PREMAQ: A New Pre-Processor to CMAQ for Air Quality Forecasting Tanya L. Otte*, George Pouliot*, and Jonathan E. Pleim* Atmospheric Modeling Division U.S.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Use of Lidar Backscatter to Determine the PBL Heights in New York City, NY Jia-Yeong Ku, Chris Hogrefe, Gopal Sistla New York State Department of Environmental.
Advertisements

Development and Application of PM2.5 Interpollutant Trading Ratios to Account for PM2.5 Secondary Formation in Georgia James Boylan and Byeong-Uk Kim Georgia.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Changes in U.S. Regional-Scale Air.
A PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF THE ETA - CMAQ AIR QUALITY FORECAST MODEL FOR THE SUMMER OF 2004 CMAS Workshop Chapel Hill, NC 20 October, 2004.
An initial linkage of the CMAQ modeling system at neighborhood scales with a human exposure model Jason Ching/Thomas Pierce Air-Surface Processes Modeling.
THE COMMUNITY MULTISCALE AIR QUALITY (CMAQ) MODEL: Model Configuration and Enhancements for 2006 Air Quality Forecasting Rohit Mathur, Jonathan Pleim,
Alan H Huber Physical Scientist; PhD, QEP NOAA, ASMD, in partnership with the US EPA, National Exposure Research Laboratory, RTP, NC, USA THE 5TH ANNUAL.
Transitioning CMAQ for NWS Operational AQ Forecasting Jeff McQueen*, Pius Lee*, Marina Tsildulko*, G. DiMego*, B. Katz* R. Mathur,T. Otte, J. Pleim, J.
Henry Fuelberg Nick Heath Sean Freeman FSU WRF-Chem During SEAC 4 RS.
Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.
Emission processing methodology for the new GEM-MACH model ABSTRACT SMOKE has recently been adapted to provide emissions for the new Meteorological Service.
Beta Testing of the SCICHEM-2012 Reactive Plume Model James T. Kelly and Kirk R. Baker Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards US Environmental Protection.
Development of WRF-CMAQ Interface Processor (WCIP)
Comparing Aircraft Measurements of Atmospheric Compounds with a Regional Photochemical Model by Jennifer Schiffelbein CE 394K GISWR Fall 2003.
O. Russell Bullock, Jr. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division (in partnership with the U.S. Environmental.
Center for Environmental Research and Technology University of California, Riverside Bourns College of Engineering Evaluation and Intercomparison of N.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory | Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division| A Tale of Two Models: A Comparison.
Importance of Lightning NO for Regional Air Quality Modeling Thomas E. Pierce/NOAA Atmospheric Modeling Division National Exposure Research Laboratory.
1 Recent Advances in the Modeling of Airborne Substances George Pouliot Shan He Tom Pierce.
Implementation of the Particle & Precursor Tagging Methodology (PPTM) for the CMAQ Modeling System: Mercury Tagging 5 th Annual CMAS Conference Research.
Jonathan Pleim 1, Robert Gilliam 1, and Aijun Xiu 2 1 Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division, NOAA, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with the.
Community Multiscale Air Quality Modeling System CMAQ Air Quality Data Summit February 2008.
Georgia Environmental Protection Division Uncertainty Analysis of Ozone Formation and Emission Control Responses using High-order Sensitivities Di Tian,
Impacts of Biomass Burning Emissions on Air Quality and Public Health in the United States Daniel Tong $, Rohit Mathur +, George Pouliot +, Kenneth Schere.
Fine scale air quality modeling using dispersion and CMAQ modeling approaches: An example application in Wilmington, DE Jason Ching NOAA/ARL/ASMD RTP,
Utah Wintertime PM2.5 Modeling Lance Avey Utah Division of Air Quality.
Preliminary Study: Direct and Emission-Induced Effects of Global Climate Change on Regional Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter K. Manomaiphiboon 1 *, A.
On using process-based statistical models of air pollutants to meet regulatory and research needs Amy Nail, Ph.D. Honestat, LLC Statistics & Analytics.
Adaptation and Application of the CMAQ Modeling System for Real-time Air Quality Forecasting During the Summer of 2004 R. Mathur, J. Pleim, T. Otte, K.
Using CMAQ-AIM to Evaluate the Gas-Particle Partitioning Treatment in CMAQ Chris Nolte Atmospheric Modeling Division National Exposure Research Laboratory.
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.
Application of the CMAQ-UCD Aerosol Model to a Coastal Urban Site Chris Nolte NOAA Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division Research Triangle Park, NC 6.
Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Evaluating.
Comparison of CMAQ Lightning NOx Schemes and Their Impacts Youhua Tang 1,2, Li Pan 1,2, Pius Lee 1, Jeffery T. McQueen 4, Jianping Huang 4,5, Daniel Tong.
