Stephen Mueller & Jonathan Mallard Tennessee Valley Authority

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Some recent studies using Models-3 Ian Rodgers Presentation to APRIL meeting London 4 th March 2003.
Advertisements

1 Policies for Addressing PM2.5 Precursor Emissions Rich Damberg EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards June 20, 2007.
Template Development and Testing of PinG and VBS modules in CMAQ 5.01 Prakash Karamchandani, Bonyoung Koo, Greg Yarwood and Jeremiah Johnson ENVIRON International.
Paul Wishinski VT DEC Presentation for: MARAMA-NESCAUM-OTC Regional Haze Workshop August 2-3, 2000 Gorham, New Hampshire LYE BROOK WILDERNESS CLASS I AREA.
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009 Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009.
Incorporation of the Model of Aerosol Dynamics, Reaction, Ionization and Dissolution (MADRID) into CMAQ Yang Zhang, Betty K. Pun, Krish Vijayaraghavan,
Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, CA
Weight of Evidence Checklist Review AoH Work Group Call June 7, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
METO 637 Lesson 16.
Illumination Independent Aerosol Optical Properties n Extinction Scattering Absorption n Volume scattering function (phase) n Transmittance.
BACKGROUND AEROSOL CONCENTRATIONS AND VISIBILITY DEGRADATION IN THE UNITED STATES Rokjin Park Motivated by EPA Regional Haze Rule Quantifying uncontrollable.
Talat Odman and Yongtao Hu, Georgia Tech Zac Adelman, Mohammad Omary and Uma Shankar, UNC James Boylan and Byeong-Uk Kim, Georgia DNR.
WRAP Regional Haze Analysis & Technical Support System IMPROVE Steering Committee Meeting September 27, 2006.
CMAQ (Community Multiscale Air Quality) pollutant Concentration change horizontal advection vertical advection horizontal dispersion vertical diffusion.
Beta Testing of the SCICHEM-2012 Reactive Plume Model James T. Kelly and Kirk R. Baker Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards US Environmental Protection.
Preparation of Fine Particulate Emissions Inventories Lesson 1 Introduction to Fine Particles (PM 2.5 )
2004 Technical Summit Overview January 26-27, 2004 Tempe, AZ.
Modeling Aerosol Formation and Transport in the Pacific Northwest with the Community Multi-scale Air Quality (CMAQ) Modeling System Susan M. O'Neill Fire.
PM2.5 Model Performance Evaluation- Purpose and Goals PM Model Evaluation Workshop February 10, 2004 Chapel Hill, NC Brian Timin EPA/OAQPS.
The Impact of Biogenic VOC Emissions on Tropospheric Ozone Formation in the Mid-Atlantic Region Michelle L. Bell Yale University Hugh Ellis Johns Hopkins.
Further Development and Application of the CMAQ Ozone and Particle Precursor Tagging Methodologies (OPTM & PPTM) 7 th Annual CMAS Conference Chapel Hill,
Properties of Particulate Matter Physical, Chemical and Optical Properties Size Range of Particulate Matter Mass Distribution of PM vs. Size: PM10, PM2.5.
Biosphere/Atmosphere Interactions in the Tropics.
WRAP CAMx-PSAT Source Apportionment Modeling Results Implementation Workgroup Meeting August 29, 2006.
Annual Simulations of Models-3/CMAQ: Issues and Lessons Learned Pat Dolwick, Carey Jang, Norm Possiel, Brian Timin, Joe Tikvart Air Quality Modeling Group.
Project Outline: Technical Support to EPA and RPOs Estimation of Natural Visibility Conditions over the US Project Period: June May 2008 Reports:
VISTAS Emissions Inventory Overview Nov 4, VISTAS is evaluating visibility and sources of fine particulate mass in the Southeastern US View NE from.
The GEOS-CHEM Simulation of Trace Gases over China Li ZHANG and Hong LIAO Institute of Atmospheric Physics Chinese Academy of Sciences April 24, 2008.
1.
Regional Modeling for Stationary Source Control Strategy Evaluation WESTAR Conference on BART Guidelines and Trading September 1, 2005 Tom Moore -
TEMIS user workshop, Frascati, 8-9 October 2007 TEMIS – VITO activities Felix Deutsch Koen De Ridder Jean Vankerkom VITO – Flemish Institute for Technological.
Source Attribution Modeling to Identify Sources of Regional Haze in Western U.S. Class I Areas Gail Tonnesen, EPA Region 8 Pat Brewer, National Park Service.
Southeast US air chemistry: directions for future SEAC 4 RS analyses Tropospheric Chemistry Breakout Group DRIVING QUESTION: How do biogenic and anthropogenic.
OVERVIEW OF ATMOSPHERIC PROCESSES: Daniel J. Jacob Ozone and particulate matter (PM) with a global change perspective.
IMPROVE Algorithm for Estimating Light Extinction Draft Recommendations to the IMPROVE Steering Committee.
GEOS-CHEM Modeling for Boundary Conditions and Natural Background James W. Boylan Georgia Department of Natural Resources - VISTAS National RPO Modeling.
THE MODELS-3 COMMUNITY MULTI- SCALE AIR QUALITY (CMAQ) MODEL: 2002 RELEASE – NEW FEATURES Jonathan Pleim, Francis Binkowski, Robin Dennis, Brian Eder,
Extending Size-Dependent Composition to the Modal Approach: A Case Study with Sea Salt Aerosol Uma Shankar and Rohit Mathur The University of North Carolina.
Opening Remarks -- Ozone and Particles: Policy and Science Recent Developments & Controversial Issues GERMAN-US WORKSHOP October 9, 2002 G. Foley *US EPA.
Implementation Workgroup Meeting December 6, 2006 Attribution of Haze Workgroup’s Monitoring Metrics Document Status: 1)2018 Visibility Projections – Alternative.
Peak 8-hr Ozone Model Performance when using Biogenic VOC estimated by MEGAN and BIOME (BEIS) Kirk Baker Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium October.
AoH/MF Meeting, San Diego, CA, Jan 25, 2006 WRAP 2002 Visibility Modeling: Summary of 2005 Modeling Results Gail Tonnesen, Zion Wang, Mohammad Omary, Chao-Jung.
W. T. Hutzell 1, G. Pouliot 2, and D. J. Luecken 1 1 Atmospheric Modeling Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 2 Atmospheric Sciences Modeling.
Western Regional Technical Air Quality Studies: support for Ozone and other Air Quality Planning in the West Tom Moore Air Quality Program Manager Western.
Emission reductions needed to meet proposed ozone standard and their effect on particulate matter Daniel Cohan and Beata Czader Department of Civil and.
Transpacific transport of anthropogenic aerosols and implications for North American air quality EGU, Vienna April 27, 2005 Colette Heald, Daniel Jacob,
Atmospheric Chemistry and Transport Science Questions.
Key Findings from May & July 2008 WRAP Technical Workshops September 30, 2008 Steve Arnold, Colorado DPHE & Bob Kotchenruther, EPA R10 (Co-Chairs, WRAP.
Properties of Particulate Matter
Informed NPS Air Quality Management Decisions in Response to a Changing Climate.
Alternative title slide
Mobile Source Contributions to Ambient PM2.5 and Ozone in 2025
SAPRC07T Implementation within the CMAQ model.
Development of a Multipollutant Version of the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Modeling System Shawn Roselle, Deborah Luecken, William Hutzell,
Lupu, Semeniuk, Kaminski, Mamun, McConnell
Sunil Kumar TAC, COG July 9, 2007
Performance of CMAQ for Inorganic Aerosol Compounds in Greater Tokyo
Changes to the Multi-Pollutant version in the CMAQ 4.7
SELECTED RESULTS OF MODELING WITH THE CMAQ PLUME-IN-GRID APPROACH
Continuous measurement of airborne particles and gases
Deborah Luecken and Golam Sarwar U.S. EPA, ORD/NERL
Some thoughts on future air quality models from a WRF-Chem modeler
Simulation of Ozone and PM in Southern Taiwan
AIR POLLUTION AND GLOBAL CHANGE: TOWARDS AN INTEGRATED POLICY
Air Pollutants 200 Air pollutants are recognized and assessed by the USEPA Listed in the Clean Air Act.
Steve Griffiths, Rob Lennard and Paul Sutton* (*RWE npower)
A. Aulinger, V. Matthias, M. Quante, Institute for Coastal Research
Results from 2018 Preliminary Reasonable Progress Modeling
Emissions Discussion Group November 6, 2003
Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
Presentation transcript:

