Environmental Engineering How Do Outdoor Pollutant Concentrations Vary Along the Height of a Tall Building? enters Abstract Itis generally assumed that vertical pollutant dispersion can reduce exposures to ambient pollutants in tall eceorch Seed Fenn buildings, 2s concentrations of some ground-source ff Paam-tndy sponsored pollutants are diluted at higher floors. However, no ‘Taipei Financial Center Corp. ‘measurements of pollutant concentrations have ever \ ooo been made specifically along the height ofa building apes 5, that would qualify as a supertall building by CTBUH NN ‘Height Criteria This paper summarizes the 2016 CTBUH Research Seed Funding study, conducted during a one-week period in the surnmer of 2017, which measured the vertical variation in the concentrations of several outdoor pollutants and environmental parameters «along the height of an approximately 60-story, 300-meter building in downtown Chicago. Floor height was found to be more strongly correlated with PML, PMs PM, CO, and O, concentrations than with local wind speed and direction, Keywords: Pollution, Height, Environment, Introduction Elevated outdoor concentrations of abomne pollutants such as particulate matter PM), ‘ozone (0), and nitrogen oxides (NO, are associated with increased risks of variety of heath effects (EPA 2009 & 2016). Howevet, ‘because outdoor pollutants can infitrate and ‘persist indoors where people in industrialized Countries spend the majority of ther time (Mepeis etal. 2001), much oftheir eposure to pollutants of autdoor origin often occurs Inside bullaings (Chen, Xnao, and Weschler 2012a & 20120; Meng et al 2005; Weschler 2006, Associations between outdoor pollutant concentrations and adverse health effects are commonly made using large {epidemiological studies that rely on stationary ambient measurements with alr sampling heights of two to 15 meters above ground (EPA 2012). But what does this mean for ‘occupants of tall buildings, where outdoor air Intake heights can be hundreds of meters above ground level?” To the authors'knowledge, no measurements cof pollutant concentrations have ever been made specifialy along the height of building that would classify as a tall or supertall Building by the CTBUH Height Ctra (CTBUH 2019). Several studies have investigated this vertical variation fora limited number of pollutants along the height of midise buildings, including: a 35-meter bulding in Boston (Wu etal. 2014), {240-meter building in China Li etal. 2005), 3 '5S-meter building in Chile (Vile etal, 2011),42-and a 127-meterbulding in ‘Singapore (Kalaarasan et al.2008). These field studies have generally confirmed findings from atmospheric measurements ‘and madels, demonstrating that particulate matter concentrations tend to decrease with building height, potential offering a protective effect at higher floors, wile ozone ‘concentrations ae likely higher at higher elevations, potentially offering 2 protective effect at lower floors. However, none have ‘extended beyond 130 meters in height, and the types of pollutant measurements have been limite, Despite the lack of measurements to date, ‘ew small epidemiology studies have suggested that building height could play an Important role inhuman health and that the vertical variation in pollutant concentrations might contribute to this effect. For example, 26 | Envecnmental Eginesing (CTBUA ural | 2019}!recent study in Switzerland suggested that ferences ln environmental exposures may have contributed to reductions in al-cause mortality that were associated with increasing residential floor height in buildings (Panczaketal.2013). Silay, 3 study of office buildings in the United States found significantly higher building-elated symptoms reported by occupants working (on the loos of buldings that had outdoor airintakes less than 60 meters above ground level which may have been due to greater levels of pollutants from vehicles at arintakes nearer the ground (Mendel et a, 2008), This work presents results fom a pilot study, funded by the Counci on Tal Buldings and Urban Habitat (CTBUM) through sponsor Taipei Financial Center Corparaton, in which the vertical variation of several outdoor polutants nd