Concentrations were calculated using an established air-sampling rate

At the 15 targeted nephelometer locations, plus an additional 14 locations near the burns, trained local personnel placed passive samplers to measure particulate matter and naphthalene for 24 to 120 hours and then sent the samplers to our laboratory for analysis. Due to winds shifting from the predicted direction, our samplers were directly downwind only at the Dunham burn. At that burn, although passive samplers were mounted on several telephone poles immediately adjacent to the burned field, only one PM10 nephelometer was successfully deployed. Highly elevated PM10 values were observed at the Dunham downwind monitor: a maximum hourly concentration of 6,500 µg per cubic meter occurred from 1:00 to 2:00 p.m., then a dramatic decline to 4.3 µg per cubic meter by 4:00 p.m. The average 24-hour PM10 concentration at this Dunham location was 276 µg per cubic meter, well above the federal criteria for unhealthy air, 150 µg per cubic meter . Although we only successfully deployed one monitor, the highly elevated concentrations were consistent with PM10 levels reported in another study of a burned field . Photo evidence was also consistent with visibility of less than 1 mile, which is expected at hazardous air levels . As noted, wind speed at this burn was somewhat higher than at the other burns . At several of the other 12 nephelometer locations, much smaller peaks were apparent in PM2.5 and PM10 after the burns were initiated, up to 57 µg per cubic meter of PM10 within the hour. Similar to the E-BAM findings, evening-to-morning peaks in PM2.5 and PM10 were observed. Although all of these peaks were relatively brief , these measurements were collected at places of public access, and even short-term exposures may have health risks. An increase in PM2.5 concentrations in air samples from city centers as low as 10 µg per cubic meter for as little as 2 hours has been associated with increased daily mortality in the surrounding population .At the laboratory, computer-controlled scanning electron microscopy and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy were used to obtain the individual sizes and chemistry of particles collected on the samplers. Then, PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 concentrations and particle size distributions were calculated using assumed particle density and shape factors and a particle deposition velocity model . In samples from the downwind locations at the Dunham burn,macetas plásticas por mayor concentrations of both PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 were elevated compared to an upwind sample. The fine fraction was primarily carbonaceous with a peak at the sub-micron range , while the coarse fraction had a lower carbonaceous percentage .

These carbonaceous percentages were higher than those measured upwind for fine and coarse fractions, as well as those reported for fine and coarse fractions in San Joaquin Valley ambient air . The coarse fraction in the downwind sample also had higher percentages of potassium, phosphorus and chlorine . Potassium and chlorine are considered potential indicators of biomass smoke , and phosphorus is found in most plant material. We also analyzed samples of unburned and burned bermudagrass and found that among inorganic elements, they contained similar peaks of potassium, phosphorus and chlorine . Their identification here may assist air pollution researchers attempting to identify sources of particulate matter in air samples. Naphthalene. Samples were analyzed for vapor-phase naphthalene by gas chromatography/mass spectroscopy.Naphthalene was occasionally detected at the five targeted burns with levels above the reportable limit at seven of the 23 locations near the burns and at one of the six more-distant locations . The highest level was detected in a sampler placed directly downwind of the Dunham burn. That highest level was lower than a reference level for respiratory effects , but only two samples were collected directly downwind and concentrations elsewhere in the plume could have been higher or lower. To compare, vapor-phase naphthalene measured in a laboratory from directly above the burning of agricultural debris was 60 µg per cubic meter . To assess health educational needs, we interviewed community leaders, community residents, farmers and school representatives from the agricultural area of Imperial County. We used a qualitative method called Key Informant Interviews , which allows for candid and in depth responses and the characterization of how interviewees discover and act on information. Potential participants were informed that the interview would take 30 to 60 minutes and that responses would be anonymous. If a respondent declined an interview, no information was recorded. Community leaders. Ten community leaders were interviewed out of 15 contacted. Those interviewed held management positions within either county environmental health agencies, nonprofit agencies that supported agriculture, or environmental organizations that promoted clean air. More than half of the community leaders ranked burning as a medium or high concern for their organization. Respondents representing the agricultural industry considered outreach important because, as one respondent said, “The public’s view of burning is fairly negative.” Suggestions for educational outreach included training for staff on the health impacts of smoke and “simple recommendations, options of actions to take during a burn.” Residents. 

