Class 1 Air Quality Protection & Weather Modeling

Class 1 Air Quality Protection & Weather Modeling

The proposed HiTest Sands, Inc., silicon smelter is proposed to be sited within just 34 miles to the Spokane Indian Reservation Class 1 Air Quality protection area.

This map will show the Washington Class 1 Areas.


The actual by-air distance from the proposed smelter site in Newport to the Spokane Indian Reservation is only 34 miles.



The Kalispel Tribe in Usk has applied for Class 1 Air Quality protection, which is under 20 miles away from the proposed site.

There has been speculation and rumor regarding whether or not these Class 1 designations will help prohibit the construction of the silicon smelter in Newport. The answer is no.

Instead, the proposed smelter must be constructed to meet higher emissions standards (which in rural areas, is generally Class II). This is actually good news - on paper. Design of the plant and emissions that are projected to be released must be lower to meet nearby Class I air standards. If the plant is ever built - the higher emissions standards will be better for the community and health of humans and the environment.

Now for the "gotchas" which you may have already detected. The PSD permit will be required by HiTest to meet the higher emission standards (lower emissions by 90% then Class II). HiTest is currently modeling how this might be done. This is the modeling that they will use to demonstrate their ability to meet the higher emission standards.

The problem here is the modeling is supposed to be based upon accurate and valid data - of which none actually exists for this particular location. This poses some problems. So instead of being able to use site specific data sets for this location, they will use Weather Research & Forecasting Models (WRF), which are existing data sets from other areas.

Models are simulations - computer generated simulations. They are not live measurements on site, and are often based upon older or even incomplete data sets. They attempt to project atmospheric conditions and dispersion patterns for what is expected to be really experienced for this particular site and region. But they are not fool-proof or without their known issues.

Modeling data sets are constantly being updated, but this isn't all-inclusive updates for all regions and areas. Climate change, for example, has played havoc upon modeling data sets which were based upon previously expected climatic patterns, seasonal variations and winds. Huge disruptions in the jet stream have caused some data sets to be considered out-of-date and inaccurate. Disruptions in precipitation (rain and snow) along with extended periods of droughts and even an increase in forest fires have "disrupted" modeling data sets for their presumed accuracy.

Unfortunately, this describes the conditions for Newport, which has in fact experienced all of the above effects. This area has seen significant changes occur, with the real "true" seasons of spring, summer, fall and winter shifting away from historical norms. Precipitation rates and amounts have also shifted, with extensive periods of "weather stalling" also occurring.

Model accuracy and issues with current data sets has long been known. This commentary is from several years ago -

The models are inaccurate due to a number of factors - The U.S. Government (NOAA) and educational institutions monitor the accuracy of models - The models are routinely tweaked by NOAA to increase accuracy - The U.S. GFS model is less accurate than the European ECMWF model - NOAA believes it may have found why and is working to change the GFS

Since then, both computing power, data sets and additional research has helped to improve - but not perfect the modeling.

Newport does not have any weather monitoring stations. The closest one is in Deer Park, WA. There are significant difference between the actual weather (wind, rain, snow, inversions, temperatures) found in Newport versus Deer Park. The differences are quite large as anyone who has lived in either location can easily attest to. You can actually "see" the storm clouds over Newport from Spokane. Our weather here is very different then Spokane - or Deer Park.

The earlier Preliminary Air Quality Report performed for Hi Test Sands, Inc. was based upon Deer Park data, and it was demonstrably wrong. Now, Hi Test will be trying to model using the WRF data, but once again, this does not represent local conditions either.

Reliance upon the WRF means that modeling alone will be used as the projected weather and wind patterns and emission dispersion from the silicon smelter. Personally, I do not find this the least bit adequate or sufficient having had a fair bit of experience with how data sets are generated, maintained and updated. A modeling "bias" is introduced during many steps of the process, which can omit, average or reduce valuations in the data set that could have been avoided if there had been actual weather data available.

Another, more current modeling accuracy estimate (May 2016, published Feb. 2017)

The Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model was compared with daily surface observations to verify the accuracy of the WRF model in forecasting surface temperature, pressure, precipitation, wind speed, and direction. Daily forecasts for the following two days were produced at nine locations across southern Alberta, Canada. Model output was verified using station observations to determine the differences in forecast accuracy for each season.

Although there were seasonal differences in the WRF model, the summer season forecasts generally had the greatest accuracy, determined by the lowest root mean square errors, whereas the winter season forecasts were the least accurate. The WRF model generally produced skillful forecasts throughout the year although with a smaller diurnal temperature range than observed. The WRF model forecast the prevailing wind direction more accurately than other directions, but it tended to slightly overestimate precipitation amounts. A sensitivity analysis consisting of three microphysics schemes showed relatively minor differences between simulated precipitation as well as 2 m surface temperatures.

