IMPROVE Data Processing

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Microsoft Excel 2002 Microsoft Excel is a powerful spreadsheet program that helps you to organize data complete calculations make decisions graph data.
Advertisements

Attribution of Haze Phase 2 and Technical Support System Project Update AoH Meeting – San Francisco, CA September 14/15, 2005 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource.
Natural Background Visibility Feb. 6, 2004 Presentation to VISTAS State Air Directors Mt. Cammerer, Great Smoky Mtn. National Park.
The main tools and functions of the system can be accessed via this side bar Allometric equations editor can be accessed under utilities, and user.
Regional Haze Rule Guidance: Tracking Progress & Natural Levels Overview of the concepts currently envisioned by EPA working groups by Marc Pitchford;
Weight of Evidence Checklist Review AoH Work Group Call June 7, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
Dissemination of Haze Data, Data Products and Information Bret Schichtel, Rodger Ames, Shawn McClure and Doug Fox.
NATURAL AND TRANSBOUNDARY INFLUENCES ON PARTICULATE MATTER IN THE UNITED STATES: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE EPA REGIONAL HAZE RULE Rokjin J. Park ACCESS VII,
Air Quality System Precision and Accuracy Data Transaction Generator (AQSP&A) Training Session.
1 WRAP Policy Fire Tracking Systems Draft December 9, 2002 FEJF Meeting December 10-11, 2002 Jackson, WY.
1 NEDP and Technology: Skills for a New System National External Diploma Program Council Conference October 2012 Providence, RI.
Tracking Visibility Progress in the Regional Haze Rule: Focusing the Reasonable Progress Framework on Controllable Emissions July 28 & 29, :00 –
Update on IMPROVE Light Extinction Equation and Natural Conditions Estimates Tom Moore, WRAP Technical Coordinator May 23, 2006.
Regional Haze Rule Reasonable Progress Goals I.Overview II.Complications III.Simplifying Approaches Prepared by Marc Pitchford for the WRAP Reasonable.
Next Steps in Regional Haze Planning in the Western U.S. Prepared by the WESTAR Planning Committee for the Fall Business Meeting, Tempe, AZ October 31,
TSS Project Update and Demo of Selected Tools WRAP IWG Meeting Santa Fe, NM December 7, 2006.
Regional Haze SIP Development Overview AQCC Presentation July 2005.
Project Outline: Technical Support to EPA and RPOs Estimation of Natural Visibility Conditions over the US Project Period: June May 2008 Reports:
An Integrated Systems Solution to Air Quality Data and Decision Support on the Web GEO Architecture Implementation Pilot – Phase 2 (AIP-2) Kickoff Workshop.
Causes of Haze Assessment Update for Fire Emissions Joint Forum -12/9/04 Meeting Marc Pitchford.
Causes of Haze Assessment (COHA) Update. Current and near-future Major Tasks Visibility trends analysis Assess meteorological representativeness of 2002.
1 Brian Finneran, Oregon DEQ WRAP IWG Meeting, Santa Fe December 2006 Update on Regional Haze 308 SIP Template.
VISIBILITY ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATIONS FEDERAL LAND MANAGERS’ AIR QUALITY RELATED VALUES WORKGROUP.
1 Conducting Reasonable Progress Determinations under the Regional Haze Rule Kathy Kaufman EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards January 11,
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.
Technical Projects Update WRAP Board Meeting Salt Lake City, UT November 10, 2004.
0 eCPIC User Training: Portfolios Module These training materials are owned by the Federal Government. They can be used or modified only by FESCOM member.
IMPROVE Algorithm for Estimating Light Extinction Draft Recommendations to the IMPROVE Steering Committee.
1 Brian Finneran, Oregon DEQ WRAP IWG Meeting, Portland August 2006 Suggested Changes to IWG Section 308 SIP Template.
Air Quality Relative Values Data Summaries Graphical summaries of the current air quality status and trends in National Parks and other federal lands.
Overview of WRAP FEJF Work Products WRAP Workshop on Fire, Carbon, and Dust May 23-24, 2006 Sacramento, CA Darla Potter (WDEQ) & Mark Fitch (USFS)
Weight of Evidence Discussion AoH Meeting – Tempe, AZ November 16/17, 2005.
Implementation Workgroup Meeting December 6, 2006 Attribution of Haze Workgroup’s Monitoring Metrics Document Status: 1)2018 Visibility Projections – Alternative.
Attribution of Haze Report Update and Web Site Tutorial Implementation Work Group Meeting March 8, 2005 Joe Adlhoch Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
Ambient Monitoring & Reporting Forum Plans for 2005 Prepared by Marc Pitchford for the WRAP Planning Team Meeting (3/9 – 3/10/05)
Reasonable Progress Demonstration Case Study for Saguaro Wilderness Area Arizona Regional Haze Stakeholder Meeting January 22, 2007.
AoH Work Group Weight of Evidence Framework WRAP Meeting – Tucson, AZ January 10/11, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
308 Outline (a) Purpose (b) When are 1st plans due (c) Options for regional planning (d) Core requirements (e) BART requirements (f) Comprehensive periodic.
Sulfate Discussion WRAP Meeting – Tucson, AZ January 10/11, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
Weight of Evidence Approach: Soil and Coarse Mass Case Studies WRAP Workshop on Fire, Carbon, and Dust May 24, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists,
Nitrate Discussion WRAP Meeting – Tucson, AZ January 10/11, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
Shawn McClure, Rodger Ames and Doug Fox - CIRA
Alternative title slide
Alternative title slide
Dissemination of Haze Data, Data Products and Information
Attribution Of Haze Case Study for Nevada Jarbidge Wilderness Area
Visibility Discussion
Review upcoming Teach-Ins and participation in WRAP Regional Haze Planning Work Group - Jay Baker and Tina Suarez-Murias.
A Conceptual Approach to Address Anthropogenic / Non-Anthropogenic Emission Sources to Help Develop a More Accurate Regional Haze Program Glidepath Control.
BART Overview Lee Alter Western Governors’ Association
Monthly Update on WRAP Workplan
Attribution Of Haze Case Study for Nevada Jarbidge Wilderness Area
Reasonable Progress: Chiricahua NM & Wilderness Area
AoH Phase 2 Update AoH Meeting – San Diego, CA January 25, 2006
Data from Scott Copeland’s IMPROVE data set
Evaluating Revised Tracking Metric for Regional Haze Planning
Tom Moore (WESTAR and WRAP) and Pat Brewer (NPS ARD)
Exceptional Events Rulemaking Proposal
Adjusting the Regional Haze Glide path using Monitoring and Modeling Data Trends Natural Conditions International Anthropogenic Contributions.
IBM SCPM PIT Data Download/Upload
Western Regional Haze Planning and
WRAP Regional Modeling Center (RMC)
Spreadsheets and Data Management
Workshop Technical and Policy Studies to Support the Annex
Presented to WRAP November 15, 2001 John Kowalczyk & Bob Neufeld
Sulfate Contributions to Regional Haze in the WRAP Region
EPA’s Roadmap for the Second Planning Period
Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
Species-Specific Data Trends
Introduction to IMPROVE and Regional Haze Data
Presentation transcript:

IMPROVE Data Processing Ryan Templeton 6/29/2017

Federal Land Manager Environmental Database http://views.cira.colostate.edu/fed/DataWizard/Default.aspx The federal land manager environmental database contains raw and processed IMPROVE datasets for States to utilize The following slides show the steps one should take to download FLM data for processing in the “XXXXX RXRIII IMPROVE.xlsm” workbook Access the database and select the ‘Raw Data’ option in the ‘Reports’ tab:

FLM Database Data Download Datasets: IMPROVE Aerosol, RHR III (New Equation) Sites: <Select Site of Interest>

FLM Database Data Download Continued Parameters: Select All Dates: Select all Years & Months

FLM Database Data Download Continued Aggregations: Non-Aggregated Fields: (default) – Dataset, Site, POC, Date, Parameter, Data Value

FLM Database Data Download Continued Options: Output Medium – Excel, Date Format – 03/14/2002, all others default “Submit…” and then right click on download prompt and “Save target as…”

IMPROVE Data Transfer Access the downloaded file, navigate to the ‘Data’ worksheet and copy columns A:DB only Paste this data into columns A:DB of the ‘Data’ worksheet of the “….XXXX RHRIII IMPROVE.xlsm” workbook

‘Data’ Worksheet This spreadsheet includes all of the IMPROVE raw and processed data downloaded from the FLM website. Columns A:DB contain data imported from the FLM IMPROVE monitor database. Columns DC:DG process the FLM data in order to determine the Clearest Days for each year.

