Workshop on Air Quality Data Analysis and Interpretation Evaluation of Emission Inventory.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Improving the Emissions Inventory Brad Toups, Manager Industrial Emissions Assessment August 12, 2004 Regulatory Forum.
Advertisements

Directive 2008/50/EC of 21 May 2008 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe These slides do not provide a complete description of the requirements.
Source Apportionment of PM 2.5 in the Southeastern US Sangil Lee 1, Yongtao Hu 1, Michael Chang 2, Karsten Baumann 2, Armistead (Ted) Russell 1 1 School.
Status of 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Program in Clark County Presentation to Air Quality Forum May 10, 2005.
1 Policies for Addressing PM2.5 Precursor Emissions Rich Damberg EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards June 20, 2007.
Inventory Issues and Modeling- Some Examples Brian Timin USEPA/OAQPS October 21, 2002.
Click to edit Master title style Click to edit Master subtitle style 1 Modeling of 1,3-Butadiene for Urban and Industrial Areas B. Rappenglück and B. Czader.
EPA PM2.5 Modeling Guidance for Attainment Demonstrations Brian Timin EPA/OAQPS February 20, 2007.
Direct PM 2.5 Emissions Data, Testing, and Monitoring Issues Ron Myers Measurement Policy Group SPPD, OAQPS.
CARBON FRACTIONS & Southern Nevada Air Quality Study (SNAQS) Judith Chow Desert Research Institute, Reno, NV February 5, 2002.
Three-State Air Quality Study (3SAQS) Three-State Data Warehouse (3SDW) 2008 CAMx Modeling Model Performance Evaluation Summary University of North Carolina.
RECEPTOR MODELLING OF UK ATMOSPHERIC AEROSOL Roy M. Harrison University of Birmingham and National Centre for Atmospheric Science.
Evaluation of Secondary Organic Aerosols in Atlanta
Discussion Space Research Centre. Urbanization and Industrialization: in 2008, more than half of humans live in cities UN Population Report 2007.
WORKING GROUP I MONITORING DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION TFMM Workshop, Paris, 2006, Nov 29 –Dec 1.
Environmentally Conscious Design & Manufacturing (ME592) Date: March 29, 2000 Slide:1 Environmentally Conscious Design & Manufacturing Class 11: Air Quality.
Evaluating emissions from top-down observations T. Ryerson – NOAA Chemical Sciences Division Motivation Most inventories compiled from bottom-up estimates,
Developments in EMEP monitoring strategy and recommendations from AirMonTech Kjetil Tørseth, NILU/EMEP-CCC.
The Control Method of Photochemical Smog Lee Jin-Young Civil & Environmental System Engineering 2006 년 6 월 12 일.
1 An Update on EPA Attainment Modeling Guidance for the 8- Hour Ozone NAAQS Brian Timin EPA/OAQPS/EMAD/AQMG November 16, 2005.
Air Quality Impact Analysis 1.Establish a relationship between emissions and air quality. AQ past = a EM past + b 2.A change in emissions results in an.
Angeliki Karanasiou Source apportionment of particulate matter in urban aerosol Institute of Nuclear Technology and Radiation Protection, Environmental.
Improving Emission Inventories in North America NERAM V October 16, 2006 William T. Pennell NARSTO Management Coordinator.
Study On Ambient Air Monitoring, Emission Inventory and Source Apportionment Methodology Frame Work By A. L. Aggarwal.
Earth System Sciences, LLC Suggested Analyses of WRAP Drilling Rig Databases Doug Blewitt, CCM 1.
Nanoparticles from Road Vehicle Exhaust. An Artifact or a Reality? Background Current emission standards for motor vehicles are mass based. Properties.
” Particulates „ Characterisation of Exhaust Particulate Emissions from Road Vehicles Key Action KA2:Sustainable Mobility and Intermodality Task 2.2:Infrastructures.
Clinton MacDonald 1, Kenneth Craig 1, Jennifer DeWinter 1, Adam Pasch 1, Brigette Tollstrup 2, and Aleta Kennard 2 1 Sonoma Technology, Inc., Petaluma,
Harikishan Perugu, Ph.D. Heng Wei, Ph.D. PE
PM2.5 Model Performance Evaluation- Purpose and Goals PM Model Evaluation Workshop February 10, 2004 Chapel Hill, NC Brian Timin EPA/OAQPS.
Presentation by: Dan Goldberg Co-authors: Tim Vinciguerra, Linda Hembeck, Sam Carpenter, Tim Canty, Ross Salawitch & Russ Dickerson 13 th Annual CMAS Conference.
Preparation of Control Strategies October 18, 2007 NAAQS RIA Workshop Darryl Weatherhead, Kevin Culligan, Serpil Kayin, David Misenheimer, Larry Sorrels.
