Modeling Guidance and Examples for Commonly Asked Questions (Part II) Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Richard (Rick) Goertz, P. E
Advertisements

Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014.
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.
Status of 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Program in Clark County Presentation to Air Quality Forum May 10, 2005.
TCEQ Air Permits Division Justin Cherry, P.E. Ahmed Omar Stephen F. Austin State University February 28, 2013.
Kansas City Air Quality, Emissions, and Strategies Douglas Watson Kansas Department of Health and Environment Bureau of Air and Radiation January 10, 2006.
Modeling Guidance and Examples for Commonly Asked Questions (Part 1) Rachel Melton and Matthew Kovar Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental.
Ozone in Colorado: Issues and Reduction Strategies Presentation to the Colorado Environmental Health Association October 2,
Matthew Kovar Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Environmental Trade Fair 2015.
ADEQ Uses of ICF Modeling Analysis Tony Davis, Branch Manager – Air Planning Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality Criteria Pollutant Modeling Analysis.
Meeting of the Southern Ute Indian Tribe/State of Colorado Environmental Commission and the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission 4/16/2015.
December 4, Utility MACT Air & Waste Management Association/EPA Information Exchange December 4, 2002 William H. Maxwell Combustion Group/ESD.
Solvent Emissions and Air Quality Defining the Air Quality Challenge John Stark, R.S. City of Wichita Air Quality/HazMat Program Supervisor.
Simple Chemical modeling of ozone sensitivity
1 Emission and Air Quality Trends Review Washington July 2013.
Minnesota Air Quality and Attainment Status Frank Kohlasch Kari Palmer Statewide Travel Demand Coordinating Committee Meeting October 14, 2010.
1 Emission and Air Quality Trends Review Colorado May 2013.
1 Emission and Air Quality Trends Review Nevada May 2013.
1 Emission and Air Quality Trends Review New Jersey May 2013.
| Philadelphia | Atlanta | Houston | Washington DC SO 2 Data Requirements Rule – A Proactive Compliance Approach Mark Wenclawiak, CCM |
Development of PM2.5 Interpollutant Trading Ratios James Boylan and Byeong-Uk Kim Georgia EPD – Air Protection Branch 2012 CMAS Conference October 16,
Environmental Protection Division Air Quality Update Georgia EPD Jimmy Johnston Georgia Environmental Protection Division August 5, 2010.
The Impact of Biogenic VOC Emissions on Tropospheric Ozone Formation in the Mid-Atlantic Region Michelle L. Bell Yale University Hugh Ellis Johns Hopkins.
Sound solutions delivered uncommonly well Understanding the Permitting Impacts of the Proposed Ozone NAAQS Pine Mountain, GA ♦ August 20, 2015 Courtney.
1 Emission and Air Quality Trends Review Utah May 2013.
EPA’s DRAFT SIP and MODELING GUIDANCE Ian Cohen EPA Region 1 December 8, 2011.
Estimate of Air Emissions from Shale Gas Development and Production in North Carolina July 8, 2015 Presented to the Environmental Management Commission.
National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Current Status of Air Quality Laura Boothe North Carolina Division of Air Quality MCIC Workshops March 2012.
1 Emission and Air Quality Trends Review Connecticut July 2013.
1 Emission and Air Quality Trends Review Central States May 2013.
1 Emission and Air Quality Trends Review Alabama May 2013.
PSD/Nonattainment Review You can do this! Marc Sturdivant Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Environmental Trade Fair 2015.
November Siebert Ground Level Ozone1 PHOTOCHEMICAL SMOG & OZONE.
Emissions Banking and Trading (EBT) Overview/Update Melissa Ruano Air Quality Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting.
Permitting and National Ambient Air Quality Standards Changes Rick Goertz, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced.
1 Emission and Air Quality Trends Review North Dakota July 2013.
Air Quality in Texas Birnur Guven Houston Advanced Research Center June 23, 2010 – Johnson Space Center.
1 Emission and Air Quality Trends Review New Hampshire July 2013.
1 Emission and Air Quality Trends Review Idaho July 2013.
Nonattainment New Source Review (NA NSR) Program Raj Rao US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards ,
Stephen F. Austin State University February 27, 2014 Justin Cherry, P.E. Reece Parker TCEQ Air Permits Division.
N EW Y ORK S TATE D EPARTMENT OF E NVIRONMENTAL C ONSERVATION Short Term Ambient Air Quality Standards and The Effect on Permitting Margaret Valis NESCAUM,
NAAQS Status in GA & PSD Inventory Update James W. Boylan Georgia EPD – Air Protection Branch Manager, Planning & Support Program AWMA Regulatory Update.
Regulatory background How these standards could impact the permitting process How is compliance with the standards assessed.
Jerry Beasley, Ph.D., P.E. Mississippi Dept. of Environmental Quality MMA Environmental & Safety Conference and Expo October 16, 2015.
New Ozone NAAQS Impacts: What Happens Next with a Lower O3 Standard? Nonattainment Designation and Industry’s Opportunity to Participate New Ozone NAAQS.
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Issues on Ozone Planning in the Western United States
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Emission and Air Quality Trends Review
Presentation transcript:

Modeling Guidance and Examples for Commonly Asked Questions (Part II) Reece Parker and Justin Cherry, P.E. Air Permits Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Advanced Air Permitting Seminar 2014

What Is Ozone? Good Stratospheric Ozone O2O2 sunlight O + O O + O 2 O3O3 Bad Ground-level Ozone sunlight VOC + NO x O 3 (and other products)

Ground-level Ozone Is: The main component of smog. Not emitted directly in the air but forms when emissions of precursors, including NO x and VOCs “cook” in the sun: – Emissions from industrial facilities, electric utilities, motor vehicle exhaust, gasoline vapors, and chemical solvents are the major man-made sources of NO x and VOCs. Mainly a summertime pollutant because sunlight and hot weather accelerate its formation. Ozone levels can be high in both urban and rural areas, often due to transport of emissions of ozone precursors.

2008 Ground-level Ozone Standards Primary and secondary 8-hr ozone standards: 75 ppb* *based on the 3-yr average of the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hr ozone concentration

Type of Application Non- Attainment Review? PSD Increment: SO 2 PM 10 Property Line: SO 2 H 2 S Health Effects: Benzene PSD Review? SO 2 PM 10 Property Line: SO 2 H 2 S Health Effects: Benzene

Non-attainment vs. Attainment

Non-attainment Review Provide full documentation and details to reduce review time and mitigate potential issues Protocol document should resemble AQA without modeling results Final product? Not exactly... Ozone Impact Analysis not required. Emissions offsets to improve air quality

PSD Review If project is major by itself or a major modification, a protocol is required: – For all criteria pollutants with an increase – Must be sent to EPA Region 6 for review – May include protocol for state-only requirements Items to include in protocol are listed in protocol checklist Consider all the items in the protocol check list before you start on your protocol document An ozone impacts analysis is required when a project emits:  100 tpy or more of VOCs and/or  100 tpy or more of NO x

Ozone Impacts Analysis Obtain representative monitoring data Determine whether the project area is VOC-limited or NO x -limited* Quantitative demonstration Qualitative demonstration *Based on TCEQ’s own SIP photochemical modeling, most of the urban and rural areas of Texas are NO x -limited.

Quantitative Demonstration Photochemical modeling:  Comprehensive Air Quality Model with extensions (CAMx) Screening approach using AERMOD:  Demonstration based on comments by EPA for NO x - limited areas

Quantitative Demonstration (Cont.) Screening approach using AERMOD:  Conservative analysis based on NO x modeling: – Determine if the project is NO x -limited or VOC-limited – If VOC-limited, determine GLC max at a distance of km – Assume 90% conversion of NO x to NO 2 – Assume 3 ozone molecules per NO x molecule – Add result to the representative monitored concentration – Compare to the standard

Example of Quantitative Demonstration Determine a representative monitor concentration Project Location

Example (Cont.) Determine a representative monitor concentration Monitor Location 3-yr avg of 4 th highest daily maximum 8-hr conc. 69 ppb

