GOING FROM 12-KM TO 250-M RESOLUTION Josephine Bates 1, Audrey Flak 2, Howard Chang 2, Heather Holmes 3, David Lavoue 1, Mitchel Klein 2, Matthew Strickland.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Analysis of CMAQ Performance and Grid-to- grid Variability Over 12-km and 4-km Spacing Domains within the Houston airshed Daiwen Kang Computer Science.
Advertisements

A Web-based Community Approach to Model Evaluation using AMET Saravanan Arunachalam 1, Nathan Rice 2 and Pradeepa Vennam 1 1 Institute for the Environment.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Changes in U.S. Regional-Scale Air.
Georgia Chapter of the Air & Waste Management Association Annual Conference: Improved Air Quality Modeling for Predicting the Impacts of Controlled Forest.
Halûk Özkaynak US EPA, Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, RTP, NC Presented at the CMAS Special Symposium on Air.
CO budget and variability over the U.S. using the WRF-Chem regional model Anne Boynard, Gabriele Pfister, David Edwards National Center for Atmospheric.
U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development October 30, 2013 Prakash V. Bhave, Mary K. McCabe, Valerie C. Garcia Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division.
Human health applications of atmospheric remote sensing Simon Hales, Housing and Health Research Programme, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
CMAQ Simulations using Fire Inventory of NCAR (FINN) Emissions Cesunica Ivey, David Lavoué, Aika Davis, Yongtao Hu, Armistead Russell Georgia Institute.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory CMAS Special Session on Human Health October 13, 2010 Combining Models and Observations.
Jenny Stocker, Christina Hood, David Carruthers, Martin Seaton, Kate Johnson, Jimmy Fung The Development and Evaluation of an Automated System for Nesting.
1 icfi.com | 1 HIGH-RESOLUTION AIR QUALITY MODELING OF NEW YORK CITY TO ASSESS THE EFFECTS OF CHANGES IN FUELS FOR BOILERS AND POWER GENERATION 13 th Annual.
1 Satellite Remote Sensing of Particulate Matter Air Quality ARSET Applied Remote Sensing Education and Training A project of NASA Applied Sciences Pawan.
Operational Air Quality and Source Contribution Forecasting in Georgia Georgia Institute of Technology Yongtao Hu 1, M. Talat Odman 1, Michael E. Chang.
Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.
Aircraft spiral on July 20, 2011 at 14 UTC Validation of GOES-R ABI Surface PM2.5 Concentrations using AIRNOW and Aircraft Data Shobha Kondragunta (NOAA),
Simulating diurnal changes of speciated particulate matter in Atlanta, Georgia using CMAQ Yongtao Hu, Jaemeen Baek, Bo Yan, Rodney Weber, Sangil Lee, Evan.
Muntaseer Billah, Satoru Chatani and Kengo Sudo Department of Earth and Environmental Science Graduate School of Environmental Studies Nagoya University,
Developing a High Spatial Resolution Aerosol Optical Depth Product Using MODIS Data to Evaluate Aerosol During Large Wildfire Events STI-5701 Jennifer.
Page1 PAGE 1 The influence of MM5 nudging schemes on CMAQ simulations of benzo(a)pyrene concentrations and depositions in Europe Volker Matthias, GKSS.
Sensitivity of top-down correction of 2004 black carbon emissions inventory in the United States to rural-sites versus urban-sites observational networks.
Harikishan Perugu, Ph.D. Heng Wei, Ph.D. PE
1 AOD to PM2.5 to AQC – An excel sheet exercise ARSET Applied Remote Sensing Education and Training A project of NASA Applied Sciences Pawan Gupta Salt.
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.
Modeling Overview For Barrio Logan Community Health Neighborhood Assessment Program Andrew Ranzieri Vlad Isakov Tony Servin Shuming Du October 10, 2001.
1 Neil Wheeler, Kenneth Craig, and Clinton MacDonald Sonoma Technology, Inc. Petaluma, California Presented at the Sixth Annual Community Modeling and.
On the Model’s Ability to Capture Key Measures Relevant to Air Quality Policies through Analysis of Multi-Year O 3 Observations and CMAQ Simulations Daiwen.
Evaluation and Application of Air Quality Model System in Shanghai Qian Wang 1, Qingyan Fu 1, Yufei Zou 1, Yanmin Huang 1, Huxiong Cui 1, Junming Zhao.
Georgia Environmental Protection Division IMPACTS OF MODELING CHOICES ON RELATIVE RESPONSE FACTORS IN ATLANTA, GA Byeong-Uk Kim, Maudood Khan, Amit Marmur,
Applications of Satellite Remote Sensing to Estimate Global Ambient Fine Particulate Matter Concentrations Randall Martin, Dalhousie and Harvard-Smithsonian.
Source-Specific Forecasting of Air Quality Impacts with Dynamic Emissions Updating & Source Impact Reanalysis Georgia Institute of Technology Yongtao Hu.
Development and Preliminary Results of Image Processing Tools for Meteorology and Air Quality Modeling Limei Ran Center for Environmental Modeling for.
