Concentrations of particulate matter in France : results and key findings Olivier Le Bihan, François Mathe, Jean-Luc Houdret, Bertrand Bessagnet, Patrice.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PREV AIR : An operational system for air quality monitoring and forecasting presented by Laurence Rouïl.
Advertisements

GEMS-Aerosol WP_AER_4: Evaluation of the model and analysis Lead Partners: NUIG & CNRS-LOA Partners: DWD, RMIB, MPI-M, CEA- IPSL-LSCE,ECMWF, DLR (at no.
STN Carbon Field Blank Analysis, Derived Organic Carbon Analysis and IMPROVE blank corrected artifact analysis Bret Schichtel.
S Larssen: PM-PP-Stockholm-Oct-2003.ppt slide 1 PM in Europe - State and past trends Emissions and concentration levels Steinar Larssen Norwegian Institute.
Diurnal Variability of Aerosols Observed by Ground-based Networks Qian Tan (USRA), Mian Chin (GSFC), Jack Summers (EPA), Tom Eck (GSFC), Hongbin Yu (UMD),
Sources of PM 2.5 Carbon in the SE U.S. RPO National Work Group Meeting December 3-4, 2002.
1 st Chimere workshop March 2005Stortini,Bonafe,Deserti,Minguzzi,Jongen Operational implementation of NINFA in Northern Italy ARPA Servizio IdroMeteorologico.
FIRE AND BIOFUEL CONTRIBUTIONS TO ANNUAL MEAN AEROSOL MASS CONCENTRATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES ROKJIN J. PARK, DANIEL J. JACOB, JENNIFER A. LOGAN AGU FALL.
Section highlights Organic Aerosol and Field Studies.
INDIRECT AEROSOL EFFECTS
PREV ’AIR : An operational system for large scale air quality monitoring and forecasting over Europe
1 Laxenburg, 16 Nov TFIAM-TFMM joint workshop(1) Similarities and Differences in Particle Characteristics across Europe Jean-Philippe Putaud EC –
WORKING GROUP I MONITORING DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION TFMM Workshop, Paris, 2006, Nov 29 –Dec 1.
Clean air for London: ClearfLo David Green, King’s College London.
1 A Fractional AOD Approach to Derive PM2.5 Information Using MISR Data Coupled with GEOS-CHEM Aerosol Simulation Results Yang Liu, Ralph Kahn, Solene.
Improving regional air quality model results at the city scale : results from the EC4MACS project INERIS : Bertrand Bessagnet, Etienne Terrenoire, Augustin.
IMPROVE Report 2006 L. Debell, K. Gebhart, B. Schichtel and W. Malm.
PREV ’AIR : An operational system for air quality monitoring and forecasting Laurence ROUÏL.
Satellite Remote Sensing of Surface Air Quality
1 Satellite Remote Sensing of Particulate Matter Air Quality ARSET Applied Remote Sensing Education and Training A project of NASA Applied Sciences Pawan.
Near Real Time analyzed maps of air quality in Europe Cécile Honoré, Laurence Rouïl.
CARPE DIEM Centre for Water Resources Research NUID-UCD Contribution to Area-3 Dusseldorf meeting 26th to 28th May 2003.
J. Zhou 1, X. Zhu 1, T. Wang 1, and X. Zhang 2 J. Zhou 1, X. Zhu 1, T. Wang 1, and X. Zhang 2 1 College of Resources and Information Tech., China University.
NATURAL AND TRANSBOUNDARY INFLUENCES ON PARTICULATE MATTER IN THE UNITED STATES: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE EPA REGIONAL HAZE RULE Rokjin J. Park ACCESS VII,
1 Satellite Remote Sensing of Particulate Matter Air Quality ARSET Applied Remote Sensing Education and Training A project of NASA Applied Sciences Pawan.
Chemical composition of submicron particles with an Aerosol Chemical Speciation Monitor at the JRC-Ispra site M. Bressi, F. Cavalli, C. Belis, J-P. Putaud,
Temporal and Spatial Variations of PM2.5 Mass in Georgia Xiaolu Zhang EAS 6410 Spring 2007.
Results of Ambient Air Analyses in Support of Transport Rule Presentation for RPO Workshop November 2003.
Characterization of Aerosol Physical, Optical and Chemical Properties During the Big Bend Regional Aerosol and Visibility Observational Study (BRAVO) Jenny.
