NPS/CIRA Group Data Analysis and Receptor Modeling Receptor Modeling Meeting with Carol McCoy, ARD Division Chief CIRA, Fort Collins, CO 16 June 2011.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Nitrogen Deposition at Rocky Mountain National Park: the RoMANS Study Mike Barna Bill Malm Bret Schichtel Kristi Gebhart Air Resources Division National.
Advertisements

WRAP Meeting Nov 11, 2009 Ozone and Nitrogen Concerns in Western National Parks Chris Shaver Air Resources Division National Park Service.
MARAMA/NESCAUM/LADCO Project: MARAMA/NESCAUM/LADCO Project: Source Apportionment of Air Quality Monitoring Data: Paired Aerosol / Trajectory Database Analysis.
Causes of Haze Assessment Mark Green Desert Research Institute Marc Pitchford, Chair Ambient Monitoring & Reporting Forum.
Modeled Ammonia Nitrogen Deposition Source Apportionment at Rocky Mountain National Park for RoMANS2 Mike Barna 1 Marco Rodriguez 2 Kristi Gebhart 1 Bret.
Three-State Air Quality Study (3SAQS) Three-State Data Warehouse (3SDW) 2008 CAMx Modeling Model Performance Evaluation Summary University of North Carolina.
Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, CA
Air Quality Impacts from Prescribed Burning Karsten Baumann, PhD. Polly Gustafson.
1 The Asian Aerosol Contribution to North American PM Pollution: Recognizing Asian Transport Composition and Concentration Modeling Regional Aerosol Burdens.
BRAVO - Results Big Bend Regional Aerosol & Visibility Observational Study Bret Schichtel National Park Service,
Center for Environmental Research and Technology/Air Quality Modeling University of California at Riverside Modeling Source Apportionment Gail Tonnesen,
1 Satellite Remote Sensing of Particulate Matter Air Quality ARSET Applied Remote Sensing Education and Training A project of NASA Applied Sciences Pawan.
NATURAL AND TRANSBOUNDARY INFLUENCES ON PARTICULATE MATTER IN THE UNITED STATES: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE EPA REGIONAL HAZE RULE Rokjin J. Park ACCESS VII,
Reason for Doing Cluster Analysis Identify similar and dissimilar aerosol monitoring sites so that we can test the ability of the Causes of Haze Assessment.
Clinton MacDonald 1, Kenneth Craig 1, Jennifer DeWinter 1, Adam Pasch 1, Brigette Tollstrup 2, and Aleta Kennard 2 1 Sonoma Technology, Inc., Petaluma,
PM2.5 Model Performance Evaluation- Purpose and Goals PM Model Evaluation Workshop February 10, 2004 Chapel Hill, NC Brian Timin EPA/OAQPS.
Incorporating Monitoring, Modeling, and EI Data into AoH Analysis AoH Meeting, Salt Lake City September 21-22, 2004 Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
COHA Update Jin Xu. Update 2003 and 2004 back-trajectories – done PMF modeling by groups using 2000 to 2004 IMPROVE data – done Analysis of PMF results.
Causes of Haze Update Prepared by Marc Pitchford for the 5/24/05 AoH conference call.
Application of Combined Mathematical and Meteorological Receptor Models (UNMIX & Residence Time Analysis) to IMPROVE Aerosol Data from Brigantine.
Chemical transport modeling in support of NPS-CIRA activities Mike Barna 1 Marco Rodriguez 2 Kristi Gebhart 1 Bret Schichtel 1 Bill Malm 1 Jenny Hand 2.
Use of Airmass History Models & Techniques for Source Attribution Bret A. Schichtel Washington University St. Louis, MO Presentation to EPA Source Attribution.
Background Aerosol in the United States: Natural Sources and Transboundary Pollution Naresh Kumar, Ph.D. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA Presented at MANE-VU/MARAMA.
AoH/MF Meeting, San Diego, CA, Jan 25, 2006 Source Apportionment Modeling Results and RMC Status report Gail Tonnesen, Zion Wang, Mohammad Omary, Chao-Jung.
U.S.-Canada Air Quality Agreement: Transboundary PM Science Assessment Report to the Air Quality Committee June, 2004.
Causes of Haze Assessment Dave DuBois Desert Research Institute.
Estimating the Contribution of Smoke and Its Fuel Types to Fine Particulate Carbon using a Hybrid- CMB Model Bret A. Schichtel and William C. Malm - NPS.
Combined Aerosol & Trajectory Tool (CATT) Development R. Husar, K. Hoijarvi, J. Colson, S. Falke Center for Air Pollution Impact and Trend Analysis (CAPITA)