Seven interviews were conducted after we contacted 15 residents who lived either in single-family homes or apartments within 2 miles of fields. Most considered burning a high or medium health concern compared to other community health concerns. One person said, “You’re closing doors and windows, just trying to keep the smoke out.” No respondent had ever called or inquired with government agencies. One respondent explained, “We all have to live with our neighbors. . . it would be difficult to file a complaint or inquiry.” None of the respondents were aware of any educational materials. Farmers. Of 30 farmers that we contacted, three agreed to participate. All three burned bermudagrass or wheat fields, thousands of acres in some years. The farmers discussed the benefits: as one explained, “Burned fields are more profitable.” All had considered disking their fields or using minimum tillage as an alternative to burning, which they had learned about by trial and error. All three discussed a certificate program used by the Air Pollution Control District to accredit and stimulate financial rewards for farmers who do not burn . All three also had voluntarily notified their neighbors about planned field burns. .School representatives. Out of 30 contacted, we interviewed five teachers or superintendents who each worked at a separate school or district near historically burned fields. School representatives were concerned about enforcement. Their suggestions included: “Have people call a number if they notice illegal burning or something suspect” and implement “stiff penalties for those who don’t [follow burning rules].” They had ideas about community education, such as public service announcements on television. Two respondents, who were not enthusiastic about doing outreach, said, “There’s so much that we have to do.” This consideration may have also been part of the reason why the participation rate was low for key informants in this group, and possibly the farmer group.Responses from our key informants indicated that educational messages were needed. We developed two-page fact sheets for three Imperial County audiences — the general public, school representatives and farmers. These covered the reasons for burning, burn regulations, potential health impacts and behavioral recommendations to reduce exposures. In our studies,cultivo del arandano azul elevated particulate matter levels and visible drift were observed as far as 500 feet from the edge of burning fields, and wind directions could quickly change. We advised that anyone who could see or smell smoke or was within 300 feet of a burning field should go inside. If people had to be outside near a burning field, we recommended face-piece particulate respirators , which are available at most hardware stores. A worker who must be outdoors and near a burn must be in a respiratory protection program that includes medical evaluations and fit-testing of the respirator’s seal on the worker’s face . A draft of the fact sheet for the general public was tested with community members at a health clinic and shopping center. Although there were complaints about its length, the fact sheet was highly rated for usefulness: all 20 participants gave it either a four or a five on a scale of one to five . The final fact sheets were distributed to local organizations and are available on the Internet .In our studies, agricultural burning created potentially hazardous air levels immediately downwind; during evening-to-morning hours, PM2.5 levels increased 2 to 8 µg per cubic meter.

