Evaluation of the impact of dust suppressant application on ambient PM10 concentrations in London

Environmental
Research Group
Evaluation of the impact of dust suppressant

application on ambient PM10 concentrations in
London
King’s College London, Environmental Research Group
Prepared for Transport for London under contract to URS Infrastructure & Environment Ltd
Ben Barratt, David Carslaw, Gary Fuller, David Green and Anja Tremper
November 2012
Title Evaluation of the impact of dust suppressant application on ambient PM10
concentrations in London
Customer Transport for London

Customer Ref 49306764
File Reference \\vogue\erg\airquali\TfLProjects\CMA\EvaluationReport

Report Number
Environmental Research Group

King’s College London
th
4 Floor
Franklin Wilkins Building
150 Stamford Street
London SE1 9NH
Tel: 020 7848 4044
Fax: 020 7848 4045
Name Signature Date

Lead Author Ben Barratt Nov 2012
Reviewed by Gary Fuller (King’s), David Deakin (URS Nov 2012
I&E)
Approved by Gary Fuller Nov 2012
King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 2

Summary
This document provides a non-technical summary of King’s College London’s evaluation of the
impact of Calcium Magnesium Acetate (CMA) dust suppressant application on ambient PM10
concentrations across London during Phases 1 and 2 of TfL’s Cleaning and Dust Suppressants
(CADS) programme.
Phase 1 commenced on 9th December 2010 and concluded on 27th May 2011 encompassing two
road corridors in PM10 priority hotspots. Phase 2 included a greater number of road corridors
where there was evidence of high PM10 levels and public exposure. Phase 2 commenced on 29th
September 2011 and ended in April 2012, although some limited application was on-going at the
time of the analysis.
The use of CMA was also trialled during Phase 2 at four industrial sites known to produce
unusually high levels of PM10. Previous studies around these industrial sites have shown that this
excessive PM10 is emitted both from within the industrial yard and from roads surrounding the
site. In order to address each of these sources, CMA was sprayed onto the surrounding roads,
using the same vehicles as the road corridors, and manually from backpack sprayers within the
yard by the industrial operators. Monitoring adjacent to these industrial sites has historically
recorded amongst the highest PM10 concentrations in London.
PM10 comprises of a mix of substances from a range of sources, both natural and anthropogenic. A
varying proportion of the total PM10 mass measured at roadside locations within London arises
from the adjacent road and the vehicle movements upon it. Similarly, not all of the PM10 emitted
by a vehicle will be from its exhaust; particles can also be emitted through mechanical wear of
tyres and brakes, physical wear of the road surface and resuspension of dust caused by the
vehicle’s passage and wind.
Around the industrial sites, emissions from within the process yard can be caused by activities
such as waste handling or the suspension of dry standing materials by the wind. Emissions from
the surrounding roads are typically caused by vehicle tracking particulate matter out from the site
entrance onto the public road, and subsequently resuspended by vehicles on that road.
There is evidence of on-road CMA application being used successfully in other European countries
to reduce ambient PM10 concentrations. A major European project (EU Life Project ‘CMA+’)
investigated its use in high altitude areas of central Europe, where long periods of calm, dry
weather during the autumn and winter can lead to exceptionally high levels of resuspended PM10.
There is, however, little research into of the impact of CMA application in large urban areas such
as London.
Previous studies have shown that the majority of resuspended particulate matter is in the coarse
fraction of PM10 (between 2.5 µg and 10 µg in diameter). In London, the proportion of total PM10
mass in this coarse fraction varies according to weather conditions and the local sources of
pollution.
Establishing cause and effect of a pollution control measure such as the CMA application can be
extremely challenging due to the wide range of influences on pollutant concentrations. In order to
address these issues, a series of complementary analysis methods were used comparing measured
concentrations of PM10 and other relevant metrics on days when CMA was applied to days when
no CMA was applied either before or during the trial.

Figure 1: Location of the study sites in relation to the CMA application road corridors (blue lines)
These analyses were carried out at nine contrasting site locations on the CMA corridors where
pollution monitoring data were available (Figure 1). Each site had its own distinct geographical and
emissions characteristics, allowing an assessment of the impact of CMA in differing situations and
CMA application rates. In two of these locations, historical datasets were available during Phase 1
CMA application; at the remaining three sites evaluation was limited to Phase 2 application.
Due to its complexity, this study required large diverse measurement datasets incorporating a
range of air pollutants, meteorological, traffic and road surface metrics. In all, over 2.5 million
unique measurements were analysed. The principal source of pollution measurements was the
London Air Quality Network (LAQN – www.londonair.org.uk). All equipment was operated to
defined quality standards. All measurements were ratified to defined quality standards. As
reference equivalent monitoring equipment was used for PM10 measurements, results were
directly applicable to EU Limit Value exceedence calculations.
Before carrying out any of the analyses used in this study, the ‘local component’ of pollutant
measurements was calculated to remove the influence of regional or transboundary pollution
sources. This process is particularly important when studying changes in PM10 concentrations due
to the strong influence of particulate matter transported from the European Continent and
beyond.
Four analysis techniques were used – NOX tracer analysis, meteorological normalisation, diurnal
characterisation and chemical mass closure. Each technique has previously been used to
characterise particulate matter in London and full methodologies are available in published
literature. By using more than one independent methodology, results could be cross checked
against each other to form more robust conclusions.
A summary of results indicating findings relating to changes in local PM10 concentrations during
the CMA application trial periods is shown in Table 1. PM2.5 measurements were also evaluated,
but no CMA effect was identified, as expected from previous published studies.

Site name Site description Results PM10 ‘residual’*
Neasden Lane, Large mixed industrial site Limited analysis possible due to small number of application days and mixed 13 µg m-3
Brent on-site applications. Tentative 22% reduction in local PM10 compared to non
CMA days following on-site application.
Horn Lane, Acton Medium industrial site On-road application: 18% reduction in local PM10 compared to non CMA days. 8 µg m-3
On-site application: 36% reduction in local PM10 compared to non CMA days.
Manor Road, Erith Medium industrial site On-site application: mean 41% reduction in local PM10 compared to non CMA 8 µg m-3
days. On-road application: analysis not possible.
A2 Blackheath Road corridor impacted by 44% reduction in local PM10 compared to pre-trial period, equating to a 6 µg m-3
emissions from construction decrease in annual mean of c. 12%. No effect compared to non CMA days.
site opposite.
A3211 Upper Congested road corridor Daily CMA application >10 mg m-2 only: 38% reduction in local PM10 compared n.a.**
Thames Street beneath a wide bridge. to non CMA days, equating to a decrease in annual mean of c. 16%. No effect
at 10 mg m-2 application rate.
Mercury Way, Small industrial site. No robust results due to limited monitoring and few on-site application days. n.a.**
Lewisham
A501 Marylebone Heavily trafficked road The analyses could not identify any significant effect. 1 µg m-3
Road corridor in a street canyon.
A2 New Cross Single lane road corridor. The analyses could not identify any significant effect. -1 µg m-3
A12 Blackwall Heavily trafficked road The analyses could not identify any significant effect. -1 µg m-3
corridor in an open location,
partial application.
Table 1: Summary of study findings
* The residual shows the deviation from the LAQN linear fit line shown in Figure 4, which indicates the ‘expected’ concentration of PM10 relative to the concentration of NOX,
principally related to vehicle emissions. ** NOX was not monitored at these sites, so a residual calculation was not possible.

Evaluation of the impact of dust suppressant application
Five of the nine study sites showed a beneficial effect from CMA application due to specific local
conditions. No robust evidence was found for a benefit of CMA application at three study sites:
A501 Marylebone Road, A2 New Cross and A12 Blackwall.
Of the road corridor sites, the strongest evidence of a positive effect was found at the A3211
Upper Thames Street study site, located under a bridge. This effect was only seen at application
rates greater than 10 mg m-2, i.e., two or three applications per day (Figure 2). The estimated
impact on local PM10 concentrations was a decrease of approximately 38% ± 11%. This equates to
an average reduction in total PM10 of approximately 16%, based on mean concentrations during
the study period. Given evidence that this decrease was achieved on higher intensity application
days, 11 exceedences of the EU Limit Value concentration for PM10 may have been avoided. Had
CMA been applied along Upper Thames Street at high intensity every day of 2011, the number of
exceedences recorded may have decreased from 53 to 30 days. It should be stressed that this
potential change in exceedence days is only applicable to the unusual location of the study site
under the bridge; normal patterns of windblown dispersion of PM10 and the action of rain to wash
off material deposited on the road will be different to other locations. The result is not applicable
to the whole of the A3211 Victoria Embankment, Upper Thames Street and Tower Hill corridor.
Furthermore, the arrangement of the monitoring was not optimal for the assessment of the
impacts of CMA.
Figure 2: NOX tracer analysis results at the Upper Thames Street study site showing contrasting results
during Phase 1 and Phase 2.
At the A2 Blackheath site local PM10 concentrations were 44% ± 7% lower than expected in
comparison with pre-trial concentrations, equating to a decrease in total PM10 mass of
approximately 12%. This decrease was timed closely with the commencement of the trial and was
sustained through to the end of the analysis period. There was no significant difference in the
magnitude of reduction between CMA and non CMA days, despite application being suspended for
a period of 24 days mid-way through the trial.
Photographic evidence indicated that the construction of a block of flats was underway before and
during the trial. It is likely that the completion of the construction phase of these building works
was responsible for a proportion of the reduction in local PM10 concentrations, but the analysis
was not able to separate the effect of CMA application from changes in construction activity.

At the Marylebone Road study site, a range of independent analyses were carried out. Chemical
speciation analysis indicated that only a small proportion of the total PM10 was due to the mineral
component (5%). It also suggested that metal particulate associated with crustal matter, and
therefore good tracers for resuspended particulate, can be blown along the street canyon from
other locations. Therefore, even if road cleaning and CMA application on the road surface were
100% effective, resuspended particulate would still be present blown from surfaces other than the
treated road.
At New Cross a lack of clear signal reflects the small proportion of PM10 recorded at the site that is
likely to be related to resuspension and therefore susceptible to removal by CMA. Only one lane in
each direction was treated with CMA at the A12 Blackwall site. This, combined with the study
site’s position in an open location makes it likely that resuspended particulate matter from sources
other than these two road surfaces were dominant.
It is therefore unlikely that CMA application prevented any exceedences of the EU Limit Value
concentration (daily mean > 50 µg m-3) for PM10 at these three locations (A501 Marylebone Road,
A2 New Cross and A12 Blackwall) during either phase of the trial period. It is also unlikely that
continued application of CMA along these corridors would result in the prevention any future
exceedences.
Of the four industrial study sites, the analysis identified beneficial impacts of CMA application on
the roads adjacent to the monitoring sites and/or on the process yard at three sites. At the fourth,
Mercury Way, no robust analysis was possible due to limited measurements and CMA
applications.
The most robust findings were at Horn Lane. A clear drop in local PM10 concentrations occurred in
the hour following on-site CMA application of between 31% and 59% relative to the control (Figure
3). A lesser decrease was associated with the on-road applications. Analysis at Manor Road was
restricted due to a lack of pre-trial period, but a similar decrease in local PM10 (41%) was
associated with on-site CMA application. The complexity the industrial area surrounding the
Neasden Lane study site made robust analysis difficult, but some limited benefit of CMA
application was identified.
18th Pre 18th Post 6th Pre 6th Post 7th Pre 7th Post No CMA
100
90
Mean 'local' PM10 concentration / ug m-3
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Hour (local time)
Figure 3: Diurnal variation in 'local' PM10 at Horn Lane, with days CMA applied on-site split between pre-
and post-application, showing an immediate drop in concentrations following application.
It can therefore be concluded that CMA could have an on-going role in reducing ambient PM10
concentrations in London in specific circumstances where levels of resuspended PM10 are
unusually high. Figure 25 presents a method by which such circumstances may be identified. It

shows the relationship between annual mean PM10 and NOX concentrations across all sites in the
London Air Quality Network. The linear fit line indicates the ‘expected’ concentration of PM10
relative to the concentration of NOX, principally related to vehicle emissions. A positive deviation
above this line indicates the presence of a local non-exhaust related source of PM10, which can
often be related to resuspended particulate emissions, such as those from industrial waste
processing sites.
60
50
(Bondway Interchange)
Marylebone Road
40 Neasden Lane
Annual Mean PM10 / ug m-3
Horn Lane
A2, Blackheath
Manor Road
30
A12, Blackwall
20 A2, New Cross
10
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Annual Mean NOX / ug m-3
Figure 4: Relationship between annual mean NOX and PM10 across the LAQN in 2011.
The linear fit line was calculated using reduced major axis (RMA) regression. CMA study sites are
highlighted in red.
The results in Table 1 are sorted according to this ‘residual’ PM10 concentration, i.e., the distance
above the linear fit. At those sites where a beneficial effect of CMA application was found, PM10
levels were higher than expected. Investigation has shown that in each case this could be
attributed to unusually high levels of dust attributed to resuspension. The PM10 increment at the
remaining site well above the line, Bondway Interchange, has previously been demonstrated to be
due to very local emissions from an adjacent London Underground vent. This issue was resolved
mid-way through 2011 with the partial screening of the vent.
This study provided evidence of a beneficial effect of CMA application on roads and industrial
sites. It highlighted that CMA application is most effective in locations with unusually high local
levels of PM10 most likely due to resuspension and that application had no identifiable effect in
more typical roadside locations, even where total PM10 levels are elevated. A straightforward
method for identifying locations where CMA application is likely to be most beneficial is
presented, without the need for full chemical characterisation. This residual PM10 approach is an
area of further work which could be developed to understand which types of locations deviate
from expected NOX to PM10 ratios, and so may benefit from dust suppressant application.
Continuing application of CMA on and around the industrial study sites is likely to have the
greatest impact on PM10 concentrations. At sites with a complex combination of dust generating
processes, detailed studies should be carried out by local permitting agencies to identify sources in

