Markus Amann International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Recent developments of the RAINS model

Recent model development Energy & emission databases Modelling of deposition and its effects Modelling of ozone and its impacts health Vegetation Internet version

Modelling of deposition and its effects

Issues Source-receptor relationships for deposition Ecosystem-specific deposition Dynamic modelling

S-R relations for RAINS Linearity of changes in PM due to changes in emissions is crucial for the mathematical design of RAINS 87 model experiments with the new EMEP model: Response of European S/N deposition to changes in SO2, NOx, NH3, [VOC, PPM2.5/10] emissions For German, Italian, Dutch, UK and European emissions 3 emission scenarios: CLE (current legislation 2010) = CAFE baseline for 2010 MFR (maximum technically feasible reductions 2010 UFR (ultimately feasible reductions) = MFR/2

Response of total S deposition due to changes in UK SO2 emissions Emissions change from UFR UK emissions change from CLE to UFR Emissions change from CLE UK emissions change from CLE to MFR

Response of total S deposition due to changes in UK NH3 emissions Emissions change from UFR UK emissions change from CLE to UFR Emissions change from CLE UK emissions change from CLE to MFR

Response of total S deposition due to changes in all UK emissions Emissions change from UFR UK emissions change from CLE to UFR Emissions change from CLE UK emissions change from CLE to MFR

Emissions change from CLE UK emissions change from CLE to MFR Response of total oxidised N deposition due to changes in UK NOx emissions Emissions change from UFR UK emissions change from CLE to UFR Emissions change from CLE UK emissions change from CLE to MFR

Emissions change from CLE UK emissions change from CLE to MFR Response of total oxidised N deposition due to changes in UK NH3 emissions Emissions change from UFR UK emissions change from CLE to UFR Emissions change from CLE UK emissions change from CLE to MFR

Emissions change from CLE UK emissions change from CLE to MFR Response of total oxidised N deposition due to changes in all UK emissions Emissions change from UFR UK emissions change from CLE to UFR Emissions change from CLE UK emissions change from CLE to MFR

Conclusion on S-R relations Linear treatment (transfer matrices) seems sufficient Work together with MSC-W is underway to derive coefficients Time problem to calculate many different years

Eco-system specific deposition

Ecosystem-specific deposition Ecosystem-specific deposition: Estimates of unprotected ecosystems in Europe for 2010: Harmonized land-use maps: Meeting at IIASA in March. CDFs of CL will be delivered for forests, lakes, others. Lagrangian model 150 km grid-average deposition New Eulerian model 50km, grid-average deposition New Eulerian model 50km, ecosystem- specific deposition Acidification 3% 15 % 25 % Eutrophication 20% 60 % 80 %

Excess of forest critical loads 2000 2010 2020 Percentage of forest area with acid deposition above critical loads, using ecosystem-specific deposition, mean meteorology

Estimated in 2003 with ecosystem specific deposition Probability of deposition exceeeding critical loads for the Gothenburg 2010 ceilings, EU-15 Estimated in 2003 with ecosystem specific deposition Estimated in 1999

Dynamic modelling

Five stages in dynamic acidification modelling Important time factors: Damage delay time Recover delay time

Use of dynamic modelling in RAINS Target load functions have been developed for IAM, specifying the levels of S/N deposition in a given year that lead to recovery of x% of ecosystems within y years. Could be directly used in RAINS optimisation with x, y as policy choices. But: How to upscale to ecosystems without dynamic estimates? How to reach full European coverage? Historic base cation deposition?

Ozone modelling

Ozone modelling Health impact assessment Vegetation impacts Regional ozone modelling Linearity Uncertainty Urban ozone modelling

Health impacts

Health impacts All epidemiological studies use Daily maximum 8-hour mean concentration as metric, often for the full year. Different from hourly values used for AOT calculations! Models not yet evaluated against health metric. WHO review: Effects found below 60 ppb, no solid evidence on existence of threshold How to treat this in an integrated assessment?

Critical question for IAM of O3 How certain are we about health impacts below (natural) background levels (30-40 ppb)? Especially, if ozone is reduced below background because of (too) high NOx concentrations? Do we expect health benefits from reductions in urban O3 through increased NOx emissions - while total oxidants (NOx + Ox) increase?

