The AIRPACT-3 Photochemical Air Quality Forecast System: Evaluation and Enhancements Jack Chen, Farren Thorpe, Jeremy Avis, Matt Porter, Joseph Vaughan,

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Georgia Institute of Technology Evaluation of CMAQ with FAQS Episode of August 11 th -20 th, 2000 Yongtao Hu, M. Talat Odman, Maudood Khan and Armistead.

Advertisements

Inventory Issues and Modeling- Some Examples Brian Timin USEPA/OAQPS October 21, 2002.

Multi-scale and Ensemble Modeling of the Effects of Global Change on Air Quality in the US NW –AIRQUEST Annual Meeting Washington State University Pullman,

Experiments with Assimilation of Fine Aerosols using GSI and EnKF with WRF-Chem (on the need of assimilating satellite observations) Mariusz Pagowski Georg.

Three-State Air Quality Study (3SAQS) Three-State Data Warehouse (3SDW) 2008 CAMx Modeling Model Performance Evaluation Summary University of North Carolina.

Incorporation of the Model of Aerosol Dynamics, Reaction, Ionization and Dissolution (MADRID) into CMAQ Yang Zhang, Betty K. Pun, Krish Vijayaraghavan,

V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt CRGAQS: Revised CAMx Results Presentation to the Gorge Study Technical Team By ENVIRON International Corporation December.

4-km AIRPACT vs 12-km AIRPACT Both with dynamic boundary conditions from MOZART-4 Figures created on 5/29/2011 (corrected corrupted JPROC input file)

Climate, Fire and Air Quality Climate Impacts Group June 1, 2006.

Short-Term Air Quality Forecasts for the Pacific Northwest and Long-Range Global Change Predictions for the US Jack Chen Committee Members: Brian Lamb,

CENRAP Modeling Workgroup Mational RPO Modeling Meeting May 25-26, Denver CO Calvin Ku Missouri DNR May 25, 2004.

The AIRPACT-3 Photochemical Air Quality Forecast System: Evaluation and Enhancements Jack Chen, Farren Thorpe, Jeremy Avis, Matt Porter, Joseph Vaughan,

The ClearSky Field-Burning Decision Support System Joe Vaughan, Charleston Ramos, Brian Lamb Laboratory for Atmospheric Research WSU-Pullman NW-AIRQUEST.

Regional Air Quality Modeling: Long Range Global Change Simulations.

Integration of CMAQ into the Western Macedonia environmental management system A. Sfetsos 1,2, J. Bartzis 2 1 Environmental Research Laboratory, NCSR Demokritos.

Evaluation of the AIRPACT2 modeling system for the Pacific Northwest Abdullah Mahmud MS Student, CEE Washington State University.

CMAQ (Community Multiscale Air Quality) pollutant Concentration change horizontal advection vertical advection horizontal dispersion vertical diffusion.

A Modeling Investigation of the Climate Effects of Air Pollutants Aijun Xiu 1, Rohit Mathur 2, Adel Hanna 1, Uma Shankar 1, Frank Binkowski 1, Carlie Coats.

Modeling Aerosol Formation and Transport in the Pacific Northwest with the Community Multi-scale Air Quality (CMAQ) Modeling System Susan M. O'Neill Fire.

University of California Riverside, ENVIRON Corporation, MCNC WRAP Regional Modeling Center WRAP Regional Haze CMAQ 1996 Model Performance and for Section.

Prediction of Future North American Air Quality Gabriele Pfister, Stacy Walters, Mary Barth, Jean-Francois Lamarque, John Wong Atmospheric Chemistry Division,

Available Analytical Approaches for Estimating Fire Impacts on Ozone Formation Stephen Reid Sean Raffuse Hilary Hafner Sonoma Technology, Inc. Petaluma,

Clinton MacDonald 1, Kenneth Craig 1, Jennifer DeWinter 1, Adam Pasch 1, Brigette Tollstrup 2, and Aleta Kennard 2 1 Sonoma Technology, Inc., Petaluma,

1 Using Hemispheric-CMAQ to Provide Initial and Boundary Conditions for Regional Modeling Joshua S. Fu 1, Xinyi Dong 1, Kan Huang 1, and Carey Jang 2 1.

Annual Simulations of Models-3/CMAQ: Issues and Lessons Learned Pat Dolwick, Carey Jang, Norm Possiel, Brian Timin, Joe Tikvart Air Quality Modeling Group.

V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt CRGAQS: Initial CAMx Results Presentation to the Gorge Study Technical Team By ENVIRON International Corporation October.

AIRPACT-3 status and near- term objectives Joe Vaughan Brian Lamb Jeremy Avise Jack Chen Matt Porter Li Wang.

AIRPACT and ClearSky Activity Report Joe Vaughan, Farren Herron-Thorpe, Serena Chung and Brian Lamb NW-AIRQUEST Annual Meeting June 2, 2011 Pullman, WA.

