1. Modelled results vs. emission estimates S.Dutchak, I.Ilyin, O.Travnikov, O.Rozovskaya, M.Varygina EMEP/MSC-East Modelled results vs. emission estimates S.Dutchak, I.Ilyin, O.Travnikov, O.Rozovskaya, M.Varygina EMEP/MSC-East Larnaka, 2010

2. Some events Uncertainties in modelling, emissions and measurements  TFEIP - Rovaniemi, 2005  TFEIP - Thessaloniki, 2006  TFEIP/TFMM - Dublin, 2007  2007 – CEIP

3. Model results vs. observations (presented in Rovaniemi, 2005) Underestimation of observed concentrations by 65-75 % for Pb and Cd Official emissions data, 2000 Mod = 0.35 Obs Corr = 0.70 Pb

4. TFMM/TFEIP scientific workshops (Dublin, 2007) Objective Increase the interaction between emissions, monitoring and modelling Conclusions  natural emissions  finer spatial and temporal resolution  detailed activity data and emission factors

5. HM model developments, 2007-2010 (after Dublin workshop, 2007) Main directions:  Model sensitivity analysis – most sensitive to the emissions  Model uncertainties – 30-40% for intrinsic parameters  Refinement of vertical structure and size-segregated description – increase of total depositions ~ 2%

6. HM model developments, 2007-2010 Main directions:  Refinement of meteorological data – increase of wet deposition ~ 3%  Global/regional scale modelling – improvement of boundary conditions  Evaluation of atmospheric transport modelling

7. TF HTAP model intercomparison, 2008 Vertical profile of CO tracer MSC-E Models Average concentration of CO tracer in Europe Evaluation of atmospheric transport

8. Re-suspension of HMs MSC-E estimations (2007) Re-suspension varies in countries: 15 – 80 %; uncertainties are very high PbCd Countries estimates are of great importance [ ECE/EC.AIR/2008/4]

9. Model development: inclusion of re-suspension (Pb) Underestimation < 40%Underestimation > 50% Comparison with observations, 2007

10. Underestimation < 40%Underestimation > 50% CZ1 Model development: inclusion of re-suspension (Cd) Comparison with observations, 2007

11. Back trajectory analysis (CZ1) Svratouch, Czech Republic (CZ1) 01.09.2005 06.11.2005 Transport from Poland Transport from Western Europe Daily mean Cd concentration in air, 2005

12. Comparison of emissions in Poland with neighboring countries (official data, 2008) Total emissions: Poland – 41.8 t Slovakia – 11 t France – 3.8 t Czech Republic – 3.8 t Bulgaria – 3.7 t Germany – 2.7 t Belgium – 2 t Austria – 1.1 t

13. Spatial distributions of emission data (Cd, 2008) Official gridded data reported by 26 countries - 2005, and 2 countries - 2000

14. Gridded data for modelling prepared by CEIP differ from official gridded data (for 17 countries of 28) Belgium Bulgaria Czech Republic Norway Poland Slovakia Slovenia United Kingdom Croatia Cyprus Finland France Hungary Italy Latvia Lithuania Sweden According to PM spatial distribution No explanation

15. Reported by Poland for 2005 Prepared by CEIP for 2008 (based on PM) Spatial distributions of Cd emissions data (Poland, 2008)

16. What data should be used for modelling?

17. EMEP case study on HM Main purpose Improvement of pollution assessment based on analysis of discrepancies between modelled and measurement data in close cooperation with national experts on emissions, monitoring, modelling

18. Input data National experts (at present 6 countries) will deliver: - gridded data with 5 x 5 km (10 x 10 km) resolution - complementary information on measurements, land-use, meteorological data - etc …… EMEP case study on HM

19. Detailed discussion on the HM Case Study will be held at the TFMM meeting tomorrow from 9.00 to 12.00 WELCOME !!! Progress will be reported to the next TFMM and TFEIP meetings EMEP case study on HM