Presented by: Brian Lamb, WSU-LAR Contributors:

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

WRAP Technical Support System for Air Quality Planning, Tracking, & Decision Support Tom Moore | Shawn McClure Western Regional Air Partnership | Cooperative.

Advertisements

System Science Applications, Inc. EASy: An Environmental System for Mapping and Modeling Aquatic Systems.

Montana/Idaho Airshed Group. Our Area Comprised of 29 “airsheds” Each Airshed has a designated Coordinator as a point of contact 17 Impact Zones 3 “Units”

Phase 1 – 2002 Fire Emissions Inventory FEJF Meeting September 8 – 9, 2004 Worley, ID – Coeur D’Alene Casino Resort Hotel Dave Randall ( x221;

1 WRAP Fire Emissions Tracking System for Air Quality Planning, Tracking, & Decision Support December 6, 2007 Tom Moore | Shawn McClure | Dave Randall.

Georgia Chapter of the Air & Waste Management Association Annual Conference: Improved Air Quality Modeling for Predicting the Impacts of Controlled Forest.

2011 NW-AIRQUEST Annual Meeting Pullman, WA -- June 2, 2011 Status of the ClearSky Online Gaming Tool Joe Vaughan, Brian Lamb and Jen Hinds Laboratory.

Coupled NMM-CALMET Meteorology Development for the CALPUFF Air Dispersion Modelling in Complex Terrain and Shoreline Settings Presented at: European Geoscience.

The AIRPACT-3 Photochemical Air Quality Forecast System: Evaluation and Enhancements Jack Chen, Farren Thorpe, Jeremy Avis, Matt Porter, Joseph Vaughan,

The ClearSky Field-Burning Decision Support System Joe Vaughan, Charleston Ramos, Brian Lamb Laboratory for Atmospheric Research WSU-Pullman NW-AIRQUEST.

BlueSky Implementation in CANSAC Julide Kahyaoglu-Koracin Desert Research Institute - CEFA CANSAC Workshop Riverside, CA May 2006 Julide Kahyaoglu-Koracin.

The AIRPACT-3 Photochemical Air Quality Forecast System: Evaluation and Enhancements Jack Chen, Farren Thorpe, Jeremy Avis, Matt Porter, Joseph Vaughan,

Current Status and Ongoing Development of BlueSky Sim Larkin, Robert Solomon (US Forest Service) Dana Sullivan, Sean Raffuse, Chris Ovard, Lyle Chinkin.

Evaluation of the AIRPACT2 modeling system for the Pacific Northwest Abdullah Mahmud MS Student, CEE Washington State University.

SCEC: An NSF + USGS Research Center ShakeAlert CISN Testing Center (CTC) Development Philip Maechling Information Technology Architect Southern California.

Operational Air Quality and Source Contribution Forecasting in Georgia Georgia Institute of Technology Yongtao Hu 1, M. Talat Odman 1, Michael E. Chang.

Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling Division, Applied Modeling Research Branch October 8, 2008.

Photo Seattle Times, 9/2012 Use of Advanced Dispersion Modeling Examples for the Northwest Susan O’Neill, Research Scientist USDA Forest Service, AirFire.

1 July 12, 2006/10a Fire Emissions Tracking System White Paper Fire Emissions Joint Forum July 11-12, 2006 Portland, OR Dave Randall, Air Sciences Inc.

Prototyping the Emergency Smoke Response System (ESRS) Sim Larkin, Tara Strand, Robert Solomon (US Forest Service AirFire Team) Sean Raffuse, Dana Raffuse,

PHASE II PROJECT Day 1 – 3:15p PHASE II PROJECT -- Ag Burning – Integration of QC responses -- NIF Format -- Plume Characteristics Update -- Next Steps.

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center WRAP Regional Haze CMAQ 1996 Model Performance and for Section.

1 Using Hemispheric-CMAQ to Provide Initial and Boundary Conditions for Regional Modeling Joshua S. Fu 1, Xinyi Dong 1, Kan Huang 1, and Carey Jang 2 1.

AIRPACT-3 status and near- term objectives Joe Vaughan Brian Lamb Jeremy Avise Jack Chen Matt Porter Li Wang.