Evaluation and Application of Air Quality Model System in Shanghai Qian Wang 1, Qingyan Fu 1, Yufei Zou 1, Yanmin Huang 1, Huxiong Cui 1, Junming Zhao.

PM Model Performance in Southern California Using UAMAERO-LT Joseph Cassmassi Senior Meteorologist SCAQMD February 11, 2004.

WRAP Experience: Investigation of Model Biases Uma Shankar, Rohit Mathur and Francis Binkowski MCNC–Environmental Modeling Center Research Triangle Park,

Development and Preliminary Results of Image Processing Tools for Meteorology and Air Quality Modeling Limei Ran Center for Environmental Modeling for.

OThree Chemistry MM5/CAMx Model Diagnostic and Sensitivity Analysis Results Central California Ozone Study: Bi-Weekly Presentation 2 T. W. Tesche Dennis.

PM Model Performance & Grid Resolution Kirk Baker Midwest Regional Planning Organization November 2003.

Operational Evaluation and Comparison of CMAQ and REMSAD- An Annual Simulation Brian Timin, Carey Jang, Pat Dolwick, Norm Possiel, Tom Braverman USEPA/OAQPS.

Northwest-AIRQUEST & AIRPACT-3 Regional Modeling Studies Joseph Vaughan, Farren Thorpe, Ying Xie, Serena Chung, Brian Lamb and George Mount Laboratory.

ARCTAS-CA June 2008 Air Quality Simulations. July 1, 2009 ARCTAS-CA Data Analysis Workshop 2 Collaborators Ajith Kaduwela, Chenxia Cai, Dazhong Yin, Jin.

1 CRGAQS: Meteorological Modeling prepared for Southwest Clean Air Agency 19 June 2006 prepared by Alpine Geophysics, LLC ENVIRON International Corp.

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.

Impact of high resolution modeling on ozone predictions in the Cascadia region Ying Xie and Brian Lamb Laboratory for Atmospheric Research Department of.

Applications of Models-3 in Coastal Areas of Canada M. Lepage, J.W. Boulton, X. Qiu and M. Gauthier RWDI AIR Inc. C. di Cenzo Environment Canada, P&YR.

1 Impact on Ozone Prediction at a Fine Grid Resolution: An Examination of Nudging Analysis and PBL Schemes in Meteorological Model Yunhee Kim, Joshua S.

GEOS-CHEM Modeling for Boundary Conditions and Natural Background James W. Boylan Georgia Department of Natural Resources - VISTAS National RPO Modeling.

Analysis of Ozone Modeling for May – July 2006 in PNW using AIRPACT3 (CMAQ) and CAMx. Robert Kotchenruther, Ph.D. EPA Region 10 Nov CMAQ O 3 Prediction.

Evaluation of Models-3 CMAQ I. Results from the 2003 Release II. Plans for the 2004 Release Model Evaluation Team Members Prakash Bhave, Robin Dennis,

THE MODELS-3 COMMUNITY MULTI- SCALE AIR QUALITY (CMAQ) MODEL: 2002 RELEASE – NEW FEATURES Jonathan Pleim, Francis Binkowski, Robin Dennis, Brian Eder,

Impact of the changes of prescribed fire emissions on regional air quality from 2002 to 2050 in the southeastern United States Tao Zeng 1,3, Yuhang Wang.

Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Office of Research and Development.

Sensitivity analysis of influencing factors on PM 2.5 nitrate simulation the 11 th Annual CMAS Conference October 16, 2012 This research was supported.

Evaluation of 2002 Multi-pollutant Platform: Air Toxics, Mercury, Ozone, and Particulate Matter US EPA / OAQPS / AQAD / AQMG Sharon Phillips, Kai Wang,

Peak 8-hr Ozone Model Performance when using Biogenic VOC estimated by MEGAN and BIOME (BEIS) Kirk Baker Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium October.

Three-State Air Quality Study (3SAQS) Three-State Data Warehouse (3SDW) 3SAQS 2011 CAMx Model Performance Evaluation University of North Carolina (UNC-IE)

1 Preliminary evaluation of the 2002 Base B1 CMAQ simulation: Temporal Analysis A more complete statistical evaluation, including diurnal variations, of.

Impacts of Meteorological Variations on RRFs (Relative Response Factors) in the Demonstration of Attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality for 8-hr.

Emission reductions needed to meet proposed ozone standard and their effect on particulate matter Daniel Cohan and Beata Czader Department of Civil and.

3 YEARS’ OPERATION OF AIR QUALITY FORECAST SYSTEM Hyun Cheol Kim, Daewon Byun, DaeGyun Lee, Soontae Kim, and Fong Ngan University of Houston The Institute.

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.

Georgia Institute of Technology Evaluation of the 2006 Air Quality Forecasting Operation in Georgia Talat Odman, Yongtao Hu, Ted Russell School of Civil.

