Influence of COVID-19 lockdowns on Switzerland’s air quality
Introduction
Europe was identified as an epicentre of the COVID-19 pandemic in early March, 2020.[1] In response to widespread community spread and to urgently reduce infection rates of SARS-CoV-2, the virus which causes COVID-19 in the population, many European governments imposed strict “lockdown” measures in early or mid-March, 2020. These lockdown measures were unprecedented and compelled (or forced) most of the population to stay in their homes, work from home if possible, and businesses such as restaurants, shopping malls, schools, universities, playgrounds, etc. were closed. Essential services remained open and generally included commercial activities around food, medication, transportation, and utilities.
The Swiss Federal Council announced a country-wide lockdown on March 16, 2020 which would begin on March 17 and provisionally end on April 20 (but was subsequently extended to April 27).[2] The Swiss lockdown was somewhat more lenient than those seen in other European countries where leisure and recreational activities were more strictly controlled. Due to Switzerland’s federalist structure, there were also some differences among the different cantons. For example, the southern canton of Ticino boarding Italy introduced many measures earlier than the rest of the country. This was because the area experienced an earlier increase in infections due to the proximity to the northern Italian outbreak.
The lockdowns experienced in Europe effectively acted as a switch where economic activity all but stopped within a very short amount of time. The financial and economic consequences of such measures will likely be dire.[3] A small positive which comes from such actions is that air quality should have improved rather quickly due to emissions of atmospheric pollutants being dramatically reduced across almost all of Europe.[4] There have been many news articles showing this effect, and the satellite imagery over China and Europe have been particularly striking.[5–10] CO2 emissions have also reduced.[11] Here, we will explore the air quality situation in Switzerland with ambient monitoring data from the National Air Pollution Monitoring Network (NABEL).
The importance of weather
A discussion which has been lacking in most of the news articles, and is very important to consider, is the influence of weather when investigating changes in air pollutant concentrations.[12] It is obvious that emissions of pollutants would have reduced throughout Europe due the the COVID-19 lockdown measures from curtailed economic activities.[13] This would have resulted in lower concentrations and better air quality in many locations. However, the same effect of decreasing concentrations would be observed if, for example, wind speed and atmospheric dispersion had increased. This is a classic issue and question in air quality interpretation: “Are the changes observed due to emissions or weather?” Here, we take into account changes in weather so we can more robustly determine what effect the lockdown had on air quality. A similar analysis has been conducted in the United Kingdom by David Carslaw, a previous supervisor and a colleague.[14, 15]
All data and analyses are preliminary at this stage and research is ongoing.
Analysis framework
Hourly nitrogen dioxide (NO2), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and ozone (O3) data from many NABEL ambient monitoring sites across Switzerland were used.[16] Basic details of the sites can be found in Table 1 and the locations of the sites are shown in Figure 1. Not all NABEL sites were included in the analysis. Sites were selected based on what pollutants are monitored and their site type (classification of what type of environment the sites are located in, for example, roadside or rural). The sites’ observations were used to train random forest machine learning models[17] to predict pollutant concentrations based on meteorological/weather measurements. The random forest models also used time variables as inputs because pollutants vary over different time scales, for example, by season and throughout the day. Complete and thorough details of the method can be found elsewhere.[18, 19] The approach has been used in Switzerland before, but for a different application.[20]
Site | Site (NABEL code) | Site name | Lat. | Long. | Elevation (m) | Site type | Site area |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ch0001g | JUN | Jungfraujoch | 46.548 | 7.985 | 3578 | High alpine | Rural |
ch0002r | PAY | Payerne | 46.813 | 6.944 | 489 | Rural background | Rural |
ch0003r | TAE | Tänikon | 47.480 | 8.905 | 538 | Rural background | Rural |
