EMEP intensive measurements

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A EUROPEAN AEROSOL PHENOMENOLOGY: TOTAL CARBON, ELEMENTAL CARBON AND ABSORPTION COEFFICIENT Fabrizia Cavalli European Commission – DG Joint Research Centre.
Advertisements

Using field campaigns results to reduce uncertainties in inventories Wenche Aas, Knut Breivik and Karl Espen Yttri And material from: Eiko Nemitz (CEH,
Section highlights Organic Aerosol and Field Studies.
Title PM2.5: Comparison of modelling and measurements Presented by Hilde Fagerli SB, Geneva, September 7-9, 2009.
Title EMEP Unified model Importance of observations for model evaluation Svetlana Tsyro MSC-W / EMEP TFMM workshop, Lillestrøm, 19 October 2010.
Title Performance of the EMEP aerosol model: current results and further needs Presented by Svetlana Tsyro (EMEP/MSC-W) EMEP workshop on Particulate Matter.
1 Laxenburg, 16 Nov TFIAM-TFMM joint workshop(1) Similarities and Differences in Particle Characteristics across Europe Jean-Philippe Putaud EC –
AREHNA Workshop-Mobility and Health, 3-6 May 2003, Kos, Greece EARLINET The European Aerosol Research Lidar Network A. PAPAYANNIS Lasers and Applications.
Intensive measurements and modelling of size segregated chemical composition of aerosols in June 2006 and Jan 2007 Wenche Aas, Rami Alfarra, Elke Bieber,
Developments in EMEP monitoring strategy and recommendations from AirMonTech Kjetil Tørseth, NILU/EMEP-CCC.
Cooperation of EMEP/CCC and EEA on near real-time air quality data. Presented by Wenche Aas Though most of the work is done by: Tim Haigh, Bernt Rondell,
/tfmm3 EMEP Chemical Coordinating Centre Measurements of particulate matter in EMEP Current implementation Kjetil Tørseth, Wenche Aas, Michael.
DUST 2014, 1-6 June 2014, Castellaneta Marina, Italy Long-Term EARLINET Dust Observations L. Mona 1*, V. Amiridis 2, A. Amodeo 1, G. D’amico 1, A. Schwarz.
EARLINET-ASOS Symposium 20 September 2010, Geneva, Switzerland EARLINET: Future plans Gelsomina Pappalardo Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche-Istituto.
VRAME: Vertically Resolved Aerosol Model for Europe from a Synergy of EARLINET and AERONET data Elina Giannakaki, Ina Mattis, Detlef Müller, Olaf Krüger.
EMEP INTENSIVE MEASUREMENT PERIODS IN CLOSE PARTNERSSHIP WITH EU PROJECTS Wenche Aas, Andres Alastuey, Francesco Canonaco, Fabrizia Cavalli, Franco Lucarelli,
Proposal for a Research Infrastructure for Advanced Aerosol Observations and Capacity Building in China Alfred WIEDENSOHLER Leibniz Institute for Tropospheric.
Uncertainties in atmospheric observations Wenche Aas EMEP/CCC.
Synergies between EMEP and EUSAAR Wenche Aas and Kjetil Tørseth EMEP/CCC (NILU)
Second GALION workshop, WMO, Geneva September 2010 Aerosol Lidar Observations: A Missing Component Of Near-Real-Time Data Assimilation Requirements.
EMEP Monitoring programme Wenche Aas EMEP/CCC (NILU)
Model Evaluation Comparing Model Output to Ambient Data Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, California.
20 Sept nd GALION WS WMO, Geneva 1 Optimisation of Instruments Arnoud Apituley Volker Freudenthaler Adolfo Comeron.
EMEP Monitoring Strategy Status and challenges, with main focus on the EECCA region Wenche Aas and Kjetil Tørseth EMEP/CCC (NILU)
II GALION workshop - Geneva, Switzerland – September 21-23, 2010 EARLINET contribution to SDS-WAS Europe – North Africa regional node Lucia Mona Istituto.
EMEP WGSR, EMEP Progress on HMs, 2006  Review and evaluation of the MSCE-HM model (TFMM)  Atmospheric pollution in 2004 (emissions, monitoring.
Atmospheric Sciences Research Center University at Albany QA/SAC for the Americas World Data Centre for Precipitation Chemistry QA/SAC of the Americas.
WP3.2.1: Development of a measurement standardization and data submission protocol for aerosol particle mass spectroscopy based on Aerosol Chemical Speciation.
Alfred Wiedensohler & Kay Weinhold
Svetlana Tsyro, David Simpson, Leonor Tarrason
EU Water Framework Directive
Svetlana Tsyro, David Simpson, Leonor Tarrasón
Availability to Observation data. Kjetil Tørseth, NILU
EMEP intensive measurements, June 2006 and Jan 2007
Wenche Aas and Karl Espen Yttri (EMEP/CCC)
ACTRIS Aerosol Chemical Speciation Monitor (ACSM) Network and new filter off-line techniques to measure PM chemical composition and determine organic aerosol.
Concentrations of particulate matter in France : results and key findings Olivier Le Bihan, François Mathe, Jean-Luc Houdret, Bertrand Bessagnet, Patrice.
A Review of Time Integrated PM2.5 Monitoring Data in the United States
Assessment of Atmospheric PM in the Slovak Republic
Massimo Vieno, Eiko Nemitz CEH Edinburgh & Univ. Edinburgh
EMEP Monitoring Strategy
Status of data from EMEP intensive period 2008/2009
Monitoring strategy, technical issues
EARLINET/ACTRIS IOP in summer 2012
C.N.R. Institute of Atmospheric Pollution
Rami Alfarra, Urs Baltensperger: Paul Scherrer Institute, CH.
Overview of the implementation of the SEA directive
PM modelling assessment in Northern Italy
TFMM PM Assessment Report
EMEP intensive measurements, June 2006
Uncertainties in atmospheric observations
EMEP/ACTRIS/COLOSSAL intensive measurement period Des 2017 – March 2018 Wenche Aas, EMEP/CCC.
An Overview of the EUSAAR I3 Project
H. Fagerli, TFMM Bordeux, april 2008
EUSAAR contribution to the EMEP intensive field campaigns
19th TFMM Meeting, Geneva May 3rd 2018
Jean-Philippe Putaud, Fabrizia Cavalli
Eiko Nemitz Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH) United Kingdom
Future intensive field periods Recommendations
Introduction – workshop on EBAS and Data Quality
Lessons learnt from the EMEP intensive measurements
Wenche Aas Status of EMEP measurements today Field intercomparison
Title Recent developments of the EMEP/MSC-W model aiming at PM improvement Work by MSC-W modelling group presented by Svetlana Tsyro TFMM.
First use of satellite AOD data for EMEP model validation for PM
EC/OC – monitoring within EMEP
Comparison of model results with measurements
EMEP intensive measurement periods
EMEP/MSC-W How can EMEP Intensive measurement periods help to improve modelling of acidification, eutrophication, O3 and PM? Views from MSC-W H. Fagerli.
Benefits of ACTRIS for Implementation of EMEP monitoring strategy
Svetlana Tsyro, David Simpson, Leonor Tarrason
Presentation transcript:

EMEP intensive measurements Experience from 2006-7 and outlook for 2008-9 Wenche Aas

Objective of intensive measurements Study temporal and spatial variation of PM and PM constituents in Europe, their sources and formation mechanisms, and for model validation. To underpin the EMEP monitoring programme not realistic to require full daily chemical speciation or continuous measurements 365 days a year. Coordinate and harmonise the research campaigns and monitoring efforts in Europe

Sites and measurments

PM10 June 2006 PM10 Jan 2007 PM2.5 Jan 2007 PM2.5 June 2006 PM2.5 june 2006

Challenges to combine all the information Chemical speciation in many sizes, but not always mass measurements for the same sizes PM mass at many sites and sizes, but not necessary chemical speciation Different species for speciation. Inorganic at several, EC/OC at some, mineral dust at only two Data completeness are varying. Missing data is a problem when comparing averages Different methods Are these data comparable?

Inconsistency and incomparability EC/OC, TC or OM are sometimes corrected and sometimes not. Not known what temperature programme is used. Size distribution –different size bins and methods (SMPS;DMPS;TDMPS;LASX) and maybe not used recommended calibration procedures etc (jf EUSAAR recommendations) Data reported will not be used in the present form Bias of NO3, NH4 from filters without knowing the artefact (only IT01) Online inorganic measurements not necessarily comparable to filter Sometimes PM10> PM2.4 > PM1.0( mass or speciation) How to deal with this?

NO3 in PM2.5 > in PM10 ? GB48, Auchencorth Moss

AMS and Digitel at CH02 Conclusion: Use SO4 from filters and NH4 and NO3 from AMS??

SO2 at GB36 (Harwell)

NO3 in PM2.5 at GB36

Carbonaceous material in PM2.5 corrected for positive artefacts. New: Defined two different OC and TC in the EMEP database: Organic_carbon (OC) and organic_carbon_corrected (OCp). Important to report which method used (QBQ, Teflon..)

Artefact in gas/particle for N IT01, Jan 2007 Underestimation of N IT01, June 2007

Problems regarding reporting of data Only in excel (no common format) Different units are used (e.g mgS/m3, mgSO4/m3, ppm), and not always clear which one has been used. Chemical speciation in which size (TSP, PM10, PM2.5, PM1) are not always clearly specified. Method not always specified. Combined data sets instead of components (i.e sea salt, mineral dust, sum N) Some data reported in parallel to other programmes, i.e EUSAAR, EMEP,CAMP, HELCOM…

How to improve for next period Clear guidelines of which measurements are needed/wanted Harmonised measurement methods, especially needed for EC/OC –use reference Data reporting in harmonised format, either as NASA AMES or special excel macro Data ownership might be an issue when this is combined with EUCAARI Better spatial distribution of the more advanced measuremnts

