Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

NORTRIP- 2011-03-07 1 Different measures to reduce PM10 concentrations –a model sensitivity analysis Gunnar Omstedt, SMHI Introduction model description.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "NORTRIP- 2011-03-07 1 Different measures to reduce PM10 concentrations –a model sensitivity analysis Gunnar Omstedt, SMHI Introduction model description."— Presentation transcript:

1 NORTRIP Different measures to reduce PM10 concentrations –a model sensitivity analysis Gunnar Omstedt, SMHI Introduction model description model sensitivity analysis -reducing studded tyres, sanding, street sweeping conclusions

2 NORTRIP Model description see earlier description for more details

3 NORTRIP Sensitivity analysis

4 NORTRIP Sensitivity analysis The effect of not using sand in the model for this case decrease the emission factor with about 45 mg/vkm and the PM10 concentration (90-p daily mean) with about 14 µg/m 3 baseline: Hornsgatan 2000

5 NORTRIP Sensitivity analysis daily mean PM10 concentrations µg/m 3 Case 3: keeping the road surface wet for 1 week

6 NORTRIP Street sweeping Why is it so difficult to clean streets? PM10 Jagtvej year 2003 Ketzel, M., et al., 2007: Estimation and validation of PM2.5/PM10 exhaust and non-exhaust emissionfactors for practical street pollution modelling. Atmospheric Environment 41, Production and removal of road dust particles are in balance related directly to the traffic. After street sweeping a new balance will arise.

7 NORTRIP Street sweeping but how about Nordic winter conditions with strong seasonal variations in concentrations? l is the baseline case 4: street sweeping 1 March

8 NORTRIP Street sweeping so the timing is important! case 5: street sweeping 15 April

9 NORTRIP Street sweeping Case 6: street sweeping 1 March and no sanding after that studded tyres is more important than sand

10 NORTRIP Studded tyres Norman, M., Johansson, C., 2006 Atmospheric Environment 40,

11 NORTRIP Studded tyres Case 7: max stud=50% with sand Cases: 7 and 12

12 NORTRIP Summary of results

13 NORTRIP Summary of results

14 NORTRIP Conclusions  The model seems to response qualitatively rather realistic to different measures for reducing PM10 concentrations  Studded tyres is the most important parameter  Sanding can increase the emissions  Street sweeping can decrease emissions but the effectiveness is strongly dependent of timing  Street sweeping, doing it at the right time, can be as effective as not using sand  A combination of different measures will probably be the best solution This is only a model sensitivity study so the conclusions are first of all related to the model!

15 NORTRIP Applications of the models: discussion on the suitability of the models for assessment/ planning/ management

16 NORTRIP PM10 90-percentil > 50 µg/m µg/m µg/m µg/m 3 <35 µg/m 3 Norrköpings kommun Miljö- och hälsoskyddskontoret Robert Sandsveden Åtgärdsprogram-PM10 Norrköping nuläge Example

17 NORTRIP Norrköping scenario 2015 med ökad trafik genomförda åtgärder PM10 90-percentil > 50 µg/m µg/m µg/m µg/m 3 <35 µg/m 3 Norrköpings kommun Miljö- och hälsoskyddskontoret Robert Sandsveden Trafikuppräkning Dammbindnig med CMA, tidigare samt upprepad vårrengörning, Fysiska åtgärder hamnbron, Sjötullsgatan Söderleden+ ny Norrled Beteendeändringar: minskad dubbdäck, mer kollektiv trafik

18 NORTRIP Type of stations  19 streets and close to roads stations  21 urban background stations Andersson, S. och Omstedt, G., 2009: Validering av SIMAIR mot mätningar av PM10, NO2 och bensen. Utvärdering för svenska tätorter och trafikmiljöer avseende år 2004 och SMHI Meteorologi, Nr Model validation of SIMAIRroad

19 NORTRIP Results- streets and roads The uncertainty of modelling estimation is defined as the maximum deviation between the measured and calculated concentration levels for 90 % of individual monitoring points, without taking into account the timing of the events. The average annual modelling uncertainty for PM10 is defined as ±50% Comparison with EU Air Quality Directive targets MRPE annual mean=0.38 ; MRDE annual mean=0.24 MRPE 90-percentile =0.42 Fairmode

20 NORTRIP Uncertainties in models SIMAIR: MRPE annual mean=0.38 and MRPE 90-percentile =0.42 this means that the model is OK ?, but how should we communicate such results? Example: calculated yearly mean PM10 concentration is 25 µg/m 3 and calculated 90-percentil is 40 µg/m 3 then the uncertainties is: Yearly mean: 25 +/-9.5 µg/m 3 i.e. between µg/m 3 90-percentil(daily mean): 40 +/ µg/m 3 i.e. between µg/m 3 Fairmode

21 NORTRIP Improvements/ decreasing uncertainties  inputdata traffic, geometric configurations, uncertain information about studded tyres, sanding/salting, cleaning etc., background concentrations, meteorological data  model description simple dispersion concept such as street canyon and open roads  meteorological uncertainties  measurements: representatives, errors


Download ppt "NORTRIP- 2011-03-07 1 Different measures to reduce PM10 concentrations –a model sensitivity analysis Gunnar Omstedt, SMHI Introduction model description."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google