Template Development and Testing of PinG and VBS modules in CMAQ 5.01 Prakash Karamchandani, Bonyoung Koo, Greg Yarwood and Jeremiah Johnson ENVIRON International.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Template Source Attribution and Source Sensitivity Modeling Studies with CMAQ and CAMx Prakash Karamchandani 1, Jeremiah Johnson 1, Tejas Shah 1, Jaegun.
Advertisements

Intercomparison of secondary organic aerosol models based on SOA/O x ratio Yu Morino, Kiyoshi Tanabe, Kei Sato, and Toshimasa Ohara National Institute.
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.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Changes in U.S. Regional-Scale Air.
Template Implementing APT Plume-in-Grid and Volatility Basis Set (VBS) Algorithms in CMAQ 5.0 Bonyoung Koo, Prakash Karamchandani, Greg Yarwood and Jeremiah.
COMPARATIVE MODEL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF CMAQ-VISTAS, CMAQ-MADRID, AND CMAQ-MADRID-APT FOR A NITROGEN DEPOSITION ASSESSMENT OF THE ESCAMBIA BAY, FLORIDA.
MODELING CHEMICALLY REACTIVE AIR TOXICS IN THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA USING CAMx Chris Emery, Greg Yarwood and Ed Tai ENVIRON International Corporation.
U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development October 30, 2013 Prakash V. Bhave, Mary K. McCabe, Valerie C. Garcia Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division.
Template Reactive Plume Modeling to Investigate NO x Reactions and Transport in Nighttime Plumes and Impact on Next-day Ozone Prakash Karamchandani, Greg.
Incorporation of the Model of Aerosol Dynamics, Reaction, Ionization and Dissolution (MADRID) into CMAQ Yang Zhang, Betty K. Pun, Krish Vijayaraghavan,
Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, CA
Understanding sources of organic aerosol during CalNex 2010 using the CMAQ-VBS Matthew Woody 1, Kirk Baker 1, Patrick Hayes 2, Jose Jimenez 3, and Havala.
Spatial Variability of Seasonal PM2.5 Interpollutant Trading Ratios in Georgia James Boylan and Byeong-Uk Kim Georgia EPD – Air Protection Branch 2014.
Mercury Source Attribution at Global, Regional and Local Scales Christian Seigneur, Krish Vijayaraghavan, Kristen Lohman, and Prakash Karamchandani AER.
Eladio M. Knipping, Ph.D. January 16, 2014 Air Quality Applied Science Team (AQAST) Meeting Rice University, Houston, TX Air Quality Research from the.
Estimating the impacts of emissions from single sources on secondary PM 2.5 and ozone using an Eulerian photochemical model 1 James T. Kelly, Kirk R. Baker,
Operational Air Quality and Source Contribution Forecasting in Georgia Georgia Institute of Technology Yongtao Hu 1, M. Talat Odman 1, Michael E. Chang.
Template Development of a Plume-in-Grid Version of Global-through-Urban WRF/Chem Prakash Karamchandani, Krish Vijayaraghavan, Shu-Yun Chen ENVIRON International.
Beta Testing of the SCICHEM-2012 Reactive Plume Model James T. Kelly and Kirk R. Baker Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards US Environmental Protection.
Use of Hybrid Plume/Grid Modeling and the St. Louis Super Site Data to Model PM 2.5 Concentrations in the St. Louis Area Ralph Morris, Bonyoung Koo, Jeremiah,
Muntaseer Billah, Satoru Chatani and Kengo Sudo Department of Earth and Environmental Science Graduate School of Environmental Studies Nagoya University,