Modeling as an exposure estimation approach for use in epidemiologic studies Part 2: Example applications KL Dionisio 1, LK Baxter 1, V Isakov 1, SE Sarnat.
On using process-based statistical models of air pollutants to meet regulatory and research needs Amy Nail, Ph.D. Honestat, LLC Statistics & Analytics.
Assimilating AIRNOW Ozone Observations into CMAQ Model to Improve Ozone Forecasts Tianfeng Chai 1, Rohit Mathur 2, David Wong 2, Daiwen Kang 1, Hsin-mu.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Using Dynamical Downscaling to Project.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Office of Research and Development.
Continued improvements of air quality forecasting through emission adjustments using surface and satellite data & Estimating fire emissions: satellite.
Photo image area measures 2” H x 6.93” W and can be masked by a collage strip of one, two or three images. The photo image area is located 3.19” from left.
William G. Benjey* Physical Scientist NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division Research Triangle Park, NC Fifth Annual CMAS.
1 Aika Yano, Yongtao Hu, M. Talat Odman, Armistead Russell Georgia Institute of Technology October 15, th annual CMAS conference.
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,
Evaluating temporal and spatial O 3 and PM 2.5 patterns simulated during an annual CMAQ application over the continental U.S. Evaluating temporal and spatial.
Impact of the changes of prescribed fire emissions on regional air quality from 2002 to 2050 in the southeastern United States Tao Zeng 1,3, Yuhang Wang.
Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and Emission Reduction An FAA/NASA/TC-sponsored Center of Excellence Matthew Woody and Saravanan Arunachalam Institute.
Exposure Assessment for Health Effect Studies: Insights from Air Pollution Epidemiology Lianne Sheppard University of Washington Special thanks to Sun-Young.
Robert W. Pinder, Alice B. Gilliland, Robert C. Gilliam, K. Wyat Appel Atmospheric Modeling Division, NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, in partnership with.
Evaluation of CMAQ Driven by Downscaled Historical Meteorological Fields Karl Seltzer 1, Chris Nolte 2, Tanya Spero 2, Wyat Appel 2, Jia Xing 2 14th Annual.
Low-cost Sensor Packages for Roadside Emissions Factor Estimation CMAS – 10/7/2015 KAROLINE K. JOHNSON, MICHAEL H. BERGIN, DUKE UNIVERSITY ARMISTEAD G.
INTEGRATING SATELLITE AND MONITORING DATA TO RETROSPECTIVELY ESTIMATE MONTHLY PM 2.5 CONCENTRATIONS IN THE EASTERN U.S. Christopher J. Paciorek 1 and Yang.
Response of fine particles to the reduction of precursor emissions in Yangtze River Delta (YRD), China Juan Li 1, Joshua S. Fu 1, Yang Gao 1, Yun-Fat Lam.
Georgia Institute of Technology Evaluation of the 2006 Air Quality Forecasting Operation in Georgia Talat Odman, Yongtao Hu, Ted Russell School of Civil.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Examining the impact of aerosol direct.
Fine Scale Modeling of Ozone Exposure Estimates using a Source Sensitivity Approach Cesunica E. Ivey, Lucas Henneman, Cong Liu, Yongtao T. Hu, Armistead.
Modeling as an exposure estimation approach for use in epidemiologic studies Part 2: Example applications KL Dionisio 1, LK Baxter 1, V Isakov 1, SE Sarnat.
Exposure Prediction and Measurement Error in Air Pollution and Health Studies Lianne Sheppard Adam A. Szpiro, Sun-Young Kim University of Washington CMAS.
The Near-road Exposures and Effects of Urban air pollutant Study (NEXUS) investigating whether children with asthma living near major roadways in Detroit,
7. Air Quality Modeling Laboratory: individual processes Field: system observations Numerical Models: Enable description of complex, interacting, often.
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.
N Engl J Med Jun 29;376(26): doi: 10
Yang Liu, PhD HAQAST1 November 3-4, 2016 Emory University, Atlanta
RD Evaluation and Comparison OF Methods to Construct Air Quality Fields for Exposure Assessment haofei yu, jim mulholland, howard chang, ran huang,
Statistical Methods for Model Evaluation – Moving Beyond the Comparison of Matched Observations and Output for Model Grid Cells Kristen M. Foley1, Jenise.
High-resolution air quality forecasting for Hong Kong
Forecasting the Impacts of Wildland Fires
Using CMAQ to Interpolate Among CASTNET Measurements
Air Quality Assessment and Management
J. Burke1, K. Wesson2, W. Appel1, A. Vette1, R. Williams1
REGIONAL AND LOCAL-SCALE EVALUATION OF 2002 MM5 METEOROLOGICAL FIELDS FOR VARIOUS AIR QUALITY MODELING APPLICATIONS Pat Dolwick*, U.S. EPA, RTP, NC, USA.
GEOS-Chem and AMOD Average 48-hr PM2.5, December 9th-11th, 2017
Presentation transcript:

GOING FROM 12-KM TO 250-M RESOLUTION Josephine Bates 1, Audrey Flak 2, Howard Chang 2, Heather Holmes 3, David Lavoue 1, Mitchel Klein 2, Matthew Strickland 2, Lyndsey Darrow 2, James Mulholland 1, Armistead Russell 1 1 Georgia Institute of Technology 2 Emory University 3 University of Nevada, Reno Comparison of Two Downscaling Techniques R SCAPE

Motivation Epidemiologic data for population-based studies available at a finer spatial resolution than air quality data 0.6 – – – – 0.6 < – km Average (99 cells)Health Data (~25,000 points) Sites of homes for health study

Goal Goal: Develop a method for estimating daily exposure estimates at 250-m grid resolution using 12-km CMAQ data for a birth cohort study Two approaches: 1. Bayesian Statistical Downscaler 2. CTM - Dispersion Model Fusion 3

APPROACH 1 Bayesian Statistical Downscaler 4

Inputs SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL PREDICTORS Daily CMAQ PM 2.5 for 2005 CDC National Environmental Public Health Tracking Network, v4.7, CB05, 24 vertical layers, 2002 NEI, MM5, 12-km Eastern United States Daily or every 3-day monitor data PM 2.5 for 2005 LAND USE AND METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES Daily average temperature & wind speed for 2005 WRF v3.3.1, 13 vertical layers, Pleim-Xiu land surface model 2011 annually-averaged Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) roadway emissions or Research Line (R-LINE) dispersion model concentration estimates (assume 2011 data apply to each year) 5

Inputs 2011 ARC Emissions Link-based emissions in g/day/m provided by the Atlanta Regional Commission 6

Inputs R-LINE is a line-source dispersion model for near-surface releases developed by the EPA ΔPM 2.5 = 10 [0.32*log(RLINE_PM2.5) ) We adjusted the R-LINE estimates using a three-step process 1. Fit R-LINE estimates to Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) vehicle source estimates 2. Fit R-LINE estimates to monitor values (after subtracting out background PM 2.5 ) 3. Average the coefficients from each fit Xinxin Zhai, et al. “Comparison and calibration of Research-Line (RLINE) model results with measurement- based and CMAQ-based source impacts”, 14 th Annual CMAS Conference. Chapel Hill, NC

Method (Bayesian Statistical Downscaler) PM (s,t) = α o (s,t) + α 1 (s,t)*AQ(s,t) + ε(s,t) Additive bias: α o (s,t) = β o (s) + β o (t) + o Z o Multiplicative bias: α 1 (s,t) = β 1 (s) + β 1 (t) + 1 Z 1 PM = point-level measurements (PM 2.5 observations) AQ = gridded air quality data (CMAQ replaced aerosol optical depth (AOD) Z = land use and meteorology (Temp, WS, ARC or R-LINE) ε = residual errors Chang et al. (2013), Calibrating MODIS aerosol optical depth for predicting daily PM2.5 concentrations via statistical downscaling, Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology, 24,

ARC EmissionsR-LINE concentrations ARC + Obs 2005 Annually-Averaged Estimates *only health study sites Mean (SD) = 16.8 (0.9) Mean (SD) = 17.7 (3.0)Mean (SD) = 15.7 (0.6) μg/m < > 20.0

