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

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
VISTAS Modeling Overview May 25, 2004 Mt. Cammerer, Great Smoky Mtns. National Park.
Advertisements

Regional Haze Modeling: Recent Modeling Results for VISTAS and WRAP October 27, 2003, CMAS Annual Meeting, RTP, NC University of California, Riverside.
UC Riverside Attribution of Haze Meeting, June 22, 2005, Seattle, WA UNC/CEPENVIRON Corp. Spatial Processing and Display of WRAP Emissions Data, and Source.
Center for Environmental Research and Technology/Air Quality Modeling University of California at Riverside Model Performance Metrics, Ambient Data Sets.
Georgia Institute of Technology Evaluation of CMAQ with FAQS Episode of August 11 th -20 th, 2000 Yongtao Hu, M. Talat Odman, Maudood Khan and Armistead.
Biocomplexity Project: N-deposition Model Evaluation UCR, CE-CERT, Air Quality Modeling Group Model Performance Evaluation for San Bernardino Mountains.
Three-State Air Quality Study (3SAQS) Three-State Data Warehouse (3SDW) 2008 CAMx Modeling Model Performance Evaluation Summary University of North Carolina.
Title EMEP Unified model Importance of observations for model evaluation Svetlana Tsyro MSC-W / EMEP TFMM workshop, Lillestrøm, 19 October 2010.
CENRAP Modeling Workgroup Mational RPO Modeling Meeting May 25-26, Denver CO Calvin Ku Missouri DNR May 25, 2004.
The AIRPACT-3 Photochemical Air Quality Forecast System: Evaluation and Enhancements Jack Chen, Farren Thorpe, Jeremy Avis, Matt Porter, Joseph Vaughan,
The AIRPACT-3 Photochemical Air Quality Forecast System: Evaluation and Enhancements Jack Chen, Farren Thorpe, Jeremy Avis, Matt Porter, Joseph Vaughan,
Center for Environmental Research and Technology/Air Quality Modeling University of California at Riverside Modeling Source Apportionment Gail Tonnesen,
Operational Air Quality and Source Contribution Forecasting in Georgia Georgia Institute of Technology Yongtao Hu 1, M. Talat Odman 1, Michael E. Chang.
AoH Report Update Joint DEJF & AoH Meeting, Las Vegas November , 2004 Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
TSS Data Preparation Update WRAP TSS Project Team Meeting Ft. Collins, CO March 28-31, 2006.
CMAQ Evaluation Preliminary 2002 version C WRAP 2002 Visibility Modeling: Annual CMAQ Performance Evaluation using Preliminary 2002 version C Emissions.
Center for Environmental Research and Technology University of California, Riverside Bourns College of Engineering Evaluation and Intercomparison of N.
PM2.5 Model Performance Evaluation- Purpose and Goals PM Model Evaluation Workshop February 10, 2004 Chapel Hill, NC Brian Timin EPA/OAQPS.
WRAP Update. Projects Updated 1996 emissions QA procedures New evaluation tools Model updates CB-IV km MM5 Fugitive dust NH 3 emissions Model.
1 Recent Advances in the Modeling of Airborne Substances George Pouliot Shan He Tom Pierce.
Presents:/slides/greg/PSAT_ ppt Effects of Sectional PM Distribution on PM Modeling in the Western US Ralph Morris and Bonyoung Koo ENVIRON International.
Ozone MPE, TAF Meeting, July 30, 2008 Review of Ozone Performance in WRAP Modeling and Relevance to Future Regional Ozone Planning Gail Tonnesen, Zion.
WRAP Regional Modeling Center April 25-26, 2006 AoH Work Group Meeting Regional Modeling Center Status Report AoH Workgroup Meeting Seattle, WA April 25-26,
Projects:/WRAP RMC/309_SIP/progress_sep02/Annex_MTF_Sep20.ppt Preliminary Mobile Source Significance Test Modeling Results WRAP Regional Modeling Center.
AoH/MF Meeting, San Diego, CA, Jan 25, 2006 Source Apportionment Modeling Results and RMC Status report Gail Tonnesen, Zion Wang, Mohammad Omary, Chao-Jung.
WRAP Modeling. WRAP Setup Two-pronged approach Jump start Regional Modeling Center (RMC) Jump start contractor MCNC/ENVIRON RMC UCR/ENVIRON.
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt CRGAQS: Initial CAMx Results Presentation to the Gorge Study Technical Team By ENVIRON International Corporation October.
Center for Environmental Research and Technology/Air Quality Modeling University of California at Riverside CMAQ Tagged Species Source Apportionment (TSSA)
A comparison of PM 2.5 simulations over the Eastern United States using CB-IV and RADM2 chemical mechanisms Michael Ku, Kevin Civerolo, and Gopal Sistla.
PM Model Performance in Southern California Using UAMAERO-LT Joseph Cassmassi Senior Meteorologist SCAQMD February 11, 2004.
WRAP Experience: Investigation of Model Biases Uma Shankar, Rohit Mathur and Francis Binkowski MCNC–Environmental Modeling Center Research Triangle Park,