Recent Developments in California and the U.S. Bart Croes Air Resources Board Sacramento, California 6 March, 1996.
The Use of Source Apportionment for Air Quality Management and Health Assessments Philip K. Hopke Clarkson University Center for Air Resources Engineering.
1 Neil Wheeler, Kenneth Craig, and Clinton MacDonald Sonoma Technology, Inc. Petaluma, California Presented at the Sixth Annual Community Modeling and.
Causes of Haze Assessment Dave DuBois Desert Research Institute.
Emission Inventories and EI Data Sets Sarah Kelly, ITEP Les Benedict, St. Regis Mohawk Tribe.
Analysis Examples and Issues: Identifying Sources Policy Analysis Tools for Air Quality and Health A workshop hosted by NERAM and Pollution Probe Jeffrey.
PM Model Performance in Southern California Using UAMAERO-LT Joseph Cassmassi Senior Meteorologist SCAQMD February 11, 2004.
Comparison of Ambient Measurements to Emissions Representations in Modeling Presented by: Lyle R. Chinkin and Stephen B. Reid Sonoma Technology, Inc. Petaluma,
Causes of Haze Assessment (COHA) Update. Current and near-future Major Tasks Visibility trends analysis Assess meteorological representativeness of 2002.
Public Meeting to Discuss “Weekend Effect” Research June 23, 1999.
Secondary Organic Aerosols
January 24, Update to CCAQS PC Final Projects for CCOS & CRPAQS.
Regional Modeling Joseph Cassmassi South Coast Air Quality Management District USA.
TEMIS user workshop, Frascati, 8-9 October 2007 TEMIS – VITO activities Felix Deutsch Koen De Ridder Jean Vankerkom VITO – Flemish Institute for Technological.
Prakash V. Bhave, Ph.D. Physical Scientist PM Model Performance Workshop February 10, 2004 Postprocessing Model Output for Comparison to Ambient Data.
1 Modeling the Atmospheric Transport and Deposition of Mercury Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Silver Spring, Maryland Mercury Workshop, Great.
May 22, UNDERSTANDING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PRECURSOR REDUCTIONS IN LOWERING 8-HOUR OZONE CONCENTRATIONS Steve Reynolds Charles Blanchard Envair 12.
1 What did we learn? : Effect of Air Pollution on Health Status of Participants.
Georgia Institute of Technology SUPPORTING INTEX THROUGH INTEGRATED ANALYSIS OF SATELLITE AND SUB-ORBITAL MEASUREMENTS WITH GLOBAL AND REGIONAL 3-D MODELS:
June 29, 2011NASA/ARB Data Analyses Discussion1 What can We Learn from ARCTAS-CARB Data? Modeling and Meteorology Branch Planning and Technical Support.
Western Air Quality Issues and Photochemical Modeling - An Industrial Perspective Doug Blewitt, CCM AQRM Dana Wood, PE BP.
Operational Evaluation and Model Response Comparison of CAMx and CMAQ for Ozone & PM2.5 Kirk Baker, Brian Timin, Sharon Phillips U.S. Environmental Protection.
NPS Source Attribution Modeling Deterministic Models Dispersion or deterministic models Receptor Models Analysis of Spatial & Temporal Patterns Back Trajectory.
Particulate Matter and its Sources in Georgia Sangil Lee.
Organo-Sulfur and Receptor Modeling Status/Challenges Christopher Palmer Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry.
Impact of VOCs from different sources on surface ozone concentration in summer in Beijing, China Hang Qu.
Status Report on the Role of Ammonia in the San Joaquin Valley December 11, 2003 Air Resources Board California Environmental Protection Agency.
Workshop on Air Quality Data Analysis and Interpretation Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PAMS) – US Approach.
October 1999PM Data Analysis Workbook: Glossary1 Glossary and Acronyms This section provides definitions of acronyms and terms used in the workbook. A.
Workshop on Air Quality Data Analysis and Interpretation Ozone Formation Potential.
CENRAP Modeling and Weight of Evidence Approaches
Stephen Reid, Hilary Hafner, Yuan Du Sonoma Technology, Inc.
Suggested Analyses of WRAP Drilling Rig Databases
Source Apportionment of PM2.5 With CMB8
Uncertainties influencing dynamic evaluation of ozone trends
U.S. Perspective on Particulate Matter and Ozone
RECEPTOR MODELLING OF AIRBORNE PARTICULATE MATTER
Diagnostic and Operational Evaluation of 2002 and 2005 Estimated 8-hr Ozone to Support Model Attainment Demonstrations Kirk Baker Donna Kenski Lake Michigan.
Presentation transcript:

Workshop on Air Quality Data Analysis and Interpretation Evaluation of Emission Inventory

Emission Inventories  Emission inventories are routinely used for planning purposes and as input to comprehensive photochemical air quality models.  Significant biases in either VOC or NO x emission estimates can lead to poor baseline photochemical model performance and erroneous estimates of the effects of control strategies. Essential top-down emission inventory evaluation procedure: comparison of emission estimates with ambient air quality data.  Caution: Ambient/emission inventory comparisons are useful for examining the relative composition of emission inventories; they are not useful for verifying absolute amounts unless they are combined with bottom-up evaluations.

Approach Perform the following three tasks:  Compare early morning (e.g., LT) ambient- and emissions-derived NMOC/NO x and CO/NO x ratios.  Compare early morning ambient- and emissions-derived relative compositions of individual chemical species and species groups.  Compare early morning ambient- and emissions-derived relative reactivities of individual chemical species and species groups. Early morning sampling periods are more appropriate to use in these evaluations because they have the best potential to minimize the effects of upwind transport and photochemistry. Emissions are generally high, mixing depths are low, winds are usually light, and photochemical reactions are minimized.  Conduct a second evaluation following the incorporation of the recommendations made in the first evaluation, in order to verify improvement.

NMHC/NO x Emissions  PCD – 1997 (Bangkok Inventory) Total NMHC (MW=14 g/mol) on a per C basis (268,882 ton/yr)x(1000 kg/ton)/(0.014 kg/mol) = 19.2 x 10 9 mol/yr Total NO x (MW=46 g/mol as NO 2 ) (329,161 ton/yr)x(1000 kg/ton)/(0.046 kg/mol) = 7.16 x 10 9 mol/yr NMHC/NO x =2.7 (ppbC/ppb)

NMHC/NO x Emissions - Mobile  PCD – 1997 (Bangkok Inventory) Mobile NMHC (MW=14 g/mol C) (232,973 ton/yr)x(1000 kg/ton)/(0.014 kg/mol) = 16.6 x 10 9 mol/yr Mobile NO x (MW=46 g/mol) (264,648 ton/yr)x(1000 kg/ton)/(0.046 kg/mol) = 5.75 x 10 9 mol/yr NMHC/NO x =2.9 (ppbC/ppb)

Bangkok Emission Inventory Comparison NO x /CO  Ambient = 30 – 70 ppb/ppm  Inventory (Total) = 430  Inventory (Mobile) = 460 NMHC/NO x  Ambient (slope) = 9.3 ppbC/ppb  Ambient mean, median = 22.9, 17.2  Inventory (Total) = 2.7  Inventory (Mobile) = 2.9

Let’s look at the NMHC/CO ratio in emissions! Total Emissions  NMHC/CO = (19.2 x 10 9 mol/yr)/ (16.5 x 10 9 mol/yr) = 1.2 ppbC/ppb Mobile Emissions  NMHC/CO = (16.6 x 10 9 mol/yr)/ (12.5 x 10 9 mol/yr) = 1.3 ppbC/ppb Ambient  NMHC/CO = 0.5 (slope of scatter plot)  NMHC/CO = 1.3, 0.9 (Mean, median of ratio at National Housing 10T)

Bangkok Emissions Inventory Conclusions  NO x /CO – lower for ambient than inventory  NMHC/NO x – higher for ambient than inventory  NMHC/CO – reasonably close in ambient to inventory  These results make one question the NO x portion of the inventory specifically. It seems to be high in the inventory relative to both CO and NMHC.

