Urbanized MM5 meso-met modeling for the Houston Texas ozone SIP Prof. Bob Bornstein Dept. of Meteorology San Jose State University San Jose, CA USA presented at Imperial College 16 March 2005

OVERVIEW MESO-MET URBANIZATION MESO-MET URBANIZATION FORMULATION FORMULATION REQUIRED INPUTS REQUIRED INPUTS RESULTS RESULTS HOUSTON CASE STUDY HOUSTON CASE STUDY DOMAINS DOMAINS GIS INPUTS GIS INPUTS RESULTS RESULTS

From EPA uMM5: Mason + Martilli: by Dupont Within Gayno-Seaman PBL/TKE scheme

 Advanced urbanization scheme from Masson (2000) __________ _________ 3 new terms in each prog equation

New GIS/RS inputs for uMM5 as f (x, y, z)  land use (38 categories)  roughness elements  anthropogenic heat as f (t)  vegetation and building heights  paved-surface fractions  drag-force coef for buildings & vegetation  building H/W, wall-plan, & impervious-area ratios  building frontal, plan, & and rooftop area-densities  wall and roof: ε, cρ, α, etc.  vegetation: canopies, root zones, stomatal resistances

Urbanization  day/nite same-line  not f (Ri) Martilli/EPFL results Non-urban: urban

Current SJSU uMM5 Configuration Modified EPA uMM5-96 Modified EPA uMM nested-domains 5 nested-domains Inner urbanized-domain: 134 x 141, 1-km grids Inner urbanized-domain: 134 x 141, 1-km grids GIS/RS sfc-parameters as f(x,y) GIS/RS sfc-parameters as f(x,y) 5-layer soil-model; Gayno-Seaman TKE 5-layer soil-model; Gayno-Seaman TKE Simulation: 8 days Simulation: 8 days 106 SJSU cluster 106 SJSU cluster 1 CPU  15 to 1 1 CPU  15 to 1 96 CPU  0.25 to 1 96 CPU  0.25 to 1

Domains: 108, 36, 12, 4, 1 km Pts: 43×53×28,55×55×28,100×100×28,136×151×28, 133×141×48

KEY IDEA: IDEAL MESO-MET ATM-MODEL CAPTURES ALL BC FORCINGS O 3 EPISODES OCCUR ON GIVEN DAY: O 3 EPISODES OCCUR ON GIVEN DAY: NOT FROM CHANGES IN: TOPO, Q, OR SFC MESO- FORCING (EXCEPT FOG) NOT FROM CHANGES IN: TOPO, Q +, OR SFC MESO- FORCING (EXCEPT FOG) BUT FROM CHANGES IN UPPER-LEVEL SYN’S, WHICH BUT FROM CHANGES IN UPPER-LEVEL SYN’S, WHICH ARE FROM EXTERNAL-MODEL & WHICH ARE FROM EXTERNAL-MODEL & WHICH ALTER MESO SFC-FORCINGS (i.e., TOPO, LAND/SEA, URBAN) VIA MESO-T AND THUS V ALTER MESO SFC-FORCINGS (i.e., TOPO, LAND/SEA, URBAN) VIA MESO-T AND THUS V THUS EVALUATE (SEQUENTIALLY): THUS EVALUATE (SEQUENTIALLY): UPPER LEVEL Syn Wx patterns: p (via HPGF) & then V UPPER LEVEL Syn Wx patterns: p (via HPGF) & then V TOPOGRAPHY (via grid spacing): channeling of V TOPOGRAPHY (via grid spacing): channeling of V MESO SFC: T (via Fr/Diff) & then V MESO SFC: T (via Fr/Diff) & then V

HOUSTON (S. Stetson)

3-PM Coastal-L Episode day Domains: 1-3 L L L

Domain 3, 4 PM: cold-core L: (from SST-eddy??) L

Domain 4 (3 PM) : L off Houston on O 3 day (25 th ) L L  Episode day day LLLLLLLL

Urbanized D-5: near-sfc 3 PM V, 4-days  Max Oday O 3 day

Base-case (current) veg cover (urban min) Modeled increased veg cover: urban max values: 0.1 of above

Soil moisture increase for: Run 12 (entire area, left) & Run 13 (urban area only, right)

Run 12 (urban-max reforestation) minus Run 10 (base case): 4 PM near-sfc ∆T (C) shows: reforested urban-center cools & surrounding deforested rural-areas warm

u1u1 seasea ru r u2u2 HOUSTIN-SIP CMAQ-O: 6 tree-planting scenarios  HOUSTIN-SIP CMAQ-O 3 : 6 tree-planting scenarios  reduced UHIs (right) in urban-box 1 (left) for Run 17 Max impact

Importance urbanized MM5 + urban tree planting  urbanized MM5 + urban tree planting  ↓ daytime max-UHI  ↓ daytime max-UHI  ↓ reduced a/c  ↓ precursor emissions & slower atm-chem  ↓ reduced a/c  ↓ precursor emissions & slower atm-chem  ↓ lower CMAQ-ozone  ↓ lower CMAQ-ozone  EPA emission-reduction SIP credits EPA emission-reduction SIP credits

The End