the area. CMA application is likely to be most beneficial when it is applied frequently and across as
wide an area as possible. The findings at the industrial sites support the implementation of dust
suppressant application at other locations with potentially high levels of PM10 attributed to
resuspension, such as construction sites.
Based on the findings of this study and associated activities, TfL and the GLA should consider the
following recommendations:
• The use of on-site CMA application using backpack sprayers should continue at the
industrial sites included in this study.
• At these industrial sites, CMA should be applied regularly on dry days across as wide an
area as possible.
• Consideration should be given to expanding on-site CMA application to include other
industrial sites shown to generate large quantities of dust.
• For constriction sites, the use of CMA should be considered on haulage routes on and off
site during the demolition and construction phases of large developments. This might
usefully be included in the Mayor of London’s Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘The
control of dust and emissions from construction and demolition’.
• It may benefit local air quality for major road works within Congestion Management Areas,
as defined in TfL’s Lane Rental Scheme, to apply CMA in the vicinity of the works at least
once per day of dust generating activity.
• PM10 and NOX monitoring results should be analysed at regular intervals to identify
locations where PM10 concentrations are exceptionally high in relation to NOX
concentrations. Any such locations should then undergo inspections and, where it is
considered likely that the cause is resuspended dust, a programme of CMA application
instigated.

Acronyms
ATC Automatic Traffic Counter
AQS UK Air Quality Strategy
AURN Automatic Urban Network
CADS Cleaning and Dust Suppressant [programme]
CAF Clean Air Fund
CMA Calcium Magnesium Acetate (dust suppressant)
Defra Department for the Environment, Rood and Rural Affairs
DfT Department for Transport
ERG Environmental Research Group
EU European Union
FDMS Filter Dynamic Measurement System
GAM Generalised Additive Model
HGV Heavy Goods Vehicle
LAQN London Air Quality Network
NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide
NOX Oxides of Nitrogen
PM Particulate Matter
PM10 Particulate Matter with an approximate diameter of 10 µm
PM2.5 Particulate Matter with an approximate diameter of 2.5 µm
PMC Coarse particulate matter (PM10 – PM2.5)
QA/QC Quality Assurance / Quality Control
TEOM Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance
TfL Transport for London
VCM Volatile Correction Model
WTS Waste Transfer Station

Glossary
Airborne particulate
Particles suspended in the atmosphere. These particles may have a range of physical and chemical
properties. The smaller the particle size, the longer it is likely to remain suspended in the
atmosphere.
Application rate
The amount of CMA solution sprayed onto the road surface in milligrammes per square metre in
one application.
CMA days
Days during which CMA was applied during the trial period. If CMA was applied after 9pm, the
following day was marked as a CMA day.
Dust
Another term for airborne particulate, usually applied to inert compounds such as elemental
carbon and minerals. Dust can refer to particulate matter of any size. The larger particles (such as
those visible in the air) are generally only airborne for short periods of time and may be too large
to enter the human body through breathing.
High intensity application rate

A CMA application rate of >10 mg m-2 per day (usually 20 mg m-2). During the trial 10 mg m-2 was
applied per application. A high intensity application rate was achieved by multiple passes of the
spraying vehicle, either within the hour or during the afternoon of the same day.
Industrial [study] site

A study location in close proximity to one or more industrial processes that generate unusually
high levels of airborne particulate matter. The processes typically include aggregates storage,
cement batching and waste transfer stations.
Local component [of PM10]

The concentration of PM10 (or other pollutant) that can be related to emission sources close to the
study site, rather than farther afield.
Non-CMA days
Days during which no CMA was applied within the trial period.
Non-local sources
Sources of pollution emitted some distance from the study site and affecting the whole area. Non-
local sources comprise of a combination of London-wide pollution emissions and transboundary
emissions, which have been transported across the UK from Continental Europe or further afield.
Phase 1
The first CMA pilot study carried out by TfL under the CADS programme, where CMA was applied
along two road corridors in PM10 priority hotspots. Phase 1 commenced on 9th December 2010 and
concluded on 27th May 2011.
Phase 2
The second CMA pilot study funded by the CAF, which included a greater number of locations
where there was evidence of high PM10 levels and public exposure. Phase 2 commenced on 29th
September 2011 and was still underway when this analysis was carried out.

PM10 priority hotspots

Road corridors in central London identified in the Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy as being at greatest
risk of exceeding PM10 daily limit values in 2011.
PM10 residual
A derived PM10 concentration, which indicates the deviation from the ‘expected’ concentration of
PM10 relative to the concentration of NOX, principally related to vehicle emissions in London.
Resuspended PM
Particulate matter that has been emitted elsewhere, settled out of the atmosphere, then
resuspended into the air by disturbances such as wind or vehicle movements. The majority of
resuspended PM10 is in the coarse fraction, i.e., between 2.5 and 10 µg as smaller particles are
more able to disperse into the mixed layer of the atmosphere rather than fall to the ground.
Therefore, the sources of resuspended PM tend to be processes that emit larger particles, such as
construction activity, waste handling and soil movement.
Resuspension tracer
A specific component of PM, such as calcium, that behaves in a similar way to total resuspended
PM. Although such a tracer is only one component of resuspended PM, they could be used to
examine how resuspended PM was affected by meteorology, traffic and CMA application during
the analysis period.
Trial period
The time period during which CMA was applied alongside the study site. The trial period varied
between sites, dependent on when application commenced. The trial cut off date for the purpose
of this study was 8th March 2012, even though application continued until May 2012.
Waste Transfer Station

A single or group of small industrial units that serve as an intermediate sorting station for waste,
primarily from demolition sites, before being taken for reuse, recycling, landfill, incineration.

Contents
1. Background 14
2. Introduction 15
2.1 The CADS programme 15
2.2 The use of dust suppressants to reduce ambient PM10 15
2.3 Analysis overview 16
3. Methods 18
3.1 Input data 18
3.2 Isolation of the ‘local component’ of measured concentrations 20
3.3 Use of ‘non CMA’ control days 20
3.4 NOX tracer analysis (all study sites except Mercury Way) 20
3.5 Meteorological normalisation (all study sites) 21
3.6 Polar plot cluster analysis (industrial sites only) 21
3.7 Diurnal characterisation (all study sites) 22
3.8 Chemical mass closure (Marylebone Road only) 22
3.9 Suspended CMA characterisation (Marylebone Road only) 23
4. Results 24
4.1 A501 Marylebone Road 24
4.2 A3211 Upper Thames Street 27
4.3 A2 Blackheath 28
4.4 A2 New Cross 31
4.5 A12 Blackwall Tunnel Northern Approach 32
4.6 Horn Lane, Acton 33
4.7 Manor Road, Erith 36
4.8 Mercury Way, Lewisham 38
4.9 Neasden Lane, Neasden 40
5. Discussion 44
6. Recommendations 49
7. References 50
Appendix – study site photographs 52

1. Background
Between November 2010 and April 2011 Transport for London (TfL) undertook a trial to assess the
potential benefits that the application of Calcium Magnesium Acetate (CMA) dust suppressant
may have with regards reducing PM10 concentrations along hot spot road corridors (‘Phase 1’). The
creation of the Clean Air Fund (CAF) allowed the implementation of the Cleaning and Dust
Suppressant (CADS) programme, including the application of dust suppressants, to continue during
2011 and 2012 and expand to include additional road corridors, industrial and construction sites
(‘Phase 2’).
TfL commissioned Environmental Research Group at King’s College London (King’s), under
subcontract to URS Infrastructure and Environment Ltd, to carry out a detailed evaluation of the
impact of Phases 1 and 2 of the CADS programme on ambient PM10 concentrations along five hot
spot road corridors and on the perimeter of four industrial sites where CMA was applied. This
document provides the results of this evaluation. Trials for application of CMA at construction sites
are on-going.

2. Introduction
2.1 The CADS programme
The Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy (MAQS) identified a range of local measures to reduce the risk of
exceeding the daily mean EU limit values for PM10 at a number of hotspot locations across London
(GLA, 2010). This included the application of dust suppressants through the CADS programme. The
CAF facilitated the expansion of the CADS programme to include a greater number of locations
where there was evidence of high PM10 levels and public exposure, including additional road
corridors outside of MAQS priority corridor and trials at construction and industrial sites
incorporating waste transfer stations. Trials for application of CMA at construction sites are on-
going.
Phase 1 of the CADS programme commenced on 9th December 2010 and concluded on 27th May
2011 and included two road corridors in PM10 priority hotspots; the first encompassing the A501
Marylebone Road and Euston Road, the second the A3211 Victoria Embankment, Upper Thames
Street and Tower Hill. The start date of Phase 2 varied between road corridors; 29th September
2011 for corridors included in Phase 1, 16th October 2011 for the A2 Old Kent Road, New Cross
Road and Blackheath Road corridor and 14th November for the A102 and A12 Blackwall tunnel
approaches corridor. The analysis cut-off date for the road corridor analysis was 8th March 2012,
although Phase 2 was still underway when the analysis was carried out.
The use of CMA was also trialled during Phase 2 at four industrial sites known to produce excessive
levels of PM10. Previous studies around these industrial sites (Barratt & Fuller, 2008, Fuller &
Baker, 2008, Fuller & Barratt, 2009) have shown that this excessive PM10 is emitted both from
within the industrial yard and from roads surrounding the site. Emissions from within the yard can
be caused by activities such as waste handling or the resuspension of dry standing materials by the
wind. Emissions from the surrounding roads are typically caused by vehicle tracking PM out from
the site entrance onto the public road, and subsequently resuspended by vehicles on that road. In
order to address each of these sources, CMA was sprayed onto the surrounding roads, using the
same vehicles as the road corridors, and manually from backpack sprayers within the yard by the
industrial operators.
The application of commencement of CMA application at the industrial sites also varied,
dependent on site operators.
Further details of the method of application of CMA to road surfaces are contained within the
Phase 1 pilot study report produced by URS for TfL and available at
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/dust-suppressant-results.pdf.
2.2 The use of dust suppressants to reduce ambient PM10
PM10 comprises of a mix of substances from a range of sources, both natural and anthropogenic. A
varying proportion of the total PM10 mass measured at roadside locations within London arises
from the adjacent road and the vehicle movements upon it. This proportion at any point in time
depends on weather conditions and the volume, composition and speed of those vehicles. For
example, easterly winds can transport particulate pollution from industrial and traffic sources on
the European Continent and beyond causing widespread PM10 episodes across the whole of the
south east of the UK, including rural areas.
Similarly, not all of the PM10 emitted by a vehicle will be from its exhaust; particles can also be
emitted through mechanical wear of tyres and brakes, physical wear of the road surface and
resuspension of dust caused by the vehicle’s passage. Particulate matter can also be resuspended
from any surface by wind, independent of vehicle movements. Due to this diverse range of

sources, the reduction of PM10 concentrations within London requires a range of strategies at the
local, city-wide, national and international levels.
The application of Calcium Magnesium Acetate solution was developed to target the resuspended
component of ambient PM10. The solution is sprayed onto a surface, which binds particles that
come into contact with it and prevents them from becoming airborne again when agitated by
wind, tyre action or vehicle turbulence. It has proved most effective when sprayed onto unpaved
roads where resuspension rates are relatively high.
As the majority of resuspended particulate matter is larger than 2.5 µg in diameter (Karanasiou,
2012), the application of CMA is not expected to have any significant impact on PM2.5
concentrations.
CMA has been used as dust suppressant in a number of European towns and cities, particularly
where specific local conditions favour the generation of resuspended PM, such as Scandinavia
(through the use of studded tyres) and Alpine towns (long, dry stagnant winter meteorological
conditions). However, there is very little published literature evaluating the efficacy of CMA in an
urban setting such as London, where large volumes of traffic pass over the treated road surface. A
review of the available literature concerning the use and effectiveness of CMA is contained within
the Phase 1 pilot study report (Deakin and Ren, 2011) and an updated phase 2 literature review
(Deakin, 2012)..
2.3 Analysis overview
Establishing cause and effect of a pollution control measure such as the CMA application can be
extremely challenging due to the wide range of influences on pollutant concentrations. Input data
must be sufficiently robust to produce meaningful results within the bounds of uncertainty and
effective analysis control methods are required to minimise the impact of confounding factors
such as meteorology.
In order to address these issues, a series of complementary analysis methods were used
comparing measured concentrations of PM10 and other relevant metrics on days when CMA was
applied to days when no CMA was applied either before or during the trial. Each method had
advantages and limitations, but taken as a whole the aim was to characterise the impact of CMA
application with cross checks to test the repeatability and robustness of each result.
The analysis was carried out in two phases – road corridor analysis and Industrial site analysis. The
techniques used for each phase were similar, but the trial periods differed according to application
period.
The road corridor analysis was carried out at five contrasting site locations on the CMA corridors
where pollution monitoring data were available. All but one study site (A2, New Cross) reported
elevated levels of PM10 relative to other roadside sites in London. Two sites were in areas with
limited dispersion rates; Marylebone Road in a street canyon and Upper Thames Street beneath a
bridge. At the A12 Blackwall site CMA was applied to only one lane of three in each direction. In
two study locations, historical datasets are available during Phase 1 CMA application, allowing the
analyses to interrogate ‘off-on-off-on’ conditions from 2010 through to 2012. Measurements were
available at two additional locations (Old Kent Road and Cromwell Road), but analyses were not
carried out due to poor data availability during the lead up to the Phase 2 trial period.
While continuous PM10 measurements at hourly resolution were available at all five study sites,
the availability of supporting measurements varied. Therefore, not all analyses were possible at all
sites. Further details of the study sites are included in the next section.

