WRAP/FEJF Phase III/IV Emissions Inventory Project WRAP - Fire Emissions Joint Forum Meeting San Diego, CA 22 February 2007 1015a – Presentation (a)

Slides:



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

Fire Modeling Protocol MeetingBoise, IDAugust 31 – September 1, 2010 Applying Fire Emission Inventories in Chemical Transport Models Zac Adelman
Attribution of Haze Phase 2 and Technical Support System Project Update AoH Meeting – San Francisco, CA September 14/15, 2005 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource.
WRAP 2002 Fire Emissions Inventory Inter-RPO Fire and Smoke Technical and Policy Coordination Meeting February 9-10, 2005 – Round Rock, TX Dave Randall.
Technical Support System Review / / RPO Monitoring/Data Analysis Workgroup Conference.
Technical Support System Review Board Meeting March 8, 2007.
National Fire & Air Workshop January 28-30, 2003 Westward Look Resort Tucson, AZ Emission Inventory for Prescribed and Wildland Fire: –What we mean by.
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.
Western Regional Air Partnership Emissions Database Management System Presentation to Fire Emissions Joint Forum Las Vegas, Nevada December 09, 2004 E.H.
WRAP Fire Emissions Tracking System Project Update, Outline, and Timeline WRAP - Fire Emissions Joint Forum Meeting San Diego, CA 22 February p.
PHASE II PROJECT Day 1 – 3:15p PHASE II PROJECT -- Ag Burning – Integration of QC responses -- NIF Format -- Plume Characteristics Update -- Next Steps.
1 WRAP Fire Tracking Systems Draft Intent of WRAP FTS Policy – Assist states/tribes to address emissions inventory and tracking associated with fire in.
1 WRAP Policy Fire Tracking Systems Draft December 9, 2002 FEJF Meeting December 10-11, 2002 Jackson, WY.
Developing a Workplan for Implementing the Strategic Plan for the WRAP Board October 1, 2008.
An Update on the Colorado Regional Haze SIP Process and Outcomes Presented at: WRAP – Implementation Work Group San Francisco, CA March 2005.
WRAP/FEJF Inter RPO Report WRAP - Fire Emissions Joint Forum Meeting San Diego, CA 22 February a – Presentation (c)
WRAP Committee and Forum Updates WRAP Board Meeting Salt Lake City, UT October 15, 2003.
February 23-24, 2005Salt Lake City, Utah1 In-house QC Semi-Automated Duplicate Checking, Large Fire Refinement Complex Fire Identification Phase 2 Fire.
PHASE II PROJECT Day 1 – 1:15p PHASE II PROJECT -- Technical Refinements Large Fires Complex Identification Duplicates -- WF and Rx Fire QC Packets States,
Stationary and Area Source Committee Update OTC Committee Meeting September 13, 2012 Washington, D.C. Hall of the States 1.
WRAP Update WESTAR Meeting San Francisco April 25, 2011.
Center for Environmental Research and Technology/Environmental Modeling University of California at Riverside Fire Plume Rise WRAP (FEJF) Method vs. SMOKE.
1 WRAP Oil & Gas Phase II Work Plan: 2002 and 2018 Area Source Inventory Improvements and Area Source Controls Evaluation WRAP Stationary Sources Forum.
1 Brian Finneran, Oregon DEQ WRAP IWG Meeting, Santa Fe December 2006 Update on Regional Haze 308 SIP Template.
Fugitive Dust Project Phase One The WRAP Emissions Forum contracted with a team of contractors lead by ENVIRON to produce regional PM 10 and PM 2.5 emissions.
February 23-24, 2005Salt Lake City, Utah1 Rangeland Burning (Non-Federal Lands) Methodology Phase 2 Fire Emission Inventory WRAP – FEJF.
Development of Wildland Fire Emission Inventories with the BlueSky Smoke Modeling Framework Sean Raffuse, Erin Gilliland, Dana Sullivan, Neil Wheeler,
Technical Projects Update WRAP Board Meeting Salt Lake City, UT November 10, 2004.
Modeling Wildfire Emissions Using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Technology and Satellite Data STI-3009 Presented by Neil J. M. Wheeler Sonoma Technology,
November 2, 2005San Diego, California1 Calculation Tool for Estimating Projected Emissions - Methods Roll Out – (Day 2 – ) Phase III/IV Project.
12/14/20151 Fire Emissions Tracking System Development & Implementation Workshop on Regional Emissions & Air Quality Modeling Studies Biogenics, Ammonia,
September 28, 2005Ph III/IV Project Team1 Phase III/IV Planning EIs Update and Status Report.
Introduction Session (Day 1 – ) Phase III/IV Project Technical Workshop #2 November 1-2, 2005 – San Diego, CA.
1 Brian Finneran, Oregon DEQ WRAP IWG Meeting, Portland August 2006 Suggested Changes to IWG Section 308 SIP Template.
February 23-24, 2005Salt Lake City, Utah1 National Inventory Format NIF3 Methodology & Visual Display Phase 2 Fire Emission Inventory WRAP – FEJF.
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)
1/13/20161 FETS: State of the System Providers, Features, Lessons Learned August 31, 2009 FETS Project Meeting Boise, ID.
Wyoming WISE Agricultural Burning EI Development Day 1 – 2:45p Wyoming WISE Agricultural Burning EI Development.
Denver 2004 TGP1 PM2.5 Emissions Inventory Workshop Denver, CO March 2004 Thompson G. Pace USEPA Emissions Estimation for Wildland Fires.
Uncertainties in Wildfire Emission Estimates Workshop on Regional Emissions & Air Quality Modeling July 30, 2008 Shawn Urbanski, Wei Min Hao, Bryce Nordgren.
Wildfire Emissions Updated Methodology Neva Sotolongo Emission Inventory Branch.
Overview of ARS Presentations and Review of EI Data Sets AoH Meeting, Salt Lake City September 21-22, 2004 Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc. 1 EDMS Purpose Regional Haze Rule Implementation Performance Monitoring Region-Wide Emission Inventory Analysis of Collected.
TSS Project Update WRAP Technical Analysis Forum Boise, ID May 22, 2007.
Attribution of Haze Report Update and Web Site Tutorial Implementation Work Group Meeting March 8, 2005 Joe Adlhoch Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
Application of Fuel Characteristic Classification System to Ph II EI (add-on task to Inter RPO project) Fire Emissions Joint Forum Meeting Spokane, WA.
September 28, 2005Missoula, Montana1 Inter-RPO 2002 National Wildfire Emission Inventory - Results - by Air Sciences Inc. and EC/R, Inc. for the Inter-RPO.
WRAP Activities Overview §308 Technical Work Outline June 3, 2003.
Technical Support System Review Board Meeting March 8, 2007.
November 2, 2005San Diego, California1 Strawman Projection Activity Targets (Day 1 – ) Phase III/IV Project Technical Workshop #2 November 1-2,
Attribution of Haze Project Update Fire Emissions Joint Forum Meeting September 8-9, 2004 Worley, ID.
WRAP Workshop on Fire, Carbon, & Dust Emissions of Carbon from Fire Fire Emissions Joint Forum Presented by – Dave Randall, Air Sciences Inc. May 23, 2006.
1 Fire Emissions Inventories (almost) Closeout -- Ph IV Projections – Fire Emissions Joint Forum Meeting Spokane, WA Day 1 – 1015a part A Dave Randall.
MANE-VU 2002 Fire Emissions Inventory Megan Schuster Inter-RPO Fire and Smoke Technical and Policy Coordination Meeting Austin, TX February 2005.
WRAP Regional Haze Progress Report & FEJF Projects/Budget
AoH Phase 2 Update AoH Meeting – San Diego, CA January 25, 2006
Annual Emission Goals for Fire
Phase 1 – 2002 Fire Emissions Inventory
WRAP Regional Haze Grant Status, Technical Project Priorities, & Proposed Technical Analysis Forum Tom Moore WRAP Technical Coordinator Attribution.
Western Regional Haze Planning and
Tribal Data WG Fire and Smoke WG Oil and Gas WG
Phase 1 – 2002 Fire Emissions Inventory
July 11, 2006 / 3p Phase IV Projection Emission Inventories
Inter-RPO 2002 Fire Emissions Inventory
Regional Haze SIP Status Report
FEJF Meeting Day 1, 845a – Seattle, WA
Fire Emissions and Smoke Management Plans
Fire Emissions Joint Forum February 9, 2005
Smoke Management in Alaska
Tribal Data WG Fire and Smoke WG Oil and Gas WG
Presentation transcript:

WRAP/FEJF Phase III/IV Emissions Inventory Project WRAP - Fire Emissions Joint Forum Meeting San Diego, CA 22 February a – Presentation (a)

Overview Getting from Draft to Final Report Final Posting Page Kickoff of small project –Develop recommendation/discussion for emission inventory suites to model.

Getting from Draft to Final Posted for comment on Jan 25, 07 Comment period closed Feb 14, 07 2 comments received –CA Air Resources Board –US DOI Bureau of Land Management Summary of comments/responses Summary of “action items”

Final Posting Page FEJFtask7Phase3-4.htmlhttp:// FEJFtask7Phase3-4.html Final Doc (PDF) will replace Draft Doc Walk-through of Ph III/IV EI files as they are posted on the WRAP’s web page. Questions/Comments

Kickoff of Small Project Limited resources for WRAP/RMC modeling Many possible combinations of emission inventory files –Different fire scenarios –Could be paired with different mixes of emission inventory files of other (non-fire sources)

Kickoff of Small Project Selection of fire EI files to run should hinge on getting answers to most important questions needed by FEJF/WRAP/States/Tribes as Regional Haze SIPs are prepared. Task team with technical direction provided by Air Sciences to formulate recommendations for FEJF/WRAP consideration. Timing

WRAP/FEJF Emission Inventory Projection Tool WRAP - Fire Emissions Joint Forum Meeting San Diego, CA 22 February a – Presentation (b)

Overview Integrate as tool available on the WRAP’s Technical Support System (TSS) Ideas to make more “lean and mean”

Integrate as Tool on the TSS Goal is to have Fire-related Tools available on the TSS (in the same way that other tools are provided to generate SIP ready data summaries/analyses). Included as a task in the Scope of Work for the Fire Emissions Tracking System (FETS) development.