ch0004r | CHA | Chaumont | 47.050 | 6.979 | 1136 | Rural elevated | Rural |
ch0005a | DUE | Dübendorf-Empa | 47.403 | 8.613 | 432 | Suburban | Suburban |
ch0005r | RIG | Rigi-Seebodenalp | 47.067 | 8.463 | 1031 | Rural elevated | Rural |
ch0008a | BAS | Basel-Binningen | 47.541 | 7.583 | 316 | Suburban | Suburban |
ch0010a | ZUE | Zürich-Kaserne | 47.378 | 8.530 | 409 | Urban background | Urban |
ch0011a | LUG | Lugano-Università | 46.011 | 8.957 | 280 | Urban background | Urban |
ch0028a | LAU | Lausanne-César-Roux | 46.522 | 6.640 | 530 | Urban roadside | Urban |
ch0031a | BER | Bern-Bollwerk | 46.951 | 7.441 | 536 | Urban roadside | Urban |
ch0032a | HAE | Härkingen-A1 | 47.312 | 7.821 | 431 | Rural motorway | Rural |
ch0033a | MAG | Magadino-Cadenazzo | 46.160 | 8.934 | 203 | Rural background | Rural |
ch0052a | SIO | Sion-Aéroport-A9 | 46.220 | 7.342 | 483 | Rural motorway | Rural |
ch2000e | BER | Beromünster | 47.190 | 8.175 | 797 | Rural background | Rural |
ch2001e | DAV | Davos-Seehornwald | 46.802 | 9.839 | 1637 | Rural elevated | Rural |
Data between January 1, 2018 and February 29, 2020 were used for training of the random forest models. Data from March 1, 2020 onwards were not used for model training, however, the meteorological data were used to predict pollutant concentrations. These predictions after March 1 can be thought of as a “business as usual” scenario and gives an estimate on what pollutant concentrations would have been without the hypothesised decrease in emissions resulting from reduced economic activity due to forced reductions in mobility. Predictions can be compared with the observed values to see how the measurements differ. The models used are regression models so they generalise and are unable to capture minima and maxima of concentrations of some pollutants particularly well. However, if we look at errors over time, and if the business as usual scenario is true, the errors will bounce around zero. In contrast, if the system changes, the errors will diverge from zero. This is the basis of the analysis.
Results and discussion
First checks
Time series of pollutant concentrations at selected monitoring sites for between March 1 and July 31, 2020 are shown in Figure 2. Generally, it seems that concentrations of NO2, NOx, and O3 did not drastically change after the lockdown was implemented. There are however examples, such as NO2 and NOx at Lugano-Università, where concentrations have visibly decreased after the lockdown, indicating that concentrations and lockdown measures are connected. Therefore, additional, more in-depth exploration is needed to help explain the patterns seen in Figure 2.
When starting an analysis such as this, it is important to consider what the general state-of-play of weather conditions have been for the analysis period. The weather in the first five months of 2020 was mild in most of Switzerland.
In Figure 3, it can been seen that average air temperatures in the first seven months of 2020 have been higher in many locations plotted compared to the last few years. In some locations, such as Basel and Zürich, wind speed has also been unusually high. The warmer temperatures and higher wind speeds have likely led to a less stable planetary boundary layer (the lowest portion of the atmosphere). Although this may not have been universal across all of Switzerland, the dispersion characteristics of the atmosphere have likely been enhanced in the January–July 2020 period compared to previous years in many locations. These observations suggest that emissions of pollutants may have been lower than the last previous years, and in some locations there would have been enhanced dispersion.
Mean pollutant concentrations for the same periods (between January and July for 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020) are displayed in Figure 4. Here, we can see for NO2 and NOx, that concentrations are generally lower in 2020 than in previous years. In some locations such as Bern-Bollwerk, Härkingen-A1, and Payerne the mean NO2 and NOx concentrations in 2020 are much lower than in previous years. However, for O3, this is not the case.
The aggregations in 2020 shown in Figure 4 include a few months of lockdown measures, so this question can be asked: "Are the lockdown measures responsible for the observed decreases?’’ Based on the meteorological data shown in Figure 3, it is expected that concentrations may have been lower due to a mild winter and increased atmospheric dispersion in many locations in Switzerland. Therefore, further work is required to disentangle the influence of the lockdown measures and the potentially confounding meteorological factors.