ARC EmissionsR-LINE concentrations ARC + Obs 2005 Annually-Averaged Estimates *only health study sites Mean (SD) = 16.8 (0.9) Mean (SD) = 17.7 (3.0)Mean (SD) = 15.7 (0.6) Percent of grid cells RLINE ARC ARC + obs μg/m 3 PM2.5 Annual Average Estimates 10 Monitors not capturing full spatial distribution of Atlanta (adding 12% more data at a rural site changes results) High temporal correlations ( ) and low spatial correlations (0-0.3) imply issues with ARC/R-LINE input Different results for ARC and R-LINE inputs μg/m < > 20.0

Issues with Spatial Gradients 13.5 – – – – – – – – – – 17.4 ARC + obsRLINE ModelRMSE CMAQ6.40 DS-ARC+obs Unphysical results due to negative RLINE coefficient Must check spatial map, not just RMSE DS-RLINE 11

Conclusions (Bayesian Statistical Downscaler) Results very dependent on number of monitor values it is trained on (CO, NO 2 ) Results very dependent on land-use variables (ARC vs. R-LINE) Downscaler not yet ready to be used with CMAQ and R-LINE 12

APPROACH 2 CTM – Dispersion Model Fusion 13

Inputs Dispersion Model 2011 RLINE estimations adjusted using observations Assume 2011 RLINE estimations apply to each year 250-m resolution Chemical Transport Model CMAQ-OBS : must adjust CMAQ values using observations before inputting into CTM-Dispersion model 12-km resolution Scale 12-km CMAQ using fine-scale dispersion model vehicle source impact estimates from R-LINE 14

Fused Field and Temporal Correlation Estimation C* CMAQ Observations PM 2.5 (  g/m 3 ), 7/23/08 Data-Fused CMAQ-OBS optimized for temporal variation temporal variation from OBS; spatial structure from mean CMAQ temporal variation & spatial structure from CMAQ; scaled to mean OBS Zhai, et al. “Spatiotemporal error assessment for ambient air pollution estimates obtained using an observation-CMAQ data fusion technique”, 13 th annual CMAS Conference 15

Method (CTM-Dispersion Model Fusion) 1. Spatially average R-LINE values to grid scale of CMAQ-OBS (12-km) 2. Subtract averaged R-LINE concentrations from CMAQ-OBS values to remove mobile impacts on PM Spatially interpolate this result using bilinear interpolation to obtain spatially smooth estimates at the grid scale of R-LINE concentrations (250-m) 4. Add R-LINE estimated PM 2.5 to results of step 3 to add mobile PM 2.5 back into model 16

2011 R-LINE 12km_av 1. Average R-LINE Concentrations 2011 R-LINE Concentrations 17

2. Subtract R-LINE (12-km) from CMAQ-OBS 2011 R-LINE 12km_av 2005 Annually Averaged CMAQ-OBS 18

3. Spatial Bilinear Interpolation CMAQ-OBS – R-LINE 12km_av Interpolated Results 19

4. Add R-LINE (250-m) back into model 2011 R-LINE ConcentrationsInterpolated Results 20

2005 Annual Average PM 2.5 Results μg/m 3 21

Model Comparisons Evaluations paired in time and space number of pairs = 1616 for DS; 1618 for CTM-Dispersion CTM-Dispersion Fusion 97.5% faster to run ModelRMSE (µg/m 3 )Computation Time CMAQ DS – RLINE2.32 Data prep: 8.5 min Run: 16.7 hours DS – ARC+obs2.68 Data prep: 8.5 min Run: 16.7 hours CTM-Dispersion1.64 Data prep: 34 min Run: 2.5 min *Run time for daily estimates of 329,472 grid cells over 1 year *Data prep time does not include running or adjusting CMAQ or R-LINE 22

Conclusions (CTM-Dispersion Model Fusion ) Data fusion of CMAQ and R-LINE successfully created spatially resolved exposure estimates. Daily estimates will be used for a spatially-resolved birth cohort study in Atlanta from This approach can be applied to any pollutant with CMAQ and R-LINE estimates and any CMAQ grid size ≤ 12km Evaluation statistics depend heavily on performance of input estimates (better at roadways) This approach is much faster than the statistical downscaler 23

Acknowledgments Collaborators at Georgia Tech and Emory University *This publication was made possible by US EPA grant R This publication’s contents are solely the responsibility of the grantee and do not necessarily represent the official views of the US EPA. Further, US EPA does not endorse the purchase of any commercial products or services mentioned in the publication. Southeastern Center for Air Pollution & Epidemiology (SCAPE) Josephine Bates 24

THANKS!