AIRPACT and ClearSky Activity Report Joe Vaughan, Farren Herron-Thorpe, Serena Chung and Brian Lamb NW-AIRQUEST Annual Meeting June 2, 2011 Pullman, WA.

Expected Ozone Benefits from EGU NOx Reductions Tim Vinciguerra, Emily Bull, Timothy Canty, Hao He, Eric Zalewsky, Michael Woodman, Sheryl Ehrman, Russell.

Northwest-AIRQUEST & AIRPACT-3 Regional Modeling Studies Joseph Vaughan, Farren Thorpe, Ying Xie, Serena Chung, Brian Lamb and George Mount Laboratory.

Development of Wildland Fire Emission Inventories with the BlueSky Smoke Modeling Framework Sean Raffuse, Erin Gilliland, Dana Sullivan, Neil Wheeler,

Analysis of Ozone Modeling for May – July 2006 in PNW using AIRPACT3 (CMAQ) and CAMx. Robert Kotchenruther, Ph.D. EPA Region 10 Nov CMAQ O 3 Prediction.

1 Aika Yano, Yongtao Hu, M. Talat Odman, Armistead Russell Georgia Institute of Technology October 15, th annual CMAS conference.

1/13/20161 FETS: State of the System Providers, Features, Lessons Learned August 31, 2009 FETS Project Meeting Boise, ID.

Carolina Environmental Program At UNC 2003 Models-3 Workshop Status of the CMAS Center Bob Imhoff, CMAS Director.

WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/04 Introduction to the the RMC Source Apportionment Modeling Effort Gail Tonnesen,

Network Plan - Not a new requirement [40 CFR 58.10(a)] Due every year Simple accounting of changes expected for that year Network Assessment – Once every.

AN EVALUATION OF THE ETA-CMAQ AIR QUALITY FORECAST MODEL AS PART OF NOAA’S NATIONAL PROGRAM CMAQ AIRNOW AIRNOW Brian Eder* Daiwen Kang * Ken Schere* Ken.

TSS Project Update WRAP Technical Analysis Forum Boise, ID May 22, 2007.

NW-AIRQUEST projects on Agricultural and Wildfire Smoke in the Inland Northwest: ClearSky and AIRPACT-3 presented by: Joe Vaughan WSU-LAR contributors:

Advances in Support of the CMAQ Bidirectional Science Option for the Estimation of Ammonia Flux from Agricultural cropland Ellen Cooter U.S. EPA, National.

Comparisons of CALPUFF and AERMOD for Vermont Applications Examining differing model performance for a 76 meter and 12 meter (stub) stack with emission.

HIC Meeting, 02/25/2010 NWS Hydrologic Forecast Verification Team: Status and Discussion Julie Demargne OHD/HSMB Hydrologic Ensemble Prediction (HEP) group.

Daiwen Kang 1, Rohit Mathur 2, S. Trivikrama Rao 2 1 Science and Technology Corporation 2 Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division ARL/NOAA NERL/U.S. EPA.

CMAQ PM 2.5 Forecasts Adjusted to Errors in Model Wind Fields Eun-Su Yang 1, Sundar A. Christopher 2 1 Earth System Science Center, UAHuntsville 2 Department.

New NWS Online Spot Program

SMOKE-MOVES Processing

ShakeAlert CISN Testing Center (CTC) Development

Dynamic Evaluation of CMAQ-Modeled Ozone Response to Emission Changes in The South coast air Basin Prakash Karamchandani1, Ralph Morris1, Andrew Wentland1,

Environmental Specialist

The Use of AMET and Automated Scripts for Model Evaluation

Kenneth Craig, Garnet Erdakos, Lynn Baringer, and Stephen Reid

 MCCM-WEPS: Coupling of Meteorological, Air Quality and Erosion Models for Mexico City. 1M.I. Emmanuel Díaz, 2Dr. John Tatarko,

Hybrid Plume/Grid Modeling for the Allegheny County PM2.5 SIPs

Wildfires Impacts on Regional Air Quality A Case Study on Colorado

Medhavy Thankappan and Lan-Wei Wang

Introduction and Overview of Course

Forecasts and Warnings

Suggested Analyses of WRAP Drilling Rig Databases

Training Session Fire Emissions Tracking System

Examples of 1-Hour NO2 and SO2 Modeling William O’Sullivan Director, Division of Air Quality NJDEP April 28, 2011.