Modelling pollutant concentrations between March 1 and July 31, 2020
After the random forest models were trained, checked for adequate skill, and used to predict concentrations of NO2, NOx, and O3 between March 1 and July 31, 2020, the observed concentrations were compared to those which were predicted. Figure 5 shows daily time series of observed and predicted concentrations for between March and June for the sites included in the analysis. For some sites, such as Bern-Bollwerk and Lugano-Università, a clear divergence is seen between the NO2 observed and predicted values after the March 17 lockdown date. The observed concentrations were lower than the predicted values suggesting that actual NO2 concentrations were lower than those based on a business as usual scenario. The differences (delta) between the observed and predicted values are also shown in Figure 6.
To more clearly expose the differences between the observed and predicted values, cumulative sums (cumsum
) were calculated for the selected sites’ pollutants. This technique simply aggregates the deltas/differences over time and allows for identification of both the direction and time when the divergence occurred. Cumulative sums of NO2,
NOx, and O3 for the selected sites are displayed in Figure 7.
Figure 7 is a key figure in many ways because the changes shown are relative to the business as usual scenario. First, it shows that NO2 and NOx have decreased across most of Switzerland, but for the rural sites (Beromünster and Payerne), this decrease has been much less dramatic. For Bern-Bollwerk, Lausanne-César-Roux, and Härkingen-A1 (all traffic sites), the divergence from the business as usual scenario occurs immediately at the start of March which suggests that concentrations of NO2 and NOx were lower than what the model predicts two weeks before the lockdown was announced. This could be explained by NOx emissions already being lower than normal three weeks before the lockdown, or limited skill of the model from using the surface meteorological variables for training – or perhaps a combination of both. These features in Figure 7 link back to the interpretation of the simple aggregations shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4. Because these three sites are classed as traffic sites (Table 1), the decreases can be interpreted as lower emissions of these pollutants in close proximity to the monitoring sites.
When the sites were aggregated to their site classifications, all site types showed lower NO2 and NOx concentrations than expected three weeks before the lockdown measures were implemented (Figure 8). Figure 8 gives further evidence that economic slowdown and subsequent reduction of emissions was occurring three weeks before the national lockdown on March 17.
Figure 7 and Figure 8 suggests that O3 concentrations have been higher between March and June, 2020 than the business as usual scenario. O3 is not a primary (directly emitted) pollutant and is generated in the atmosphere. O3 and NOx are linked by a transformation cycle where a component of NOx is transformed to O3 in the presence of ultra-violet light. Because of this relationship, if NOx concentrations decrease, O3 concentrations increase which is what is observed in Figure 7 and Figure 8.
Looking at the differences after March 17
For the period after March 17, 2020, the differences between the observed and predicted values can be aggregated and transformed into percentage change. Table 2 shows these calculations and a plot of the observed and predicted means are displayed in Figure 9. Table 2 demonstrates that NO2 and NOx concentrations have decreased by up to 44 and 58 % respectively (at Lugano-Università) based on the scenario modelling technique. Care is needed with interpreting these results however because the uncertainty calculations have not been conducted yet. Additionally, Figure 7 demonstrates that some models showed immediate departure from the observed time series when used to predict at the start of March, 2020. This may led to an overestimation of the changes seen in Table 2.
Inversely, O3 concentrations have increased in all locations across Switzerland in response to lower NOx which is to be expected due to the chemical relationship between NOx and O3 within the troposphere (lower atmosphere). A figure visualising the percentage changes is available in Figure 10. Please note that the percentage change calculations are relative to one another and need to be interpreted alongside the concentrations (these data are in Table 2 and Figure 9).