Krish Vijayaraghavan, Prakash Karamchandani Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, CA 3rd Annual CMAS Models-3 Conference October 18-20, 2004 Chapel Hill, NC.
Sub-Grid Scale Modeling of Air Toxics Concentrations Near Roadways Prakash Karamchandani, Kristen Lohman & Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, CA 6th Annual.
Plume-in-Grid Modeling for PM & Mercury Prakash Karamchandani, Krish Vijayaraghavan, Shu-Yun Chen & Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, CA 5th Annual CMAS.
Development of PM2.5 Interpollutant Trading Ratios James Boylan and Byeong-Uk Kim Georgia EPD – Air Protection Branch 2012 CMAS Conference October 16,
Development and Application of a State-of-the-Science Plume-in-Grid Model CMAQ-APT Prakash Karamchandani, Christian Seigneur, Krish Vijayaraghavan and.
2004 Workplan WRAP Regional Modeling Center Prepared by: Gail Tonnesen, University of California Riverside Ralph Morris, ENVIRON Corporation Zac Adelman,
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory | Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division| A Tale of Two Models: A Comparison.
Template Evaluation of an Advanced Reactive Puff Model using Aircraft-based Plume Measurements Krish Vijayaraghavan, Prakash Karamchandani, Bart Brashers,
Implementation of the Particle & Precursor Tagging Methodology (PPTM) for the CMAQ Modeling System: Mercury Tagging 5 th Annual CMAS Conference Research.
Further Development and Application of the CMAQ Ozone and Particle Precursor Tagging Methodologies (OPTM & PPTM) 7 th Annual CMAS Conference Chapel Hill,
1/30 2-year observation of Organic Aerosol properties In Cape Corsica J. Sciare, and LSCE.
Impacts of MOVES2014 On-Road Mobile Emissions on Air Quality Simulations of the Western U.S. Z. Adelman, M. Omary, D. Yang UNC – Institute for the Environment.
Application of the CMAQ Particle and Precursor Tagging Methodology (PPTM) to Support Water Quality Planning for the Virginia Mercury Study 6 th Annual.
Development and Application of Parallel Plume-in-Grid Models Prakash Karamchandani, Krish Vijayaraghavan, Shu-Yun Chen and Christian Seigneur AER, San.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Using Dynamical Downscaling to Project.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Office of Research and Development.
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.
Evaluation of the VISTAS 2002 CMAQ/CAMx Annual Simulations T. W. Tesche & Dennis McNally -- Alpine Geophysics, LLC Ralph Morris -- ENVIRON Gail Tonnesen.
1 Modeling Under PSD Air quality models (screening and refined) are used in various ways under the PSD program. Step 1: Significant Impact Analysis –Use.
William G. Benjey* Physical Scientist NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division Research Triangle Park, NC Fifth Annual CMAS.
Evaluation and Application of AMSTERDAM: Focus on Plume In Grid Prakash Karamchandani, Krish Vijayaraghavan, Shu-Yun Chen and Rochelle Balmori Atmospheric.
GEOS-CHEM Modeling for Boundary Conditions and Natural Background James W. Boylan Georgia Department of Natural Resources - VISTAS National RPO Modeling.
Seasonal Modeling of the Export of Pollutants from North America using the Multiscale Air Quality Simulation Platform (MAQSIP) Adel Hanna, 1 Rohit Mathur,
Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and Emission Reduction An FAA/NASA/TC-sponsored Center of Excellence Matthew Woody and Saravanan Arunachalam Institute.
1 Prakash Karamchandani 1, David Parrish 2, Lynsey Parker 1, Thomas Ryerson 3, Paul O. Wennberg 4, Alex Teng 4, John D. Crounse 4, Greg Yarwood 1 1 Ramboll.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Office of Research and Development.
Multiscale Predictions of Aircraft-Attributable PM 2.5 Modeled Using CMAQ-APT enhanced with an Aircraft-Specific 1-D Model for U.S. Airports Matthew Woody,
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division October 21, 2009 Evaluation of CMAQ.
Implementation Workgroup Meeting December 6, 2006 Attribution of Haze Workgroup’s Monitoring Metrics Document Status: 1)2018 Visibility Projections – Alternative.
Peak 8-hr Ozone Model Performance when using Biogenic VOC estimated by MEGAN and BIOME (BEIS) Kirk Baker Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium October.
Template A screening method for ozone impacts of new sources based on high-order sensitivity analysis of CAMx simulations for Sydney Greg Yarwood
AoH/MF Meeting, San Diego, CA, Jan 25, 2006 WRAP 2002 Visibility Modeling: Summary of 2005 Modeling Results Gail Tonnesen, Zion Wang, Mohammad Omary, Chao-Jung.
Operational Evaluation and Model Response Comparison of CAMx and CMAQ for Ozone & PM2.5 Kirk Baker, Brian Timin, Sharon Phillips U.S. Environmental Protection.
Template Comparison of PM Source Apportionment and Sensitivity Analysis in CAMx Bonyoung Koo, Gary Wilson, Ralph Morris, Greg Yarwood ENVIRON Alan Dunker.
W. T. Hutzell 1, G. Pouliot 2, and D. J. Luecken 1 1 Atmospheric Modeling Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 2 Atmospheric Sciences Modeling.
Evaluation of CAMx: Issues Related to Sectional Models Ralph Morris, Bonyoung Koo, Steve Lau and Greg Yarwood ENVIRON International Corporation Novato,
Emission reductions needed to meet proposed ozone standard and their effect on particulate matter Daniel Cohan and Beata Czader Department of Civil and.
MRPO Technical Approach “Nearer” Term Overview For: Emissions Modeling Meteorological Modeling Photochemical Modeling & Domain Model Performance Evaluation.
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 Species to Emissions in the Southeast Sun-Kyoung Park and Armistead G. Russell Georgia Institute of Technology Sensitivity of PM.
Template Application of SCICHEM-2012 for 1-Hour NO 2 Concentration Assessments Prakash Karamchandani, Ralph Morris, Greg Yarwood, Bart Brashers, S.-Y.
Krish Vijayaraghavan, Rochelle Balmori, Shu-Yun Chen, Prakash Karamchandani and Christian Seigneur AER, San Ramon, CA Justin T. Walters and John J. Jansen.
Understanding the impact of isoprene nitrates and OH reformation on regional air quality using recent advances in isoprene photooxidation chemistry Ying.
Single-Source Impacts with SCICHEM and CAMx
Predicting PM2.5 Concentrations that Result from Compliance with National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) James T. Kelly, Adam Reff, and Brett Gantt.
Photochemical Modeling of Industrial Flare Plumes with SCICHEM 3.1
Stephen Mueller & Jonathan Mallard Tennessee Valley Authority
SELECTED RESULTS OF MODELING WITH THE CMAQ PLUME-IN-GRID APPROACH
Deborah Luecken and Golam Sarwar U.S. EPA, ORD/NERL
Presentation transcript:

Template Development and Testing of PinG and VBS modules in CMAQ 5.01 Prakash Karamchandani, Bonyoung Koo, Greg Yarwood and Jeremiah Johnson ENVIRON International Corporation Eladio Knipping Electric Power Research Institute October 15, th Annual CMAS Conference, Chapel Hill, NC

773 San Marin Drive, Suite 2115, Novato, CA P: F: Acknowledgements This work was supported by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) The U.S. EPA provided access to early alpha and beta versions of CMAQ 5.0 and pre-release versions of CMAQ 5.0 and CMAQ 5.01 to facilitate community contributions to this new release Scientists from the U.S. EPA Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Branch provided valuable technical advice and support during the implementation and testing of the new modules in CMAQ

773 San Marin Drive, Suite 2115, Novato, CA P: F: Scope of Study 3 Implement Advanced Plume Treatment (APT) for sub- grid scale treatment of point source plumes in CMAQ 5.01 Implement Volatility Basis Set (VBS) approach as an alternative option for organic PM Application of new modules using existing modeling datasets and comparison of results with those from the base (“standard”) CMAQ 5.01 Submission of new code and model results to EPA/CMAS for review (pending) Include as new options in next interim release after submission is approved

773 San Marin Drive, Suite 2115, Novato, CA P: F: VBS Implementation for CMAQ v5.0.1 Volatility basis set approach –Recognizes that both secondary and primary OA are semi-volatile –Accounts for volatility decrease with chemical aging –Aerosol formation from VOC, IVOC and SVOC emissions Implementation distinguishes OA by major source category and between HOA and OOA (for comparison with AMS data) –Four volatility basis sets  One basis set for HOA (hydrocarbon-like OA) for emissions of fresh OA from anthropogenic sources  One basis set for BBOA (biomass-burning OA) for emissions of fresh OA from fires  Two basis sets for secondary OOA (oxygenated OA) from anthropogenic and biogenic sources  HOA converts to OOA with chemical aging –IVOC and SVOC are added internally  Current inventories lack IVOC and SVOC  Internally estimate I/SVOC from primary emissions, by major source category Performance –Both STD and VBS schemes biased low; VBS bias has less seasonal dependence –VBS performance improves when I/SVOC emissions are estimated based on Mexico City plume analyses (Shrivastava et al., 2011) –Minor computational increase (~10%) with VBS 4

5 APT Implementation Embedded plume model: SCICHEM Updated plume model gas-phase chemistry, aerosol, and aqueous modules for consistency with CMAQ 5.01 default options (CB05TUCL, AE6) Model interfaces rewritten to deal with structural changes to CMAQ (new modules for specification of model species, code re- engineering to increase modularity) –SCICHEM now uses CMAQ modules and derived data types to build species lists and species properties –Much tighter integration between CMAQ and SCICHEM –Updates for future CMAQ versions likely to require less coding effort as long as CMAQ is not re-engineered again Update host and plume models for point source treatment –SCICHEM now reads CMAQ in-line point source files directly and uses the LPING flag in the stack groups file to determine point sources to simulate –CMAQ does not treat point sources that are simulated with SCICHEM –SCICHEM uses CMAQ plume-rise algorithms 5

6 CMAQ v5 Test Case 6 Modeling episodes –Two-week episode for each of January and July 2005 Modeling domains –12 km modeling grid (119 X 158) centered on the Eastern U.S. ~20 point sources selected for plume-in- grid treatment in CMAQ-APT simulation Preliminary analysis focuses on summertime differences in source attributions from the base CMAQ and CMAQ-APT Source contributions determined by conducting a “background” simulation without the point sources

7 Source Contributions to Daily Max 8-hour O 3 July 9, 2005 Base CMAQ 5.01CMAQ-APT 5.01APT-Base

8 Source Contributions to Daily Max 8-hour O 3 July 10, 2005 Base CMAQ 5.01CMAQ-APT 5.01APT-Base

9 Source Contributions to Daily Max 8-hour O 3 July 11, 2005 Base CMAQ 5.01CMAQ-APT 5.01APT-Base

10 Source Contributions to 24-hour average PM 2.5 July 1, 2005 Base CMAQ 5.01CMAQ-APT 5.01APT-Base

11 Source Contributions to 24-hour average PM 2.5 July 9, 2005 Base CMAQ 5.01CMAQ-APT 5.01APT-Base

12 Source Contributions to 24-hour average PM 2.5 July 11, 2005 Base CMAQ 5.01CMAQ-APT 5.01APT-Base

13 Source Contributions to 15-Day S Deposition July 1-15, 2005 Base CMAQ 5.01CMAQ-APT 5.01APT-Base

14 Source Contributions to 15-Day N Deposition July 1-15, 2005 Base CMAQ 5.01CMAQ-APT 5.01APT-Base

773 San Marin Drive, Suite 2115, Novato, CA P: F: Summary and Next Steps 15 Overall spatial patterns of point source contributions to ozone, PM 2.5, and deposition are qualitatively similar in the base and plume-in-grid simulations Plume-in-grid treatment generally shows smaller point source contributions than standard CMAQ: –Significantly lower near the sources –Comparable or slightly higher contributions at longer downwind distances Additional analysis of summer results ongoing Winter episode simulations ongoing New VBS and APT codes, inputs and model results to be submitted to EPA for review after completing the analyses