Stephen Mueller & Jonathan Mallard Tennessee Valley Authority Modeling Natural Fine Particle Concentrations Using the CMAQ Model with Added Treatments of Reduced Sulfur Compounds Stephen Mueller & Jonathan Mallard Tennessee Valley Authority

Research on Natural Particle Levels Identify natural emissions not routinely considered by US regulatory modeling. Develop expanded natural emissions data base. Identify model changes needed to accommodate expanded list of natural emissions. Quantify effects of revised emissions/model versus results from “standard” modeling approach.

Motivation for Research US EPA lowered the 24-hr PM2.5 standard & is considering a lower annual standard. US Regional Haze Rule explicitly requires consideration of “natural haze” components. Efforts to establish secondary standards (e.g., SOx/NOx) should consider natural pollutants.

Natural Emissions Current Technology Added Biogenic VOCs Lightning NOx Reduced sulfur (marine, wetlands, soil, lakes & geothermal ) Biogenic NOx Fires Windblown dust Ocean chlorinated gases Sea salt Ocean ammonia Animal ammonia Geogenic SO2* *Not typically included in data inventories although the system is designed to include it.

Study Area – Modeling Domain Limit of optimal lightning detection

New Natural Emissions Species Dimethylsulfide (DMS): oceans, lakes, coastal wetlands. H2S: oceans, lakes, coastal wetlands, geothermal features (hot springs, fumaroles, etc.) Nitryl chloride (ClNO2) & HCl: oceans – these emissions are surrogates for complex interaction between air pollutants & sea salt.

Natural & Anthropogenic Emissions in July 2002 Data Base “Orange”=anthropogenic “Green”=natural

CMAQ* Model CB05 Updates Gas chemistry Cloud chemistry Added reactions involving DMS, H2S and derivatives. Added reactions involving chlorine, OH, & DMS and its derivatives. Added ClNO2, HCl and chlorine radical reactions to CB05. *Version 4.6

Grid-Averaged Time Series: Sulfur

Grid-Averaged Time Series: Aerosols

Maximum Simulated “Natural” 24-hr Aerosol Concentrations for 2002 Sulfate Organic Carbon

Simulated Particles vs. Haze Guidance

Distribution of Simulated Natural + Background PM2.5 at 50 Receptors

Primary Conclusions CMAQ natural particle simulations useful tool for investigating contributions of natural systems to PM2.5/haze, ozone and deposition. EPA natural haze guidance is too simplistic. Modeling DMS & H2S introduces competition for OH that reduces sulfate formation in natural systems…effects in combined emissions simulations?