Site name | Variable | Observed | Predicted | Observed-predicted delta | Predicted-observed percentage change |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lugano-Università | NO2 | 12.6 | 22.4 | -9.8 | -43.8 |
Magadino | NO2 | 8.3 | 13.2 | -5.0 | -37.5 |
Bern-Bollwerk | NO2 | 21.8 | 31.8 | -10.1 | -31.7 |
Zürich-Kaserne | NO2 | 14.6 | 20.9 | -6.2 | -29.9 |
Härkingen-A1 | NO2 | 20.1 | 27.9 | -7.8 | -27.8 |
Lausanne-César | NO2 | 22.7 | 31.2 | -8.6 | -27.4 |
Basel-Binningen | NO2 | 10.2 | 13.4 | -3.3 | -24.3 |
Dübendorf-Empa | NO2 | 14.6 | 18.7 | -4.0 | -21.7 |
Payerne | NO2 | 7.3 | 9.2 | -2.0 | -21.2 |
Beromünster | NO2 | 5.5 | 5.9 | -0.4 | -7.2 |
Lugano-Università | NOx | 13.9 | 33.1 | -19.2 | -58.0 |
Magadino | NOx | 10.2 | 19.7 | -9.5 | -48.4 |
Bern-Bollwerk | NOx | 35.2 | 61.2 | -26.0 | -42.5 |
Zürich-Kaserne | NOx | 16.9 | 28.1 | -11.2 | -39.7 |
Dübendorf-Empa | NOx | 17.6 | 28.8 | -11.1 | -38.7 |
Lausanne-César | NOx | 33.6 | 52.2 | -18.6 | -35.6 |
Härkingen-A1 | NOx | 34.8 | 53.1 | -18.2 | -34.4 |
Basel-Binningen | NOx | 11.8 | 16.4 | -4.5 | -27.7 |
Payerne | NOx | 8.2 | 11.3 | -3.1 | -27.4 |
Beromünster | NOx | 5.9 | 6.5 | -0.6 | -8.7 |
Payerne | O3 | 67.7 | 67.5 | 0.2 | 0.2 |
Dübendorf-Empa | O3 | 64.0 | 63.4 | 0.6 | 1.0 |
Basel-Binningen | O3 | 70.8 | 68.9 | 1.8 | 2.6 |
Zürich-Kaserne | O3 | 70.2 | 66.8 | 3.4 | 5.2 |
Härkingen-A1 | O3 | 58.8 | 55.5 | 3.3 | 5.9 |
Beromünster | O3 | 84.8 | 79.4 | 5.5 | 6.9 |
Magadino | O3 | 69.1 | 63.5 | 5.7 | 8.9 |
Lausanne-César | O3 | 65.5 | 60.1 | 5.4 | 9.1 |
Bern-Bollwerk | O3 | 58.6 | 51.2 | 7.4 | 14.4 |
Lugano-Università | O3 | 80.6 | 66.5 | 14.0 | 21.1 |
Final notes
A classic question in air quality data analysis is if changes in pollutant concentrations are caused by reduction of emissions or changes in weather. To robustly investigate the effect of the COVID-19 lockdown measures in Switzerland on air quality, a scenario modelling approach was applied using machine learning models. This approach allows for an estimate of what pollutant concentrations would have been if lockdown measures were not applied in March, 2020. These estimates can be compared to what was observed and the differences explored.
The results indicated that NO2 and NOx concentrations have decreased in most locations in Switzerland by up to 44 and 58 % respectively due to the lockdown measures. Care is needed with interpreting these results because of the relative nature of these calculations and the lack of uncertainty calculations at this stage. O3 on the other hand has generally increased across Switzerland due to the inverse relationship this pollutant has with NOx. These results outline the complexity of the atmospheric pollutant climate with different sources and the links among different species. This is something which has been stated in some news articles but has rarely been quantified.[12]
Please note that the observations used and the data analysis are preliminary at this stage and research is on going. The results will be enhanced and revised in the near future.