Verification of the Weather Research and Forecasting Model when Forecasting Daily Surface Conditions in Southern Alberta

In this case, modeling had better seasonal accuracy (summer), but not winter, and perhaps most important of all - there was actual weather monitoring measurements (real data measurements vs modeled data) to compare against for the accuracy of the model.

Newport does not have this information, and neither do any of the towns that will be affected by air pollution from the smelter.

WRF data sets have latitude, seasonal, and diurnal variations that can lead to fairly significant accuracy issues when (if available), compared to actual, real measurements. Modeling is in effect, just that - a "model" and should not be considered a fully accurate representation of what is happening locally.

The Pend Oreille River Valley is surrounded by mountains that funnel wind and weather precipitation in several directions (north west / east over Oldtown, Priest River, Laclede, Dover to Sandpoint and Sagle). There are also other valleys and towns in the immediate region for consideration of air dispersal of known plant emissions: Hoodoo, Blanchard & Spirit Lake, north up through Usk, Cusick, Ione and Metaline Falls.

To be fair, all of the river valleys and occupied population areas throughout the entire region can act like funnels for pollution, smoke, fog and precipitation. It's not rocket science to grasp what this means: these are the locations where the toxic plant pollution will also bio-accumulate. 

But there are more, dispersed by higher winds which everyone here knows are constantly shifting here. Even Priest Lake, Bead Lake, Marshall Lake, NoName and Sullivan and many other of the thousands of water bodies, streams and creeks which lie in topographical pockets throughout the region will be subjected to accumulating pollutants and contaminants from the plant. These critical water bodies are part of the watershed and riparian environments that make this region what it is. "Modeling" does not represent this topography and features like it should and never will.

Reliance on WRF models versus actual weather monitoring stations can omit local topographical effects and regional patterns affecting weather and air patterns. It can be snowing or raining in the Newport area, but bone dry in Deer Park (closest weather station). The topography here is radically different then Deer Park and has large effect upon localized weather variations and how toxic pollutants will actually be dispersed.

HiTest Sands, Inc. will be relying upon WRF data sets and air quality dispersion models generated. As previously shared, this attempt at air quality permitting is unsuitable for this area and should be rejected by every Washington and Idaho State and County agency, as an accurate measurements on the toxic air pollution and dispersal caused by the silicon smelter plant.

So far, in virtually all of the public documentation, announcements and materials available to the public, HiTest has refused to even mention the actual and known emissions that the plant will produce. That can only be deliberate now. You can only find out about this stuff if you dig into the all the machinations going on behind the scenes - what they don't want you to know about, and what they still won't admit to.

Pend Oreille County Commissioners (and now some in Idaho) are parroting the same blanket denials. This is not accidental, but a deliberate attempt to make it appear that there are no toxic emissions, which isn't even remotely true. This is part of the false narrative they are desperately trying to perpetuate.

There will be significant levels of air pollution that will affect nearby towns and the region. Silicon smelting is still a toxic industry. Thousands of tons of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, volatile organic compounds and particulate matter too tiny for the human eye to see, will rain down upon the region.  

Every. Single. Day. For Decades. You will wake up to this crap in the morning, and you will go to sleep at night still breathing it in as it works its slow deadly effects on your health, your life and the environment.

Air quality modeling is supposed to measure how these toxins are all going to be "dispersed", and to some degree "predict" where it might come down, but we know the answer well-enough already. The air dispersal of pollutants and the wind, rain, snow and fog in this region means it's coming down everywhere.

The term "dispersed" doesn't meant they've gone away either, it means that these toxins have been "spread out". They are still there - they're just now found everywhere.

None of these gasses and particulates are safe, and the only way to prevent long-term harm is to simply not emit them in the first place.

Lacking an actual weather monitoring station and accurate data sets means that this is all just guesswork for this particular region. This has some people seriously alarmed because without accurate data and without the public acknowledgement of actual emissions, the long-term health effects to human health and environmental health remain shrouded in deceit and inadmission and misrepresentation. This is exactly what happened in Burnsville, MS too, and the air modeling used for their permitting to this date remains suspect. But the plant was built anyway.

For some "mysterious" reasons, our public officials have gone on pretending that a smelter sited immediately above a densely populated town, right next to a watershed and major interstate river environment, will "not pollute". This denial absolutely boggles the mind of any clear thinking person. In effect, they are simply ignoring the real issue which is the future survival of this town and community, which has already had to struggle with other pollution sources for years.

We don't need more industrialized pollutant sources here - certainly none that will layer thousands of tons down every year over the forests, water and inhabited areas, and enter into our homes, schools and businesses.

What they are proposing for our region is simply insane - an industrial polluting source right over the town, in exchange for "promised" commercial receipts and a handful of jobs. But is that the real story here? Or is the sacrificing of this town and the region covering something else?

I've now come to learn that the official narrative is just the tip of the iceberg on what is actually going on here. The real story here hasn't been told.

There are people out there who know more - you are encouraged to make contact. Help us by helping where you can. Let's get the real story out on what is actually happening here.