The industrial analysis was carried out at four locations with mixed waste handling activities; Horn
Lane in Acton, Mercury Way in Lewisham, Neasden Lane in Neasden and Manor Way, Erith. As
with the corridor analysis, the monitoring data available for each site varied, but continuous hourly
mean PM10 measurements were available at all four sites.
The locations of the study sites in relation to CMA application road corridors are shown in Figure 5.
The study site codes shown in the figure are referenced in Table 2. Note that the Manor Road
industrial site (BX4) is to the east of the map area.
Figure 5: Location of the study sites in relation to the CMA application road corridors (blue lines).
Study site codes are referenced in Table 2.

3. Methods
Due to its complexity, this study required large diverse measurement datasets incorporating a
range of air pollutants, meteorological, traffic and road surface metrics. In all, over 2 million
unique measurements were analysed. This section describes the measurements used in the study
and outlines how each analysis was carried out.
3.1 Input data
The principal source of pollution measurements was the London Air Quality Network operated by
King’s (LAQN – www.londonair.org.uk). Monitoring was funded by Defra, Transport for London,
the Corporation of London and the London Boroughs of Greenwich, Lewisham, Brent, Ealing and
Bexley. All equipment was operated to defined quality standards. All measurements were ratified
to defined quality standards, except where noted in the results. As reference equivalent
monitoring equipment was used for PM10 measurements, results were directly applicable to EU
Limit Value exceedence calculations.
Five contrasting locations alongside roads where CMA was applied during Phase 2 were studied,
each with reliable continuous measurements of PM10 and NOX. These locations represented a wide
range of physical and vehicular characteristics, allowing an assessment of the impact of CMA in
differing situations. In addition, four industrial locations were studied where PM10 concentrations
were known to be excessive from historical monitoring. Each industrial location included a mix of
waste transfer stations, recycling, cement batching and aggregate storage depots. Site trial types,
locations, application periods, number of application days within the study period and brief
characteristics are shown in Table 2. The table also includes a notional ‘PM rank’ according to
annual mean PM10 recorded during 2011 relative to the whole of the LAQN (70 PM10 monitoring
locations). This rank highlights the fact that CMA application was focussed on locations where
PM10 levels were highest, incorporating five of the top 10 ranked sites. However, mid-range sites
were also included for comparison (LW2 and LW3 were ranked 36th and 44th out of 70
respectively).
Site location photographs are shown in the Appendix to this report. More information, including
precise locations and images of the monitoring sites can be found on the LAQN web site
(www.londonair.org.uk).
In addition, the chemical characterisation analysis utilised daily mean concentrations of 19 metallic
elements analysed in PM10 samples from Marylebone Road. These results were obtained on 350
days between 1st October and 31st May 2011 and again between 1st August 2011 and 1st January
2012. Further details of the laboratory methods used to derive this dataset are available in Green
et al (2009). Additional particle metrics required for the chemical characterisation analysis were
taken from Defra’s PM network (http://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/networks/network-info?view=particle).
At the time of writing PM10 FDMS measurements from Marylebone Road had not been finalised by
the Defra AURN contractors, pending further tests. Therefore Marylebone Road analyses were
undertaken using TEOM PM10 measurements with adjustments to make them reference
equivalent using the volatile correction model (VCM) as per Defra local air quality management
guidance.
Meteorological data were taken from King’s College London’s Micromet monitoring sites in central
London (http://geography.kcl.ac.uk/micromet/index.htm). These sensors were also operated to
defined quality standards. Automatic Traffic Count (ATC) data were obtained from TfL at locations
as close to each study site as possible. Road sensor data were made available by TfL from a Vaisala
‘Icenet’ network sensor (http://www.vaisala.com) close to the Marylebone Road study site
providing information on road surface dryness, temperature and the presence of salt or ice.

o
PM10 LAQN N . on-road
Trial type Site name Application period studied Site characteristics
‘rank’ code application days*
Elevated local PM10, limited 9 Dec 2010 - 27 May 2011 & 136 Within a wide street canyon with six lanes
2 MY1 Marylebone Rd.
dispersion (street canyon) 29 Sep 2011 – 8 Mar 2012 (70 at higher intensity) of slow moving traffic.
14 at higher intensity On the border of an industrial area to the

3 Industrial BT5 Neasden Lane, Neasden 29 Mar 2012 – 10 Aug 2012
+ 19 on site west and north, with housing to the east.
Elevated local PM10, limited 9 Dec 2010 - 27 May 2011 & 150 Beneath a wide bridge with two lanes of
5 CT8 Upper Thames Street
dispersion (below bridge) 29 Sep 2011 – 8 Mar 2012 (48 at higher intensity) traffic and heavy congestion.
A row of shops and housing, with a mixed

6 Industrial EA8 Horn Lane, Acton 10 Dec 2011 - 10 Aug 2012 29 + 6 on site
industrial area to the south west.
Elevated local PM10, typical 53 In a moderately open location on a hill

10 GR7 A2, Blackheath 16 Oct 2011 – 8 Mar 2012
dispersion (25 at higher intensity) with two lanes of traffic.
Mixed industrial area to the north and

12** Industrial BX4 Manor Road, Erith 09 Jan 2012 – 10 Aug 2012 53 + 47 on site
east, with residential housing to the west.
In an open location with six lanes of

Elevated local PM10, partial 39
23 TH4 A12, Blackwall 14 Nov 2011 – 8 Mar 2012 usually fast moving traffic. One lane per
treatment (0 at higher intensity)
direction treated.
Typical local PM10, typical 53 In a semi-canyon location with four lanes

36 LW2 A2, New Cross 16 Oct 2011 – 8 Mar 2012
dispersion (25 at higher intensity) of often congested traffic.
A small industrial area to the west, with

44 Industrial LW3 Mercury Way, Lewisham 11 Oct 2011 – 10 Aug 2012 57 + 8 on site
flats and housing to the east and south.
Table 2: Study site PM10 rank, locations, application periods and characteristics.
*The number of application days used in each analysis may be less than the total number of application days, dependent on the availability of input data and analysis procedure.
**At Manor Road the 2010 annual mean was used for ranking as no mean was available for 2011.

3.2 Isolation of the ‘local component’ of measured concentrations
Before carrying out any of the analyses used in this study, the ‘local component’ of pollutant
measurements was calculated. This method is frequently used to remove the influence of regional or
transboundary pollution sources (Lenschow et al 2001, Barratt, 2009). The resulting ‘local’
concentration can be attributed to emission sources close to the study site. This process is
particularly important when studying changes in PM10 concentrations due to the strong influence of
particulate matter transported from the European Continent and beyond, which can dominate total
PM10 and PM2.5 during many pollution episodes.
The local component was derived by subtracting hourly mean concentrations from the closest
applicable urban background monitoring site from those recorded at the same time from the study
site. The background monitoring site varied dependent on study site location and monitoring
equipment used.
3.3 Use of ‘non CMA’ control days
Each of the analysis methods uses a comparison of results on days where CMA was applied to those
when it was not to evaluate the effectiveness of CMA. Where CMA was applied between 21:00 and
midnight, the following day was labelled as a CMA day. The non CMA control days were initially
extracted from weekdays within the trial period (i.e., after application of CMA had commenced)
when no CMA was applied. A second control period was used, where non CMA days were extracted
from weekdays in the pre trial period. Results using each control method were compared and
discussed in the results.
For the NOX tracer and diurnal analyses, measurements were only included on ‘dry’ days, i.e., days
when no rainfall was recorded. This was to address the potential control bias arising from the fact
that CMA was not applied on days when rainfall was ongoing or forecast.
At the industrial sites, where CMA was applied both manually on site with backpack sprayers, CMA
days were further split into ‘on-road CMA’ and ‘on-site CMA’.
3.4 NOX tracer analysis (all study sites except Mercury Way)
This method utilised the close relationship between local NOX and PM emissions from vehicles and
was first used in London by Fuller et al (2002) to apportion PM10 across a range of site types and by
Fuller et al (2004) to assess the impact of building works on PM10 concentrations. To assess any
impacts of CMA application the NOX tracer method utilises the hypothesis that CMA would be
expected to yield a change in local PM10 emissions but it would not change those of NOX; the
emissions ratio and therefore the ratio of the local NOX:PM10 concentrations would therefore
change.
The approach controls for many influences that can affect analysis of changes due to an intervention
such as CMA application. Both NOX and PM10 emissions from busy roads are subject to the same
local dispersion processes. Changes in fleet emissions may alter the PM10:NOX ratio, but these were
expected to be small in the short timescales of the CMA trial.
The analysis first derived a local NOX to PM10 emissions ratio during a baseline period before CMA
application commenced. This ratio was then calculated during the trial on days when CMA was
applied (‘CMA day’) and no CMA was applied (‘non CMA day’). The ratios were then compared to
assess any impact of CMA application at each site. The PM10:NOX relationship in the baseline period

was also used to create a time series model of predicted local PM10 concentrations. Any significant
over or under prediction of PM10 (model residuals) during the trial period could then be used to
quantify the impact of CMA and the approximate timing of any identifiable change.
The baseline and trial period varied between sites dependent on the timing of CMA application
commencement.
When applied to the industrial sites it was assumed that the local PM10 was comprised of primary
emissions from traffic and a local-other PM10 source from the waste site or the resuspension of
abnormally large quantities of material deposited on the road. The primary PM10 was calculated
from the local NOX concentration assuming this to be a good tracer for primary PM10 based on the
emissions ratio observed at Marylebone Road. The ‘local-other’ PM10 assumed to be equal to the
model residual. This model residual was compared between CMA days and non CMA days to
estimate the impact of application.
Daily variation in the ‘local-other’ component of PM10 at the industrial sites, caused by meteorology
and level of on-site dust generating activity, made identification of a reliable pre-baseline period
difficult. Therefore the NOX tracer analysis result at these sites focussed on comparison of CMA and
non CMA days during the trial period where possible.
3.5 Meteorological normalisation (all study sites)
Meteorology exerts a large influence on concentrations of PM concentrations. In order to address

this confounding effect, King’s developed a method of ‘meteorological normalisation’ using a
statistical modelling technique that can be used to remove as much of the interfering behaviour of
meteorology, giving a much better chance of observing the effect of an intervention or emissions
change. This technique has been used to investigate the impact of the LEZ for TfL (Carslaw, 2010)
and trends in air quality for the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (Barratt, 2011)
The technique involves using a range of advanced meteorological, traffic and, where available, road
surface state measurements to create a specific statistical model for each study site. This removes
the variations in measured ‘local’ pollution concentrations caused by variations in meteorology and
vehicle flows. Any remaining changes in local concentrations should be the result of events unknown
to the model, for example, the application of CMA. Importantly, meteorological normalisation does
not use NOX concentrations and it can therefore be considered as a complimentary method.
The results are presented as a time series chart of daily mean ‘normalised’ local pollution
concentrations, with CMA application days marked on for comparison. A study on the build-up of
CMA on a treated road surface by the Transport Research Laboratory indicated that the CMA loading
peaked after two or three days (TRL, 2012), suggesting that any CMA effect should be almost
immediate on a monthly timescale. Therefore, the effectiveness of CMA application was assessed by
looking for a sudden decrease in normalised local PM10 upon commencement of the trial and CMA
applications.
3.6 Polar plot cluster analysis (industrial sites only)
The polar plot cluster analysis was used at the industrial sites order to separate PM10 emissions
arising from within the process yard and dust resuspended from the road adjacent to the monitoring
site. This was important in order to independently assess the impact of on-road and on-site CMA
applications.