References
1. BBC. (2020). Coronavirus: Europe now epicentre of the pandemic, says WHO. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51876784
2. Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH). (2020). New coronavirus: Federal government measures. Retrieved from https://www.bag.admin.ch/bag/en/home/krankheiten/ausbrueche-epidemien-pandemien/aktuelle-ausbrueche-epidemien/novel-cov/massnahmen-des-bundes.html
3. Fernandes, N. (2020). Economic effects of coronavirus outbreak (covid-19) on the world economy. Available at SSRN 3557504. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3557504
4. European Environment Agency’s (EEA). (2020). Air pollution goes down as europe takes hard measures to combat coronavirus. Retrieved from https://www.eea.europa.eu/highlights/air-pollution-goes-down-as
5. Watts, J., & Kommenda, N. (2020). Coronavirus pandemic leading to huge drop in air pollution. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2Rnkvbk
6. Carrington, D. (2020). Coronavirus UK lockdown causes big drop in air pollution. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/27/coronavirus-uk-lockdown-big-drop-air-pollution?CMP=share_btn_fb&fbclid=IwAR2hH6xZLM97xNvMtkjgOpAPFjA9rQ41FDjdPxWYg2O7wc4a7GgRVzzk1Zo
7. Hall, K. (2020). Lockdown helping cleanup New Zealand’s environment. Retrieved from https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/lockdown-helping-cleanup-new-zealands-environment?fbclid=IwAR2cBICDH840xOD9UJ2hXQEefiog-6-Z41q4K9dNblX6yr4tIsV_-Sniijc
8. Ammann, K. (2020). Stickstoffdioxid und Ozon, Die Luft in der Schweiz ist sauberer—aber warum? Retrieved from https://www.srf.ch/news/schweiz/stickstoffdioxid-und-ozon-die-luft-in-der-schweiz-ist-sauberer-aber-warum
9. Hook, L., & Wisniewska, A. (2020). How coronavirus stalled climate change momentum. Retrieved from https://www.ft.com/content/052923d2-78c2-11ea-af44-daa3def9ae03
10. Liu, F., Page, A., Strode, S. A., Yoshida, Y., Choi, S., Zheng, B., … Joiner, J. (2020). Abrupt decline in tropospheric nitrogen dioxide over china after the outbreak of covid-19. Science Advances. doi:10.1126/sciadv.abc2992
11. Le Quéré, C., Jackson, R. B., Jones, M. W., Smith, A. J. P., Abernethy, S., Andrew, R. M., … Peters, G. P. (2020). Temporary reduction in daily global co\(_2\) emissions during the covid-19 forced confinement. Nature Climate Change. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-0797-x
12. Schiermeier, Q. (2020). Why pollution is plummeting in some cities—but not others. Nature. doi:10.1038/d41586-020-01049-6
13. Lee, J. D., Drysdale, W. S., Finch, D. P., Wilde, S. E., & Palmer, P. I. (2020). UK surface NO\(_2\) levels dropped by 42% during the COVID-19 lockdown: impact on surface O\(_3\). Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions, 2020, 1–27. Retrieved from https://acp.copernicus.org/preprints/acp-2020-838/
14. Carslaw, D. (2020). Analysis of COVID-19 lockdown on UK local air pollution. Retrieved from https://ee.ricardo.com/news/analysis-of-covid-19-lockdown-on-uk-local-air-pollution
15. Carslaw, D. (2020). Blog update on covid-19 and changes in air pollution. Retrieved from https://ee.ricardo.com/news/blog-update-on-covid-19-and-changes-in-air-pollution
16. Federal Office for the Environment. (2017). National air pollution monitoring network (NABEL). Retrieved from https://www.bafu.admin.ch/bafu/en/home/topics/air/state/data/national-air-pollution-monitoring-network--nabel-.html
17. Breiman, L. (2001). Random forests. Machine Learning, 45(1), 5–32. doi:10.1023/A:1010933404324
18. Grange, S. K., & Carslaw, D. C. (2019). Using meteorological normalisation to detect interventions in air quality time series. Science of the Total Environment, 653, 578–588. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004896971834244X
19. Grange, S. K. (2018). rmweather: Tools to Conduct Meteorological Normalisation on Air Quality Data. Retrieved from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=rmweather
20. Grange, S. K., Carslaw, D. C., Lewis, A. C., Boleti, E., & Hueglin, C. (2018). Random forest meteorological normalisation models for Swiss PM\(_{10}\) trend analysis. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 18(9), 6223–6239. doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-6223-2018