000
(Unit: G/Kg)
8
Coal Combustion Boilers
Chulha (Dung, Wood)
Stoker Fired Boilers

CO=0.3
CO2=2840
Sox=19.5S
Nox=4.5
PM= 5.0
FBC Boilers
CO=0.3
CO2=ND
Sox=1.45
Nox=0.9
PM=
Pulverized Coal Boilers
Sox=19.5S
Nox=9.0
PM=
(Unit: Kg/Mg)
PM=6.3
PM10=5.04
SO2= 0.48
(Unit: G/Kg)
TSP=1.9
CO=31
NOx=1.4
S= Weight Percent Sulphur.

AP-42 1.2-1,2,3
Use suitable EF pertinent to the city & 2x2 grid
Alternative PM E.F. = 0.8A where A is ash content of fuel, weight %
Reddy And Venkatraman - (PM10, SO2, PM)

USEPA 2000
S. No. (as
per list
given by
CPCB)
Source/Activity
Reference/Remarks
TNMOC=29.8
CH4=3
14
15
18
Kerosene
Generators
Domestic
Diesel
Industrial
Generators
Large
Stationary Diesel And All
Stationary Dual - Fuel
Engines(Film Shooting)
Secondary Metal Smelting

(Lead)
And
Other
Operations (Foundries)
(Unit: G/Kg)
Apply same EF as for item no. 6: domestic Kerosene combustions
PM10 = 1.33 E-03
CO2= 0.69
CO=4.06 E-03
Sox= 1.24 E-03
NOx=0.0188
Aldehydes= 2.81 E-04
TOC
Exhaust = 1.50 E-03
Evaporative =0
Crankcase = 2.68 E-03
Refueling =0
(Unit: Kg/Kw-Hr)
Lead
Sweating
PM=16-35
Pb=4-8
SO2=ND
Reverberatory Smelting
PM=162
Pb=32
SO2=40
Blast Smelting Cupola
PM=153
Pb=52
SO2=27
Kettle Refining
PM=0.02
Pb=0.006
SO2=ND
Kettle Oxidation
PM=< 20
Pb=ND
SO2=ND
AP-42 (Table 3.3-1) EF For Uncontrolled Gasoline & Diesel Industrial Engines.
AP-42 12.11 For Lead; 12.13 For Steel Foundries; 12.4 For Zinc
S. No. (as
per list
given by
CPCB)
Source/Activity
Casting
PM=0.02
Pb=0.007
SO2=ND
(Unit: Kg/Mg)
Steel Foundries
Melting
Electric Arc
TSP=6.5 (2 To 20)
Nox=0.1
PM10=ND
Open Hearth
TSP =5.5 (1 To 10)
Nox=0.005
PM10=ND
Open Hearth Oxygen Lanced
TSP =5.5 (1 To 10)
Nox=0.005
PM10=ND
Electric Induction
TSP =0.05
Nox=ND
PM10=0.045
Sand Grinding/Handling In Mold And Core Making
TSP =ND
Nox=NA
PM10=0.27 3.0
Core Ovens
TSP =ND
Nox=ND
PM10=1.11 0.45
Pouring And Casting
TSP =ND
Nox=NA
PM10=1.4
Casting Cleaning
TSP =ND
Nox=NA
PM10=0.85
Reference/Remarks
S. No. (as
per list
given by
CPCB)
Source/Activity
Charge Handling
TSP =ND
Nox=NA
PM10=0.18
Casting Cooling
TSP =ND
Nox=NA
PM10=0.7
(Unit: Kg/Mg)
Zinc
Reverberatory Sweating
Clean Metallic Scrap
PM= Neglliible
General Metallic Scrap
PM=6.5
Residual Scrap
PM=16
(Unit: Mg/Mg Of Feed)
Rotary Sweating
PM=5.5-12.5
Muffle Seating
PM=5.4-16
Kettle Sweating
Clean Metallic Scrap
PM= Negligible
General Metallic Scrap
PM=5.5
Residual Scrap
PM=12.5
Electric Resistance Sweating
PM=<5
Sodium Carbonate Leaching Calcining
PM=44.5
(Unit: Kg/Mg Of Zinc Used)
Kettle Pot
Reference/Remarks
S. No. (as
per list
given by
CPCB)
Source/Activity
Reference/Remarks
PM=0.05
(Unit: Mg/Mg)
Crucible Melting
PM=ND
Reverberatory Melting
PM=ND
Electric Induction Melting
PM=ND
Alloying
PM=ND
Retort And Muffle Distillation
Pouring
PM=0.2 0.4
Casting
PM=0.1-0.2
Muffle Distillation
PM=22.5
(Unit: Kg/Mg Of Product)
Graphite Rod Distillation
PM-Neg
Retort Distillation/Oxidation
PM=10-20
Muffle Distillation/Oxidation
PM=10-20
Retort Reduction
PM=23.5
Galvanizing
PM=2.5
(Unit: Kg/Mg Of Zinc Used)
19
Cast Iron Furnace
Cupola
Uncontrolled
PM=6.9
Electric Arc Furnace
Uncontrolled
AP-42 (Table 12.10-2)