Overview of the Climate Impact on Regional Air Quality (CIRAQ) Project Ellen J. Cooter *, Alice Gilliland *, William Benjey *, Robert Gilliam * and Jenise.
Use of space-based tropospheric NO 2 observations in regional air quality modeling Robert W. Pinder 1, Sergey L. Napelenok 1, Alice B. Gilliland 1, Randall.
U.S. EPA and WIST Rob Gilliam *NOAA/**U.S. EPA
William G. Benjey* Physical Scientist NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division Research Triangle Park, NC Fifth Annual CMAS.
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,
Diagnostic Study on Fine Particulate Matter Predictions of CMAQ in the Southeastern U.S. Ping Liu and Yang Zhang North Carolina State University, Raleigh,
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.
New Features of the 2003 Release of the CMAQ Model Jonathan Pleim 1, Gerald Gipson 2, Shawn Roselle 1, and Jeffrey Young 1 1 ASMD, ARL, NOAA, RTP, NC 2.
Robert W. Pinder, Alice B. Gilliland, Robert C. Gilliam, K. Wyat Appel Atmospheric Modeling Division, NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, in partnership with.
Georgia Institute of Technology SUPPORTING INTEX THROUGH INTEGRATED ANALYSIS OF SATELLITE AND SUB-ORBITAL MEASUREMENTS WITH GLOBAL AND REGIONAL 3-D MODELS:
AN EVALUATION OF THE ETA-CMAQ AIR QUALITY FORECAST MODEL AS PART OF NOAA’S NATIONAL PROGRAM CMAQ AIRNOW AIRNOW Brian Eder* Daiwen Kang * Ken Schere* Ken.
Assessment of aerosol direct effects on surface radiation in the northern hemisphere using two-way WRF-CMAQ model Jia Xing, Jonathan Pleim, Rohit Mathur,
Impact of Temporal Fluctuations in Power Plant Emissions on Air Quality Forecasts Prakash Doraiswamy 1, Christian Hogrefe 1,2, Eric Zalewsky 2, Winston.
W. T. Hutzell 1, G. Pouliot 2, and D. J. Luecken 1 1 Atmospheric Modeling Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 2 Atmospheric Sciences Modeling.
MRPO Technical Approach “Nearer” Term Overview For: Emissions Modeling Meteorological Modeling Photochemical Modeling & Domain Model Performance Evaluation.
Although this work was reviewed by EPA and approved for publication, it may not necessarily reflect official Agency policy Jonathan Pleim, Shawn Roselle,
Jonathan Pleim NOAA/ARL* RTP, NC A NEW COMBINED LOCAL AND NON-LOCAL PBL MODEL FOR METEOROLOGY AND AIR QUALITY MODELING * In Partnership with the U.S. Environmental.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling Division Donna Schwede NOAA/Air Resources Laboratory Atmospheric.
On the Verification of Particulate Matter Simulated by the NOAA-EPA Air Quality Forecast System Ho-Chun Huang 1, Pius Lee 1, Binbin Zhou 1, Jian Zeng 6,
Limei Ran 1, Ellen Cooter 2, Verel Benson 3, Dongmei Yang 1, Robert Gilliam 2, Adel Hanna 1, William Benjey 2 1 Center for Environmental Modeling for Policy.
Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory WRF-CMAQ 2-way Coupled System: Part II Jonathan.
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.
Ozone Sensitivity to Nitric Oxide Emissions in WRF-Chem
Simulation of PM2.5 Trace Elements in Detroit using CMAQ
Overview of Emissions Processing for the 2002 Base Case CMAQ Modeling
Development of a Multipollutant Version of the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Modeling System Shawn Roselle, Deborah Luecken, William Hutzell,
Statistical Methods for Model Evaluation – Moving Beyond the Comparison of Matched Observations and Output for Model Grid Cells Kristen M. Foley1, Jenise.
A Performance Evaluation of Lightning-NO Algorithms in CMAQ
C. Nolte, T. Spero, P. Dolwick, B. Henderson, R. Pinder
Photochemical Model Performance and Consistency
Impact on Recent North American Air Quality Forecasts of Replacing a Retrospective U.S. Emissions Inventory with a Projected Inventory Michael Moran1,
SELECTED RESULTS OF MODELING WITH THE CMAQ PLUME-IN-GRID APPROACH
Deborah Luecken and Golam Sarwar U.S. EPA, ORD/NERL
J. Burke1, K. Wesson2, W. Appel1, A. Vette1, R. Williams1
The Value of Nudging in the Meteorology Model for Retrospective CMAQ Simulations Tanya L. Otte NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, RTP, NC (In partnership with.
JEHN-YIH JUANG, Donna Schwede, and Jon Pleim
Presentation transcript:

PREMAQ: A New Pre-Processor to CMAQ for Air Quality Forecasting Tanya L. Otte*, George Pouliot*, and Jonathan E. Pleim* Atmospheric Modeling Division U.S. EPA ORD National Exposure Research Laboratory Research Triangle Park, NC *On assignment from NOAA Air Resources Laboratory. Disclaimer: The research presented here was performed under the Memorandum of Understanding between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and under agreement number DW Although it has been reviewed by EPA and NOAA and approved for publication, it does not necessarily reflect their views or policies.