Example (Cont.) Determine GLC max km from project sources

Example (Cont.) Model Output Converting model result to ppb: 2.96 µg/m 3 x (100 ppb)/(188 µg/m 3 ) =1.57 ppb

Example (Cont.) Assume 90% conversion of NO X to NO 2 : 1.57 ppb x 0.9 = ppb Assume 3 molecules ozone per molecule NO X : 3 x ppb = 4.24 ppb Add result to monitored concentration: 69 ppb ppb = ppb Compare to standard: ppb < 75 ppb

Qualitative Demonstration Assessment of current air quality: – Ozone trends – NO X trends – VOC trends Analysis of the project’s potential ozone impact – Selection of Existing Photochemical Modeling Analyses: – Modeling simulation (Did photochemical modeling follow EPA guidance?) – Source characterization – Meteorological parameters and regional transport

Example Qualitative Demonstration Ozone Trends BPA Area BPA Area Ozone Design Values for all Monitoring Sites ( ) Site ID: Site ID: Site ID: hr Ozone NAAQS 2008 NAAQS Threshold hr Ozone NAAQS 1997 NAAQS Threshold Site ID: Site ID: Site ID: Site ID: Site ID: Site ID: hr Ozone Design Value (ppm)

Example (Cont.) NO x Trends (BPA Area) Summary of NO x Emissions Data in BPA Area (tons per day) NO x Emissions (tons per day) Nonroad Onroad Area Point Area Onroad Nonroad 2005 NEI 2008 NEI2011 NEI

Example (Cont.) NO x Trends (BPA Area) Maximum BPA Area Annual Average NO X Concentration ( ) Annual NO x Concentration (ppb)

Example (Cont.) VOC Trends (BPA Area) Summary of VOC Point and Area Emissions Data in BPA Area (tons per day)

Example (Cont.) VOC Trends (BPA Area) Annual Average Level of Ethylene Measured in the BPA Area ( ) Annual Average Measurements (ppb) Ethylene Emissions Range of Measured Annual Averages Median of Measured Annual Averages Year

Example (Cont.) VOC Trends (BPA Area) Annual Average Level of Propylene Measured in the BPA Area ( ) Annual Average Measurements (ppb) Propylene Emissions Range of Measured Annual Averages Median of Measured Annual Averages Year

Example (Cont.) Source Characterization Photochemical Modeling Project: – 24 Natural Gas-fired Refrigeration Compressor Turbines – 4 Acid Gas Vents – 1 Marine Flare – 2 Wet Gas Flares – 2 Dry Gas Flares – 2 Natural Gas-fired Generator Turbines – 2 Emergency Generators Proposed Project: – 6 Natural Gas-fired Refrigeration Compressor Turbines – 1 LNG Storage LP Flare – 1 Wet/Dry Gas Ground Flare – 1 Auxiliary Boiler – 4 Thermal Oxidizers – 7 Diesel Generators – 1 Natural Gas-fired Essential Generator – 1 Blowdown Vent

Example (Cont.) Source Characterization Photochemical Modeling PTE NO x Emissions 2, tpy PSD Increment: SO 2 PM 10 Property Line: SO 2 H 2 S Health Effects: Benzene Proposed Project PTE NO x Emissions tpy PSD Increment: SO 2 PM 10 Property Line: SO 2 H 2 S Health Effects: Benzene Photochemical modeling approx. 4X more NO x than proposed project.

Example (Cont.) Meteorological Parameters and Regional Transport BPA Area Surface Pressure (HPA)Relative Humidity (%)

Example (Cont.) Meteorological Parameters and Regional Transport BPA Area Surface Roughness (m)Temperature ( o C)

Example (Cont.) Meteorological Parameters and Regional Transport BPA Area Wind Vectors (knts)Wind Velocity (knts)

Example (Cont.) Model Results Photochemical modeling results in the BPA Area based on 4X as much NO x is between ppb.

Questions?

Contact Information Justin Cherry, P.E. – Air Dispersion Modeling Team – (512) – Reece Parker – Air Dispersion Modeling Team – (512) – Air Permits Division (512) Justin Cherry Air Permits Division Reece Parker (512)