University of California Riverside, ENVIRON International Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center Overview of WRAP Regional Haze Modeling Activities.
PM Model Performance & Grid Resolution Kirk Baker Midwest Regional Planning Organization November 2003.
Section 309 Mobile Source Significance Test Modeling Results WRAP Regional Modeling Center (RMC) University of California at Riverside, CE-CERT ENVIRON.
Operational Evaluation and Comparison of CMAQ and REMSAD- An Annual Simulation Brian Timin, Carey Jang, Pat Dolwick, Norm Possiel, Tom Braverman USEPA/OAQPS.
Classificatory performance evaluation of air quality forecasting in Georgia Yongtao Hu 1, M. Talat Odman 1, Michael E. Chang 2 and Armistead G. Russell.
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.
Evaluation of the VISTAS 2002 CMAQ/CAMx Annual Simulations T. W. Tesche & Dennis McNally -- Alpine Geophysics, LLC Ralph Morris -- ENVIRON Gail Tonnesen.
Applications of Models-3 in Coastal Areas of Canada M. Lepage, J.W. Boulton, X. Qiu and M. Gauthier RWDI AIR Inc. C. di Cenzo Environment Canada, P&YR.
Modeling Regional Haze in Big Bend National Park with CMAQ Betty Pun, Christian Seigneur & Shiang-Yuh Wu AER, San Ramon Naresh Kumar EPRI, Palo Alto CMAQ.
GEOS-CHEM Modeling for Boundary Conditions and Natural Background James W. Boylan Georgia Department of Natural Resources - VISTAS National RPO Modeling.
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.
Evaluation of Models-3 CMAQ I. Results from the 2003 Release II. Plans for the 2004 Release Model Evaluation Team Members Prakash Bhave, Robin Dennis,
Evaluation of 2002 Multi-pollutant Platform: Air Toxics, Mercury, Ozone, and Particulate Matter US EPA / OAQPS / AQAD / AQMG Sharon Phillips, Kai Wang,
WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/04 Introduction to the the RMC Source Apportionment Modeling Effort Gail Tonnesen,
Implementation Workgroup Meeting December 6, 2006 Attribution of Haze Workgroup’s Monitoring Metrics Document Status: 1)2018 Visibility Projections – Alternative.
October 1-3, th Annual CMAS Meeting Comparison of CMAQ and CAMx for an Annual Simulation over the South Coast Air Basin Jin Lu 1, Kathleen Fahey.
WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver 7/22/04 WRAP 2002 Visibility Modeling: Emission, Meteorology Inputs and CMAQ Performance.
WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/04 Results from January/July CMAQ Source Apportionment Modeling Gail Tonnesen,
Overview of ARS Presentations and Review of EI Data Sets AoH Meeting, Salt Lake City September 21-22, 2004 Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
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.
VISTAS Modeling Overview Oct. 29, 2003
Ambient Monitoring & Reporting Forum Plans for 2005 Prepared by Marc Pitchford for the WRAP Planning Team Meeting (3/9 – 3/10/05)
Evaluation of CAMx: Issues Related to Sectional Models Ralph Morris, Bonyoung Koo, Steve Lau and Greg Yarwood ENVIRON International Corporation Novato,
1 Projects:/WRAP_RMC/Presents/ADEQ_Feb ppt Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) Regional Modeling Center (RMC) Preliminary Fire Modeling Results.
Emission reductions needed to meet proposed ozone standard and their effect on particulate matter Daniel Cohan and Beata Czader Department of Civil and.
MRPO Technical Approach “Nearer” Term Overview For: Emissions Modeling Meteorological Modeling Photochemical Modeling & Domain Model Performance Evaluation.
Western Air Quality Study (WAQS) Intermountain Data Warehouse (IWDW) Model Performance Evaluation CAMx and CMAQ 2011b University of North Carolina (UNC-IE)
Center for Environmental Research and Technology/Air Quality Modeling University of California at Riverside CCOS 2000 Model Intercomparison: Summary of.
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 Species to Emissions in the Southeast Sun-Kyoung Park and Armistead G. Russell Georgia Institute of Technology Sensitivity of PM.
WRAP Workshop on Fire, Carbon and Dust – Sacramento, CA - May 23-24, 2006 WRAP RMC Phase II Wind Blown Dust Project Regional Modeling Center ENVIRON; UCR.
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt CRGAQS: CAMx Sensitivity Results Presentation to the Gorge Study Technical Team By ENVIRON International Corporation.
WRAP Technical Work Overview
Yongtao Hu, Jaemeen Baek, M. Talat Odman and Armistead G. Russell
7th Annual CMAS Conference
WRAP RMC Windblown Dust Emission Inventory Project Summary
Update on 2016 AQ Modeling by EPA
WRAP Regional Modeling Center (RMC)
Results from 2018 Preliminary Reasonable Progress Modeling
Presentation transcript:

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center WRAP Regional Haze CMAQ 1996 Model Performance and for Section 309 March 27, 2003, Denver, CO Gail Tonnesen University of California Riverside

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center CMAQ Domain Clean boundary conditions and initial conditions using EPA defaults with some updates to BC based on clean IMPROVE sites PM data.

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center CMAQ Description: April 2001 release Domain: –85 columns, 95 rows, 18 layers, 36km grid cells horizontally –Lambert-Conformal Projection Emissions: based on NEI with many updates: –MOBILE6, EMFAC, Biogenics: BEIS2, Point, Road Dust, Wild Fire (no Ag or Rx), Point for Mexico, no fugitive dust Meteorology: –From EPA MM simulation, processed with MCIP v.1 –23 layer MM5 averaged to 18 layers. Chemistry: CB-IV with extensions –SO2 oxidation into sulfate aerosol –VOC oxidation into secondary organic aerosol –Coupled with RADM aqueous chemistry Advection scheme is PPM

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center Emissions Processing SMOKE is used for emissions processing. Ported SMOKE to Linux Quality Assurance: – SMOKE QA reports –Post processing to total emissions subcategories for all layers and all hours.

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center Evaluation Overview IMPROVE database: –Raw Dataset Analysis period: –Year 1996 –total of 104 days available ambient data –Raw: ~53 stations Evaluation species –SO4, NO3, Bext, PM2.5, PM10, OC, EC

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center IMPROVE & Protocol Sites for Evaluation No 1996 IMPROVE Datawith 1996 IMPROVE Data

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center CASTNET Sites for Evaluation No 1996 CASTNET Datawith 1996 CASTNET Data

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center CMAQ to IMPROVE Species Mapping CompoundIMPROVE SpeciesCMAQ Mapping SO4 ASO4J + ASO4I NO3 ANO3J + ANO3I OC1.4*(OC1+OC2+OC3+OC4+OP)AORGAJ + AORGAI + AORGPAJ + AORGPAI + AORGBJ + AORGBI EC (LAC)EC1+EC2+EC3-OPAECJ + AECI SOIL2.2*Al *Si *Ca *Fe *Ti A25I +A25J PM2.5_Measured (PM25) MF1.375*(ASO4J + ASO4I) *(ANO3J + ANO3I) + (AORGAJ + AORGAI + AORGPAJ + AORGPAI + AORGBJ + AORGBI) + (AECJ + AECI) + (A25J + A25I) PM2.5_Recon (RCFM) 1.375*SO *NO3 + EC + OC + SOIL Same as PM2.5_Measured CMMT-MFACORS + ASEAS + ASOIL PM10MT1.375*(ASO4J + ASO4I) *(ANO3J + ANO3I) + (AORGAJ + AORGAI + AORGPAJ + AORGPAI + AORGBJ + AORGBI) + (AECJ + AECI) + (A25J + A25I) + (ACORS + ASEAS + ASOIL) Bext_Reconstructed (1/Mm) *f(RH) b *SO *f(RH)*NO3 + 4*OC + 10*EC + SOIL + 0.6*CM *fRH*(ASO4J + ASO4I) *fRH*(ANO3J + ANO3I) + 4*(AORGAJ + AORGAI + AORGPAJ + AORGPAI + AORGBJ + AORGBI) + 10*(AECJ + AECI) + (A25J + A25I) + 0.6*(ACORS + ASEAS + ASOIL)

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center Modeling Evaluation Procedure Analysis procedures: –Compute daily averaged model level-one concentration. –Extract species information & concentration from IMPROVE datasets –Identify monitoring sites within model domains (convert lat/lon into grid cell) –Match model predictions with IMPROVE datasets –Generate scatter plots and time-series plots of model results vs. IMPROVE datasets.

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center Results from Analysis Program (complete results at: Time series data Scatter plots –All Site and All Days –All Site for One Day –All Days for One Site –All Days for Defined Sub-regions Statistical analysis –Regression (r-squared) –Mean normalized bias (MNB) and error (MNE)

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center Annual Time-Series Plots – SO 4 Bryce Canyon, UTGrand Canyon, AZ

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center Annual Time-Series Plots – NO 3 Bryce Canyon, UTGrand Canyon, AZ

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center Annual Time-Series Plots – OC Bryce Canyon, UTGrand Canyon, AZ

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center Annual Time-Series Plots – EC Bryce Canyon, UTGrand Canyon, AZ

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center Annual Time-Series Plots – SOIL Bryce Canyon, UTGrand Canyon, AZ

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center PM2.5 mass composition at Grand Canyon Nat’l Park, AZ - Summer

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center PM2.5 mass composition at Grand Canyon Nat’l Park, AZ - Winter

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center Conclusions for 1996 Model Performance Evaluation Model over predicts most species in the winter. Model performance is best in summer. Model does not get the peaks on the correct day: –Precedent from SAMI longterm regional O3 model –Should consider “unpaired in time & space” evaluation. Coarse mass is under predicted –Missing windblown dust emissions inventory. Many upgrades planned for Section 308 modeling.

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center Sensitivity Runs EPA modeling showed strong seasonality in NH3 emissions: –We reduced winter NH3 emissions by 50% –This reduced the NO3 over prediction to be consistent with other species. –Still need to explore winter vertical mixing. Western BC were too high –Reduced western BC based on IMPROVE data at clean western sites.

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center Sensitivity to 50% NH3 change

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center