environmental parameters ‘were measured along the height ofa single tall building in downtown Chicago, from June 22-28, 2017. The aim was to provide novel measurements to quantify the dispersion of ambient pollutant concentrations and environmental patameters along the height ofthe case study building, and to determine the importance of.ouilding height and local meteorological factors in influencing the ‘observed variability inthe resiting data Ths ‘work has aleady been published inthe Journal Building and Environment (Azim ot 4.2018) here only brief summary and several excerpts ae presented, Methods Field measurements The case study bulding, which will emain unnamed and whose awneship will nt be ‘entiied was approximately 60 stories (300, meters tal Several eld measurement ‘approaches were discussed with the building engineers and ownership representatives in order to balance equipment cost accuracy, and practicality, including: (1) multiple instruments measuring simultaneously on multiple oors (0 (2 one set of mobile instruments to scan G6No previous measurements of pollutant concentrations had ever been made specifically along the height of a building that would classify as a ‘supertall’ building, according to the CTBUH Height Criteria.99 the height ofa building via (@)a pulley system or similar technology to lower and raise an instrument lator or (6) using a ‘drone or other aerial vehicle to lower and ‘alse lkely much small) instrument platform. Both options a and 2b were deemed impcactical for the purposes ofthis otk, 2s nether approach would allow for longer-term measurements (le, atleast one ‘week continuous) but would be limited t0 short-term measurements (ie, 2 few hours) ‘Additional, nether approach would allow {or actual simultaneous measurements, ‘meaning that a wue comparison of matched, simultaneous, time-stamped data could ever ealy be made (Le, only repeated scans of the bulging height would be achievable) Option 1 was chosen asthe ‘most realistic approach fiom the standpoints ‘ofboth data quality and practicality, However, Option 1 also has ts own letations For example, ar qualty monitors ‘that are formally designated as Federal Reference Methods (FRM) or Federal Equivalent Methods (FEM) to most accurately ‘measure pollutant concentrations are often at least US$10,000 and thus prohibitively expensive for simultaneous measurements in five locations. Therefore to beable to establsha finer vertical solution in ‘matched time-resolved pollutant measurements, a numberof more cost- effective air quality monitors on the market ‘were used and calibrated against each other and/or against research-grade FRM/FEM ‘methods ina lab when possible, imately, several commercially avaiable rmanitors were selected to measure concentrations of size-resolved particulate ‘matter (PM; 03-10 ur), ozone (0, nitvogen dioxide (NO), carbon dioxide (CO, and carbon monoxide (CO}, along with temperature and relative humidity in ‘outdoo. air along the height ofthe building Size-resolved PM number concentrations were also used to estimate PM, PM and PM mass concentrations Simultaneous ‘measurements were made using multiple sets of instruments placedin the outdoor air intakes on the mechanical systems located ‘on four iffeent floors ie, the second, 16th, 29th, and 44th), as well asin an open-air area ‘nthe 61st Moor located undemeath a ‘wo-meter-high cooling tower stand. The location of measurements within the ‘outdoor air intakes was upstream of ary filtration or mixing processes. Measurements were made within approximately 200, rmilimeters downstream ofa coarse metalic grate located on the exterior facade of the building, through which outdoor a lowes, and approximately three meters upstream rom adjustable louvers that were located downstream of the exterior grate. The louvers controled mixing between outdoor air and retum at, and were located two to three meters upstream ofa downstream fiter bank. All five sets of instruments were placedin the top drawer in Five identical ring tool carts with uninterruptible power supplies Installed in the bottom drawer (ee Table 1). “The top drawer ofeach rolling tool cart was rmodtfied to include a smal exhaust