Bivariate polar plots are a graphical method of representing the relationship between pollution
levels and wind conditions, thereby allowing the identification of distinct sources surrounding a
monitoring site. In this analysis, average local PM10 and NOX concentrations on weekdays between
6am and 6pm are shown on a colour scale against wind speed on the radial axis and wind direction
on the polar axis. By comparing the PM10 and NOX plots, local PM emissions arising from the road
could be separated from those arising from within the site.
The measurements relating to each source were isolated using a cluster analysis. This first identified
distinct features of the polar plot, then separated the measurements taken within these features
into separate groups. The resulting filtered measurements could then be examined separately using
the diurnal characterisation described below.
A full description of the polar plot and clustering methodology is contained in Carslaw, 2012.
3.7 Diurnal characterisation (all study sites)
Both the NOX tracer and meteorological normalisation methods present results as daily mean
outputs. The diurnal characterisation analysis was included to allow an assessment of the
effectiveness of CMA in the hours following application. It was hypothesised that the high volumes
of vehicles passing over the treated road surface may rapidly wear off the CMA coating, thereby
reducing its effectiveness over time.
This method first calculated average local PM10 and NOX concentrations recorded on each hour of
the day across all CMA application days at each study site. A random subset of ‘control’ non CMA
days equal in number to the number of CMA days was then extracted and averaged in the same
way. This process was repeated 1000 times to provide an estimate of uncertainty in the control
dataset. Weekends and Bank Holidays were excluded.
Up to three different control periods were used to test the repeatability of individual results. First,
non CMA days were selected from the period during the trial. Second control days were selected
from the pre-trial period in the four months prior to commencement of CMA application. Third,
control days were selected from the pre-trial period in the same months as the trial on the previous
year.
An additional type of diurnal analysis was possible at industrial sites where CMA was applied on site.
The days on which CMA was applied on site part way through the working day were isolated and
diurnal plots created using the same method as above. The day was thereby split into the period
prior to on-site CMA application and following application. Any step change in the expected ‘no-
CMA’ diurnal pattern could then be attributed to the action of the CMA. This technique was not
possible with on-road applications, which occurred outside of working hours.
3.8 Chemical mass closure (Marylebone Road only)
Analysis of PM chemical composition can provide information about PM sources. Importantly, it can
be used to determine the maximum reductions that might be achieved through CMA application and
tell us about which PM components are affected by the application. This analysis focused on the
impact of CMA application on specific mineral and non-exhaust components as key indicators for
resuspended dust as this is the accepted method through which CMA reduces PM concentrations.

The daily mean PM composition at the Marylebone Road study site was determined using mass
closure techniques similar to those developed by Harrison et al (2003, 2004). These techniques have
previously been employed in short measurement campaigns for TfL (Green, 2009).
Hourly resolution measurements of calcium and magnesium were also available from February 2011
onwards. These metals were used as tracers for particulate resuspended matter; although they are
only one component of resuspended PM, they were used to examine how resuspended PM was
affected by meteorology, traffic and CMA application during the analysis period. Unlike the mass
closure technique, these tracers cannot provide an assessment of the total mass of resuspended PM
in the atmosphere.
3.9 Suspended CMA characterisation (Marylebone Road only)
It has been suggested that CMA itself could contribute to atmospheric PM10 loading during spray
application or subsequent resuspension following surface degradation. CMA has its own chemical
signature, which was used to investigate the presence of CMA in the atmosphere following
application.
Hourly mean concentrations of calcium and magnesium immediately following the application of
CMA alongside the Marylebone Road study site were analysed to establish whether application was
producing significant atmospheric PM loading.

4. Results
Results are presented for each study site in turn, firstly at the road corridor sites followed by the
industrial sites.
4.1 A501 Marylebone Road
The Marylebone Road study site was within a broad street canyon, i.e., the road is bounded on
either side with a largely unbroken line of tall buildings. Three lanes of traffic travel in each direction,
one of which is a bus lane. Annual average daily total (AADT) vehicle flows were in excess of 70,000
(2011 data), with a broad diurnal peak between 5am and 8pm. Daily mean PM10 concentrations
recorded at the site exceeded 50 µg m-3 on 58 days during 2011.The monitoring equipment inlets
were between one and three metres from the kerb.
The effect of CMA application at Marylebone Road was first judged using the NOX tracer method.
The analysis incorporated measurements spanning both Phase 1 and Phase 2 applications. It found
no evidence that the application of CMA changed the emissions rate of PM10, PM2.5 or PMC relative
to NOX.
Similarly, once the effects of meteorology had been removed using the meteorological normalisation
method, no relationship between CMA application and changes in PM10 or PM2.5 could be identified.
It was hypothesised that due to the large volumes of vehicles travelling along Marylebone Road, any
beneficial effect of the CMA could be rapidly diminished as the coating is worn away by vehicle
movements. However, the diurnal analysis indicated that local PM10 concentrations were not
significantly different on CMA days compared with non CMA days at any hour of the day (Figure 6).
Mean - Application Mean - CMA Mean - NonCMA

40 45
35 40
30
35
Number of CMA application days
Mean local PM10 concentration
25
30
20
25
15
20
10
15
5
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
-5 5
-10 0
Hour of day
Figure 6: Comparison of diurnal variations in local PM10 at Marylebone Road on CMA and non CMA days.
The time and frequency of CMA application is illustrated with yellow bars on the right axis.
Chemical characterisation was used to quantify how much of the total PM10 recorded at the site was
mineral and non-exhaust in origin. These components will be the most effective indicators of any
effect of CMA application. The mass closure technique identified that the mean contribution of

mineral PM to total PM10 mass was 5%, tyre wear 6% and brake wear 14%. These percentages are
larger than the potential impact of CMA as they do not take into account either the mass of mineral
PM independent of traffic resuspension or the non-exhaust emissions released directly into the
atmosphere rather than resuspended. This proportion varied from day to day dependent on
meteorological conditions and was higher on weekdays than at the weekend due to increased traffic
flows and activity associated with construction and demolition.
The 5% of total PM10 mass relating to mineral PM found at Marylebone Road was low relative to
those calculated in previous work carried out for TfL as part of the Low Emission Zone impacts
evaluation (Green et al, 2009). The analysis using 2008 data found that the absolute mass and
percentage mineral component of PM10 was 13% at a roadside location on the North Circular in
Brent (LAQN code BT4) and 20% at the Blackwall site (TH4, also used in this study).
To assess whether the application of CMA was effective in reducing the concentrations of the
mineral fraction, and other non-exhaust emissions, concentrations on CMA days were compared to
days outside of the trial period and non CMA days. In fact, mean concentration and percentage
contribution to total PM10 mass were slightly higher on CMA days in comparison with both control
periods.
Resuspended PM Tyre Wear Brake Wear Total PM10

Period -3 -3 -3 -3
µg m µg m µg m µg m
Pre-trial 1.5 (5%) 1.9 (6%) 6.1 (18%) 33.1
non CMA 2.1 (6%) 2.1 (6%) 5.2 (14%) 36.2
CMA 3.0 (7%) 2.6 (6%) 6.1 (14%) 44.7
Table 3: Absolute and percentage of total mass concentration of non-exhaust components of PM split by
CMA application.
Mean concentrations of the tracers of resuspended PM, tyre wear and brake wear were calculated
in relation to wind speed and direction using bivariate polar plots. These types of plots are effective
in illustrating the direction of major sources of pollution relative to a monitoring site (Barratt et al,
2009, Carslaw et al, 2006). The plot for the brake wear tracer (barium, Ba) showed that
concentrations were strongly related to emissions from the adjacent road (south west quadrant),
with the highest recorded during low wind speeds. However, the resuspended PM tracer (calcium,
Ca), was very different, with the highest concentrations recorded during higher wind speeds to the
south west and North east, broadly aligned with the street canyon (Figure 7). This indicates that
resuspended PM is not only related to particulate matter on the road, but can also be blown from
further afield or along the street canyon.
Analysis was undertaken to assess whether the application of CMA itself was causing a negative
impact on PM10 in the hours immediately following application. This was assessed by comparing
hourly mean concentrations of water soluble calcium, magnesium and acetate in the hour prior to
CMA application, the hour of application and the following hour. Unfortunately, the quantity of
acetate present in the atmosphere was not sufficient to produce a dataset of sufficiently high
quality, so this chemical was omitted from the analysis. The majority of applications occurred
between the hours of 10 pm and 3 am.

Figure 7: Bivariate polar plots showing the relationship between the tracers of resuspension and brake wear
and wind conditions at Marylebone Road.
Colour scale shows mean concentration, wind direction is on the polar axis, wind speed on the radial axis.
The difference in concentration of calcium and magnesium in the hours following application, in
both concentration and percentage terms, is shown in Figure 8. There was a small decrease in
calcium and magnesium following application, relative to the previous hour. This demonstrates that
the CMA application had no detectable negative impact on ambient PM10 following application.
Given the results of other analyses, the reduction in concentrations is likely to reflect general diurnal
variation in concentrations following the periods of routine application rather than a beneficial
effect of CMA.
200
200
0.2
0.04
150
150
10 (g m )
0.1
3
10 (g m )
0.02
3
10 %
10 %
Magnesium Increment PM
Calcium Increment PM
Magnesium Increment PM
Calcium Increment PM
0.00
100
100
0.0
-0.02
-0.1
50
50
-0.04
-0.2
0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
hours since hours since hours since hours since
Figure 8: Relative change in concentration of calcium and magnesium in the hours following CMA
-3
application in µg m and as a percentage.

4.2 A3211 Upper Thames Street
The study site on the A3211, Upper Thames Street is positioned beneath the northern approach to
London Bridge (A3). The PM10 monitoring inlet was approximately 4 m from the kerb. While vehicle
flows were lower than those at Marylebone Road, PM10 concentrations were similar mostly likely
due to restricted air movement and therefore lower rates of dispersion. Daily mean PM10
concentrations recorded at the site exceeded the EU Limit Value concentration (50 µg m-3 daily
mean) on 53 days during 2011. These unusual dispersion conditions meant that a robust
meteorological normalisation model could not be undertaken. Furthermore, the study site’s paired
NOX analyser was at a location on Upper Thames Street 325 m to the west of the PM10 analyser. This
compromise resulted in wider uncertainties in the NOX tracer analysis than at other study sites.
As Upper Thames Street was included in the initial Phase 1 trial, analysis could be carried out for
both phases. As Figure 9 shows, the NOX tracer regression model provided a good prediction during
Phase 1, but under predicted measured local PM10 concentrations during Phase 2 (No CMA days).
This indicated that the PM10:NOX emissions rate increased during Phase 2 irrespective of whether
CMA was applied or not. The performance of CMA applications was therefore assessed by
comparing ‘Non CMA days’ with ‘CMA days’ for each phase.
During the Phase 1 trial (9th Dec 2010 to 27th May 2011) the analysis showed a significant decrease in
PM10 emissions rate relative to NOX on CMA days in comparison with non CMA days, equating to a
decrease in local PM10 concentrations of approximately 38% ± 11% during CMA application days >10
g m-2 per day. This percentage reduction was derived by dividing the difference between measured
and modelled local PM10 (7.4 ± 2.2 µg m-3) by the modelled local PM10 (19.4 µg m-3). This equates to
an average reduction in total PM10 of approximately 16%, based on mean concentrations during the
study period. This percentage will have varied from day to day dependent on the proportion of total
PM10 that is associated with local emissions.
No significant change was identified at the lower application intensity of 10 g m-2 per day during
Phase 1 or Phase 2.
Diurnal analysis showed that the decrease in local PM10 that may be attributed to the CMA was
spread throughout the day and approximately proportional to measured local PM10 concentration,
i.e., greater during peak periods.
CMA was applied at a rate >10 mg m-2 on 48 days during Phase 1. Under the assumption that a
decrease in local PM10 concentrations of 38% was achieved on these days, 11 exceedences of the EU
Limit Value concentration for PM10 may have been avoided.
By extrapolating this decrease across the whole of 2011, it was possible to estimate that the number
of exceedence days for the year had CMA been applied along Upper Thames Street at high intensity
(>10 mg m-2 per day) every day of the year may have reduced from 53 to 30 at this location beneath
the bridge. However, it should be noted that the analysis was only carried out on dry days, which
may lead to an exaggerated effect when extrapolated over the year.

