Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Simple urban parameterization for.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Joint GABLS-GLASS/LoCo workshop, September 2004, De Bilt, Netherlands Interactions of the land-surface with the atmospheric boundary layer: Single.
Advertisements

David J. Sailor1 and Hongli Fan2 1. Portland State University
A numerical simulation of urban and regional meteorology and assessment of its impact on pollution transport A. Starchenko Tomsk State University.
University of Houston IMAQS MM5 Meteorological Modeling for Houston-Galveston Area Air Quality Simulations Daewon W. Byun Bonnie Cheng University of Houston.
High-Resolution Land Use Data in WPS/WRF for Urban Regions
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.
Constraining Anthropogenic Emissions of Fugitive Dust with Dynamic Transportable Fraction and Measurements Chapel Hill, NC October 22, 2009 Daniel Tong.
U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development October 30, 2013 Prakash V. Bhave, Mary K. McCabe, Valerie C. Garcia Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division.
PBL simulated from different PBL Schemes in WRF during DICE
Jared H. Bowden Saravanan Arunachalam
Bay breeze enhanced air pollution event in Houston, Texas during the DISCOVER-AQ field campaign Christopher P. Loughner (University of Maryland) Melanie.
Limei Ran 1,2, Robert Gilliam 3, Jonathan Pleim 3, Adel Hanna 1, William Benjey 3 1 Center for Environmental Modeling for Policy Development, Institute.
Sensitivity to changes in HONO emissions from mobile sources simulated for Houston area Beata Czader, Yunsoo Choi, Lijun Diao University of Houston Department.
The AIRPACT-3 Photochemical Air Quality Forecast System: Evaluation and Enhancements Jack Chen, Farren Thorpe, Jeremy Avis, Matt Porter, Joseph Vaughan,
Transitioning CMAQ for NWS Operational AQ Forecasting Jeff McQueen*, Pius Lee*, Marina Tsildulko*, G. DiMego*, B. Katz* R. Mathur,T. Otte, J. Pleim, J.
Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.
Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Application and evaluation of the.
New York City Case Study: Methods of Analysis David J. Nowak USDA Forest Service Northeastern Research Station Syracuse, NY.
Mesoscale Modeling Review the tutorial at: –In class.
November 1, 2013 Bart Brashers, ENVIRON Jared Heath Bowden, UNC 3SAQS WRF Modeling Recommendations.
WRF Winter Modeling Towards Improving Cold Air Pools Jared Bowden Kevin Talgo UNC Chapel Hill Institute for the Environment Feb. 25, 2015.
Land Processes Group, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL Response of Atmospheric Model Predictions at Different Grid Resolutions Maudood.
1. Objectives Impacts of Land Use Changes on California’s Climate Hideki Kanamaru Masao Kanamitsu Experimental Climate Prediction.
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.
Jonathan Pleim 1, Robert Gilliam 1, and Aijun Xiu 2 1 Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division, NOAA, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with the.
1/26 APPLICATION OF THE URBAN VERSION OF MM5 FOR HOUSTON University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Sylvain Dupont Collaborators: Steve Burian, Jason.
Accounting for Uncertainties in NWPs using the Ensemble Approach for Inputs to ATD Models Dave Stauffer The Pennsylvania State University Office of the.
Development and Preliminary Results of Image Processing Tools for Meteorology and Air Quality Modeling Limei Ran Center for Environmental Modeling for.
USE THESE VALUES. e(T) = e s (T Dew ) PRACTICE WITH STABILITY.
Erik Crosman 1, John Horel 1, Chris Foster 1, Erik Neemann 1 1 University of Utah Department of Atmospheric Sciences Toward Improved NWP Simulations of.
Rick Saylor 1, Barry Baker 1, Pius Lee 2, Daniel Tong 2,3, Li Pan 2 and Youhua Tang 2 1 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Air Resources Laboratory.
How well can we model air pollution meteorology in the Houston area? Wayne Angevine CIRES / NOAA ESRL Mark Zagar Met. Office of Slovenia Jerome Brioude,