Many studies have associated total daily human mortality with mean daily particulate matter levels measured in urban centers, and some have observed a relationship at levels as low as 2 µg per cubic meter . In California, increases in children’s total daily hospital admissions for respiratory problems are also associated with increases in daily PM2.5 and potassium air levels, the latter an indicator of biomass smoke . To protect public health and potentially reduce exposures to smoke from agricultural burns, we recommend additional health education, smoke management and air quality research. Health education. Fact sheets are needed for other California counties where agricultural burning takes place, as well as educational materials for outdoor and field workers about respiratory mask protection and smoke visibility guidelines . As interviewees suggested, broader community education could include public service announcements. Smoke management. Currently, CARB declares a permissive-burn day when meteorological conditions ensure the regional dispersion of smoke, for example, a wind speed at 3,000 feet of at least 5 miles per hour . Imperial County’s smoke management plan states that the Air Pollution Control District may put in place additional restrictions based on meteorological and air quality conditions, including strong ground-level or gusty winds . We observed substantial drift at a slightly greater wind speed than that previously suggested for a vertical column of smoke to occur . Local Air Pollution Control Districts could reduce ground level drift by specifying a ground-level wind speed above which burns should not take place. Additionally, evening to-morning levels of particulate matter could be reduced if warranted by other restrictions, such as shortening allowable burn hours. Interviewed residents expressed reluctance to report neighbors who might be out of compliance. Supplemental Imperial County Air Pollution Control District activities could include online instructions about how to make a complaint. In addition, posting visibility guidelines for hazardous drift and a daily listing of the areas in the county where burns were scheduled would improve community notification. Research. Additional air monitoring is needed to further characterize the nature and extent of ground-level plumes and how they are affected by local crop type and conditions. Although crop-specific particulate emission factors from burning bermudagrass stubble have not yet been developed, factors for other grasses, such as Kentucky bluegrass, are about twice those for rice and wheat . The moisture level of burned residue can also significantly affect particulate matter emissions, with a change in moisture from 10% to 25% more than tripling particulate emissions during the burning of rice, wheat and barley straw . Ambient monitoring should also include indoor air, as outdoor PM2.5 may substantially infiltrate buildings , and we observed that outdoor particulate matter increases overnight when people are likely to be inside. Residents may be amenable to researchers installing unobtrusive passive samplers to monitor indoor air. In further studies, methods might be modified to allow the further identification of carbonaceous material, the gaseous component of other PAHs and some of the thousands of other volatile gases found in smoke . Information is also needed on whether residents are following recommendations to reduce their exposure to smoke from agricultural burning. Finally, farmers expressed a willingness to try alternative farming practices, notably tilling. We recommend further study of alternative farming techniques such as conservation tillage, which may reduce the need for burning, conserve water and soil, and reduce air quality impacts . In addition, integrating livestock grazing with grain and hay farming as a substitute for burning or tilling may reduce pests, herbicide use and erosion and provide additional income . Further study is needed on how farmers could viably integrate alternative techniques into current practices, particularly for local crops such as bermudagrass, and the estimated human health impacts of such changes.

Surface water originates from both on farm and off farm sources

Globally and within the United States, the cost of energy associated with crop irrigation is increasing as growers convert to higher pressure systems and pump more groundwater from greater depths as water tables continue to drop . Additionally, parts of the electric grid are under a significant or increasing amounts of strain due to elevated demand and ambitious Renewable Portfolio Standard targets . Consequences of increased reliance on groundwater pumping extends beyond the energy implications and can results in irreparable environmental damages. Those consequences include aquifer contamination by seawater intrusion or depletion beyond the point of recharge, land subsidence, infrastructure damage, and harm to groundwater dependent ecosystems . Demand management strategies such as Demand Response can help farmers better manage electricity consumption and unlock new revenue streams while providing benefits to the electricity grid and the environment . Traditionally DR has been a strategy primarily used to shift and/or lower electrical loads during peak hours . In recent years, due to evolving grid needs, the value of DR has expanded beyond load shifting to include various services as dictated by the grid needs . The goal of this paper is to establish a clear understanding of current and future needs of the electricity grid, available electricity market mechanisms, and electricity consuming/generating equipment on farms. This paper aims to achieve that clear understanding by putting forward a standardized framework similar to the illustration shown in Figure 1, which allows farm equipment to be mapped to respective grid needs through available market mechanisms. This mapping will allow for the widespread adoption of DR within the agricultural industry by removing a significant knowledge gap that exists between the farm, utilities, and the grid. Such analysis can also identify market mechanism that are required for addressing current and future grid needs and are not captured through existing ones. While there are promising technologies under development aimed at increasing the reliability of agricultural DR participation,arandano azul cultivo little attention has been given to educating the farmer, utility/DR aggregator, and grid operator about the electricity grid, electricity consuming/generating equipment on farms, available electricity market mechanisms, and how all those connect and interact with each other.