Residual PM10 Local PM10 Modelled local PM10

25
20
15
Local PM10 concentration / ug m-3
10
No
0 applications
-5
-10
-15
Baseline model No CMA CMA = 10 g m-2 CMA > 10 g m-2 No CMA CMA = 10 g m-2 CMA > 10 g m-2
Pre trial Phase 1 Phase 2
Figure 9: NOX tracer analysis results at the Upper Thames Street study site showing contrasting results
during Phase 1 and Phase 2.
Uncertainty is shown at k=2 ~ 2σ.
4.3 A2 Blackheath
The Blackheath study site is on the north side of the A2 on the junction of Blackheath Hill and
Maidenstone Hill. At this point there are two lanes of traffic merging to one uphill, one lane
downhill. The monitoring inlets were set back from the kerb of the A2 by 10 m, but approximately 3
m from the kerb of Maidenstone Hill. This site had the lowest vehicle flow rates of all study sites
(33,000 AADT in 2011). Daily mean PM10 concentrations recorded at the site exceeded the EU Limit
Value on 41 days during 2011, an unexpectedly high value for this location.
The NOX tracer analysis indicated that there was an unusually high PM10:NOX ratio, i.e., more local
PM10 was measured at the site for each unit of NOX than the London wide average. The analysis
found a significant difference between the PM10:NOX ratio in the period prior to CMA application
commencing on 16th October compared to the period following commencement of application.
However, there was no significant difference between mean local PM10 on days with CMA and days
without CMA during the trial period. Similarly, there was no significant difference between low and
high intensity application rates (Figure 10). The decrease in local PM10 following commencement of
CMA application was approximately 44% ± 7% (5.6 ± 0.88 µg m-3 as a proportion of the ‘expected’
local PM10 of 12.6 µg m-3). This equates to an average reduction in total PM10 of approximately 12%,
based on mean concentrations during the study period. This percentage will have varied from day to
day dependent on the proportion of total PM10 that was associated with local emissions.
A time series plot of model residuals (i.e., the difference between local PM10 concentrations
predicted by the NOX tracer model and those measured) is shown in Figure 11. This analysis indicates
that a decrease in measured PM10 concentrations relative to NOX occurred almost immediately
following the first application of CMA and was sustained through to the end of the analysis period.
The relative decrease in local PM10 concentrations was maintained between 15th December 2011

and 9th January 2012 (24 days) in the absence of any CMA application. If the decrease was due to
CMA, the effect would have to persist on the days following the application.
Residual PM10 Local PM10 Modelled local PM10

20
15
Local PM10 concentration / ug m-3
10
-5
-10
Baseline model No CMA All CMA CMA = 10 g m-2 CMA > 10 g m-2
Pre trial Phase 2
Figure 10: NOX tracer analysis results at the A2 Blackheath study site showing local PM10 concentrations
lower than expected during the trial period on CMA and non CMA days.
Uncertainty is shown at k=2 ~ 2σ.
CMA Application PM10 model residual

25
20
15
10
Model residual / ug m-3
-5
-10
-15
-20
-25
02-Feb
10-Feb
18-Feb
26-Feb
06-Sep
14-Sep
22-Sep
30-Sep
05-Feb
13-Feb
21-Feb
29-Feb
08-Oct
16-Oct
24-Oct
07-Apr
15-Apr
23-Apr
04-Jul
12-Jul
20-Jul
28-Jul
02-Jun
10-Jun
18-Jun
26-Jun
05-Aug
13-Aug
21-Aug
29-Aug
06-Mar
14-Mar
22-Mar
30-Mar
03-Dec
11-Dec
19-Dec
27-Dec
01-Nov
09-Nov
17-Nov
25-Nov
01-Jan
09-Jan
17-Jan
25-Jan
01-May
09-May
17-May
25-May
04-Jan
12-Jan
20-Jan
28-Jan
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb
2011 2012
Figure 11: NOX tracer model residuals at the A2, Blackheath study site showing an under prediction
developing soon after CMA application commenced.

A possible reason for the unusually high PM10:NOX ratio was presented by examining images of the
study site in Google Streetview spanning the trial period. The image of the study site and its environs
shown in the Appendix was taken in May 2012 and shows sheeted new building work nearing
completion to the south. Historical images from Google Earth show that the previous terraced
housing was demolished in the first half of 2010. It is possible that the CMA application was having a
beneficial effect on construction dust tracked onto or blowing onto the road surface. Alternatively,
the construction activity could have entered a ‘less dusty’ phase during October 2011, leading to a
decrease in resuspended PM10. The analysis was not able to differentiate between these two effects.
Assuming that a decrease in local PM10 concentrations of 44% was achieved as a result of CMA
application on all 54 days of the trial period due, one exceedence of the 50 µg m-3 daily mean
threshold may have been avoided (17th November). Under the same assumption, had CMA been
applied every day of 2011, the number of exceedence days may have reduced from 41 to 33.
Results from the meteorological normalisation analysis were not so clear cut. While normalised local
PM10 concentrations showed a similar pattern to those of the NOX tracer model residuals, a gradual
decrease was evident between mid-October 2011 and mid-January 2012.
CMA days Non-CMA days control Previous winter control Preceding summer control
18
16
Mean 'local' concentration / ug m-3
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Hour of day
CMA days Non-CMA days control Previous winter control Preceding summer control
80
Mean 'local' concentration / ug m-3
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Hour of day
Figure 12: Diurnal variation in local PM10 (upper) and NOX (lower) at Blackheath with three different control
periods (dry days only).
The diurnal analysis indicated that a significant decrease in local PM10 concentrations occurred
between 02:00 and 07:00 on weekdays during the trial period in comparison with pre-trial baseline
period. In common with the NOX tracer analysis, this decrease was present both on CMA and no

CMA days. CMA was applied along the A2 between 23:00 and 02:00, therefore the greatest decrease
occurred in the hours following CMA application. To verify this result a number of alternative
controls were tested; mean diurnal local PM10 concentrations on CMA application days were
compared with (a) mean concentrations over the same months in the previous year, (b) over the six
months preceding the CMA trial and (c) as (a) and (b) but with local NOX concentrations. This
indicated that the decrease in local PM10 was present in comparison with both the summer and
winter periods of the preceding 12 months, but local NOX concentrations were not significantly
different (Figure 12).
Therefore, the diurnal analysis confirmed the results of the NOX tracer analysis and revealed that the
majority of the decrease in local PM10 occurred during the pre-rush hour period.
4.4 A2 New Cross
The A2 New Cross study site is on the south side of New Cross Road approximately 30 m to the east
of a railway cutting. The monitoring inlets were 6 m from the kerb. While AADT vehicle flows were
higher than those at the Blackheath study site (45,500 in 2011), mean local PM10 concentrations
were lower than those measured at Blackheath and the lowest of all road corridor trial sites. Annual
mean PM10 concentrations at the site ranked 44th out of 70 sites in the LAQN in 2011. The
monitoring site’s position on the south side of the road, such that the prevailing south westerly
winds more frequently blew emissions from the adjacent road away from the measurement inlet, is
likely to be a contributing factor, however, this also supports the finding that local PM10 at
Blackheath was augmented by a non-exhaust related source. Daily mean PM10 concentrations
recorded at the site exceeded the 50 µg m-3 daily mean threshold on 19 days during 2011.
The NOX tracer analysis found no significant change in local PM10:NOX ratios following
commencement of CMA application. Similarly, there was no clear change in the meteorologically
normalised local PM10 concentrations over the analysis period, aside from a sharp increase between
the end of January 2012 and the end of February 2012 (Figure 13). This change is unlikely to be
related to CMA as no changes in application methods occurred at this time. The diurnal analysis
found no significant effect of CMA application.
CMA application Measured concentration Normalised concentration

40
35
Daily mean local PM10 concentration / ug m-3
30
25
20
15
10
0
08-Oct
16-Oct
24-Oct
05-Aug
13-Aug
21-Aug
29-Aug
03-Dec
11-Dec
19-Dec
27-Dec
01-Nov
09-Nov
17-Nov
25-Nov
01-Jan
09-Jan
17-Jan
25-Jan
01-May
09-May
17-May
25-May
04-Jan
12-Jan
20-Jan
28-Jan
02-Feb
10-Feb
18-Feb
26-Feb
06-Sep
14-Sep
22-Sep
30-Sep
05-Feb
13-Feb
21-Feb
29-Feb
07-Apr
15-Apr
23-Apr
04-Jul
12-Jul
20-Jul
28-Jul
02-Jun
10-Jun
18-Jun
26-Jun
06-Mar
14-Mar
22-Mar
30-Mar
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb
2011 2012
Figure 13: Normalised and measured local PM10 concentrations at the A2 New Cross study site.

4.5 A12 Blackwall Tunnel Northern Approach
This study site lies to the east of the A12 just north of the Blackwall Tunnel. The site is in an open
location, with a residential area to the east and a large field to the west. Monitoring inlets were 4 m
from the kerb of the A12. At this point, the A12 has six lanes of relatively fast moving vehicles and
relatively high volumes of HGV traffic. Average vehicle flows were the second highest of the study
sites (75,000 AADT, 2011), just below those of Marylebone Road. Daily mean PM10 concentrations
recorded at the site exceeded 50 µg m-3 on 32 days during 2011.
PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations at this site were measured by the FDMS TEOM instrument.
Unfortunately, the closest comparable instruments in a background location with acceptable valid
data capture rates were in North Kensington (LAQN code KC1). Background PM10 concentrations in
North Kensington were higher than those farther out from central London surrounding the study
site. This means that the local component of PM10 was underestimated at this site. This compromise
should not have affected the CMA evaluation as this underestimation should have been consistent
across the whole of the analysis period.
Unlike other study sites, CMA was applied to one of the three lanes in each direction due to practical
constraints on a road with high overnight vehicle speeds. Also, a combination of missing data from
either the study site or background control site, combined with a late commencement of application
along the A12 (14th November 2011) meant that relatively few ‘CMA days’ were available for
analysis. For example, the NOX tracer analysis was limited to 15 CMA days.
The NOX tracer method failed to find any significant difference in PM10:NOX emissions ratio when
comparing CMA days and non CMA days during the trial period. However, both the NOX tracer
analysis and meteorological normalisation analysis found that local PM10 concentrations fell
significantly during the trial period in comparison with the previous year. Both analysis methods
indicated that this change occurred in June 2011, five months before CMA application commenced
at this site.
The diurnal analysis confirmed the other analyses; local PM10 concentrations on CMA days were
similar across all hours of the day when compared to non CMA days in the same months, but
significantly lower across all hours when compared to the winter before the trial. Green et al (2009)
found high concentrations of PM calcium at this site when compared with other London locations.
This may have been due to local building works which may have continued in the pre-CMA trial
period.
The results at this study site were therefore similar to those at the Blackheath study site. However,
unlike the Blackheath analysis, the timing of the change indicates that CMA was not the cause.

CMA days - Non-CMA days control - Previous winter control -

40
35
30
25
Mean 'local' PM10 / ug m-3
20
15
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
-5
-10
Figure 14: Diurnal variation in local PM10 at the Blackwall Tunnel study site showing the uniform decrease in
concentrations occurring in June 2011.
4.6 Horn Lane, Acton
The Horn Lane study site was located to the north east of a mixed industrial area, comprising of a
waste transfer station, aggregates handling, a cement batching plant and miscellaneous other
smaller operations. PM10 monitoring commenced at this location in February 2005, with NOX
monitoring added in January 2010. Initial monitoring indicated that PM10 concentrations exceeded
50 µg m-3 on more than 50% of all days throughout the year (2006). Since then, improved dust
mitigation actions have reduced concentrations, however, they remain amongst the highest
recorded in London (ranked 6th out of 70 in 2011).
The Horn Lane industrial area was studied by Barratt and Fuller in May 2008. This concluded that:
- PM10 particulate levels were strongly related to industrial area working hours, with peak
concentrations recorded during the driest part of the day (2pm).
- Elevated local PM10 concentrations were recorded during non-working hours, including
Sundays, suggesting that fugitive dust emitted during working hours was settling across the
area, to be resuspended by wind and road vehicles.
- A marked reduction in PM10 emissions was recorded when a vehicle washer bay was
installed in the waste transfer station, leading to a less dry and dusty yard, and the cessation
of stock piling and waste handling activities outside of the designated shed.
CMA was applied to the roads surrounding the industrial site on 29 days between December 2011
and May 2012, using the same method as the road corridors. On-site CMA application was delayed
and only began on 18th July, with only 6 application days before the analysis cut off of 10th August.
Due to the monitoring site being out of service for the second half of 2010, the pre-trial baseline
period at Horn Lane ran from 9th February 2011 until 12th December 2011.
In order to carry out the diurnal analysis, the PM10 measurements were first filtered to isolate PM10
emissions relating to the industrial site. The polar plot cluster analysis indicated that the emissions of
PM10 originating from on-site activity were in a similar south westerly wind sector as those caused by
resuspension from the road surface (Figure 15). Therefore the diurnal analysis used ‘local’ PM10

