McFarland Michael J, Terry Spencer H, Calidonna Michael J, Stone Daniel A, Kerch Paul E, Rasmussen Steven L
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, USA.
J Air Waste Manag Assoc. 2004 Mar;54(3):296-306. doi: 10.1080/10473289.2004.10470908.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Reference Method 9 (Method 9) is the preferred enforcement approach for verifying facility compliance with federal visible opacity standards. Supporters of Method 9 have cited its flexibility and low cost as important technological and economic advantages of the methodology. The Digital Opacity Compliance System (DOCS), an innovative technology that employs digital imaging technology for quantifying visible opacity, has been proposed as a technically defensible and economically competitive alternative to Method 9. Results from the field application of the DOCS at EPA-approved Method 9 smoke schools located in Ogden, UT, Augusta, GA, and Columbus, OH, demonstrated that, under clear sky conditions, the DOCS consistently met the opacity error rate established under Method 9. Application of hypothesis testing on the smoke school data set confirmed that the DOCS was equivalent to Method 9 under clear sky conditions. Under overcast sky conditions, human observers seemed to be more accurate than the DOCS in measuring opacity. However, within the smoke school environment, human observers routinely employ backgrounds other than sky (e.g., trees, telephone poles, billboards) to quantify opacity on overcast days. Under conditions that compel the use of sky as plume background (e.g., emission stacks having heights above the tree line), the DOCS appears to be a more accurate methodology for quantifying opacity than are human observers.
美国环境保护局(EPA)参考方法9(方法9)是用于核实设施是否符合联邦可见不透明度标准的首选执法方法。方法9的支持者将其灵活性和低成本视为该方法重要的技术和经济优势。数字不透明度合规系统(DOCS)是一种采用数字成像技术来量化可见不透明度的创新技术,已被提议作为方法9在技术上具有合理性且在经济上具有竞争力的替代方法。DOCS在位于犹他州奥格登、佐治亚州奥古斯塔和俄亥俄州哥伦布的EPA批准的方法9烟雾学校进行现场应用的结果表明,在晴空条件下,DOCS始终符合方法9规定的不透明度误差率。对烟雾学校数据集进行假设检验的结果证实,在晴空条件下,DOCS与方法9等效。在阴天条件下,人工观测者在测量不透明度方面似乎比DOCS更准确。然而,在烟雾学校环境中,人工观测者在阴天通常会使用天空以外的背景(如树木、电线杆、广告牌)来量化不透明度。在强制使用天空作为烟羽背景的条件下(如排放烟囱高度高于树线),DOCS似乎是一种比人工观测者更准确的量化不透明度的方法。