Uncertainties in measurement and modelling : an overview Laurence Rouïl.
MODELS3 – IMPROVE – PM/FRM: Comparison of Time-Averaged Concentrations R. B. Husar S. R. Falke 1 and B. S. Schichtel 2 Center for Air Pollution Impact.
1 Satellite Remote Sensing of Particulate Matter Air Quality ARSET Applied Remote Sensing Education and Training A project of NASA Applied Sciences Pawan.
1/30 2-year observation of Organic Aerosol properties In Cape Corsica J. Sciare, and LSCE.
Latvian Environmental, Geology and Meteorology agency Future development scenarios for traffic system and air pollution in Riga city Iveta Steinberga La.
PM Model Performance in Southern California Using UAMAERO-LT Joseph Cassmassi Senior Meteorologist SCAQMD February 11, 2004.
Operational Evaluation and Comparison of CMAQ and REMSAD- An Annual Simulation Brian Timin, Carey Jang, Pat Dolwick, Norm Possiel, Tom Braverman USEPA/OAQPS.
Eric Edgerton, ARA, Inc. PM Model Performance Workshop Chapel Hill, NC February 10, 2004 SEARCH: Overview of Data for Model Performance Evaluation Photo.
TEMIS user workshop, Frascati, 8-9 October 2007 TEMIS – VITO activities Felix Deutsch Koen De Ridder Jean Vankerkom VITO – Flemish Institute for Technological.
Temporal variations of aerosol components in Tijuana, Mexico, during the Cal-Mex campaign S. Takahama, A. Johnson, J. Guzman Morales, L.M. Russell Scripps.
11 September 2015 On the role of measurements and modelling in Dutch air quality policies Guus Velders The Netherlands (RIVM)
M. Houssiau | EIONET AQ | Ljubljana – 5 October 2015 Cross analysis between urban system and air quality Provisional results ETC/Urban Land Soil systems.
Chemical Data Assimilation: Aerosols - Data Sources, availability and needs Raymond Hoff Physics Department/JCET UMBC.
Evaluation of pollution levels in urban areas of selected EMEP countries Alexey Gusev, Victor Shatalov Meteorological Synthesizing Centre - East.
Impact of various emission inventories on modelling results; impact on the use of the GMES products Laurence Rouïl
Joint thematic session: from hemispheric to local scale air pollution; Twin Site project Task Force on Measurements and modelling A. Colette (TFMM),
Joint thematic session on B(a)P pollution: main activities and results
Charles University in Prague
Aerosol chemistry studies at the SMEARIII station in Kumpula
French contribution to the EMEP intensive field campaigns
Alexey Gusev, Victor Shatalov, Olga Rozovskaya, Nadejda Vulyh
ACTRIS Aerosol Chemical Speciation Monitor (ACSM) Network and new filter off-line techniques to measure PM chemical composition and determine organic aerosol.
Alison Redington* and Derrick Ryall* Dick Derwent**
A Review of Time Integrated PM2.5 Monitoring Data in the United States
Assessment of Atmospheric PM in the Slovak Republic
Correcting TEOM Measurements using the KCL Volatile Correction Model
PM modelling assessment in Northern Italy
TFMM PM Assessment Report
CITY-DELTA Objectives, Methodology, and Results
PM observations in Europe a review of AirBase information
TFMM Work plan for 2010 Build-up the appropriate framework for the implementation of the revised monitoring strategy Technical support to the Parties.
Longer Term Aerosol Chemical speciation monitoring data during ACTRIS/EMEP activities ACSM Teams across Europe Many slides from Michael Bressi, JRC Italy.
Particulate Matter in Austria
Title Why do we underestimate Elemental Carbon in PM?
Summary: TFMM trends analysis
EMEP-Intensive-Measuring-Campaigns Summer 06 and Winter 07
EMEP new monitoring strategy in France Nathalie Poisson - ADEME
PM correction factor in France
S. SAUVAGE, V. RIFFAULT, A. SETYAN, V. CRENN (Mines Douai)
Measurement Needs for AQ Models
First use of satellite AOD data for EMEP model validation for PM
Presentation transcript:

Concentrations of particulate matter in France : results and key findings Olivier Le Bihan, François Mathe, Jean-Luc Houdret, Bertrand Bessagnet, Patrice Coddeville, Paolo Laj, Nathalie Poisson, Souad Bouallala, Cécile Honoré, Laure Malherbe, Laurence Rouïl

PM measurement network - Implemented by 38 local organisations in charge of the AQ monitoring networks - More than 300 PM10 monitoring stations (85% TEOM, 15% b gauges) - 65 PM2.5 urban/suburban monitoring stations (TEOM) - Field campaigns - Specific sites devoted to scientific research (Puy-de-Dôme)

The puy de Dôme station Aerosol Parameters Continuous measurements Size distribution (3-400 nm) - DMPS Size distribution (125 nm- 10 µm) - OPC Cluster ions (0,3 – 40 nm) - AIS Inorganic and organic composition (OC-EC) Organic speciation (CARBOSOL) Scattering coefficient -Nephelometer 3l Absorption coefficent -Aethalometer Radionucleides Natural and artificial Aerosol Mass Aerosol Optical depth (2007) Vertical distribution (LIDAR – 2007) Precipitation and wet chemistry Continuous measurements Rainfall rate – Rain jauge Droplet distribution – Doppler radar Rain Inorganic and organic chemistry Cloud physics (radius, LWC) Cloud chemistry Radionucleides Natural and artificial

Chemical composition dependent from the site typology and the season PM10 analysis - annual average varies from 22 to 25 ug/m3 - Highest concentrations obtained in Marseilles and Paris areas and at industrial sites Chemical composition dependent from the site typology and the season

Special case of the Puy de Dôme station Winter : 2 ug/m3 Summer : 5 ug/m3 A very large fraction of the organic component originates from biomass burning, especially during winter time. Increase in summer due to VOC oxydation (secondary OA) ( NO3 and NH4 measurements not considered )

Correlation between PM10 concentrations - Based on daily PM10 averages - Regressions between pairs of stations - Slopes of the regression allow to identify linkages on the spatial pattern - Correlation coefficients relies to the temporal aspect - Seasonal analysis Correlated geographical areas - summer Correlated geographical areas - winter

PM 2.5 statistics Averages of daily concentrations Highest urban concentrations in the south-West (15 ug/m3), in the south-East (17 ug/m3), in the Lyon area (15ug/m3): different reasons should be invoked Lowest concentrations in the Western part of France (10 to 13 ug/m3) Specific situation of the traffic sites in Paris area

Statistics related to “twins sites” in the North Moy1 Moy2 Nbias(%) Var ratio Corr (sub.) (urb.) 2003-2005 Nbias = 13.1 14.3 12.1 0.76 0.76 Var ratio = ratio of variances 13.5 16.7 29.2 0.87 0.74 (suburban over urban) Corr = correlation coefficient Summer 2003-2005 12.6 12.3 -0.4 0.85 0.83 - Different “increments” for different urban sites 13.0 14.4 15.5 1.10 0.88 - Large sensitivity to the season - Stronger correlation in summer Winter 2003-2005 - Larger differences in variance in winter 12.9 15.5 22.0 0.60 0.74 13.7 19.6 46.0 0.64 0.72

PM2.5 vs PM10 ratio (non volatile data) Summers 2003-2005 Years 2003-2005 Winters 2003-2005

The volatile fraction issue “Metrological” correction based on the implementation of FDMS devices for TEOM and RST devices for b gauges

Example : Peyrusse-Vieille (EMEP) Relative combined uncertainty (DoE guidance) at the mean value : 13,6 % (2 µg/m3) TEOM-FDMS/HVS 7th September – 15 th November 2005 Aver Conc : 15 µg/m3 Min : 5 µg/m3 Max : 34 µg/m3 Average Temp 15°C (Min 7 – Max 20°C) Average Hum 80% (Min 57- Max 96%) TEOM (50°C)/HVS MATERIALS 2 HVS (gravim.) : U.B.S. = 0,64 µg/m3 2 TEOM-FDMS : U.B.S. = 0,86 µg/m3 1 TEOM (50°C)

PM Modelling as a complementary tool - PM forecasts are provided by the PREV’AIR system (www.prevair.org) - Based on CHIMERE model simulations - Analysis of phenomenology especially long range pollution events (ammonium nitrate)

Prev’air scores (for PM10) Lag of the forecast Rural stations Suburban stations Observed mean (µg/m3) D - 1 13.9 (Nbr Obs: 358) 17.3 (Nbr Obs:1345) D + 0 13.9 (Nbr Obs: 358) 17.3 (Nbr Obs:1346) D + 1 13.9 (Nbr Obs: 351) 17.4 (Nbr Obs:1320) D + 2 14.0 (Nbr Obs: 346) 17.5 (Nbr Obs:1298) Simulated mean (µg/m3) D - 1 12.2 13.0 D + 0 12.6 13.5 D + 1 13.0 13.7 D + 2 13.2 13.9 Normalized Bias (%) D - 1 -10.2 -24.1 D + 0 -8.2 -22.3 D + 1 -5.6 -20.9 D + 2 -4.0 -19.3 NMSE (%) D - 1 46.5 44.7 D + 0 50.7 46.8 D + 1 52.8 46.3 D + 2 47.1 44.5 Correlation D - 1 0.63 0.63 D + 0 0.63 0.62 D + 1 0.62 0.62 D + 2 0.65 0.63 E50% (%) D - 1 91. 96. D + 0 91. 96. D + 1 90. 95. D + 2 88. 94.