concentrations recorded on weekdays between the hours of 6am and 6pm (local time) when winds
were from the southwesterly cluster and no rain was recorded throughout the day.
8 mean 8
N N mean
6 6
90 60
4 w ind spd. 80 4 w ind spd.
50
2
70
2
40
W E 60
W E
0 0
50 30
40
20
30
10
20
S NOXl S PM10l
Figure 15: Polar plots showing the relationship between wind speed and direction on 'local' NOX (left) and
PM10 (right) concentrations at the Horn Lane study site.
Weekdays between 6am and 6pm, August 2010 to August 2012.
CMA day (road) - 'local' NOX CMA day (road) - 'local' PM10 no CMA day (road) - 'local' NOX
no CMA day (road) - 'local' PM10 Pre-trial - 'local' NOX Pre-trial - 'local' PM10
180
160
140
Mean 'local' PM10 / ug m-3
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Hour of day (local time)
Figure 16: Diurnal variation in 'local' NOX and PM10 at Horn Lane, comparing CMA days and no CMA days.
Cluster 1, weekdays only.
The diurnal analysis first compared local filtered PM10 and NOX concentrations on dry days when
CMA was applied to the road to the two controls (days during the trial when no CMA was applied
and days prior to the trial). This showed that PM10 concentrations on CMA days were similar to those
on no CMA days. However, NOX concentrations were around 30% higher, indicating that
meteorological conditions were not comparable, despite the filtering procedure (Figure 16).
Local filtered PM10 and NOX concentrations on dry days when CMA was applied to within the
industrial site itself were compared to the controls. As the timing of application varied, each

application day was considered separately. As Table 4 shows, three of the six application days were
characterised by south westerly winds, i.e., wind conditions where on-site emissions would be
detected by the PM10 analyser. The diurnal profile of local PM10 was plotted on each of these days in
comparison with the no CMA control (Figure 17).
On each on-site CMA application day, PM10 concentrations recorded at the site dropped in the hour
following application in comparison with the expected diurnal profile. This was most clear on 18th
July, when local PM10 concentrations dropped from 61 µg m-3 at 10am, above the no CMA control
profile, to 16 µg m-3 at 11am, well below the no CMA control profile, following application at
10:30am. The decrease in local PM10 concentration on the three on-site application days was 59%,
31% and 33% relative to the no CMA control.
Date Time Location Wind Rain

th
18 July 2012 10:30 Waste transfer station yard SW Trace PM
th
24 July 2012 14:30 Aggregates site plus haul road E None
th
25 July 2012 10:30 Aggregates and WTS yard and haul road N None
st
1 August 2012 09:30 Aggregates site plus haul road SE None
st
1 August 2012 11:30 Waste transfer station yard SE None
th
6 August 2012 16:00 Waste transfer station yard SW None
th
7 August 2012 14:00 Aggregates site plus haul road SW None
Table 4: On-site CMA application details at Horn Lane industrial area.
18th Pre 18th Post 6th Pre 6th Post 7th Pre 7th Post No CMA
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Hour (local time)
Figure 17: Diurnal variation in 'local' PM10 at Horn Lane, with days CMA applied on site split between pre-
and post-application (cluster 1).
The NOX tracer analysis was also split into on-road application days and on-site application days. Of
the 29 days where CMA was applied on the road, 19 were entirely dry. The analysis found that the
daily mean ‘local other’ component of PM10 was 18% (±10%) lower on days where CMA was applied
on the road when compared with no CMA days and 10% (±9%) lower compared to the pre-trial
baseline period.

Of the six on-site application days, only two were entirely dry. Furthermore, this method used daily
means so could not differentiate between pre and post on-site CMA application in the way that the
diurnal analysis could. Therefore the on-site NOX tracer analysis at this site was considered less
robust than the diurnal analysis. However, the analysis found that daily mean ‘local other’
component of PM10 was 23% (±15%) lower on days where CMA was applied on site when compared
with no CMA days.
The meteorological normalisation analysis was not able to identify any clear impact of on-road or on-
site CMA application.
4.7 Manor Road, Erith
This study site was located on the south side of Manor Road in Erith, London Borough of Bexley. To
the west of the monitoring site was a primarily residential area. Large waste recycling and metals
reclamation yards were located to the north and west of the monitoring site. Vehicles using the
industrial premises had to access Manor Road from the west, passing the monitoring site and
through the residential area. The monitoring site was opened in 1999 and closed in February 2011.
Additional funding from TfL within the CADS programme allowed PM10 monitoring to re-commence
in January 2012, followed by NOX monitoring in April 2012.
N mean N mean
7 7
6
45 160
6
5 40 5 140
4 4
35
3 3 120
2 w ind spd. 30 2 w ind spd.
100
1 1
W E 25 W E
0 0 80
20
60
15
10 40
5 20
0 0
(a) S NOXl (b) S PM10l
7
6
5
4
3
2 w ind spd. cluste
W 1 E
0 1
2
3
(c) (d)
S
Figure 18: Polar plot (a and b) and cluster analysis (d) for 'local' NOX and PM10 at the Manor Road study site,
with accompanying aerial photograph (c).
Weekdays between 6am and 6pm, January to August 2012.

Like the Horn Lane study site, historical monitoring at Manor Road indicated that PM10 levels
regularly exceeded EU Limit Values. Between 2000 and 2010, a number of dust mitigation measures
had been put in place by the Environment Agency and Borough Council, supported by a series of
characterisation studies by King’s College London. These measures, combined with changes to the
type of industrial activity, led to a fall in the number of days where mean PM10 > 50 µg m-3 from a
peak of 130 in 2007 to 56 in 2010.
Figure 18 shows an aerial photograph of the study site, with Manor Road running east-west with the
monitoring site marked with a circle to the south of the road (panel c). This figure also shows the
polar plot analysis of ‘local’ NOX (panel a) and PM10 (panel b) concentrations recorded on weekdays
between 6am and 6pm in 2012. This analysis showed that the highest local PM10 concentrations
were associated with strong easterly winds, which blew particulate matter from the yards to the
east over the monitoring inlet. However, these winds are relatively infrequent, and, on average, the
majority of local PM10 emissions were caused by the resuspension of particulate matter from the
road, tracked out by vehicles leaving the waste handling processes.
The cluster analysis (Figure 18, panel d) allowed the analysis dataset to be split into the wind
conditions most likely to identify an impact of on-road CMA application (cluster 2) and on-site CMA
application (cluster 3).
On-road CMA application was first tested using the diurnal analysis. This was carried out on local
PM10 and NOX concentrations recorded when winds were in cluster 2 on weekdays 6am to 6pm
between 23rd January and 1st June 2012. Days where rain was recorded at any time were also
excluded. The diurnal variation in both NOX and PM10 concentrations was higher on days when CMA
was applied to the road than the no CMA control. Comparison was also made against the pre-trial
control with similar results. Therefore, despite extensive filtering to maximise the effectiveness of
the controls, weather conditions on no CMA days favoured dispersion of local pollution, obscuring
any CMA impacts. This may be related to the low number of days within each group following
filtering – 24 days where CMA was applied to the road and 10 days where no CMA was applied on
road or on site.
As there were no days during the trial when CMA was applied on-site during strong easterly winds,
clusters 2 and 3 were used to test the effectiveness of on-site CMA application. Most on-site
applications occurred at 11am. Where applications were before or after this hour, data points were
removed, i.e., not classified as ‘pre’ or ‘post’ application. As with the Horn Lane analysis, the diurnal
variation on days prior to application was higher than the no CMA control mean, and then dropped
below the control mean for the remainder of the day (Figure 19). On average, local PM10
concentrations following on-site CMA application were 41% lower relative to the control mean.
The meteorological normalisation and NOX tracer analyses were compromised by the fact that no
measurements were available during 2011 and reinstatement of NOX monitoring was delayed by
equipment fault until April 2012.
For the NOX tracer analysis, the pre-trial baseline period was taken from April to August 2010. Once
days recording rainfall had been removed, there were zero days during the trial when neither on-site
nor on-road CMA was applied and all of the necessary pollutant measurements were available.
Therefore comparison could only be made with the 2010 pre-trial control. Results showed that the
local other component of PM10 was higher on days where CMA was applied on site and on road in
comparison with the pre-trial control. It is probable that the emissions rate of processes in the
industrial area changed in the two year period between the trial and the pre-trial baseline period,
therefore this result is not considered robust.

No CMA Pre-application Post-application

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Hour (local time)
Figure 19: Diurnal variation in 'local' PM10 at Manor Road, with days CMA applied on site split between pre-
and post-application (clusters 2 and 3, dry days only).
4.8 Mercury Way, Lewisham
The Mercury Way study site was the smallest industrial area investigated, as reflected in the LAQN
ranking of 44 out of 70 (based on annual mean PM10 in 2011). The monitoring site was located to the
south of a waste transfer station yard. A railway line and associated un-sealed storage yard was
located to the east, suburban residential areas to the south and west. A minor road ran north-south
to the west of the monitor.
An aerial photograph of the site, with monitor circled in yellow is shown in Figure 20. The figure also
shows the local PM10 polar plot and cluster analysis outputs. The site only monitored PM10, therefore
a NOX polar plot was not possible.
The polar plot image reveals two clear local sources of PM10, one to the north, assumed to be the
industrial site, and one to the east, most probably related to the rail storage yard. As CMA was not
applied to the storage yard, cluster 3 was excluded from the diurnal analysis, which isolated
measurements taken during winds in cluster 4 and 5. As described in the Manor Road analysis,
strong winds from the east were relatively uncommon during the study period, therefore annual
mean concentrations would not be strongly influenced by the storage yard source.
CMA was applied to the roads surrounding the study location on 57 days between October 2011 and
31st May 2012. Results of the on-road diurnal analysis were similar to those at other sites, with mean
local PM10 concentrations comparable between days when CMA was applied to the road in
comparison with the two controls. On average, mean diurnal local PM10 concentrations were 15%
lower on on-road CMA days compared to no CMA days. However, the absence of the NOX control
makes it impossible to assess the influence of non-wind meteorology, such as humidity and
temperature.

N mean N
8 50 8
6
6
40 4 w ind spd.
4 w ind spd.
2 cluster
2
W E 1
30
W E 0 2
0 3
4
5
20
10
S PM10l
Figure 20: Aerial photograph, local PM10 polar plot and local PM10 cluster plot for Mercury Way.
CMA application Measured concentration Normalised concentration

45
40
Daily mean local PM10 concentration / ug m-3
35
30
25
20
15
10
0
03-Oct
10-Oct
17-Oct
24-Oct
31-Oct
01-Aug
08-Aug
15-Aug
22-Aug
29-Aug
05-Dec
12-Dec
19-Dec
26-Dec
07-Nov
14-Nov
21-Nov
28-Nov
02-Jan
09-Jan
16-Jan
23-Jan
30-Jan
07-May
14-May
21-May
28-May
05-Sep
12-Sep
19-Sep
26-Sep
06-Feb
13-Feb
20-Feb
27-Feb
02-Apr
09-Apr
16-Apr
23-Apr
30-Apr
02-Jul
09-Jul
16-Jul
23-Jul
30-Jul
04-Jun
11-Jun
18-Jun
25-Jun
05-Mar
12-Mar
19-Mar
26-Mar
Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
2011 2012
Figure 21: Daily mean measured and normalised 'local' PM10 concentrations at Mercury Way.
On-road CMA application days are shown as yellow bars.

CMA was applied on the industrial site yard on six weekdays (plus two weekends) between February
2012 and the end of the analysis period in August. Of these, only one occurred during northerly
winds and that was compromised by rainfall during the day. Therefore, it was not possible to carry
out an analysis of the impact of on-site CMA application.
The meteorological normalisation analysis found no clear association between normalised local PM10
concentrations and on-road CMA application. Peak normalised concentrations occurred between the
20th and 30th May 2012 (Figure 21). During this period winds blew from the north, transporting dust
from the site over the monitoring inlet. Unfortunately, there was no on-site CMA application during
this period.
4.9 Neasden Lane, Neasden
The Neasden Lane study site is positioned at the roadside, opposite the entrance to a large mixed
waste industrial site. There is housing in close proximity to the east, with industrial areas to the
north and west.
PM10 concentrations recorded by the Neasden Lane study site have decreased in the past five years,
largely as a result of strict enforcement regimes and improved dust mitigation measures by the
industrial operators. At its peak in 2006, the monitoring site recorded daily mean PM10
concentrations greater than 50 µg m-3 on more than half of all days throughout the year. In 2011 this
had reduced to 79, which remained higher than the objective of no more than 35 days. Despite this
decrease, annual mean PM10 concentrations remain amongst the highest recorded in London.
Continuous PM10 and NOX monitoring has been carried out in this location since 2004. A number of
studies have been carried out since then, which aimed to identify the major causes of elevated PM10
in the area. In the most recent carried out by ERG (Fuller and Barratt, 2009), monitoring data from
the study site were augmented by additional monitoring carried out to the west of the main yard by
the Environment Agency. This identified a number of distinct sources segregated by wind direction
(Figure 23, panel c), both from within the yards and arising from dust track-out and subsequent
resuspension caused by vehicles leaving the site entrance. It also found a relatively minor source far
to the west, outside of the main Neasden Lane industrial site (coloured in light blue in Figure 23,
panel c).
Since the 2009 report, additional analysis by the Environment Agency and London Borough of Brent
has concluded that this uncontrolled source has increased relative to the more strictly controlled
sources within the main yard. This is important as CMA was only applied within the main yard and
on the roads surrounding the main site.
As previous studies have shown, this is a complex location with a range of diverse sources subject to
different levels of control and changing dust generating activities. The analysis presented in this
report attempts to evaluate the impact of on-road and on-site application and not other activities
and should be considered in the context of ongoing assessments being carried out by the London
Borough of Brent and the Environment Agency.
On-road CMA was applied on 14 days during the trial period at higher intensity (two applications of
10 mg m-2 per night). On-site CMA was applied by three operators at different frequencies and on
different days from March 2012 onwards.

