Atmospheric Mercury Deposition to the Great Lakes A Multi-Year Study Supported by the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Principal Investigator: Dr. Mark.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

UPDATE ON DAQS AIR QUALITY MEASUREMENTS & MERCURY STUDIES NC DENR/DAQ Mercury/CO 2 Workshop Raleigh, NC April 19, 2004 Steve Schliesser Todd Crawford NC.

Advertisements

Czech Hydrometeorological Institute Assessment of air pollution by cadmium CZECH REPUBLIC EMEP Heavy metal case study Milan Váňa, Pavel Machálek + MSC-E.

Global, Regional, and Urban Climate Effects of Air Pollutants Mark Z. Jacobson Dept. of Civil & Environmental Engineering Stanford University.

 Great Lakes Areas of Concern  U.S. urban areas (pink shading)

1 Source-attribution for atmospheric mercury deposition: Where does the mercury in mercury deposition come from? Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources Laboratory.

Control of Nitrogen Oxides Dr. Wesam Al Madhoun. Specific sources of NO x Combustion sources Automobiles Boilers Incinerators High-temperature industrial.

Atmospheric Mercury Modeling Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources Laboratory (ARL) College Park, MD, USA Meeting with John Sherwell, Power Plant Research.

The Clean Air For Europe (CAFE) program: Scientific and economic assessment Markus Amann International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

Mercury Source Attribution at Global, Regional and Local Scales Christian Seigneur, Krish Vijayaraghavan, Kristen Lohman, and Prakash Karamchandani AER.

SOURCE ATTRIBUTION OF MERCURY EXPOSURE FOR U.S. SEAFOOD CONSUMERS: IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY Noelle Eckley Selin Joint Program on the Science and Policy.

Mercury in the Great Lakes Region Sponsored by the Commission for Environmental Cooperation’s Environment, Economy and Trade and Pollutants and Health.

Tianfeng Chai 1,2, Alice Crawford 1,2, Barbara Stunder 1, Roland Draxler 1, Michael J. Pavolonis 3, Ariel Stein 1 1.NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, College.

Janja D. Husar and Rudolf B. Husar

Evaluating the HYSPLIT-Hg Atmospheric Mercury Model Using Ambient Monitoring Data Mark Cohen 1, Winston Luke 1, Paul Kelley 1, Fantine Ngan 1, Richard.

(work funded through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative)

Continuous measurements of the atmospheric concentrations of Reactive Gaseous Mercury (RGM), Fine Particulate Mercury (FPM) and Gaseous Elemental Mercury.

Modeling the Atmospheric Transport and Deposition of Mercury to the Great Lakes Mark Cohen, Roland Draxler, Hang Lei, Richard Artz NOAA Air Resources Laboratory.

Transboundary Pollution: Acid Rain IB HL. Causes Acid rain is the increased acidity of rainfall and dry deposition as a result of human activity. Sulphur.

Organization of Course INTRODUCTION 1.Course overview 2.Air Toxics overview 3.HYSPLIT overview HYSPLIT Theory and Practice 4.Meteorology 5.Back Trajectories.

NOAA’s Atmospheric Mercury Monitoring in the Gulf of Mexico Region [April 2007 summary] This summary is updated periodically, and the current version is.

Trans-Pacific Chemical Transport of Mercury: Sensitivity Analysis on Asian Emission Contribution to Mercury Deposition in North America Using CMAQ-Hg C.-J.

Organization of Course INTRODUCTION 1.Course overview 2.Air Toxics overview 3.HYSPLIT overview HYSPLIT Theory and Practice 4.Meteorology 5.Back Trajectories.

O. Russell Bullock, Jr. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division (in partnership with the U.S. Environmental.