Airmass History Analysis During High and Low Sulfate Days Bret A. Schichtel NPS/CIRA Fort Collins, CO BRAVO Study Data Analysis Meeting San Antonio, TX.
Causes of Haze Assessment Update for Fire Emissions Joint Forum -12/9/04 Meeting Marc Pitchford.
Causes of Haze Assessment (COHA) Update. Current and near-future Major Tasks Visibility trends analysis Assess meteorological representativeness of 2002.
Trajectory Calculations Trajectory or backtrajectory analyses use interpolated measured or modeled meteorological fields to estimate the most likely central.
Introduction to Modeling – Part II
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.
Overview of the Big Bend Regional Aerosol and Visibility Observational (BRAVO) study:  Understand the long-range, trans-boundary transport of visibility-reducing.
NATURAL AND TRANSBOUNDARY POLLUTION INFLUENCES ON AEROSOL CONCENTRATIONS AND VISIBILITY DEGRADATION IN THE UNITED STATES Rokjin J. Park, Daniel J. Jacob,
Bret A. Schichtel Center for Air Pollution Impact and Trend Analysis (CAPITA) Washington University St. Louis, MO, Presented at EPA’s National Exposure.
GEOS-CHEM Modeling for Boundary Conditions and Natural Background James W. Boylan Georgia Department of Natural Resources - VISTAS National RPO Modeling.
Global and Local Dust over North America Initial Assessment by a Virtual Community on Dust Coordinated by R.
Weight of Evidence Discussion AoH Meeting – Tempe, AZ November 16/17, 2005.
WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/04 Introduction to the the RMC Source Apportionment Modeling Effort Gail Tonnesen,
MARAMA/NESCAUM/LADCO Project: MARAMA/NESCAUM/LADCO Project: Source Apportionment of Air Quality Monitoring Data: Paired Aerosol / Trajectory Database Analysis.
Western Air Quality Issues and Photochemical Modeling - An Industrial Perspective Doug Blewitt, CCM AQRM Dana Wood, PE BP.
NPS Source Attribution Modeling Deterministic Models Dispersion or deterministic models Receptor Models Analysis of Spatial & Temporal Patterns Back Trajectory.
Ambient Monitoring & Reporting Forum Plans for 2005 Prepared by Marc Pitchford for the WRAP Planning Team Meeting (3/9 – 3/10/05)
Western Air Quality Study (WAQS) Intermountain Data Warehouse (IWDW) Model Performance Evaluation CAMx and CMAQ 2011b University of North Carolina (UNC-IE)
Causes of Haze Assessment Update for the Haze Attribution Forum Meeting By Marc Pitchford 9/24/04.
Causes of Haze Assessment (COHA) Update Jin Xu. Update Visibility trends analysis (under revision) Assess meteorological representativeness of 2002 (modeling.
BACKGROUND AEROSOL IN THE UNITED STATES: NATURAL SOURCES AND TRANSBOUNDARY POLLUTION Daniel J. Jacob and Rokjin J. Park with support from EPRI, EPA/OAQPS.
Background ozone in surface air over the United States Arlene M. Fiore Daniel J. Jacob US EPA Workshop on Developing Criteria for the Chemistry and Physics.
Source apportionment of submicron organic aerosols at an urban site by linear unmixing of aerosol mass spectra V. A. Lanz 1, M. R. Alfarra 2, U. Baltensperger.
Source Contribution to PM 2.5 and Visibility Impairment in Two Class I Areas Using Positive Matrix Factorization Keith Rose EPA, Region 10 June 22, 2005.
WRAP Technical Work Overview
CENRAP Modeling and Weight of Evidence Approaches
Simulation of PM2.5 Trace Elements in Detroit using CMAQ
Md Firoz Khan, Mohd Talib Latif, Norhaniza Amil
CMAS Annual Conference, October 24-26, 2016, Chapel Hill, NC
Source Apportionment of Water Soluble Elements, EC/OC, and BrC by PMF
Source apportionment of reactive nitrogen deposition
Nitrogen Deposition: Measurement Techniques and Field Studies
AoH Phase 2 Update AoH Meeting – San Diego, CA January 25, 2006
Evaluating Revised Tracking Metric for Regional Haze Planning
Adjusting the Regional Haze Glide path using Monitoring and Modeling Data Trends Natural Conditions International Anthropogenic Contributions.
Causes of Haze Assessment Brief Overview and Status Report
M. Samaali, M. Sassi, V. Bouchet
Alexey Gusev, Victor Shatalov, Olga Rozovskaya, Nadejda Vulyh
WRAP Modeling Forum, San Diego
Air Resource Specialists, Inc. July 23, 2004
Synthesized CMAQ A BRAVO community Product
Summary: TFMM trends analysis
Presentation transcript:

NPS/CIRA Group Data Analysis and Receptor Modeling Receptor Modeling Meeting with Carol McCoy, ARD Division Chief CIRA, Fort Collins, CO 16 June 2011

Data Analysis & Interpretation Ongoing (like IMPROVE) & Special Studies Are trends in pollutants increasing or decreasing? Why? Are there geographical differences in the trends? What does that say about sources? Does the monitoring data make sense? Should there be changes in monitoring protocols or has a recent change caused unexpected changes in the data? Do the models make sense? If not, why not? Industry is claiming XXX. Is that a valid claim? Sources have shut down. Was there a noticeable effect? New sources are planned. Will it matter? Is there a better location? For the next special study… What season is best? Will locations on opposite sides of a park see the same trends? What temporal and spatial scales are necessary for monitoring if the data to be useful? What are the expected concentrations?

Some Past Topics Source attribution – source types, source locations, international sources Hygroscopicity – water uptake Smoke – natural smoke vs anthropogenic, organic chemistry issues, markers Use of Satellites – fill in spatial patterns, verify models Improving Measurement Techniques – faster, cheaper, better resolution, more accuracy, better documentation Single particle characteristics – size, shape, mixture type Data & information dissemination – web sites, databases, software, books, papers, etc. Tracking trends – emissions, concentrations, visibility Natural Background – what is it and how can we get there? Nitrogen Deposition – why is it increasing, how can we better measure it, what sources are contributing? Human Perception – what do people see, value, remember?

What are the Trends in Nitrogen Wet Deposition?

April & July Chosen for ROMANS 2006

Could Climate Change Be Influencing Ammonia Deposition At Rocky Mountain? Which Meteorological Model Does A Better Job of Predicting Precipitation at Rocky Mountain?

2006 Measured Wind Directions By Height Is there more upslope (easterly) transport during the Summer? Do the Meteorological Models Capture this?

Model Evaluation

Spatial Patterns in Model Statistics More Model Evaluation…

Source-Receptor Modeling Photo by Ralph Turcotte Where do air pollutants come from?

Some Special Studies Conducted for Source Attribution and/or Optical and Physical Characteristics Grand Canyon, AZ WHITEX (1987) MOHAVE (1991?) Mt. Rainier, WA PANORAMAS (1984) PREVENT (1990) Big Bend, TX Scoping Study (1996) BRAVO (1999) Rocky Mountain, CO ROMANS (2006) ROMANS II (2009) Grand Teton, WY Grand Trends (2011) Yosemite, CA Smoke Characteristics (2002) Eastern U.S. NAPAP SEAVS Shenandoah Assessment Typically intensive monitoring for weeks to months, followed by months to years of data analysis and modeling. Often involving stake holders on all sides of the visibility or deposition issue.

