TSS Data Preparation Update WRAP TSS Project Team Meeting Ft. Collins, CO March 28-31, 2006.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Developing 2018 Base Case Emission Inventories for Regional Haze Planning Tom Moore WRAP Technical Coordinator –
Advertisements

UC Riverside Attribution of Haze Meeting, June 22, 2005, Seattle, WA UNC/CEPENVIRON Corp. Spatial Processing and Display of WRAP Emissions Data, and Source.
Three-State Air Quality Study (3SAQS) Three-State Data Warehouse (3SDW) 2008 CAMx Modeling Model Performance Evaluation Summary University of North Carolina.
Technical Support System Review / / RPO Monitoring/Data Analysis Workgroup Conference.
Weight of Evidence Checklist Review AoH Work Group Call June 7, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
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.
NATURAL AND TRANSBOUNDARY INFLUENCES ON PARTICULATE MATTER IN THE UNITED STATES: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE EPA REGIONAL HAZE RULE Rokjin J. Park ACCESS VII,
©2005,2006 Carolina Environmental Program Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions SMOKE Modeling System Zac Adelman and Andy Holland Carolina Environmental.
2004 Technical Summit Overview January 26-27, 2004 Tempe, AZ.
AoH Report Update Joint DEJF & AoH Meeting, Las Vegas November , 2004 Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center WRAP Regional Haze CMAQ 1996 Model Performance and for Section.
Modeling Studies of Air Quality in the Four Corners Region National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Cooperative Institute for Research in.
PM2.5 Model Performance Evaluation- Purpose and Goals PM Model Evaluation Workshop February 10, 2004 Chapel Hill, NC Brian Timin EPA/OAQPS.
Attribution of Haze Phase 2 and Technical Support System Project Update Dust Emissions Joint Forums – Tempe, AZ November 16, 2005.
WRAP CAMx-PSAT Source Apportionment Modeling Results Implementation Workgroup Meeting August 29, 2006.
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.
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)
Regional Modeling Center Workplan Fire/Carbon/Dust Workshop May 24, 2006.
An Integrated Systems Solution to Air Quality Data and Decision Support on the Web GEO Architecture Implementation Pilot – Phase 2 (AIP-2) Kickoff Workshop.
PM Model Performance in Southern California Using UAMAERO-LT Joseph Cassmassi Senior Meteorologist SCAQMD February 11, 2004.
Preliminary Evaluation of Data for Reasonable Progress Montana RH FIP Laurel Dygowski, EPA Region 8 IWG Meeting – April 2007.
Causes of Haze Assessment (COHA) Update. Current and near-future Major Tasks Visibility trends analysis Assess meteorological representativeness of 2002.
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.
1 Projects:/WRAP_RMC/Presents/ADEQ_Feb ppt Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) Projection of Visibility Changes and Modeling Sensitivity Analysis.
October 6, 2015 Alison Eyth, Rich Mason (EPA OAQPS EIAG*) Alexis Zubrow (Volpe, DOT) * Emission Inventory and Analysis Group.
Model Evaluation Comparing Model Output to Ambient Data Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, California.
Operational Evaluation and Comparison of CMAQ and REMSAD- An Annual Simulation Brian Timin, Carey Jang, Pat Dolwick, Norm Possiel, Tom Braverman USEPA/OAQPS.
2005 WRAP Work Plan WRAP Board Meeting Salt Lake City, UT November 10, 2004.
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.
Regional Haze Rule Promulgated in 1999 Requires states to set RPGs based on 4 statutory factors and consideration of a URP URP = 20% reduction in manmade.
GEOS-CHEM Modeling for Boundary Conditions and Natural Background James W. Boylan Georgia Department of Natural Resources - VISTAS National RPO Modeling.
Implementation Workgroup Meeting December 6, 2006 Attribution of Haze Workgroup’s Monitoring Metrics Document Status: 1)2018 Visibility Projections – Alternative.
Georgia Institute of Technology SUPPORTING INTEX THROUGH INTEGRATED ANALYSIS OF SATELLITE AND SUB-ORBITAL MEASUREMENTS WITH GLOBAL AND REGIONAL 3-D MODELS:
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.
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt CRGAQS: CAMx 2004 PSAT Results Presentation to the Gorge Study Technical Team By ENVIRON International Corporation.
Three-State Air Quality Study (3SAQS) Three-State Data Warehouse (3SDW) 3SAQS 2011 CAMx Model Performance Evaluation University of North Carolina (UNC-IE)
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.
2005 Progress on Emissions Inventories Attribution of Haze Workgroup Meeting January 24, 2006.
Regional Haze Rule Promulgated in 1999 Requires states to set RPGs based on 4 statutory factors and consideration of a URP URP = 20% reduction in manmade.
1 Projects:/WRAP_RMC/Presents/ADEQ_Feb ppt Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) Regional Modeling Center (RMC) Preliminary Fire Modeling Results.
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,
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt CRGAQS: New CAMx 2018 Results Presentation to the Gorge Study Technical Team ENVIRON International Corporation Alpine.
WRAP Technical Work Overview
Western Regional Technical Projects 2011 through 2013
CENRAP Modeling and Weight of Evidence Approaches
Mobile Source Contributions to Ambient PM2.5 and Ozone in 2025
CRGAQS: CAMx 2018 Results Presentation to the
WRAP RMC Windblown Dust Emission Inventory Project Summary
Steve Griffiths, Rob Lennard and Paul Sutton* (*RWE npower)
Update on 2016 AQ Modeling by EPA
WRAP Regional Modeling Center (RMC)
WRAP Modeling Forum, San Diego
CAMx-PSAT Source Apportionment Modeling Results
Results from 2018 Preliminary Reasonable Progress Modeling
Regional Modeling for Stationary Source Control Strategy Evaluation
Implementation Workgroup April 19, 2007
Attribution of Haze Project Update
Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
CRGAQS: CAMx PSAT Results
Presentation transcript:

TSS Data Preparation Update WRAP TSS Project Team Meeting Ft. Collins, CO March 28-31, 2006

Modeling Data What model runs will be available on the TSS? How are data stored ? – Scenarios/IMPROVE Species/Visibility Impacts? – Same Database/Parameters as Monitored data ? Model performance evaluation results? What is best spatial/temporal resolution of data? How to handle source apportionment results? – PSAT, PMF How to handle BART analysis and results?