Space, Relativity, and Uncertainty in Ecosystem Assessment of Everglades Restoration Scenarios Michael M. Fuller, Louis J. Gross, Scott M. Duke-Sylvester,

EFFICIENT CHARACTERIZATION OF UNCERTAINTY IN CONTROL STRATEGY IMPACT PREDICTIONS EFFICIENT CHARACTERIZATION OF UNCERTAINTY IN CONTROL STRATEGY IMPACT PREDICTIONS.

Atmospheric Mercury Modeling 101 Mark Cohen Air Resources Laboratory ARL 101 June 19, /19/2012Air Resources Laboratory1.

Grand Bay Episode March 6, 2007 March 6March 7. March 6.

Monitoring and Modelling in the Malé Declaration Kevin Hicks Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI), UK Bangkok, March 2008 Malé Declaration 6 th Monitoring.

INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE (IPCC) Working Group I Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Climate Change 2007:

Causes of Haze Assessment Update for Fire Emissions Joint Forum -12/9/04 Meeting Marc Pitchford.

Modeling the Atmospheric Deposition of Mercury to Lake Champlain (from Anthropogenic Sources in the U.S. and Canada) Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources.

Anthropogenic Mercury Flow in the US and Florida, Janja D. Husar and Rudolf B. Husar Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri Supported by.

Predicting the future A view from the electricity industry Ian Rodgers

Anthropogenic Mercury Flow in the US and Florida, Janja D. Husar and Rudolf B. Husar Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri Supported by.

Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division C. Nolte, R. Pinder, W. Benjey, D.

IIASA Zbigniew Klimont International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Uncertainties in the RAINS Estimates of National Emissions Based on: Suutari,

Application of the CMAQ Particle and Precursor Tagging Methodology (PPTM) to Support Water Quality Planning for the Virginia Mercury Study 6 th Annual.

Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Using Dynamical Downscaling to Project.

Simulations of RGM air emissions from 30 power plants + 16 other large RGM sources in the 4-state region Simulations with HYSPLIT-Hg for Oct-2004 through.

Technical Projects Update WRAP Board Meeting Salt Lake City, UT November 10, 2004.

1 Modeling the Atmospheric Transport and Deposition of Mercury Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Silver Spring, Maryland Mercury Workshop, Great.

Anthropogenic Mercury Flow in the US and Florida, Janja D. Husar and Rudolf B. Husar Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri Supported by.

 Great Lakes Areas of Concern  U.S. urban areas (pink shading)  Large U.S./Canadian 2005 point sources of mercury Type of Emissions Source coal-fired.

William G. Benjey* Physical Scientist NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division Research Triangle Park, NC Fifth Annual CMAS.

Philippe Moinat MACC regional air quality multi-model forecasts: rationale and alternatives to the median ensemble November 29 - December 1, 2011 Potomac,

Anthropogenic Mercury Flow in the US and Florida, Janja D. Husar and Rudolf B. Husar Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri Supported by.

Quantifying the decrease in anthropogenic methane emissions in Europe and Siberia using modeling and atmospheric measurements of carbon dioxide and methane.

Using HYSPLIT to Understand Source-Receptor Relationships: Some Examples HYSPLIT Training NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Jun 2-4, 2009 Silver Spring, MD,

Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Silver Spring, Maryland

The Atmospheric Transport and Deposition of Mercury to the Great Lakes Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Silver Spring, Maryland Collection.

Impact of dimethylsulfide chemistry on sulfate Golam Sarwar, Kathleen Fahey, Kristen Foley, Brett Gantt, Deborah Luecken, Rohit Mathur October 7, 2015.

Georgia Institute of Technology SUPPORTING INTEX THROUGH INTEGRATED ANALYSIS OF SATELLITE AND SUB-ORBITAL MEASUREMENTS WITH GLOBAL AND REGIONAL 3-D MODELS:

Organization of Course INTRODUCTION 1.Course overview 2.Air Toxics overview 3.HYSPLIT overview HYSPLIT Theory and Practice 4.Meteorology 5.Back Trajectories.