‘Episodic Treatment’ Worksheet This worksheet processes the data for the 20% most impaired days and estimates natural and anthropogenic extinction (Mm-1) and impairment (dv). The calculations follow EPA’s methodologies outlined in Sections 5.5 and 5.6 of the 2016 draft Regional Haze Guidance1 (Guidance) and Section 2.1 of the accompanying Technical Support Document2 (TSD). The user has the ability to modify the episodic threshold for carbon and dust (default setting of 95%); however, the spreadsheet ignores adjustment of the URP for prescribed fire and international transport.

‘Episodic Treatment’ Worksheet Continued Daily Total Extinction – Calculates the daily Carbon and Dust extinction (Mm-1), Step A of the Guidance Percentile Light Extinction – Determines the 95% values for carbon and dust extinction for each year, Step A of the Guidance. The 95% threshold can be changed by the user to test the effects of different thresholds. Episodic Treatment – Removes the any daily carbon or dust in excess of the threshold values in cells I5 and I6. Redistributes extinction to species. Steps B & C of the Guidance.

‘Episodic Treatment’ Worksheet Continued NCII Natural Conditions – Isolates the revised haze natural condition estimates for the monitor of interest, Step D of the Guidance. Daily Routine Natural Contribution Extinction Values – Estimates daily routine natural extinction for each pollutant, Step D of the Guidance and Section 2.1.2 of the TSD. If the daily pollutant extinction is less than NCII value, then the daily value is all considered natural routine. Otherwise, the following equation is utilized:

‘Episodic Treatment’ Worksheet Continued Natural Impairment – Estimates the daily extinction (Mm-1) and impairment (dv) attributable to natural routine and episodic emissions. Anthropogenic Light Extinction - Estimates the daily extinction (Mm-1) attributable to anthropogenic emissions, Step E of the Guidance. Anthropogenic Impairment - Estimates impairment (dv) attributable to anthropogenic emissions and ranks each day of the year to determine the 20% most impaired days, Step F of the Guidance.

‘Trends’ Worksheet Natural Conditions – Estimated using the routine and episodic natural conditions on the 20% most impaired days, Section 2.1 of the TSD Clearest Day Trends – Estimates the annual average and 5-year rolling average for the 20% clearest days. Most Impaired Days - Estimates the annual average and 5-year rolling average for the 20% most impaired days. Visibility Thresholds – Estimates the average rate of progress, the uniform rate of progress, and establishes annual thresholds for the clearest and most impaired days.

‘Trends’ Worksheet Continued This worksheet also creates a number of useful graphics and tables for Regional Haze documentation, including: Graphical and tabular, annual and 5-yr rolling averages of clearest and most impaired day Tables of annually and 5-yr averaged anthropogenic extinction for each pollutant Tables of pollutant light extinction rankings

‘Daily Constituents’ Worksheet This worksheet provides a graphical look at the daily pollutant contributions to light extinction for the years 2011-2015.

Any other bugs the group has found? Workbook bugs/issues When data is missing for a monitor, the user may need to manually revise some of the graphs and possibly the URP calculation. For those sites processed that are missing considerable amounts of data (e.g. multiple years in the baseline period), I have not always been able to recreate EPA’s results published in the TSD. The spreadsheet does not adjust the URP for prescribed fire or international emissions. A method will needed to be developed by the workgroup to estimate these effects. Any other bugs the group has found?

What other flexibility is important? Examples: Workbook flexibility The workbook currently allows the user to adjust the dust and carbon extreme episodic event threshold. This is important for establishing a more accurate threshold for a given monitor rather than the current “one size fits all” approach. What other flexibility is important? Examples: Sulfate and nitrate thresholds? Altering the natural conditions methodology? …?