Modeling Data Model runs available on TSS Base02a(b) – Used in MPE; EI includes actual fires, CEM point data Plan02b – 2002 baseline; EI include typical fire, no CEM data Base18a – 2018 Future year base case 2018 Control Strategy Simulations Sensitivity Simulations Model simulation results stored/organized based on impacts on visibility by: – Source Categories – Species

Modeling Data Modeled Data Species mass – Required: Sulfate, Nitrate, OC, EC, Fine soil, PMCoarse – Optional: PM2.5, O3, NO, NO2, CO, SO2, HNO3, Others ? Visibility measures – Species extinction, Total extinction, Deciview Differences in: – Modeled parameters for a given year Base02 – Plan02; Strat18 – Base18; etc. – Modeled parameter for different years Base18 – Base02; Base18 – Plan02; etc.

Modeling Data Modeled Data Storage and Formats Gridded data stored as ASCIIGRID formats: – One file each by modeled species/parameter and scenario (including difference pairs) Gridded data stored in GIS Shapefile formats: – One file for each scenario (including difference pairs) each includes all relevant species/parameters Modeled data parameters at monitoring sites – Species concentration data as used for MPE – Visibility measures at Class I monitoring sites

Modeling Data Most Appropriate Spatial/Temporal Resolution Spatial Resolution – Gridded, surface layer (3D NetCDF files aggregated vertically) – 36-km (12-km); National or WRAP region ?? – Point data at IMPROVE monitors (interpolated from grid data as used in MPE) Temporal Resolution – Gridded data: Annual; Seasonal; Monthly (?) – 20% Best/Worst days

Modeling Data Model Performance Evaluation Performance measures to include: – Time-series plots of measured and modeled species concentrations – Scatter plots of model predictions vs. ambient data – Spatial plots with ambient data overlaid on model predictions – Bar plots comparing mean fractional bias (MFB) and/or mean fractional error (MFE) – “Bugle plots” showing model performance variation as a function of the PM species concentration – Stacked-bar plots of contributions to light extinction for the average of the best-20% visibility days or the worst-20% visibility days at each site

Time-series plots of measured and modeled species concentrations

Stacked-bar time-series plots of measured and modeled contributions to light extinction

Scatter plots of model predictions vs. ambient data

“Bugle plots” showing model performance variation as a function of the PM species concentration

Spatial plots with ambient data overlaid on model predictions

Bar plots comparing mean fractional bias (MFB) and/or mean fractional error (MFE)

Stacked-bar plots of contributions to light extinction for the average of the best-20% visibility days or the worst-20% visibility days at each site

Source Apportionment Results PSAT

Emissions Data What inventories will be available on the TSS? How are data stored ? – Scenarios/Species/Source Categories? – Same Database/Parameters as Monitored data? – GIS data layers? What is best spatial/temporal resolution of data? What GIS Layers are available for display/query? Where do the GIS layers reside? How are they accessed?

Emissions Data Emission inventories available on the TSS Base02a(b) Plan02b Base18b Strat18a; Strat18b; etc…

Emissions Data Source Categories For each scenario provide data by: Major source categories: Stationary Point; Area; On-road; Off-road; Biogenic Detailed source categories: Point; Area; On-road; Off-road; Offshore area; Offshore point; Offshore shipping; Oil & Gas; Fugitive Dust; WB Dust; Road Dust; Fires (Point/Area; Wild/Prescribed/Ag/Wildland Use); Biogenic

Emissions Data Pollutants For each source category include following species, as appropriate: – NOx = NO + NO2 – SO2 – VOC = ALD2 + ETH + FORM + ISOP + OLE + PAR + TOL + XYL – NH3 – PM2.5 (PMF) – PMCoarse = PM10 – PM2.5 – OC – EC Do we want/need speciated VOCs?

Emissions Data Emission Data Storage and Formats Data stored as ASCIIGRID formats: – One file each by species, source category, scenario ~8 species X ~ (4-20) categories = ~32 – 160 files / scenario Data stored as GIS Shapefile formats: – One file for each source category, scenario 4 – 20 files/scenario (each includes all relevant pollutants) Data stored in other formats? (i.e., county-level data)

Emissions Data Most Appropriate Spatial/Temporal Resolution Spatial Resolution – Surface layer (3D NetCDF files aggregated vertically) – Gridded – 36-km; (12-km??) – County-level – from SMOKE data files IDA (input); SMOKE reports (output) Temporal Resolution – Annual; Seasonal; Monthly (?) – How to handle fire emissions ??

Emissions Data GIS Data Layers GIS EI data layers for display/query – See ArcIMS demo Contextual Data – Administrative Boundaries State/County/Tribal Class I Area National/State Parks and Forests – Transportation Networks – Place Names – Landuse/Landcover GIS data storage and access – GIS data layers stored in ArcIMS – ASCII data stored at CIRA (??)