Need to Make the Projection Tool “Lean and Mean” Summary of how Projection Tool is organized and functions now. –EXCEL-based. –Includes all (WRAP-wide) Phase III (Baseline) as “Seed Data” –User-provided data serve as activity Targets –Macros pluck Seed Data until Targets are reached Identify options to make the Projection Tool smaller and easier to use.

Need to Make the Projection Tool “Lean and Mean” Options to make the Projection Tool smaller and easier to grab and use. –Create 13 state-specific tools. –Limit Seed Data to representative (but relatively small) number of events. Lots of events in the Projection EI would be identical. Would have to apply statistics to temporally and spatially distribute. –Other?

WRAP/FEJF Inter RPO Report WRAP - Fire Emissions Joint Forum Meeting San Diego, CA 22 February a – Presentation (c)

Overview Lessons Learned FCCS vs. NFDRS – a case study of wildfires in the WRAP region

Status of Draft Report 150pp report (approximate). Proofreading/Formatting in Golden as we speak. Perhaps some changes/additions to “Lessons Learned” section based on discussions today. Posted and available for review on Friday, February 23, weeks for review/comment, make necessary revisions, then post as Final.

– Lessons Learned – Technical Methodology Big hitters: –“Blackened Acres” presumption 2/3 reported acres actually burned –FEPS-generated Fuel Consumption Consumption estimated as a function of moisture regime of fuel By definition, fuel consumption is less than available fuel loading –FEPS-generated Emission Factors

Inter RPO Results / WRAP Phase II Results

What should we do NEXT time? The labor is in the data gathering and QA/QC. –Is there any (better) way to gather, store, and disseminate activity data? Build and use a SCC coding system in coordination with EPA. Improve upon the “Blackened Acres Presumption” Use FEPS –The Consumption Curves make sense. –The burning phase- specific EFs make sense. –The smoldering method makes sense.

How should we use the Inter RPO 2002 WF EI? If you want a wildfire EI that is developed in a consistent way across the US, there is probably no better. It might be an equitable way to set up “boundary” conditions due to WF emissions in regional modeling analyses. As a reference point to build “better” EI’s in the future: –Good activity data is everything. –Better fire science = more confidence in results. –Standards for NIF formats and SCC. –…and we’ve still got the challenge of representing these events “correctly” in the models (plume characteristics)

Case Study: NFDRS vs. FCCS in the WRAP (2002) Different data sources are available to represent fuel loading (& consumption) across the US. –National Fire Danger Rating System –Fuel Characteristic Classification System This analysis attempts to quantify the effect on fuel loading estimates based on NFDRS vs. FCCS for the WRAP’s 2002 Fire Inventory

Fuel Consumption Assignment Rules Rule #Fuel loading data availabilityAction 1 Event was subject to “ large fire ” fuel refinement in Phase II effort and received fuel loading based on site-level information Use refined Phase II tons 2 Fuel loading in tons or tons/acre supplied in raw activity data Use Phase II raw tons directly 3NFDRS code supplied in raw activity data Look up tons from Phase II NFDRS fuel loading table 4 Event subject to “ perimeter-based ” fuel refinement in Phase II Assign fuel loading using perimeter over FCC map 5 No fuel loading supplied in raw or refined activity data Assign fuel loading using FCC map

Basis for Fuel Consumption Values – Post Application of Fuel Assignment Rules (Percent of Acres) Source Type (Total Acres in EI) FCC- based Tons Fuel Consumption Reported in Raw Data Tons Fuel Consumption Derived via QC-effort NFDRS Fuel Model Reported in Raw Data Total Wildfire (5.3M) 13% 44%18%25%100% WFU (200K) 19% 79%0%2%100% Prescribed Burning (650K) 42% 53%0%5%100% Basis for Fuel Consumption Values (as a % of Total Acres) – Post Application of Fuel Assignment Rules

Fuel Consumption Comparison By State

Some More Statistics WRAP Wide –Fuel Consumption increases by 68% (from 48MM tons to 81MM tons) with the application of FCCS –Fuel Consumption increased in 8 states Oregon: –NFDRS G (short needle, heavy 43.5 tons/acre) …45% of the acres of the Biscuit Fire… converts to FCC2 (Western Hemlock (& tons/acre)