fan on ‘one side and small holes for ar intake dled ‘on the opposite side to continuously draw in sample airflow. A team of researchers distributed the monitoring instruments to be Installed on each floor with the help ofthe (TRUM Jura | 2019801 Enoronmenta nginering | 27Contin in in five ong tol carts deployed {ora 2¢houreotacaon ts postionedon he Interiors ofan outdoor arintake: ‘Aeroqual 50 OEM oxne mento ‘tec $0200 C02 montre -Aeroua SS00NO2 mentors LASCAR CO gers Onset 12013 HO80 2 chanel Tempentue! Fave Homi datogacr Smalleshaut fn eink oles Instrument poner supplies Unite power spies (UPS) Table Equipment seo conduct the expert building’ fcities personnel. In the ‘mechanical rooms, the rolling too carts were placed as close as possible to the exterior {fates on the outdoor air intakes, and a box fan was operated continuously to ensure that outdoor airwas lowing into the plenum area even ifwhen the HVAC outdoor air Intake happened to shutoff for periods of time For the 6st floor installation the ling tool cart was placed underneath a cooling tower stand that nas approximately two ‘meters tall and located in an otherwise open area that provided for substantial outdoor airflow tothe instrument cat, Allinstuments were synchronized to collect data at approximately the sare time Intervals of ether one or two minutes, depending on instrument imitations. In order to launch the other monitors simultaneously team members were deployed to each floor and communicated via two-nay racos to manually iniate data logging on each instument athe same Interval and at approximately the sare time, “The results a set of data that includes synchronized time-stamped data for which cach instrument for each measurement type Issynchronized tothe other instruments with the same measurement type, while all ‘measurement types are synchronized 10 within approximately 30 seconds of each other (0: closer. The monitors were then left torecocd data for approximately one week. ™ =m a j= j= j= Fo Fe Fo J Ae 3 so a ° ome i” 1” i” a” jo ju jum jo Foo Fu Fm Fv i i i i Jie Je 2 i mem tm ct vee ‘gure. Average standard devon ef theCO 0, NO» Pb, Pes and Ply concertos and the at ‘emperture a humiy ratios nested or etnated during the weeiog Bt campaign pote asthe spprsitscoreponcing ght ofthe ter bling. Data analysis Calibration factors were applied to the raw data collected fram each instrument during the caration campaigns. To evaluate the statistical significance ofthe floor-by-foor ‘comparisons, nonparametric Wioxon signed-rank tests were used to make paired Compatisons ofeach simukaneousy ‘measured parameter across the five foots. ‘Adjusted p-values that account forthe ge sample sizes were used to determine statistical significance (le, p= 1~(1— (005); where n = the number of recorded data points for each instrument) "Nonparametric Spearman rank correlation coefficients were used to evaluate the statisial signficance of comparisons ‘between parameter measurements and floor height and wind speeds and clrections from 2 nearby weather station. Results ‘Summary of measurements The 0,0, and ternperature and relative humidity dataloggers successuly collected data fr the entre weellong period, synchronized at one-minute intervals. PM measurements were also successful collecting at two-minute intervals imited by ‘onboard data storage capacity. The NO; monitors recorded data at one-minute intervals, only forthe last~55 days of the measurement campaign, because thelr Internal memory cards were fle, and ealer data points wete automatically overwritten, The CO loggets resulted in primary ‘observations below the detection limi, and ‘thus CO data are excluded. Comparisons between floors Figure 1 shows average (+ standard deviation) values fo all measured parameters ‘over the weeklong monitoring period, Plotted versus approximate building height ‘Alliferences in measured parameters between floors were statistically significant ‘except for comparisons of () PMs concentrations measured on the 4ath and 61s loors and (i) humidity ratio measured con the 16th and 61st floors. Belowisa summary of results for each measurement type. The second: loor measurements were 28 | Emonmenal Engineering (CTBUA ural | 2019}!used asa close-to-ground:-evel reference for all comparsons, Temperature. The average temperature was '~28%6 higher on the 16th floor compared to the second floor, but was ~1 7% (ie, ~04"C), ~238%6 (1e, ~05°0) and ~7 686 (ie, ~1.7O) lower on the 29th, 44th, and 613 floors compared tothe second float respectively. The average temperature ciference of =1.