Next campaign EMEP/EUCAARI 17 Sep – 16 Oct 2008 and 25 Feb – 26 Mar 2009 Mass closure (inorganic, crustal, EC/OC) in PM2.5 and PM10 . Daily or hourly Aerosol size distributions Inorganic gas concentrations (HNO3, NH3) Attempts to quantify aerosol water Attempts to quantify the OC/OM ratio Separation of organic aerosol into primary vs. secondary and biogenic vs. anthropogenic components (e.g. levoglucosane, 14C); Vertical profiles (Earlinet)

Harmonised method for EC/OC: For quantification: EUSAAR 2 temperature protocol For sampling: apply a QBQ set up. This very simple approach assessable for all the sites It is not an optimal approach, e.g. it does not provide an estimate for the negative artifact. However, it is the only feasible approach since only a few sites have a denuder available, and as there is no agreement regarding which sorbent should be used.

Centralised analysis possible: EC/OC (~ 60 € per sample) NILU and Lund use the agreed temp protocol. Sampling should be done using the QBC approach Mineral dust (40 - 100 € per sample) NERI & Lund apply PIXE from cellulose esters/polycarbonate filters CNR apply XRF from Teflon filters Levoglucosan (~ 150 € per sample) NILU can analyse this -Quartz or Teflon filters (to be harmonised) 14C of TC (~ 500 € per sample) PSI and Lund can analyse this – quartz filter only

Draft overview of sites

..and their measurements

Possible contribution of EARLINET to the 2008-2009 intensive field campaigns EARLINET: is a European lidar network providing aerosol profiles 27 sites distributed across Europe reported data in 2006. 20 sites have equipment giving backscatter coefficient profile, extinction coefficient profile, optical depth (columnar quantity), lidar ratio profile, aerosol depolarization ratio 7 stations provide only profiles with backscatter coefficients Regular observations for all sites (when there are no instrumental problems): 1 daytime measurements per week on Monday (around 1400 local solar Time) 2 measurements per week on Monday and Thursday (2 hours around the sunset) Additional measurements are performed for Calipso correlative measurements. Therefore ideally each station, provide a basic dataset of about 15 measurements over a period of 1 month. Supported by EARLINET-ASOS, which is an EC Integrated Activity http://www.earlinetasos.org EARLINET was established in February, 2000 as a research project supported by the European Commission. After the end of the EC-project EARLINET continues to operate as a voluntary association of research institutions with specific interest in atmospheric aerosol research. The network is supported by EARLINET-ASOS, which is an EC Integrated Activity implemented as Coordination Action. Ideally measurements are performed at 3 times per day, 2 days per week. 27 sites reported data in 2006.

Possible contribution of EARLINET to the 2008-2009 intensive field campaigns EMEP stations The blue circle: 200 km radius of an EMEP station 7 EARLINET stations within 200 km radius of an EMEP site coincident EARLINET-EMEP station 3 EARLINET stations with h24 operation other EARLINET stations EMEP sites indicated at the map: (Dette skulled et vært, og er basert på en liste jeg har fått av deg, men jeg ser at noen av de mangler, får ikke gjort noe med det nå.  AT002 Illmitz CH0001 Jungfraujoch CH0002 Payerne CZ0003 Kozetice DK0041 Lille Valby DE0044 Melpitz ES0017 Montseny FI0050 Hyytiälä FI0096 Pallas FR0030 Puy de Dôme GB0040 Auchencorth Moss GB0030 Harwell GR0002 Finokalia HU0002 K-Puzta IE0031 Mace Head IT0001 Montelibretti IT0004 Ispra NL0011 Cabauw NO0001 Birkenes SE001 Vavihill

Possible contribution of EARLINET to the 2008-2009 intensive field campaigns For the intensive campaigns: motivate the lidar stations Located within the circles to perform devoted measurements: Neuchatel, Lausanne, L’Aquila, Naples, Barcelona, Leipzig and Bilthoven. Athens, Potenza and Maisach (close to Munich) could be involved The EMEP site in Greece will have a lidar comparison point Maisach station is in the middle between two cluster of EMEP stations Potenza could provide important information about the microphysical aerosol properties of the Saharan dust coming into continental Europe. Ispra, Hamburg and Cabauw: equipped with automated 24 h operational lidars This gives a maximum of 13 EARLINET stations that might be involved in the campaign with additional measurements. Information flow through GEOMON NOTE: lidars are not automatic. It is a big effort to provide measurements and to evaluate them. A compromise between efforts and benefits has to be reached and will be decisive for the sites involved in the campaigns. the eventually EARLINET contribution is research-driven and not mandatory the scientific interest in the integration between the EMEP and EARLINET will be important

Summary The last intensive measurement periods contributed with new type of data for the EMEP community challenge for QA/QC, comparability, data reporting BUT very valuable –peer review papers will be written Upcoming measurement periods Learn from experience and make it more easy for our self. This will lead to better quality and faster data delivery Feedback from the parties needed on what they will measure Sampling and reporting protocols will be distributed Increaed cooperation with other programmes and projects: EUCAARI, EUSAAR and EARLINET