A study of process contributions to PM 2.5 formation during the 2004 ICARTT period using the Eta-CMAQ forecast model over the eastern U.S. Shaocai Yu $,

NW-AIRQUEST projects on Agricultural and Wildfire Smoke in the Inland Northwest: ClearSky and AIRPACT-3 presented by: Joe Vaughan WSU-LAR contributors:

Aerosol simulation with coupled meteorology-radiation- chemistry model WRF/Chem over Europe.

V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt CRGAQS: CAMx Sensitivity Results Presentation to the Gorge Study Technical Team By ENVIRON International Corporation.

Preliminary Evaluation of the June 2002 Version of CMAQ Brian Eder Shaocai Yu Robin Dennis Jonathan Pleim Ken Schere Atmospheric Modeling Division* National.

Potential use of TEMPO AOD & NO2 retrievals to support wild fire plume & O3 & PM2.5 forecast in National Air Quality Forecasting Capability (NAQFC) Pius.

Model Future: Nesting with Regional Models

Yongtao Hu, Jaemeen Baek, M. Talat Odman and Armistead G. Russell

Simulation of Ozone and PM in Southern Taiwan

Modelling atmospheric transport of Benzo(a)Pyrene with CMAQ

AIRPACT-5 Fire Emissions Processing Methodology

Current Research on 3-D Air Quality Modeling: wildfire!

Presentation transcript:

The AIRPACT-3 Photochemical Air Quality Forecast System: Evaluation and Enhancements Jack Chen, Farren Thorpe, Jeremy Avis, Matt Porter, Joseph Vaughan, and Brian Lamb Laboratory for Atmospheric Research Washington State University

Tomorrow’s Air Quality: AIRPACT-3 Daily Forecast System MM5(3.7.3) numerical mesoscale meteorological model SMOKE(2.1): Sparse Matrix Operating Kernal for Emissions processing. CMAQ (4.6): Community Multi- scale Air Quality model:  SAPRC-99 O3 & toxics chemistry  Aerosol (ver.4) in Aitken, accumulation, & coarse modes  Deposition of N, S, O3, & Hg species  12 km x 12 km grid cells, 21 layers  Forecast to 64 hours daily PM species Nitrates Sulfates Organic aerosols Wind-Blown Dust (soon) PM2.5 total mass

Daisy-chain Initial Conditions Dynamic Boundary Conditions: spatial & temporal variations from MOZART monthly diurnal average profiles 2005 anthropogenic emissions (SMOKE) Wild and Prescribed Fire Emissions (from BlueSky system) Gridded Emissions Updated Biogenic Emission Model (BEIS3) WSU Dairy NH3 Emissions Module AIRPACT-3 Dynamic Emissions & IC/BC MM5/MCIP Meteorology from UW Weather Forecast System CMAQ

AIRPACT3, July, 2006 Ozone and Biogenic SOA Formation

Retrospective long term evaluation Aug – Nov, 2004 (coincident with Columbia Gorge Visibility Monitoring program) 8 hr daily maximum O 3 24 hr daily maximum PM2.5 Speciated PM2.5

MM5 forecast performance results August 2004 Surface Temp. ( o C) Wind Direction (deg) Wind Speed (m/s) Precip (mm) RH (%) Mean error Mean abs. error N Nov Surface Temp. ( o C) Wind Direction (deg) Wind Speed (m/s) Precip (mm) RH (%) Mean error Mean abs. error N GFS initialization, CCM2 radiation scheme, Reisner-2 moisture microphysics parameterization, Kain- Fritsch cumulus parameterization and the MRF/Hong-Pan planetary boundary layer (PBL) scheme

Daily maximum 8 hr ozone results P/O vs Observed Timing errors (running 8 hr means)

Bias and error maps for Aug-Sept daily maximum 8 hr ozone Normalized mean bias Normalized mean error

Ranked daily maximum 8 hr ozone for selected sites (Aug/Sept, 2004)

24 hr PM2.5 Performance Time Series

Ranked speciated PM2.5 observations and predictions

Initial evaluation results Ozone 8 hr daily maxima NMB = 6% and NME = 17% Peak values correctly estimated PM hr daily maxima Daily FB range: -75% to +75%, mean FB = 3% Daily FE range: 3% to 79%, mean FE = 50% Speciated PM2.5 Good match with NO3 observations Split decision for NH4: Gorge sites underestimated SO4 underestimated OC and EC overestimated at peak levels (associated with wildfires)

Enhancements to Airpact-3 Wildfire emissions exported to Airpact-3 from the Forest Service BlueSky System BlueSky fire locations & size SMOKE emissions processing for CMAQ Predicted PM2.5 from fires

Enhancement of Airpact using satellite data OMI-Aura Satellite Retrievals and AIRPACT-3 for NO2 U.S. retrievalAIRPACT-3

OMI (American)OMI (Dutch)AIRPACT Urban NO2 along the I-5 corridor: OMI-AURA and Airpact

Collaborators & Acknowledgements Collaborating research groups USDA – Forest Service Don McKenzie & Sim Larkin USDA – NRCS Susan O’Neill Funding sources NW-Airquest Consortium NASA ROSES Decision Support System grant