On-Site CMA Application PM10 model residual On-Road CMA Application

80
70
60
Model residual / ug m-3
50
40
30
20
10
-10
-20
06-May
20-May
05-May
19-May
07-Oct
21-Oct
01-Jan
15-Jan
29-Jan
13-Jan
27-Jan
12-Feb
26-Feb
10-Feb
24-Feb
09-Sep
23-Sep
02-Dec
16-Dec
30-Dec
03-Jun
17-Jun
02-Jun
16-Jun
30-Jun
04-Nov
18-Nov
11-Mar
25-Mar
10-Mar
24-Mar
01-Jul
15-Jul
29-Jul
14-Jul
28-Jul
08-Apr
22-Apr
12-Aug
26-Aug
07-Apr
21-Apr
2011 2012
Figure 22 Time series of daily mean model residual (local-other) PM10 at Neasden Lane.
On-road and on-site CMA applications shown in yellow and green respectively.
Figure 22 shows the output of the NOX tracer analysis at Neasden Lane. This illustrated the large
variability in daily mean local PM10 emissions associated with the industrial area, from zero up to 70
µg m-3. This variability was caused by a combination of weather conditions and irregular dust
generating activity within the industrial area. The figure also indicates that, unlike other study sites,
on-road applications (purple lines) were grouped into two short periods overlapping the on-site
applications (blue lines).
Each of these factors made an assessment of the impact of CMA application difficult at this study
site. The assessment of on-road CMA application had to be limited to days where no on-site
applications were made, and vice versa. The control periods had to be taken from days where
neither on-site nor on-road application was made. These constraints led to small sample sizes for the
assessments.
In order to address the fact that on-road CMA was applied in short intensive blocks at Neasden Lane,
the no CMA control period was defined in two different ways; from the date of the first application
to the last (in line with the assessments at other study sites) and as one week either site of the
periods when CMA was applied.
A comparison of local other PM10 concentrations when CMA was applied either on-road or on-site to
both of these no CMA control periods revealed no significant decrease in concentrations. However
this needs to be interpreted in light of the very small sample size, with only two dry exclusively on-
road CMA days and five dry exclusively on-site CMA days.
The polar plot analysis indicated that local PM10 relating to emissions from the yard and adjacent
road were to the west (Figure 23, panel a). The NOX polar plot indicated that yard and road sources
were associated with similar wind conditions, therefore these two sources could not be separated.
The cluster analysis isolated these sources, represented by cluster 1 in Figure 23.
Neither of the two dry exclusively on-road application days were coincidental with winds from
cluster 1. Therefore, no on-road diurnal evaluation could be made.

8
mean N mean
N
7
100
6 6
90
5
4 4 w ind spd.
80 80
3
70
2 w ind spd. 2
60 60
1
W E W E
0 0
50
40 40
30
20
20
10
(a) S NOx l
(b) S PM10l
4 w ind spd.
2
clus
W E
0
(c) (d)
Figure 23: Polar plot (a and b) and cluster analysis (d) for 'local' NOX and PM10 at the Neasden Lane study
site, with accompanying aerial photograph (c).
Principal directional sources of local PM10 are shown on the aerial photograph using data from the study site
(east) and Environment Agency mobile monitoring site (west) (source: Fuller and Barratt, 2009).
Weekdays between 6am and 6pm, January to August 2012.
CMA was applied on site on 13 distinct days by three operators from 16th March onwards. Seven of
these were dry weekdays, but only two during winds within cluster 1 (16th March and 23rd July).
These two dates were isolated and diurnal analysis carried out to identify whether change had
occurred immediately following application.
As Figure 24 shows, hourly mean local PM10 concentrations in the hours following CMA application
were lower, relative to the no CMA control days, than those prior to application. However, this
reduction was not as clear as that seen at Horn Lane (Figure 17). It is likely that this is because of the
complex mix of industrial processes and yards in the area. Application of CMA around any one of
these yards in isolation will therefore have only partial impact on local PM10 emissions as a whole.
Despite this, application around one process yard was associated with a 26% reduction in local PM10
on 16th March. Application on a different yard on 23rd July was associated with an 18% reduction.
Further analysis of a larger number of application days would be required to establish the relative
impact of CMA application on different process yards and areas.

No CMA 16th Pre (BT5b) 16th Post (BT5b) 23rd Pre (BT5c) 23rd Post (BT5c)
250
200
150
100
50
0
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Hour (local time)
Figure 24: Diurnal variation in 'local' PM10 at Neasden Lane, with days CMA applied on site split between
pre- and post-application (cluster 1)
BT5b and BT5c codes refer to specific on-site process areas.

5. Discussion
This study aimed to evaluate the impact of CMA dust suppressant application on ambient PM10
concentrations carried out within TfL’s Cleaning and Dust Suppressants programme. Within this
programme, CMA was applied in a number of locations identified by modelling or monitoring as
having elevated PM10 concentrations and therefore at risk of breaching the EU Limit Values for PM10.
This study considered nine such locations where measurements were available prior to and
following the application periods.
There is evidence of on-road CMA application being used successfully in other European countries to
reduce ambient PM10 concentrations. A major European project (EU Life Project ‘CMA+’)
investigated its use in high altitude areas of central Europe, where long periods of calm, dry weather
during the autumn and winter can lead to exceptionally high levels of resuspended PM10. This found
that CMA application reduced concentrations on paved and unpaved roads. Its use has also been
demonstrated in Scandinavian countries, where studded tyres can lead to additional resuspended
PM10 through road surface wear. There is, however, little robust research into of the impact of CMA
application in large urban areas such as London.
The sprayed application of CMA onto a surface forms a hygroscopic coating, keeping the surface
‘damp’. When particulate matter comes into contact with a treated surface it is less likely to become
resuspended, thus reducing the amount of dust in the air. In common with other surface treatment
pollution reduction measures, such as green walls and titanium dioxide coatings, CMA will only
affect particulate matter that comes into contact with the treated surface. The larger the surface
area treated, the greater the potential benefit. Similarly, any potential benefit will be lost if the
surface ceases to be hygroscopic, because it has been blocked by trapped particles, or worn off by
tyres.
Previous studies have shown that the majority of resuspended particulate matter is in the coarse
fraction of PM10 (between 2.5 µg and 10 µg in diameter). In London, the proportion of total PM10
mass in this coarse fraction varies according to weather conditions and the local sources of pollution.
For example, in dry conditions the majority of PM10 recorded close to an industrial site handling
skipped waste may be in the coarse fraction, whereas in a typical street canyon, where PM10 is
dominated by traffic emissions, only a small proportion of total PM10 may be in the coarse fraction.
Therefore, PM10 composition is also important in assessing the potential benefit of CMA application.
Five of the study sites were located along road corridors in PM10 priority hotspots and four were
close to industrial sites characterised by waste transfer stations and other processes generating
unusually high levels of airborne dust. Each road corridor study site had a distinct physical layout,
allowing an evaluation across a range conditions. The industrial sites varied from small, single
process sites (Mercury Way) through to large mixed process sites (Neasden Lane). Five of the study
sites ranked in the 10 highest annual mean PM10 concentrations measured across London in 2011.
A range of analysis methods were used to assess the impact of CMA application at each study site.
By using more than one independent methodology, results could be cross checked against each
other to form more robust conclusions. Statistical and graphical methods were used to isolate the
impact of CMA from confounding factors such as the influence of the weather, long-range pollution
sources and variations in emissions rates. In most cases, days or hours where CMA was applied were
compared to control periods where no CMA was applied. The effectiveness of this method was
limited by the number of applications and the availability of pollution measurements. For example, a
more complete and robust analysis was possible at Marylebone Road, where extensive pollution

measurements were available and CMA was applied over 150 days, than at Neasden Lane, where
CMA was only applied on 14 days.
The study found that CMA had an identifiable impact at some locations but not others. When
considered as a whole, it becomes evident that the impact of application on road and on site was
not related to the total PM10 concentration at a location. This was clearly illustrated by the
Marylebone Road analysis results; annual mean PM10 concentrations at this kerbside location were
the second highest in London in 2011, however, despite a very extensive and robust evaluation, no
impact of CMA application could be found. Conversely, at Horn Lane, ranked 6th in London in 2011, a
substantial benefit of application was identified.
A summary of results is shown in Table 5. Five of the nine study sites showed a beneficial effect from
CMA application due to specific local conditions. No robust evidence for a benefit of CMA
application at three study sites: A501 Marylebone Road, A2 New Cross and A12 Blackwall. The study
focussed on PM10 concentrations. Where available, PM2.5 measurements were also evaluated, but no
CMA effect was identified.
Of the road corridor sites, the strongest evidence of a positive effect was found at the Upper Thames
Street study site, located under a bridge. This effect was only seen at application rates greater than
10 mg m-2, i.e., two or three applications per day. The estimated impact on local PM10 concentrations
was a decrease of approximately 38% ± 11%. This equates to an average reduction in total PM10 of
approximately 16%, based on mean concentrations during the study period. Given evidence that this
decrease was achieved on higher intensity application days, 11 exceedences of the EU Limit Value
concentration for PM10 may have been avoided. Had CMA been applied along Upper Thames Street
at high intensity every day of 2011, the number of exceedences recorded may have decreased from
53 to 30 days. It should be stressed that this potential change in exceedence days is only applicable
to the unusual location of the study site under the bridge; normal patterns of windblown dispersion
of PM10 and the action of rain to wash off material deposited on the road will be different to other
locations. The result is not applicable to the whole of the A3211 Victoria Embankment, Upper
Thames Street and Tower Hill corridor. Furthermore, the arrangement of the monitoring was not
optimal for the assessment of the impacts of CMA.
At the A2 Blackheath site local PM10 concentrations were 44% ± 7% lower than expected in
comparison with pre-trial concentrations, equating to a decrease in total PM10 mass of
approximately 12%. This decrease was timed closely with the commencement of the trial and was
sustained through to the end of the analysis period. There was no significant difference in the
magnitude of reduction between CMA and non CMA days, despite application being suspended for a
period of 24 days mid-way through the trial.
Photographic evidence indicated that the construction of a block of flats was underway before and
during the trial. It is likely that the completion of the construction phase of these building works was
responsible for a proportion of the reduction in local PM10 concentrations, but the analysis was not
able to separate the effect of CMA application from changes in construction activity.

Site name Site description Results PM10 ‘residual’*

Neasden Lane, Large mixed industrial site Limited analysis possible due to small number of application days and mixed 13 µg m-3
Neasden on-site applications. Tentative 22% reduction in local PM10 compared to non
CMA days following on-site application.
Horn Lane, Acton Medium industrial site On-road application: 18% reduction in local PM10 compared to non CMA days. 8 µg m-3
On-site application: 36% reduction in local PM10 compared to non CMA days.
Manor Road, Erith Medium industrial site On-site application: mean 41% reduction in local PM10 compared to non CMA 8 µg m-3
days. On-road application: analysis not possible.
A2 Blackheath Road corridor impacted by 44% reduction in local PM10 compared to pre-trial period, equating to a 6 µg m-3
emissions from construction decrease in annual mean of c. 12%. No effect compared to non CMA days.
site opposite.
A3211 Upper Congested road corridor Daily CMA application >10 mg m-2 only: 38% reduction in local PM10 compared n.a.
Thames Street beneath a wide bridge. to non CMA days, equating to a decrease in annual mean of c. 16%. No effect
at 10 mg m-2 application rate.
Mercury Way, Small industrial site. No robust results due to limited monitoring and few on-site application days. n.a.
Lewisham
A501 Marylebone Heavily trafficked road The analyses could not identify any significant effect. 1 µg m-3
Road corridor in a street canyon.
A2 New Cross Single lane road corridor. The analyses could not identify any significant effect. -1 µg m-3
A12 Blackwall Heavily trafficked road The analyses could not identify any significant effect. -1 µg m-3
corridor in an open location,
partial application.
Table 5: Summary of study findings
* The residual represents the deviation from the LAQN linear fit line shown in Figure 25, which indicates the ‘expected’ concentration of PM10 relative to the concentration
of NOX, principally related to vehicle emissions.