Example implementation CAFE baseline energy & emission projection for 2000, 2010, 2010 EMEP Eulerian dispersion model, regional background concentrations Mean meteorology, 1999 & 2003 No adjustment of ozone levels for urban areas (awaiting results from City-Delta) RR from WHO meta study (1.003) Calculation for summer, no effects for winter assumed

Premature deaths attributable to O3 Absolute numbers (for 6 months), with different cut-offs 30 ppb 40 ppb 60 ppb Provisional estimates!

Reduction of premature deaths attributable to O3 compared to 2000, with different cut-offs 30 ppb 40 ppb 60 ppb Provisional estimates!

Approach recommended by TFH7 Focus on mortality – premature deaths attributable to ozone Will create bias, because morbidity not considered Do not use potential impacts of ozone below background to drive policy Use 35 ppb as cut-off Reflects present background concentrations Use of linear regressed RR will underestimate the effect Consider full year Use one “characteristic” urban concentration level

Premature deaths attributable to O3 Year 2000, mean meteorology, cut-off=30 ppb, percent of total deaths

Vegetation impacts

Concentration-based critical levels for ozone Source: Mapping manual Receptor Time period Critical level AOT30, ppm.h (only for IAM) AOT40, ppm.h Agricultural crops 3 months 4 3 Horticultural crops 4 months - 5 Forest trees Growing season (6 months) 9 Semi-natural vegetation

Flux-based critical levels for ozone Source: Mapping manual Receptor Time period Critical level (AFst6) Wheat 900 ˚C days starting 200 ˚C days before anthesis (flowering) 1 mmol/m2 projected sunlit leaf area Potato 1130 ˚C days starting at plant emergence 5 mmol/m2 projected sunlit leaf area

Considerations for RAINS Critical levels for forests are most sensitive Use flux-based assessment for ex-post scenario analysis, concentrations-based CL for optimisation For trees, mapping manuals leaves a choice between AOT40 and AOT30 Further analysis of advantages and disadvantages necessary

Statistical indicators for AOT-based CL Source: Mapping manual   Linear regression for birch and beech r2 p for the slope p for the intercept slope AOT30 0.61 <0.01 0.63 - 0.494 AOT40 0.62 0.31 - 0.732

Source-receptor relations Regional scale: Linearity? Confidence? Urban scale

Response of ozone due to ΔNOx from German emissions AOT30 AOT40

Response of ozone due to ΔVOC from German emissions AOT30 AOT40

How much can we trust results from one model? Euro-Delta intercomparison of regional scale models Coordinated by JRC, IIASA, MSC-W, TNO, CONCAWE 5 models: CHIMERE (F) EMEP LOTOS (NL) MATCH (S) REM (D) Study model responses to emission control cases Ensemble model

Graphs courtesy of Kees Cuvelier and Philippe Thunis, JRC

Summary of model performances AOT30 AOT40 r2 of critical level estimates for birch, beech 0.61 0.62 Correlation coefficient of ensemble dispersion models 0.65 Correlation coefficient of the EMEP model 0.57 0.48 Variability of model results for emission control scenarios ? ?? Linearity between CLE and MFR ???

Urban scale

Changes in urban ozone for further NOx reduction City-Delta results AOT30 Graphs courtesy of Kees Cuvelier and Philippe Thunis, JRC AOT40 Urban O3 Population-weighted O3

Changes in urban ozone for further VOC reduction City-Delta results AOT30 Graphs courtesy of Kees Cuvelier and Philippe Thunis, JRC AOT40 Urban O3 Population-weighted O3

Can titration be detected for long-term ozone at urban background Can titration be detected for long-term ozone at urban background? Preliminary results from City-Delta Difference between observed urban and background O3, annual mean O3 Graphs courtesy of Kees Cuvelier and Philippe Thunis, JRC NOx emission density in urban domain

Next steps Analyze City-Delta 2 results, especially for PM Develop functional relationships between rural and urban concentrations Develop extension to other cities Implement in RAINS Final City-Delta workshop, fall 2004

Internet version RAINS available on the Internet Free access at: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/web-apps/tap/RainsWeb/