“Deterministic” or “Source-based” Models Model(s) Emissions Chemistry Meteorology Predictions of concentrations and source attributions at a receptor of interest Common Problems: Lack of input data Expense Examples -SMOKE (Emissions Model) -CAMx, CMAQ (Air Quality Models) -Boundary conditions – GOCART, GEOSCHEM -MM5 & wrf mesoscale meteorology

Receptor Models Simple Statistical Analysis Measured Data at and/or near a receptor Sometimes Meteorology and/or Source Characterization Qualitative and/or Quantitative Source Attribution Problems: Simplifying Assumptions Sometimes long-term averages only. Examples: -Many trajectory analyses – forward & backward -Spatial & temporal patterns (EOF) -Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) -Positive Matrix Factorization (PMF)

Hybrid Models Further Analyses, more modeling, a melding of all available information. Results of Deterministic Models Results of Receptor Models Better Predictions of concentrations & source attributions, Insight into problems Examples -Model reconciliation -Tests against tracer data -Tests against synthetic data -Spatial & temporal patterns of error using BRAVO, IMPROVE, & CASTNet Data -Synthesized REMSAD & CMAQ -Scaled receptor techniques More Monitoring Data

Saharan Dust and Mineral Ratios

Factor Analysis Type 1 (Species by Time, 1 Site) What species vary similarly? Do they suggest source types? Factor % of variance Soil elements, Zn, Pb, SO 2 (Power plant, smelter) Factor % of variance S, Se, Na (TX, marine, industry) Factor % of variance V, Ni & OC, K (Oil & fires) Factor % of variance As, Cu (smelter) Example from Big Bend 1996 Scoping Study

BRAVO 1999

Factor Analysis Type 2 (Site by Time, 1 Species) What times, sites vary similarly? Do patterns suggest source areas? Example from BRAVO 1999

Trajectory Analysis Methods Trajectory Mass Balance Model Residence Time Type Analyses Quadrant Assignment Cluster Analysis Hit - No Hit Emissions Estimation Residence Time Conditional Probability Differential Probability Source Contribution Function Average and Maximum Fields Concentration Weighted Residence Time

Qualitative back trajectory analyses… Where does air come from on high and low pollution days ? Several statistical techniques used. This is the simplest. High SulfurLow Sulfur QUALITATIVE RECEPTOR MODELING

ROMANS II 2009 Ammonia

Winter Spring Summer Fall 2009 Mean Ammonia

Five Transport Patterns 1996 Scoping Study, Big Bend National Park Cluster Analysis

Concentrations by Transport Patterns Based on Clustered Trajectories 1996 Scoping Study - Big Bend National Park

Transport from Northeastern Colorado

Regression Techniques of Source Apportionment Assumption: The concentration measured at the receptor is some linear combination of the contributions of several sources Concentration = a 1 Source 1 + a 2 Source 2 + … Variations: CMB (Chemical Mass Balance), PMF (Positive Matrix Factorization), UNMIX Use source profiles and concentrations of several species to predict attributions for 1 measurement period. Source profiles are inferred from the measured concentration data in the latter two. TrMB ( Trajectory Mass Balance) Use many concentrations of 1 species and counts of trajectory endpoints in source regions to predict average attributions over a long period. Others...

TrMB Source Regions How do we know TrMB works? Inert Tracers from BRAVO.

TrMB modeling of BRAVO tracers at K-Bar, 9/17-10/28 (42 days). Negative concentrations were set to zero before summing. Attributions accurate to within the uncertainty of the measurement and standard error of the regression coefficients shown in bold and a larger font.

ROMANS 2006 – Automating thousands of TrMB Runs

Sensitivity Analyses … To Source Area Selection… To Height of Trajectories

WRF vs MM5 – ROMANS I April 23, 2006 Episode

Should be S Westerly Should be Easterly

Should be S Westerly Should be Easterly

Ammonia 2009 By Season WinterSpring Summer Fall

Ammonia 2009 By Season Winter Spring Summer Fall

Receptor Models Have Been Used For … Peer-reviewed literature Regulatory decisions (RHR) Education & Outreach Interagency Task Forces Interpretive Exhibits Booklets (Intro To Visibility) Understanding Trends “Reality” checks on models Counterbalance to industry Etc……