Two Decades of WRF/CMAQ simulations over the continental U. S

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

Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Changes in U.S. Regional-Scale Air.
U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development October 30, 2013 Prakash V. Bhave, Mary K. McCabe, Valerie C. Garcia Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division.
A statistical method for calculating the impact of climate change on future air quality over the Northeast United States. Collaborators: Cynthia Lin, Katharine.
An Assessment of CMAQ with TEOM Measurements over the Eastern US Michael Ku, Chris Hogrefe, Kevin Civerolo, and Gopal Sistla PM Model Performance Workshop,
Application and Analysis of Kolmogorov- Zurbenko Filter in the Dynamic Evaluation of a Regional Air Quality Model Daiwen Kang Computer Science Corporation,
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.
Does ozone model performance vary as a function of synoptic meteorological type? Pat Dolwick, Christian Hogrefe, Mark Evangelista, Chris Misenis, Sharon.
OTAG Air Quality Analysis Workgroup Volume I: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Dave Guinnup and Bob Collom, Workgroup co-chair “Telling the ozone story with data”
Using Air Quality Models for Emissions Management Decisions
Regional Climate Modeling in the Source Region of Yellow River with complex topography using the RegCM3: Model validation Pinhong Hui, Jianping Tang School.
Improvement of extreme climate predictions from dynamical climate downscaling Yang Gao 1, Joshua S. Fu 1, John B. Drake 1, Yang Liu 2, Jean-Francois Lamarque.
October 17, CMAS 2006 conference
Examination of the impact of recent laboratory evidence of photoexcited NO 2 chemistry on simulated summer-time regional air quality Golam Sarwar, Robert.
Five-year Progress in the Performance of Air Quality Forecast Models: Analysis on Categorical Statistics for the National Air Quality Forecast Capacity.
Sensitivity of top-down correction of 2004 black carbon emissions inventory in the United States to rural-sites versus urban-sites observational networks.
Impacts of Biomass Burning Emissions on Air Quality and Public Health in the United States Daniel Tong $, Rohit Mathur +, George Pouliot +, Kenneth Schere.
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.
Georgia Environmental Protection Division IMPACTS OF MODELING CHOICES ON RELATIVE RESPONSE FACTORS IN ATLANTA, GA Byeong-Uk Kim, Maudood Khan, Amit Marmur,
Marina Astitha 1, S.T. Rao 2, Jaemo Yang 1, Huiying Luo 1, Inherent uncertainty in the prediction of ozone and particulate matter for NE US 1 Department.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Using Dynamical Downscaling to Project.
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.
William G. Benjey* Physical Scientist NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division Research Triangle Park, NC Fifth Annual CMAS.
C. Hogrefe 1,2, W. Hao 2, E.E. Zalewsky 2, J.-Y. Ku 2, B. Lynn 3, C. Rosenzweig 4, M. Schultz 5, S. Rast 6, M. Newchurch 7, L. Wang 7, P.L. Kinney 8, and.
The Impact of Short-term Climate Variations on Predicted Surface Ozone Concentrations in the Eastern US 2020 and beyond Shao-Hang Chu and W.M. Cox US Environmental.
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.
Opening Remarks -- Ozone and Particles: Policy and Science Recent Developments & Controversial Issues GERMAN-US WORKSHOP October 9, 2002 G. Foley *US EPA.
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.
Assessment of aerosol direct effects on surface radiation in the northern hemisphere using two-way WRF-CMAQ model Jia Xing, Jonathan Pleim, Rohit Mathur,
Operational Evaluation and Model Response Comparison of CAMx and CMAQ for Ozone & PM2.5 Kirk Baker, Brian Timin, Sharon Phillips U.S. Environmental Protection.
Impact of Temporal Fluctuations in Power Plant Emissions on Air Quality Forecasts Prakash Doraiswamy 1, Christian Hogrefe 1,2, Eric Zalewsky 2, Winston.
Emission reductions needed to meet proposed ozone standard and their effect on particulate matter Daniel Cohan and Beata Czader Department of Civil and.
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 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.
Land Use in Regional Climate Modeling
Dynamic Evaluation of CMAQ-Modeled Ozone Response to Emission Changes in The South coast air Basin Prakash Karamchandani1, Ralph Morris1, Andrew Wentland1,
15th Annual CMAS Conference
Stephen Reid, Hilary Hafner, Yuan Du Sonoma Technology, Inc.
Predicting PM2.5 Concentrations that Result from Compliance with National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) James T. Kelly, Adam Reff, and Brett Gantt.
Tanya L. Spero1, Megan S. Mallard1, Stephany M
Global Influences on Local Pollution
Significantly Reduced Health Burden from Ambient Air Pollution in the U.S. Under Emission Reductions from 1990 to th CMAS Conference 10/24/2017.
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
16th Annual CMAS Conference
Byeong-Uk Kim and Jim Boylan Planning and Support Program
C. Nolte, T. Spero, P. Dolwick, B. Henderson, R. Pinder
17th Annual CMAS Conference, Chapel Hill, NC
Dynamic evaluation of WRF-CMAQ PM2
Significantly Reduced Health Burden from Ambient Air Pollution in the U.S. Under Emission Reductions from 1990 to AGU Fall Meeting, 12/15/2017.
Predicting Future-Year Ozone Concentrations: Integrated Observational-Modeling Approach for Probabilistic Evaluation of the Efficacy of Emission Control.
Significantly Reduced Health Burden from Ambient Air Pollution in the U.S. Under Emission Reductions from 1990 to th CMAS Conference 10/24/2017.
Significantly Reduced Health Burden from Ambient Air Pollution in the U.S. Under Emission Reductions from 1990 to th AAAR Conference 10/19/2017.
Quantification of Lightning NOX and its Impact on Air Quality over the Contiguous United States Daiwen Kang, Rohit Mathur, Limei Ran, Gorge Pouliot, David.
Modeling the impacts of green infrastructure land use changes on air quality and meteorology—case study and sensitivity analysis in Kansas City Yuqiang.
AQMEII3: the EU and NA regional scale program of the Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution Task Force The AQMEII 3 modelling team S. Galmarini, C. Hogrefe,
Heather Simon, Kirk Baker, Norm Possiel, Pat Dolwick, Brian Timin
Using CMAQ to Interpolate Among CASTNET Measurements
ORD Moment of Science: Significantly Reduced Health Burden from Ambient Air Pollution in the U.S. Under Emission Reductions from 1990 to /04/2017.
Deborah Luecken and Golam Sarwar U.S. EPA, ORD/NERL
J. Burke1, K. Wesson2, W. Appel1, A. Vette1, R. Williams1
Uncertainties influencing dynamic evaluation of ozone trends
Questions for consideration
Alexey Gusev, Victor Shatalov, Olga Rozovskaya, Nadejda Vulyh
17th Task Force on Measurement and Modelling Meeting
REGIONAL AND LOCAL-SCALE EVALUATION OF 2002 MM5 METEOROLOGICAL FIELDS FOR VARIOUS AIR QUALITY MODELING APPLICATIONS Pat Dolwick*, U.S. EPA, RTP, NC, USA.
Diagnostic and Operational Evaluation of 2002 and 2005 Estimated 8-hr Ozone to Support Model Attainment Demonstrations Kirk Baker Donna Kenski Lake Michigan.
Presentation transcript:

Two Decades of WRF/CMAQ simulations over the continental U. S Two Decades of WRF/CMAQ simulations over the continental U.S.: New approaches for performing dynamic model evaluation and determining confidence limits for the O3 design value Marina Astitha1, Huiying Luo1, S.T. Rao1, Christian Hogrefe2, Rohit Mathur2, and Naresh Kumar3 1Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of Connecticut, Storrs-Mansfield, CT, USA 2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA 3 EPRI, Palo Alto, CA, USA `` AS’ \ Email: marina.astitha@uconn.edu 15th Annual CMAS Conference and will be held on October 24-26, 2016 at the Friday Center, UNC-Chapel Hill

OBJECTIVES Analyze and interpret the features embedded in tropospheric ozone observations and model outputs within the 21-year period 1990-2010 Assess the model’s ability to reproduce changes in observed ozone concentrations versus absolute values (dynamic evaluation) How can we develop confidence intervals for the estimated design value (DV)? 1/20

Data analysis techniques Dynamic evaluation OUTLINE Models and data Data analysis techniques Dynamic evaluation Confidence intervals for design values Concluding remarks 2/20

Models and data Coupled WRF-CMAQ (vers. 5.0.1) with 36-km grid cells over the USA driven with internally consistent historic emission inventories and boundary conditions derived from the hemispheric CMAQ model (Gan et al. 2015; Xing et al. 2013) Observations of the summertime (May-September) daily maximum 8-hr average (DM8HR) ozone concentrations from U.S. EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) for the period 1990-2010 Stations were selected based on quality-assured ozone measurements that have at least 80% data coverage at each monitoring location and each year (#186 stations) (see Porter et al. 2015 AE Paper). 3/20

Data analysis Spectral decomposition using the Kolmogorov-Zurbenko (KZ) filter (Zurbenko 1986; Eskridge et al. 1997; Rao et al., 1997; Hogrefe et al. 2000; Porter et al. 2015). KZ is based on an iterative moving average that separates high frequency variations from the data. DM8HR ozone concentrations are decomposed into components: short-term (synoptic reflecting weather-induced variation: SY) and long-term (baseline reflecting seasonality, emissions loading, policy, and trend: BL) Baseline (BL)=KZ5,5(O3) Synoptic Forcing (SY)=[O3-KZ5,5(O3)] Statistical metrics: Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) Mean Bias (MB) Correlation coefficient (R) Relative change= 100* (Future-Base)/Base Absolute change=Future-Base 4/20

AQS Stations across CONUS (#186) Region Station #: NE 43 SE 38 SW 47 MW 58 Station selection: >80% coverage for 1990-2010 5/20

Operational Evaluation (DM8HR) 1990-2000 2000-2010 RMSE Reduction in the 2000-2010 period (13-14ppb  10-12ppb). Decrease in the higher O3 conc; Increase of counts in the range of 30-60ppb. 6/20