ClearSky: status and near-term objectives

Laura Bright David Maier Portland State University

Importing NEI Data From EIS Into TEISS

Bulkley Valley-Lakes District Air Quality Ambient Air Quality Assessment: June 2006 AGM & Public Forum Benjamin Weinstein Air Quality Meteorologist Ministry.

R Package for Smoke Monitoring Data

Phase 1 – 2002 Fire Emissions Inventory

Update on 2016 AQ Modeling by EPA

AIRPACT-5 Fire Emissions Processing Methodology

Planning for TEMPO data access via U.S. EPA Remote Sensing Gateway

Tribal Data WG Fire and Smoke WG Oil and Gas WG

Current Research on 3-D Air Quality Modeling: wildfire!

Regional Modeling for Stationary Source Control Strategy Evaluation

Presentation transcript:

ClearSky Reruns for Accomplished Agricultural Burning by Automated FETS Access Presented by: Brian Lamb, WSU-LAR Contributors: Andrew Fink, Pennsylvania State University and WSU-LAR Summer REU Fellow; Joe Vaughan WSU-LAR Jen Hinds, WSU-LAR Ray Peterson, Pasayten Consulting 2009 FETS Project Meeting Boise, ID, August 31--Sept 1, 2009

Hybrid emissions generation Standard Overnight Run of the ClearSky Ag-Burn Smoke Dispersion Modeling Decision Support System Ag-burn scenarios: defaults web-submitted by users IC/BC (GFS) landuse terrain Hybrid emissions generation WRF MCIP CALMET reformatter MCIP Met files CALPUFF CALMET Met files Met Forecast Web-served PM2.5 plume animations

ClearSky Use & Evaluation ClearSky runs nightly with default emission scenarios and/or with user submitted scenarios Emission scenarios are potential burns (may have little to do with the next day’s reality) Previous evaluations have been post-burn season Compilation of accomplished burns Compilation of available PM2.5 ambient observations Rerun of ClearSky for each burn day for the season Analysis of model results and observations A very labor intensive process, hampered by inconsistent methods for identifying accomplished burns FETS offers a new way to approach ClearSky Evaluation Rapid (Automated) access to accomplished burns Automated access to AIRNOW PM2.5 observations Automated processing each day to develop performance statistics

Accomplished Burn Rerun of ClearSky using FETS Accomplished Burn Acquisition for previous day WRAP/ FETS Database EPA/STI AIRNow Gateway Hybrid emissions generation Access AIRNow PM2.5 for Sites CALMET Met files CALPUFF Web-served Predicted vs. Observed PM2.5 Plots Web-served PM2.5 plume animations New version of Web-served PM2.5 plume animations Scenario PM2.5 results

Monitoring data for PM2. 5 for comparison to ClearSky CALPUFF PM2 Monitoring data for PM2.5 for comparison to ClearSky CALPUFF PM2.5 results is obtained via the AIRNow gateway

Currently, access for FETS agricultural burns is interactive. Automated FETS access is eagerly anticipated! Emissions used to rerun CALPUFF

Example Left: ClearSky image for a model re-run for July 19, 2009. The Kamiah, ID PM2.5 station is marked “x”. Below: line plot of modeled and observed PM2.5

Summary In this project, we attempt to provide burn coordinators with a way to retrospectively compare ClearSky PM2.5 results for accomplished agricultural burns against PM2.5 observations retrieved from EPA's AIRNow database. This prototype system accesses accomplished burns, submitted by the Nez Perce Tribe, from the WRAP Fire Emissions Tracking System (FETS) and uses these to generate ClearSky scenarios to model. Our goal is to improve how well ClearSky can support agricultural-burning decisions. Automated re-simulation of accomplished ag burns will build a database of well- matched simulated and observed results for use in improving ClearSky and in improving user confidence.

Thanks for your attention! Acknowledgments: Matt Mavko at Air Sciences Inc., for help accessing WRAP-FETS. SIMILE Widgets and Google, for software. Project support by the National Science Foundation's REU program.