What is PREMAQ? PREMAQ = “Preprocessor to CMAQ” Part of National AQF System Currently processes Eta Model output Handles functionality of MCIP, parts of SMOKE, and parts of BCON in real time Currently a serial code

The Eta/CMAQ AQF System Eta-12 CMAQ Eta Post PRDGEN PREMAQ AQF Post Verification Tools Vertical interpolation from eta to sigma Horizontal interpolation to Lambert grid CMAQ-ready meteorology and emissions Gridded ozone files for users Chemistry model Meteorology model Performance feedback for users and developers

Practical and Technical Differences fewer (~22) layers terrain-following vert. northeast U.S. Lambert Conformal Arakawa-C P TOP = 100 hPa 60 layers step-mountain vert. continental rotated lat-lon Arakawa-E P TOP = 25 hPa EtaCMAQ

New in PREMAQ (vs. MCIP) GRIB reader (2-D slices vs. full 3-D fields, Arakawa-A) Grid geometry calculations –Different method of defining grids in GRIB –GRIB precision insufficient for lat/lon Modifications to use different suite of variables New dry deposition routine (EtaDry) Met-dependent emissions & LBCs included

166 grid cells 142 grid cells Lambert Conformal projection true at 46°N true at 36°N center at 40.5°N, 79.5°W central meridian 79.5°W I/O API Lower-Left Corner: , [meters from center]  x = 12 km  y = 12 km GRIB Lower-Left Corner: °N, °W Must use LLC lat-lon and projection info (including earth radius) to calculate center and distance from center to LLC!

Grid Gymnastics E dx u,v h i j j+1/2 j-1/2 i-1/2i+1/2 Eta A dx u,v,h j+1 j j-1 i-1ii+1 GRIB C dx j+1 j j-1 i-1ii+1 h u v CMAQ

Changes at NCEP for AQF Hourly post-processed Eta output Hydrostatic  -P structure to 100 hPa Additional forecast variables (PBL height, canopy conductance, plant canopy water) New GRIB grids for AQF

grid cells 259 grid cells Northeast Domain East “3x” Domain Forecast Domains (2004)

PREMAQ: Emission Processing PREMAQ contains a subset of the SMOKE modules PREMAQ contains Point Source and Biogenic Source processing from SMOKE Area Sources computed in SMOKE outside of PREMAQ Mobile Sources (nonlinear least squares approximation to SMOKE/Mobile6)

PREMAQ (part of SMOKE) LaypointMrggridSmkmerge Tmpbeis3

Area and Biogenic Sources Area Sources: 2001 NEI version 3 inventory used. (CAIR) No changes made to inventory. Computed outside of PREMAQ Biogenic Sources: BEIS3.12 included directly into PREMAQ. Canadian Inventory: 1995 used (no changes) Mexico Inventory: BRAVO 1999 used for point sources (3x domain only)

Mobile Sources SMOKE/MOBILE6 not efficient for real- time forecasting SMOKE/MOBILE6 used to create retrospective emissions for AQF grid –1999 VMT data used for input to Mobile 6 –2004 Vehicle Fleet used for input to Mobile 6

Mobile Sources Regression applied at each grid cell at each hour of the week for each species to create temperature/emission relationship Mobile Source emissions calculated in real-time using this derived temperature/emission relationship

NE Domain Mobile6 vs Regression 2003 retrospective SMOKE/MOBILE6 vs nonlinear approximation for NO (Nitric oxide) 8/4/03-9/29/03

NE Domain Mobile6 vs Regression 2003 retrospective SMOKE/MOBILE6 vs. nonlinear approximation for ALD2 (Acetaldehyde and higher aldehydes) 8/4/03-9/29/03

Point Sources 2001 NEIv3 inventory (from CAIR); modified EGU NOx emissions using DOE’s Annual Energy Outlook (Jan 2004) Calculated 2004/2001 NOx annual emission ratios on a regional basis (from DOE data) Applied NOx factors to 2001 base inventory for 2003 (retrospective) and 2004

EGU NOX adjustments 2004/2001 by region for Point Source Inventory Source: Department of Energy Annual Energy Outlook

AQF vs Reported NOx TVA Cumberland Plant

AQF vs Reported NOx TVA Shawnee Plant

PREMAQ Emissions Summary Area/Biogenic No major changes made Mobile Sources: Nonlinear regression used to create temperature/emissions relationship. Point Sources: EGU projections to 2003 and 2004 seem to capture the emission changes from the larger sources but not from smaller sources