Spatial distribution of correlation and RMSE for DM8HR 1990-2000 2000-2010 Similar R ---- Decrease in RMSE Almost no change for the SW U.S. (similar results in Foley et al. 2014, 14th CMAS) 7/20

RMSE for SY and BL components 21-years: 1990-2010 1990-2000 2000-2010 RMSE of BL is higher for 1990-2010 compared to 2000-2010 What about air quality changes over the 21-years? Role of emission-induced forcing vs. meteorological variability? 8/20

DYNAMIC EVALUATION 9/20

Trends in the BL component (slope) 21-years: 1990-2010 1990-2000 2000-2010 Decreasing emissions over 1990-2010 have led to a decrease in the BL across the Eastern US at a rate of ≈ 0.2-0.5 ppb/yr. The slopes calculated by the model are more negative compared to the observed trends, especially for 2000-2010. 10/20

Relative change for 4th highest and the average of top 10 days 𝑅𝐶(𝐶𝑀𝐴𝑄)=100 ∗ 𝐶𝑀𝐴𝑄 𝑓𝑢𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 − 𝐶𝑀𝐴𝑄 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝐶𝑀𝐴𝑄 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑅𝐶(𝑂𝑏𝑠)=100∗ 𝑂𝐵𝑆 𝑓𝑢𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 − 𝑂𝐵𝑆 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑂𝐵𝑆 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 11/20

10-year interval SW NE Relative changes for SW U.S. are poorly described Relative changes for earlier years are underestimated SE MW Future year 12/20

5-year interval NE SW Future year Relative changes for SW U.S. are poorly described SE MW The model is more skillful in representing the relative changes in the 4th highest and Avg10 for NE, SE and MW than SW Future year 13/20

COMPARISON of ABSOLUTE value vs. CHANGE in MEAN BL 10-yr intervals CORRELATION R 𝐵𝐿 mean 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔= 𝐵𝐿 𝐶𝑀𝐴𝑄 𝑓𝑢𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 − 𝐵𝐿 𝐶𝑀𝐴𝑄 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝐵𝐿 mean 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜= 𝐵𝐿 𝐶𝑀𝐴𝑄 𝑓𝑢𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝐵𝐿 𝐶𝑀𝐴𝑄 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 14/20

COMPARISON of ABSOLUTE value vs. CHANGE in MEAN BL 10-yr intervals RMSE ppb The model shows lower RMSE and higher R when representing the changes in the baseline ozone concentration for most regions, mainly for the recent years 15/20

BLmean vs. #days>70ppb What controls O3 exceedances? Correlations; NE U.S. for 1990-2010 (21-y) BLmean vs. #days>70ppb SY vs. 4th Model and observations show that the Baseline is the main driver for the O3 exceedances 4th –4th highest; ex –# of days exceeding 70ppb; BL – Baseline mean; SY – stdev of SY forcing 16/20

(preliminary results) Confidence intervals for Design Values (preliminary results) Design Value (3-y average of 4th highest DM8HR) Mean of 21 DV ± 2 std. dev. of 21 DV Example: Future year = 2010 Base year = 1995 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐁𝐚𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞: 𝐵𝐿 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗, 2010 = 𝐵𝐿 𝑂𝑏𝑠,1995 ∙ 𝐵𝐿 𝐶𝑀𝐴𝑄 2010 𝐵𝐿 𝐶𝑀𝐴𝑄 1995 Reconstruction of the ozone time-series: O3(2010)_1 = BLproj(2010) + SYobs(1990) O3(2010)_2 = BLproj(2010) + SYobs(1991) … O3(2010)_21 = BLproj(2010) + SYobs(2010) DV(2010),1=MEAN4th(2010,2009,2008) DV(2010),2=MEAN4th(2010,2009,2008) … DV(2010),21=MEAN4th(2010,2009,2008) 4th (2010),1 4th (2010),2 … 4th (2010),21 17/20

Bounds for the Design Value (3-year average 4th highest ozone conc) 10-year projection interval Sites showing agreement/disagreement Greenwich, CT 2000-2010 projection Green: Observed is within the estimated confidence bounds Red: Outside (possible due to 36-Km CMAQ grids) 18/20

Bounds for the Design Value (3-year average 4th highest ozone conc) 15-year projection interval Sites showing agreement/disagreement Greenwich, CT 1995-2010 projection Green: Observed is within the estimated confidence bounds Red: Outside (possibly due to 36-Km CMAQ grids) 19/20

CONCLUDING REMARKS Long-term simulations provide a unique opportunity to assess the changes caused by emission reduction policies Trends in the mean BL are improved during the 2nd half of the 21-years (2000-2010); Might be that emission inventory discrepancies in the two decades are influencing the trends (need for further analysis) There is a strong relationship between the baseline (long-term forcing) and number of exceedances in both observations and model simulations Accurate prediction of changes in baseline O3 coupled with observed historic SY provide a robust estimate of the impact of emission controls. 20/20

Acknowledgements Two of the authors (MA and HL) gratefully acknowledge the support of the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) for this research under Contract #00-10005071, 2015-2017. Although this work has been reviewed and approved for publication by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, it does not reflect Agency’s views and policies.