°C between the 6st flor (height of ~300 meters) and the second floor {height of ~5 meters yields an average temperature lapse rate of about 058°C per 100 meters along the height of the bulging. which is within ~10% ‘ofthe commonly used Standard Lapse Rate of 65°C per 1,000 meters (\e, 265°C per 100 ‘meters (Els and Torclin 2005; Leung and ‘Weisenantle 2008). However, the temperature lapse was not constant across each floor ‘compatison, which suggest that the temperature lapse rate assumption fora building ofthis size inthis urban context may not be linear, and may be influenced ty other factors such as surrounding buildings or highly localized meteorological conditions (Tong, Chen, and Malkawi 2017). Hurmidity ratio The average absolute humidity ratios were ~5.2%,~7.9%,~8 0% and ~5.1% lower on the 16th, 25th, 44th, and 61st floors ‘compared tothe second floor respectively, ‘There was no clea linear trend observed between humidity rato and building height, but the humidity ratio was lower on al lors above ground level Parteulate matter. The average PM, concentration was estimated to be ~18,486, 248%, ~34.5% and ~23796 lower on the 16th, 29th, 4th, and 61st floors compared to the second floor respectively, suggesting a fairly consistent trend of PM, concentrations decreasing with building height (see Figure 2. Similar, the average PM25 concentration vas estimated to be ~10-4%6, ~ 180%, ~30.3%, and ~31.7% lower on the 16th, 29th, “48th and 61 floors compared to the second loo, respectively The trend for both Mand PM. was near linear from floors 2 ‘through 44, with a deviation inthe open-air 6st floor location. The PM and PMs concentration dispersion data are reasonably consistent with prior ambient measurements (Chan and Kwok 2000; Li et a-2008) The average PM, concentration was estimated tobe ~129%, ~324%% and ~31 5% lower on ‘the 29th, 44th and 61st floors compared to the second floor respectively, but actually ‘was ~158%6higher on the 16th floor compared to the second flea (see Figure 3), This inconsistent tend atthe lower levels is suggestive of aca ground sources with greater dition occurring at higher ‘elevations Interestingly the standard deviation of PM concentrations was largest ‘on the 16th floor, which means that there ‘were peridicaly very high PMix concentrations measured on the 16th floor, and suggests an influence from nearby transient PM sources around this height. Note that the average PM, PM, and PMs concentrations estimated from number ‘measurements inthe second floor outdoor air intake as a near-ground reference were 15 ugit,-23 yal’ and ~106 afm, respectively, which are Surpisingly low foran Urban environment such as Chicago However, the average dally PM: concentration measured atthe nearest ambient regulatory monitor (-9 lometers, away) was only 28 ya/m? during the ‘measurement campaign (EPA 2014) For comparison, the average dally PMs concentration fr the year 2017 measured at the same regulatory monitor was ~8.6 y/ rm Although ths presents only a limited comparison it demonstrates thatthe field campaign happened to occur during a period of elatvely ow ambient PM concentrations. (zone and Oxides For 0, only data above the highest measured limit of detection 0D) forthe inexpensive instruments (which was estimated to be ~30 ppb) were used for ‘comparison, as varying LODs make it Impossible o compare null values with actual values recorded at concentrations lower than ~30 ppb. The average O; concentration above this LOD was ~11.9%6 and ~11.3% lower on the 16th and 29th floors compared tothe second floor respectively, but “160% and ~180% higher ‘onthe 44th and 61st lors compared tothe second foo, respectivly (se Figure 4. 