At the Marylebone Road study site, a range of independent analyses were carried out using a mix
of pollutants, including those most closely related to resuspended particulate matter. Chemical
speciation analysis indicated that only a small proportion of the total PM10 was due to the mineral
component of PM (5%). It also suggested that metal particulate associated with crustal matter,
and therefore good tracers for resuspended particulate, can be blown along the street canyon
from other locations. Therefore, even if road cleaning and CMA application on the road surface
were 100% effective, resuspended particulate would still be present blown from surfaces other
than the treated road.
Although the chemical speciation analysis demonstrated a significant contribution from tyre wear
(6%) and brake wear (14%), it was not possible to differentiate between that released directly into
the atmosphere and that resuspended by passing vehicles. Nevertheless, no decrease was seen in
the metals relating to these sources.
At New Cross only relatively small concentrations of local PM10 were recorded at the study site,
partly due to the position of the monitoring equipment on the upwind side of the road being
treated. This made the detection of a significant effect more difficult than at other sites. However,
a lack of clear signal also reflects the small proportion of PM10 recorded at the site that is likely to
be related to resuspension and therefore susceptible to removal by CMA.
The lack of identifiable effect at the A12 Blackwall site may be related to the fact that one lane in
each direction was treated with CMA. The study site’s position in an open location makes it likely
that resuspended particulate matter from sources other than these two road surfaces were
dominant.
It is therefore unlikely that CMA application prevented any exceedences of the EU Limit Value
concentration (daily mean > 50 µg m-3) for PM10 at these three locations (Marylebone Road, New
Cross and A12 Blackwall) during either phase of the trial period. It is also unlikely that continued
application of CMA along these corridors would result in the prevention any future exceedences.
Of the four industrial study sites, the analysis identified beneficial impacts of CMA application on
the roads adjacent to the monitoring sites and/or on the process yard at three sites. At the fourth,
Mercury Way, no robust analysis was possible due to limited measurements and CMA
applications.The most robust findings were at Horn Lane. A clear drop in local PM10 concentrations
occurred in the hour following on-site CMA application of between 31% and 59% relative to the
control. A lesser decrease was associated with the on-road applications. Analysis at Manor Road
was restricted due to a lack of pre-trial period, but a similar decrease in local PM10 (41%) was
associated with on-site CMA application. The complexity the industrial area surrounding the
Neasden Lane study site made robust analysis difficult, but some limited benefit of CMA
application was identified.
It can therefore be concluded that CMA could have an on-going role in reducing ambient PM10
concentrations in London in specific circumstances where levels of resuspended PM10 are
unusually high. Figure 25 presents a method by which such circumstances may be identified. It
shows the relationship between annual mean PM10 and NOX concentrations. Each point represents
an LAQN monitoring site where both pollutants were monitored for at least 75% of the year. CMA
Study sites are shown in red (except Mercury Way and Upper Thames Street, which don’t monitor
NOX). The linear fit line indicates the ‘expected’ concentration of PM10 relative to the
concentration of NOX, principally related to vehicle emissions. This relationship forms the basis of
the NOX tracer analysis used in the study. A positive deviation above this line indicates the
presence of a local non-exhaust related source of PM10, which can often be related to resuspended
particulate emissions, such as those from industrial waste processing sites.

60
50
(Bondway Interchange)
Marylebone Road
40 Neasden Lane
Annual Mean PM10 / ug m-3
Horn Lane
A2, Blackheath
Manor Road
30
A12, Blackwall
20 A2, New Cross
10
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Annual Mean NOX / ug m-3
Figure 25: Relationship between annual mean NOX and PM10 across the LAQN in 2011.
The linear fit line was calculated using reduced major axis (RMA) regression. CMA study sites are
highlighted in red. Note that the results for Manor Road are taken from 2010.
The results in Table 5 are sorted according to this ‘residual’ PM10 concentration, i.e., the distance
above the linear fit. In 2011, the three CMA study sites where no effect of CMA was found
(Marylebone, Blackwall and New Cross) were very close to this line, i.e., PM10 levels were as
expected from NOX concentrations. At those sites that did show a beneficial effect of CMA
application, PM10 levels were higher than expected. Investigation has shown that in each case this
could be attributed to unusually high levels of dust attributed to resuspension. The PM10
increment at the remaining site well above the line, Bondway Interchange, has previously been
demonstrated to be due to very local emissions from an adjacent London Underground vent. This
issue was resolved mid-way through 2011 with the partial screening of the vent.
This study provided evidence of a beneficial effect of CMA application on roads and industrial
sites. It highlighted that CMA application is most effective in locations with unusually high local
levels of PM10 most likely due to resuspension and that application had no identifiable effect in
more typical roadside locations, even where total PM10 levels are elevated. A straightforward
method for identifying locations where CMA application is likely to be most beneficial is
presented, without the need for full chemical characterisation. This residual PM10 approach is an
area of further work which could be developed to understand which types of locations deviate
from expected NOX to PM10 ratios, and so may benefit from dust suppressant application.
Continuing application of CMA on and around the industrial study sites is likely to have the
greatest impact on PM10 concentrations. At sites with a complex combination of dust generating
processes, detailed studies should be carried out by local permitting agencies to identify sources in
the area. CMA application is likely to be most beneficial when it is applied frequently and across as
wide an area as possible. The findings at the industrial sites support the implementation of dust
suppressant application at other locations with potentially high levels of PM10 attributed to
resuspension, such as construction sites.

6. Recommendations
Based on the findings of this study and associated activities, TfL and the GLA should consider the
following recommendations:
• The use of on-site CMA application using backpack sprayers should continue at the
industrial sites included in this study.
• At these industrial sites, CMA should be applied regularly on dry days across as wide an
area as possible.
• Consideration should be given to expanding on-site CMA application to include other
industrial sites shown to generate large quantities of dust.
• For constriction sites, the use of CMA should be considered on haulage routes on and off
site during the demolition and construction phases of large developments. This might
usefully be included in the Mayor of London’s Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘The
control of dust and emissions from construction and demolition’.
• It may benefit local air quality for major road works within Congestion Management Areas,
as defined in TfL’s Lane Rental Scheme, to apply CMA in the vicinity of the works at least
once per day of dust generating activity.
• PM10 and NOX monitoring results should be analysed at regular intervals to identify
locations where PM10 concentrations are exceptionally high in relation to NOX
concentrations. Any such locations should then undergo inspections and, where it is
considered likely that the cause is resuspended dust, a programme of CMA application
instigated.

7. References
Barratt B., Carslaw D.C., Green D., Fuller G.W., 2011. Characterisation and trends in air quality
within the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. King’s College London, August 2011.
Available on request from RBKC.
Barratt B., Carslaw D.C., Green D., Fuller G., Tremper, A., 2009. Analysis of Air Quality Data (LEZ) –
Year 1 Results. Client: Transport for London, May 2009. Available on request from TfL.
Barratt B., Fuller G.W., 2008. Analysis of PM10 concentrations at Horn Lane, Acton. Report for
Environment Agency . Available from ERG, King’s College London.
Carslaw D.C., Barratt B., 2010. Detecting London LEZ impacts on pollutant concentrations (briefing
note). King’s College London, August 2010. Available on request from TfL.
Carslaw D.C., Beevers S.D., Ropkins K., Bell M.C., 2006. Detecting and quantifying aircraft and
other on-airport contributions to ambient nitrogen oxides in the vicinity of a large international
airport. Atmospheric Environment. 40(28):5424-5434.
Carslaw D.C., Taylor P.J., 2009. Analysis of air pollution data at a mixed source location using
boosted regression trees. Atmospheric Environment 43 3563–3570.
Carslaw D.C.. 2012. The openair manual - open-source tools for analysing air pollution data.
Manual for version 0.6-0, King’s College London. Available from http://www.openair-
project.org/Downloads/OpenAirManual.aspx. Accessed 1st November 2012.
Deakin D., Ren C., 2011. Targeted Application of Calcium Magnesium Acetate (CMA) Pilot Study
Monitoring Report. URS Corporation report 49306764/LERP0002, August 2011. Available from
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/dust-suppressant-results.pdf. Accessed 1st
June 2012.
Deakin D., 2012. CMA Phase 2 Trials Literature Review. Prepared for Transport for London. URS
Infrastructure and Environment Ltd.
Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), 2009. Part IV of the Environment
Act 1995 Environment (Northern Ireland) Order 2002 Part III Local Air Quality Management
Technical Guidance LAQM.TG(09), Defra, London.
Font A.M., Fuller G.W., 2012. Characterization of the PM10 contribution from waste treatment
industrial sources. Report for LB Lewisham. Available from ERG, King’s College London.
Fuller G.W., Baker T., 2008. PM10 Source Apportionment at Bexley 4, Manor Road, Erith. Report for
LB Bexley. Available from ERG, King’s College London.
Fuller G.W., Barratt B., 2009. Characterisation of PM10 sources and trends at Neasden Goods Yard,
Neasden. Report for the Environment Agency. Available from ERG, King’s College London.
Fuller G.W., Carslaw D.C., Lodge H.W., 2002. An empirical approach for the prediction of daily
mean PM10 concentrations. Atmospheric Environment 36, 1431-1441.
Fuller G.W., Green D., 2004. The Impact of local fugitive PM10 from building works and road works
on the assessment of the European Union Limit Value. Atmospheric Environment 38, 4993-5002.
GLA, 2010. Clearing the air - The Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy. Greater London Authority,
December 2010. ISBN 978 1 84781 411 1. Available from www.london.gov.uk.

Green D., Tremper A., Fuller G.W., 2009. Chemical Speciation of PM10 at LEZ Supersites. King’s
College London, November 2009. Available on request from TfL.
Harrison R.M., Jones A.M., Lawrence R.G., 2003. A pragmatic mass closure model for airborne
particulate matter at urban background and roadside sites. Atmospheric Environment 37, 4927–
4933.
Harrison R. M., Jones A. M. and Lawrence R. G., 2004. Major component composition of PM10 and
PM2.5 from roadside and urban background sites. Atmospheric Environment. 38, 4531–4538.
Karanasiou A., Moreno T., Amato F., Tobías A., Boldo E., Linares C., Lumbreras J., Borge R.,
Alastuey A., Querol X., 2012. Variation of PM2.5 concentrations in relation to street washing
activities. Atmospheric Environment 54, 465-469
Lenschow P., Abraham H.J., Kutzner K., Lutz M., Preuβ J.D., Reichenbächer W., 2001. Some ideas
about the sources of PM10. Atmospheric Environment 35, S23-S33.
TRL, 2012. A summary of monitoring CMA concentrations on a London carriageway in November

2011. Transport Research Laboratory. Available from TfL on request.

Appendix – study site photographs

A501 Marylebone Rd, Westminster - Elevated PM10, limited dispersion (street canyon)
A3211 Upper Thames Street, City of London - Elevated PM10, limited dispersion (below
bridge)

A2 – Blackheath, Greenwich - Elevated local PM10, typical dispersion
A2 – New Cross, Lewisham - typical PM10, typical dispersion

Blackwall (Tunnel Northern Approach), Tower Hamlets - Elevated PM10, partial

treatment
Neasden Lane, Neasden (large industrial site)

Horn Lane, Acton (medium industrial site)
Manor Road, Erith (medium industrial site)

Mercury Way, Lewisham (small industrial site)
Images taken from Google Street View, July 2012.

Evaluation of the impact of dust suppressant application on ambient PM10 concentrations in London

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Evaluation of the impact of dust suppressant application on ambient PM10 concentrations in London

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Environmental

Evaluation of the impact of dust suppressant

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group

Customer Transport for London

File Reference \\vogue\erg\airquali\TfLProjects\CMA\EvaluationReport

Environmental Research Group

Name Signature Date

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 2

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 3

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 4

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 5

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 6

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 7

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 8

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 9

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 10

High intensity application rate

Industrial [study] site

Local component [of PM10]

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 11

PM10 priority hotspots

Waste Transfer Station

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 12

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 13

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 14

2.2 The use of dust suppressants to reduce ambient PM10

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 15

2.3 Analysis overview

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 16

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 17

3.1 Input data

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 18

14 at higher intensity On the border of an industrial area to the

A row of shops and housing, with a mixed

Elevated local PM10, typical 53 In a moderately open location on a hill

Mixed industrial area to the north and

In an open location with six lanes of

Typical local PM10, typical 53 In a semi-canyon location with four lanes

A small industrial area to the west, with

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 19

3.2 Isolation of the ‘local component’ of measured concentrations

3.3 Use of ‘non CMA’ control days

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 20

3.5 Meteorological normalisation (all study sites)

Meteorology exerts a large influence on concentrations of PM concentrations. In order to address

3.6 Polar plot cluster analysis (industrial sites only)

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 21

3.7 Diurnal characterisation (all study sites)

3.8 Chemical mass closure (Marylebone Road only)

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 22

3.9 Suspended CMA characterisation (Marylebone Road only)

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 23

4.1 A501 Marylebone Road

Mean - Application Mean - CMA Mean - NonCMA

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 24

Resuspended PM Tyre Wear Brake Wear Total PM10

Pre-trial 1.5 (5%) 1.9 (6%) 6.1 (18%) 33.1

non CMA 2.1 (6%) 2.1 (6%) 5.2 (14%) 36.2

CMA 3.0 (7%) 2.6 (6%) 6.1 (14%) 44.7

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 25

hours since hours since hours since hours since

King’s College London, Environmental Research Group 26

4.2 A3211 Upper Thames Street