As discussed by Aghajanzadeh, et. al. , agricultural loads, with their potential flexibility, can help reduce their energy cost, and improve grid stability as energy markets move into a future of increasingly distributed and renewable electricity generation. However, agriculture’s operational constraints, conventional irrigation system design and management standards, and low penetration of in field automation limit farms from taking advantage of more flexible energy and water use strategies that could benefit the grower, utility, and the grid. Several studies have highlighted the technological and operational hurdles for widespread adoption of DR in the agricultural sector. Olsen, et. al. provide foundational information on the status of agricultural DR in California . In this work Olsen et. al. identified several factors as barriers for farmers to participate in existing DR programs. Those barriers include insufficient irrigation capacity, lack of communications, controls, and financial incentives. Other factors hindering DR adoption include inflexibility of water delivery, application methods, and labor. According to Pacific Institute and Ringler et. al., the agricultural industry has the opportunity to improve its bottom line by tapping into new revenue streams such as DR incentives or implementing energy and water efficiency practices that reduce farm operation costs . However, agricultural demand management programs have proven to be unsuccessful in facilitating the needs of the farm and helping the utilities manage their demand and reduce cost . Many DR programs offered by electric utilities are developed with no regard to on farm operational constraints. Many customers may not even be aware of available DR enabling technologies or operational measures . Marks et al., also point out that the complex process of DR program enrollment, enablement, and participation has led to unsuccessful adoption of existing demand management programs within the agricultural industry .The electricity grid has evolved and integration of intermittent renewable sources such as wind and solar has made balancing the grid more complex. Figure 2 shows the generation mix of California’s grid under a 50% RPS scenario which is expected to be achieved by the year 2030 . Intra-hour variability and short-duration ramps are one of the immediate challenges faced by a 50% renewable California grid. In a 50% RPS scenario, thermal power plants need to ramp down as solar resources come online in the early hours of the day . However, they cannot drop to zero since a minimum capacity need to remain spinning for contingency as well as the evening ramp up, and in the absence of cheap energy storage, excess solar generation needs to be curtailed in order to maintain grid stability . As the solar resources stop generating electricity in the evening hours , thermal power plants need to ramp up to make up for the lost solar generation. The ramp up to meet the evening peak will be more pronounced due to lower than usual net demand due to high solar penetration .

Market mechanisms are platforms that connect electricity end users, generators, and grid operators. These mechanisms are needed to ensure that the needs of the electric grid are satisfied while entities providing services to the grid are fairly compensated. While more intermittent renewable sources are integrated into the grid as dictated by the RPS targets, grid operation becomes more complex thus giving rise to more complicated and nascent market mechanisms. While new systems such as Automated Demand Response 3 are seen crucial in addressing the challenges faced by the future grid, today’s wholesale DR systems seem experimental, and retail DR systems typically work on slow time scales as open loop systems to address peak load reduction . In order to address the variable generation mix and the dynamic demand of electricity, new market mechanisms are introduced and existing mechanism are constantly modified. The constant evolution of market mechanisms has led to a lack of understanding and a knowledge gap in how the electricity markets operate and the ways through which end users can participate in them. Moreover, the DR needs and availabilities of different actors may evolve over time needing constant modification of existing market mechanism which can further widen this knowledge gap. Another layer of complexity is the hardware requirements and communication protocols used for each market mechanism and by various service providers . This will leave many end users unaware of technological or operational measures available to them . Although this paper does not discuss communication protocols, telemetry, and settlement metering requirements, it lays the groundwork for further exploring those requirements by providing conceptual DR participation pathways. All DR service types fall into two main categories. Demand Side or load modifying resources, which reshape or reduce the net load curve; and Supply Side or supply resources, which are integrated into the Independent System Operator energy markets. Figure 8 summarizes these two categories and requirements for participating in each category.Energy efficiency and load management programs offered through the utilities in many US states are collectively called demand side resources. Such retail DR systems typically work on slow time scales as open loop systems to address peak load reduction . Currently agricultural loads can only participate in demand side DR by enrolling in a TOU, DR,macetas 25 litros or ADR program offered by their local utility.