S. No. (as
per list
given by
CPCB)
Source/Activity
21
Wood
Residue
Combustion In Boilers /
Bakeries
25
Cupolla Cast Iron
27
Manufacture Of Rubber
Products / Plastics Small
Scale
30
Glass Manufacturing
31
Lead Oxide And Pigment

Production
Reference/Remarks
PM=6.3
(Unit: Kg Of Pollutant/Mg Of Grey Iron Produced)
PM10=17.3
CO=126.3
Sox=0.2
Nox=1.3
CO2=1700
Total VOC=114.5
(Unit: Kg /Mg)
TSP=6.9
SO2=0.6S
Nox=NA
CO=73
VOC=NA
Pb=0.32
(Unit: Kg /Tons)
PM=17.5
Gases=8.5
(Unit: Kg /Mg)
TSP=0.7
SO2=1.7
NOX=3.1
CO=0.1
VOC=0.1
(Unit: Kg /Ton)
TSP=7
SO2=NA
NOX= NA
CO= NA
VOC= NA
Pb=7
(Unit: Kg /Ton)
AP42 (Sec. 1.9, Pp. 1.10.4, Table 1.9.1)

WHO 1993, Rapid Techniques In Environmental Pollution Part 1 By Alexander

P. Economopoulos
AP-42 (Table 6.6.1-1)

P. Economopoulos

P. Economopoulos
S. No. (as
per list
given by
CPCB)
32
Source/Activity
Reference/Remarks
Construction (Building)
TSP=1.2
For Details Refer AP-42 Section 13.2.3.3

Use suitable EF pertinent to the city & 2x2 grid depending upon construction
activity
(Unit: Tons/Acre/ Month Of Activity)

33
Construction Roads (A)

Aggregate Laying And (B)
Asphalt
TSP=1.2

activity
34
Construction Of Flyovers
TSP=1.2
37
Paved Roads

Refer Section 13.2.1.3 Of AP-42

activity
AP 42 (13.2.1.3)
Given equation has to be used and respective parameters shall vary for each
city and/or grid
Appendix I : Climatological Data for

Bangalore (IMD)

TERI Bangalore Air Quality Study

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

TERI Bangalore Air Quality Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

February 2010

Air quality assessment, emission inventory and

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., R&D Centre, Faridabad

Project Report No.2004EE28

The Energy and Resources Institute

Suggested format for citation

For more information

T E R I Report No. 2004EE28

T E R I Report No. 2004EE28

About Bangalore sources of air pollution

Approach to the study

Figure 1 Overall approach for the source apportionment study

iii Executive summary

Air quality status

T E R I Report No. 2004 EE 28

Figure 4 Average concentration of gaseous pollutants during three seasons

T E R I Report No. 2004 EE 28

T E R I Report No. 2004 EE 28

Figure 5 Percentage share of different sources in total PM10 emission loads

Figure 6 Percentage share of different sources in total NOX emission loads

Receptor modelling and source apportionment

T E R I Report No. 2004 EE 28

vii Executive summary

Motor vehicle exhaust, secondary particulate matter, construction activities, natural

soil, road dust

Road dust, coal combustion, vegetative burning, secondary particle formation,

vehicle exhaust, incinerator combustion

secondary particle formation

T E R I Report No. 2004 EE 28

viii Executive summary

Dispersion modelling : existing scenario

T E R I Report No. 2004 EE 28

Existing Scenario: PM10 and NOX

8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000

T E R I Report No. 2004 EE 28

8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000

Emission control options and analysis

BAU - Business as usual scenario

T E R I Report No. 2004 EE 28

Population growth rate of 3.1% as listed in Master

Vehicle-wise growth rates were calculated using the

5.85% as depicted in Industrial development plan

Based on population growth rates for domestic sets

Based on population growth rates

Based on increase in VKT ( from transport sector)

Based on population growth rates

T E R I Report No. 2004 EE 28

0.1 0.1 0.2

1.8 2.1 2.4

PM10 Emission Load (T/d)

0.0 0.0 0.0

0.2 0.2 0.3

2.7 3.2 3.7

0.0 0.0 0.0

Nox Emission Load (T/d)

xii Executive summary

Dispersion modelling - BAU Scenarios 2012 and 2017

PM10 Conc (g/m 3)

T E R I Report No. 2004 EE 28

xiii Executive summary

8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000

8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 20000 22000 24000

T E R I Report No. 2004 EE 28

xiv Executive summary