204 Noor [6th Noor fl 290 Noor I 4th Noo il 61st Noor Ho 4 iit a 1 PM, concentration (g/m) 7 PMs concentration (g/m!) -oure 2 Boxplots of existe of Ph, Ps and Pla mas concentrations mde fom number concentration mesardon ach the fv oor: Outer are ela or ‘yooh cry, The PM mast concentration ae einer made suming apheral siape an density = 15 ge Noma: Below. um it counted 9 mae concentton ety underestimated (TRUM Jura | 2019801 Emornmenta nginering | 2966Concentrations of carbon dioxide were consistently lower on all floors above the second floor, suggesting dilution or dispersion of ground-level sources at higher floors.99 “This inconsistent vertical wend in; concentrations is not unlike the limited data from aircraft measurements, in which concentrations ist decrease and then Increase with elevation (Zhang and Rao 1998), This may be due to tration of O, by [NO from ground:evel tailpipe emission Sources, which might not reach the higher elevations or might be diluted and/or reacted away bythe time air masses reached higher elevations The average NO; concentration was ~25 3% lower onthe 16th floor, 47084 higher on the 29th lor, 03-05 um ~15.1%6 ower on the 4éth flor and ~5.3% oweron the 6st floor each compared to the second floor. The average CO; concentration was ~76%6,~1.5% ~49% and '~699%lower on the 16th, 29th, 4ath, and 61st floors compared to the second floor, respectively. These relative diferences cortespond to average absolute differences (of ~30 ppm, ~6 ppm, ~20 ppm, and ~28 ‘opin, respectively. There was no consistent linear trend in average CO, concentrations acrossall elevations, though once again, concentrations were consistently lower on all floors above the second floor suggesting lution or dispersion of croundevel sources a higher floots. Potential Drivers of Variations in the ‘Measured Data To investigate other potential meteorological ders ofthe observed varatons in measured parameters on each foo, data for wind speed and wind direction from the same time period asthe feld measurements ‘were obtained ftom a nearby weather station (Weather Underground 2017). These data ‘were typically reported at five-minute intervals, which were then summarized as hourly averages fr analysis. The most prevalent wind direction was ~200 to ~250" (ie, predominantly fiom the southwest, wihich would be expected to transport ‘tafic-elated pollutants from the heavily traficked 190/94 and -290 highways toward the bulding located in downtown Chicago. 2c foc 16th oor Ill 29th oo il eh Moor i 6st oor 05-1 ym 12m _ 1 aT i | = i i i” +t + a ; z 2aNo7 “Wono7 __6oesa7 B 1aaibs B0e;06 30806 40806 5806 ‘Number concentration (#/m) Number concentration (#/m’) 2-5um 5104m F10B6e0 20b%00 s08860 400000 500500 Number concentration (#/m’) ‘otal number concentration (0:3-10 um) — ‘|| i 4|| 4 a a Number concetnton i?) Numer concentration) Number concentration) Faure 3. ox pl of a0 rere parte number concentration at measredon eich ofthe fe ors Bnd: 09-05 ym 05-1 en 1-24 2m 5-10 mando umber concenvatons (03-10 ym), Outlers ate excused or graphical clay. 30 | Eenmenal Engineering (CTBUA ural | 2019}![2nd oor I 16th oor I 23th oor Il 44th oor Ii 61st oor --—_{i—+- 1 Hi i - 1 4 be a Ihe. 7 4 — 1[—- +t Hl H+ or 7 Fcwas wokamacn Cronus = owe 4 explo xan (0 nitrogen nse NOs nd carbon doi (0 concent ata measteden each othe fe Rr Lake Michigan isto the eas ofthe ‘measurement ste There was minimal afl ) 2018 Integrated cence stesment fr ides of open Health Criteria ech Tale PS, \VLLEWA , LEANN KURTENBACH RISEN, SSE, RUB, MA, CRORATTO GB RAPENGLOC. 201 Nee aden HONO, NOxand Om Sago eC: Amospher Ermer 423 386)-73 DO \WEATHERUNDERGROUND, 2017-FS Data Mest oop LCHCAO3"hes/twnanunergound cond pesonalweter ato astbaweD-KLCHCMES \WESCHLER 1 a08-O2onesnsuton abc ests Conviowions fom indoor posure zene nd Products of zone aed Chest Enaanmetal Heath Perspect 0 98998 0011288" etesrse \WU.C.D, MACNAUGHTON FLY LANE. ‘ADRYMEWCZ G, DURANT, BRUGSE DE SNGLER {10.2014 Mapong he eral Dtewton of osuaion ‘andar rFelizionin A Nes ghey Urban Neshtorhood: nears tr Epos ssn Jeurel ol posure Scere and Eieonrentl Tptemitogy 33297-30400 1108201384, 2G 1 RAS 1998 leet engin ‘eTerpor Erion of Gund evel Ozne once doumalot Ape Meteo 32: 1-91. Do Ta Ps snOSHSOSRP AIST TRON >a0coa 232 | Envecnmental Eginesing (CTBUA ural | 2019}!