Any resource that transacts with the electricity grid by providing a bid, price, and duration with short or no notification is treated as a generator and required to adhere to the same requirements . Transaction for such resources happen in wholesale ancillary services markets, operated by the ISO. This type of advanced DR will become more valuable over time, as the ISOs across the US integrate additional renewable energy sources and curtailment becomes more significant during the midday hours . There are currently no mechanisms in place that allows agricultural loads to directly provide supply side DR. Agricultural operations consume a variety of energy types for different purposes: directly as gasoline, diesel, natural gas, propane, or electricity , and indirectly as fertilizer or pesticide . Given that the focus of this paper is providing DR services to the grid, only direct electricity consumption is discussed. The number of farms producing electricity on site through renewable sources doubled between 2007 and 2012 . Farms that produce their own electricity are linked to energy markets on both the supply side and the demand side. This exposes farms to volatility in energy prices as energy consumers and uncertainty of revenue from the production of electricity generated on site and sold back to the grid . For example, electricity prices affect the costs of crop irrigation due to water pumping but also affect the value of renewable power generated on farm . While similar analysis can be carried out for other energy types consumed or generated on a farm, the focus of this paper is only on direct electricity consumption or generation on a farm specifically for the purposes of crop irrigation. Agriculture is a major user of ground and surface water in the US, accounting for approximately 80% of the nation’s consumptive water use. In many Western drought prone states that number increases to 90% . In Western states, irrigation provides most of the crop water requirements, while in eastern areas irrigation is largely supplemental . Unlike turf irrigation, which is mostly done at night, irrigating farms require a constant supply of water to meet crop requirements . Therefore, a large amount of agricultural pumping occurs during period of high evapotranspiration4  including summer afternoons which are prone to having the highest levels of ET. Irrigation pumps are primarily powered by electricity. According to 2013 Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey, 85% of irrigation pumps are electric and only 13% of pumps are powered by diesel . Since most pumps on farms use electricity to convey water, the large water pumping demand for agriculture can be translated to large electricity consumption. About 70% of the electricity consumed on a farm is due to water pumping .

Electricity is consumed on a farm to either pump water out of the ground, divert surface water, or pressurize water for irrigation applications. While pumps use the majority of the electricity on the farm, there are other equipment and generation sources that complicate the analysis of energy consumption on a farm. Those equipment include solar panels, variable frequency drives on pumps, and water storage. Presence of those components can affect the timing and manner of electricity consumption and its controllability on a farm. To take full advantage of available loads on farms, their DR potential, level of automation, response time , and required notification time should be characterized. Figure 10 illustrates a generic representation of available assets on a farm as well as the electricity and water flows. Figure 10 is representative of a generic farm and does not include all possible equipment found a farm . This paper focuses on water related energy consumers on a farm; therefore, all the equipment listed in Figure 10 and the rest of this analysis include equipment that are involved in water conveyance, pressurization, and storage. In the following sub sections, each relevant piece of farm equipment will be analyzed in detail, including its manner and timing of energy use, level of automation, and ways through which they can impact electricity consumption on a farm. A summary of farm equipment characteristics discussed in this section is presented in Table 2. In order to integrate agricultural loads into the grid their level of automation, response time, and demand flexibility need to be characterized. Three levels of automation is assigned to each farm end use . Surface water pumps divert water from surface water sources and distribute the water throughout the farm for irrigation purposes.On farm surface water comes from ponds, lakes, or streams and rivers, while off farm water sources are generally supplied to the farm through local irrigation districts; mutual, private, cooperative, or neighborhood water delivery companies; or from local or municipal water systems . Surface pumps are low static head systems with most of the energy expended to overcome the dynamic head. As of 2008, 52% of irrigation water needs were satisfied through surface water sources, but that number has been decreasing in recent years with groundwater withdrawals increasing to make up for the surface water shortage.