An Evaluation of the Influence of the Morning Residual Layer on Afternoon Ozone Concentrations in Houston Using Ozonesonde Data.
Sensitivity of Air Quality Model Predictions to Various Parameterizations of Vertical Eddy Diffusivity Zhiwei Han and Meigen Zhang Institute of Atmospheric.
Investigating Land-Atmosphere CO 2 Exchange with a Coupled Biosphere-Atmosphere Model: SiB3-RAMS K.D. Corbin, A.S. Denning, I. Baker, N. Parazoo, A. Schuh,
Melanie Follette-Cook (MSU/GESTAR) Christopher Loughner (ESSIC, UMD) Kenneth Pickering (NASA GSFC) Rob Gilliam (EPA) Jim MacKay (TCEQ) CMAS Oct 5-7, 2015.
Implementation and preliminary test of the unified Noah LSM in WRF F. Chen, M. Tewari, W. Wang, J. Dudhia, NCAR K. Mitchell, M. Ek, NCEP G. Gayno, J. Wegiel,
Session 5, CMAS 2004 INTRODUCTION: Fine scale modeling for Exposure and risk assessments.
Photo image area measures 2” H x 6.93” W and can be masked by a collage strip of one, two or three images. The photo image area is located 3.19” from left.
An Exploration of Model Concentration Differences Between CMAQ and CAMx Brian Timin, Karen Wesson, Pat Dolwick, Norm Possiel, Sharon Phillips EPA/OAQPS.
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.
Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Simple urban parameterization for.
1 Aika Yano, Yongtao Hu, M. Talat Odman, Armistead Russell Georgia Institute of Technology October 15, th annual CMAS conference.
Boundary layer depth verification system at NCEP M. Tsidulko, C. M. Tassone, J. McQueen, G. DiMego, and M. Ek 15th International Symposium for the Advancement.
Robert W. Pinder, Alice B. Gilliland, Robert C. Gilliam, K. Wyat Appel Atmospheric Modeling Division, NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, in partnership with.
Impacts of Meteorological Conditions Modified by Urban Expansion on Surface Ozone over Yangtz River Delta and Pearl River Delta region, China Xuemei Wang,
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.
Jonathan Pleim NOAA/ARL* RTP, NC A NEW COMBINED LOCAL AND NON-LOCAL PBL MODEL FOR METEOROLOGY AND AIR QUALITY MODELING * In Partnership with the U.S. Environmental.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Examining the impact of aerosol direct.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Office of Research and Development.
AOSC 200 Lesson 27. A Typical Day in a Pollution Episode A common severe pollution weather pattern occurs when high pressure is centered just west of.
Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory WRF-CMAQ 2-way Coupled System: Part II Jonathan.
Erik Crosman 1, John Horel 1, Chris Foster 1, Erik Neemann 1 1 University of Utah Department of Atmospheric Sciences Toward Improved NWP Simulations of.
Off-line Air Quality Modeling Paradigms:
Impacts of Land Use Changes From Urban Development on Future Air Quality in Kansas City 15th CMAS Conference 10/26/2016 Yuqiang Zhang, Jesse Bash, Shawn.
Meso-scale Model's Results
Characterizing urban boundary layer dynamics using
High-resolution air quality forecasting for Hong Kong
16th Annual CMAS Conference
17th Annual CMAS Conference
Quantification of Lightning NOX and its Impact on Air Quality over the Contiguous United States Daiwen Kang, Rohit Mathur, Limei Ran, Gorge Pouliot, David.
Modeling the impacts of green infrastructure land use changes on air quality and meteorology—case study and sensitivity analysis in Kansas City Yuqiang.
Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division,
Cliff Mass University of Washington
Chris Misenis*, Xiaoming Hu, and Yang Zhang
MODELING AT NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE Sylvain Dupont and Jason Ching
REGIONAL AND LOCAL-SCALE EVALUATION OF 2002 MM5 METEOROLOGICAL FIELDS FOR VARIOUS AIR QUALITY MODELING APPLICATIONS Pat Dolwick*, U.S. EPA, RTP, NC, USA.
Good afternoon, everyone. I am Momei, a postdoc from Georgia Tech.
WRAP 2014 Regional Modeling
Improving Regional PM2.5 Modeling along Utah’s Wasatch Front
Presentation transcript:

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Simple urban parameterization for WRF-CMAQ. Jonathan Pleim and Robert Gilliam USEPA

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Motivation Urban/suburban areas are generally warmer and more turbulent than surroundings Less stable boundary layers at night and during morning and evening transitions mix surface emissions more quickly Rate of morning PBL growth and entrainment from residual layers are critical for photochemisty in urban areas Effects of built environments disproportionately important for AQ because of high emissions in these areas 2

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Problem Without realistic treatment of urban effects: –PBL too stable during morning and evening transitions and overnight –Overprediction of ground emitted primary species (e.g. CO, NOx, Primary PM) July 2006 – CMAQ 12 km CO Birmingham (SEARCH)

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Potential Solutions Meteorological models and parameterizations for urban areas vary greatly in complexity and data requirements. Currently WRF has several urban parameterizations: Bulk, single-layer, and multi-level BEP-BEM NUDAPT all tied to the NOAH LSM Need for a simple scheme considers the effects of development at the local (1-4 km) and regional (12 km) grid scales that works with the PX LSM that we use for WRF- CMAQ.

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory A New Bulk Approach for PX LSM Leverage very high resolution National Land Cover Database (NLCD) with multi-level urban classifications –PX LSM considers subgrid LU fractions Utilize NLCD-based Impervious surface data directly in land- surface model to scale surface heat capacity Increase surface roughness for urban LU classes to better represent developed areas Decrease albedo in urbanized areas to account for sky-view and radiation trapping effects Reduce deep soil temperature nudging strength

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory 6 Impervious Fraction (%) for 12 km Grid

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory 7 Impervious Fraction (%) for 4km Grid

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory 8 Impervious Fraction (%) for 1 km Grid Shopping malls in Sugarland

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Skin Temperature on Aug 24,2006 at 10Z 9 Base – NLCD 2006 Urban

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory 1 km WRF August 2006: Urban - Base 10 Albedo T2m (Aug 31, 6AM LT)

Evaluation Using Tethersonde Profiles Tethersondes were launched on selected evening and nights in September through November at U of Houston Profiles from 2 model runs : Base (NoImp) --- no impervious, NLCD 2006 Urban (Imp2) – Impervious, increased roughness, decreased albedo and weaker deep soil temp nudging Tethersonde data provided by Bernhard Rappenglueck (UH)

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory September 7, 20 LT (1Z) vv WS

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory September 7, 23LT (4Z)

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory September 7, Midnight LT (5Z)

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory September 8, 2LT (7Z)

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory September 8, 3LT (8Z)

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory September 8, 4LT (9Z)

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory September 8, 6LT (11Z)

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory September 8, 8LT (13Z)

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory CMAQ urban treatment To compensate for inadequate treatment of enhanced turbulent mixing in urban areas CMAQ sets the minimum eddy diffusivity according to fraction of urban LU: –In CMAQv4.7.1 and earlier: K zurb = 2.0 and K zrur = 0.5 m 2 /s –In CMAQv5.0 and later: K zurb = 1.0 and K zrur = 0.01 m 2 /s We hope to eliminate the need for this arbitrarily large K zmin in urban areas by improving urban model in WRF 20

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory CMAQ Runs Four runs for 4 km Texas domain – Aug 23 – September 9 Unmodified CMAQ – Base run using WRF-NLCD2006 –Urban run using impervious data and other urban mods Modified CMAQ with minimum Kz set to 0.01 m2/s everywhere –Base run –Urban run 21

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Base – Urban at 13Z (8AM LT) Aug 31, NOx PM O3O3 Large differences in primary pollutants at night and morning Substantial differences in O 3 but at a time when concentrations are low No urban minimum K z (K zmin = 0.01)

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory NOx: August 24 – September 8, AQS sites 6 AQS sites  Way too high at night in Houston for all runs  Both the Urban mods and the high minimum Kz reduce over prediction of NOx 3 AQS sites

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory PM2.5: August 24 – September 8, 2006  Urban mods effective for Dallas in lowering nocturnal PM2.5  High minimum Kz more effective for Houston  Model too low at San Antonio except for morning Rush

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Conclusions New bulk urban scheme for the PX-LSM shows much improved PBL structure in evening, overnight, and morning compared to Houston tethersonde measurements 4 km CMAQ runs show reduced high bias for primary pollutants but still too high Removing urban K zmin makes over-prediction worse Further improvements should be evaluated meteorologically since nocturnal emissions may have significant errors 25

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Next steps Enhancements to the Urban parameterization: –Add anthropogenic heating based on population and housing unit density –Add NLCD canopy fraction data for accurate accounting of tree cover in all areas including urban. Comprehensive evaluation of meteorology and AQ at all scales

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Extras 27

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Why AQ model at 4 km resolution grossly overpredicts NOx in Houston AQS site near Houston ship channel 2 km

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory 4 km modeling for Houston – August 2006 WRF Potential temperature (blue) in Houston at 7 PM shows premature surface inversion CMAQ v4.7 and 5.0 overpredict CO especially during morning and evening rush hours

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Ozone at 00Z (7PM LT) Sept 1, Substantial ozone differences in evening when concentrations are high Base - Urban Urban

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Ozone: August 24 – September 8, 2006  Difference among the 4 runs are less for Ozone than for NOx  Run with least nocturnal mixing (highest over-prediction of NOx) is closest to Obs for Dallas and San Antonio.  All runs too low for Houston.

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory NOx: August 24 – September 8, AQS sites 2 AQS sites  Daytime modeled NOx compares well for San Antonio  Urban effects are small for Austin