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

Spatial distribution of hourly trajectory endpoint frequencies top 10% of daytime RGM vs. total year with estimated 2002 emissions of reactive gaseous.

Source-apportionment for atmospheric mercury deposition: Where does the mercury in mercury deposition come from? Mark Cohen, Roland Draxler, and Richard.

* Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies (CIMSS) / Department of Atmospheric & Oceanic Sciences. Currently of Earth System Science.

2002 U.S. data from USEPA National Emissions Inventory (NEI); 2002 Canadian data from Environment Canada; 1999 Mexican data from inventory prepared by.

NOAA’s Atmospheric Mercury Monitoring in the Gulf of Mexico Region January 17,

27-28/10/2005IGBP-QUEST Fire Fast Track Initiative Workshop Inverse Modeling of CO Emissions Results for Biomass Burning Gabrielle Pétron National Center.

Simulating the Atmospheric Fate and Transport of Air Toxics with the NOAA HYSPLIT Model (with Particular Attention to Dioxin and Mercury) Mark Cohen NOAA.

IIASA Riku Suutari, Markus Amann, Janusz Cofala, Zbigniew Klimont Wolfgang Schöpp A methodology to propagate uncertainties through the RAINS scenario calculations.

UEP Steering Review December 2008 Exploring the use of MOLAND as a system to predict emissions from mobile sources Edward Casey Under the supervision.

Uncertainties in the RAINS cost estimates

Mercury Presentation

Why Does Industry Cause Pollution?

Key Issues Where is industry distributed? Why are situation and site factors important? Why does industry cause pollution? Why are situation and site factors.

Three policy scenarios for CAFE

Spatial Methodology Introduction Outline of draft Chapter Highlights

Atmospheric modelling of HMs Sensitivity study

Presentation transcript:

Atmospheric Mercury Deposition to the Great Lakes A Multi-Year Study Supported by the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Principal Investigator: Dr. Mark Cohen, NOAA Air Resources Laboratory  FY10 GLRI funding: Baseline analysis for 2005  Used “EDAS” meteorological data  One set of model parameters and emissions data  Summary:  Final Report:  Recent Presentations:  FY11 GLRI funding: Sensitivity analysis  Used “NARR” meteorological data  Numerous variations of model parameters and emissions data  Overall results – even for largest variations found – not changed dramatically  Conclusion: results are robust  Final Report:  FY12 GLRI funding: Analysis of alternative future emissions scenarios  Work is beginning on this policy-relevant analysis  FY13 GLRI funding (and beyond): Updates to more recent years

2

Comparison of precipitation measured by rain gauges at Mercury Deposition Network sites with that in the EDAS and NARR meteorological datasets used to drive the HYSPLIT-Hg model EDAS used in Phase 1 baseline analysis NARR used in Phase 2 sensitivity analysis 3

Overall source attribution results not changed dramatically for Lake Erie (top) or the Great Lakes Basin (bottom) for largest variations in modeling methodology; 2005 baseline (left); variations (center & right) 4

2005 Atmospheric Mercury Emissions from Large Point Sources Type of Emissions Source coal-fired power plants other fuel combustion waste incineration metallurgical manufacturing & other Emissions (kg/yr) – – – –3000 NOAA Air Resources Laboratory 5

2005 Atmospheric Mercury Emissions (Direct Anthropogenic + Re-emit + Natural) Policy-Relevant Scenario Analysis NOAA Air Resources Laboratory 6

Geographical Distribution of 2005 Atmospheric Mercury Deposition Contributions to Lake Erie Policy-Relevant Scenario Analysis 7 Here’s where the mercury came from that was deposited to Lake Erie

A tiny fraction of 2005 global mercury emissions within 500 km of Lake Erie Modeling results show that these “regional” emissions are responsible for a large fraction of the modeled 2005 atmospheric deposition Important policy implications! 8 Results can be shown in many ways…

9