Differences between Emission Inventories and Ambient are Common

Problems with Vehicle Emissions

Uncertainties in Evaluation of Emission Inventories EMISSION INVENTORY UNCERTAINTY ISSUES  Spatial and temporal allocation of activities  Adjustment of emission rates for temperature and day-specific activities  Assignment of accurate and representative source speciation profiles AMBIENT MEASUREMENTS UNCERTAINTY ISSUES  The representativeness of the monitoring sites  The influence of lower quantifiable limits and precision  The identification, misidentification, or lack of identification of all important species  Potential sampling or handling losses of total mass or individual species COMPARISONS-RELATED UNCERTAINTY ISSUES  The matching of emissions and ambient NMOC species  The temporal matching of the emissions and ambient data  The spatial matching of the emissions and ambient data  Meteorological factors such as wind speed and direction and mixing height  The level of ambient background NMOC and NO x concentrations  Chemical reactions

VOCs as tracers SpeciesMajor SourceComments AcetyleneMobile sources, combustion processes Tracer for vehicle exhaust EtheneMobile sources, petrochemical industry Tracer for vehicle exhaust EthaneNatural gas useNon-reactive PropaneLPG and natural gas use, oil and gas production Relatively non-reactive, often underestimated in E.I. i-butaneConsumer products, gasoline evaporative emissions, refining Replacement for CFCs in consumer products

VOCs as tracers (continued) SpeciesMajor SourceComments ButaneGasoline evaporative emission Tracer of gasoline use IsopreneBiogenics Tracer of biogenic emission, highly reactive BenzeneMotor vehicle exhaust, combustion processes, refining Tracer for combustion, motor vehicle exhaust TolueneSolvent use, refining, mobile sources One of most abundant species in urban air internal olefins Gasoline evaporative emissions, plastics production Reactive XylenesSolvent use, refining, mobile sources Reactive

SPECIATE  This is a very useful tool to provide estimates of the composition of emissions from a variety of sources.  Speciates the TOC emissions from a few hundred different sources into individual organic compounds.  Also, speciates the PM emissions from a few hundred different sources into individual “elemental” contributions.  Source profiles can be exported to the Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) model.

Source Contributions  Species contributions to sources are generally based on emission source measurements or standard source- contributions like SPECIATE.  Source characterization can be quite expensive and representative of operations during test conditions.  We will briefly discuss an option based on ambient measurements.

Comparison of Source Contributions

GRACE/SAFER Graphical Ratio Analysis for Composition Estimates (GRACE)  Correlations between acetylene (assumed to be emitted solely from vehicle exhaust) and other VOC are used to establish the minimum and maximum exhaust-related ratios of acetylene to other species. GRACE plots of each roadway-corrected species versus all others are also examined. Source Apportionment by Factors with Explicit Restrictions (SAFER)  SAFER is a multivariate receptor model that predicts the number of sources and their composition from the ambient data. SAFER requires that these predictions be consistent with observed intercorrelations of the concentrations and with physical constraints and explicit constraints derived from GRACE.  SAFER requires large data sets, thus, the PAMS auto-GC data are well suited for this analysis. Environ. Sci. Technol., 28, , 1994.

Plots of VOCs vs Acetylene

Edge Relationship Environ. Sci. Technol., 28, (1994).

Ratios to Acetylene

Ambient Data for Emissions Profiles GRACE/SAFER RESULTS 1990 ATLANTA OZONE STUDY  Using ambient data, obtained three source profiles: roadway emissions (acetylene), whole gasoline (roadway-corrected 2,3- dimethylpentane), gasoline headspace vapor (n-butane).  GRACE/SAFER-derived profiles compared well to source measurements.  Source profiles used in subsequent CMB modeling.  PAMS data well suited for these analyses.

VOC Source Contributions Roadway Whole Gasoline headspace White – model derived Black – source derived

Chemical Mass Balance Approach  The CMB model can be quite useful in identifying various source contributions to ambient air quality measurements.  CMB has been used extensively to understand source contributions to particulate measurement, based on the elemental composition of samples.  The same approach is quite useful for understanding various source contributions to ambient VOC measurements, based on speciated VOC composition of the samples.