Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory Atmospheric Modeling Division, Research Triangle Park, NC September 17, 2015 Annmarie.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development October 25, 2011 Prakash Bhave, Golam Sarwar, Havala Pye, George Pouliot, Heather Simon, Jeffrey Young, Chris.
Advertisements

Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Lab, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division 28 October 2013 H. O. T. Pye, R. Pinder,
1 Biogenic Hydrocarbons Lecture AOSC 637 Atmospheric Chemistry Russell R. Dickerson Finlayson-Pitts Chapt. 6 & 9 Seinfeld Chapt. 6 OUTLINE History Nomenclature.
Constraining Anthropogenic Emissions of Fugitive Dust with Dynamic Transportable Fraction and Measurements Chapel Hill, NC October 22, 2009 Daniel Tong.
Template Assessment of the Sources of Organic Carbon at Monitoring Sites in the Southeastern United States using Receptor and Deterministic Models Ralph.
U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development October 30, 2013 Prakash V. Bhave, Mary K. McCabe, Valerie C. Garcia Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division.
Modeled Trends in Impacts of Landing and Takeoff Aircraft Emissions on Surface Air-Quality in U.S for 2005, 2010 and 2018 Lakshmi Pradeepa Vennam 1, Saravanan.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Human Exposure and Atmospheric Sciences Division Photo image area measures 2”
Havala O. T. Pye 1, Rob Pinder 1, Ying Xie 1, Deborah Luecken 1, Bill Hutzell 1, Golam Sarwar 1, Jason Surratt 2 1 US Environmental Protection Agency 2.
PHOTOCHEMICAL MODELING OF THE OZARKS ISOPRENE EXPERIMENT (OZIE): COMPARISON OF MEGAN AND BEIS Kirk Baker and Annmarie Carlton U.S. Environmental Protection.
The semi-volatile nature of secondary organic aerosol (SOA) in the Mexico City Metropolitan Area November 2, 2007 EAS Graduate Student Symposium Christopher.
Office of Research and Development 6 October 2008 Updates to the Treatment of Secondary Organic Aerosol in CMAQv4.7 Sergey L. Napelenok, Annmarie G. Carlton,
Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, CA
Prakash V. Bhave, Ph.D. Physical Scientist EMEP Workshop – PM Measurement & Modeling April 22, 2004 Measurement Needs for Evaluating Model Calculations.
Organic Carbon Aerosol: An Overview (and Insight from Recent Field Campaigns) Colette L. Heald NOAA Climate and Global Change Postdoctoral Fellow
Investigating the Sources of Organic Carbon Aerosol in the Atmosphere Colette L. Heald NOAA Climate and Global Change Postdoctoral Fellow University of.
Organic Carbon Aerosol Colette L. Heald University of California, Berkeley NOAA Summer Institute, Steamboat Springs, CO July 12, 2006.
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.
Modeling Elemental Composition of Organic Aerosol: Exploiting Laboratory and Ambient Measurement and the Implications of the Gap Between Them Qi Chen*
Pacific 2001 – Synthesis of Findings and Policy Implications Roxanne Vingarzan Pacific and Yukon Region.
U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development, Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division October 21, 2009 Prakash Bhave, Ann Marie Carlton, Sergey Napelenok,
Results of Ambient Air Analyses in Support of Transport Rule Presentation for RPO Workshop November 2003.
Examination of the impact of recent laboratory evidence of photoexcited NO 2 chemistry on simulated summer-time regional air quality Golam Sarwar, Robert.
School of something FACULTY OF OTHER 1 Lecture 2: Aerosol sources and sinks Ken Carslaw.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory | Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division| A Tale of Two Models: A Comparison.
Importance of Lightning NO for Regional Air Quality Modeling Thomas E. Pierce/NOAA Atmospheric Modeling Division National Exposure Research Laboratory.
CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF NORTH AMERICAN OUTFLOW: INSIGHTS FROM CHEBOGUE POINT, NOVA SCOTIA Allen Goldstein, Dylan Millet, James Allan, Eben Cross, Rupert.
Biosphere/Atmosphere Interactions in the Tropics.
Impacts of Biomass Burning Emissions on Air Quality and Public Health in the United States Daniel Tong $, Rohit Mathur +, George Pouliot +, Kenneth Schere.
Request for LAOF facilities in support of SOAS: Southern Oxidant and Aerosol Study SOAS Science Objective: To quantify biogenic emissions and anthropogenic.
X. Zhang, J. Liu, E. T. Parker and R. J. Weber
Regional and temporal trends in semi-empirical estimates of aerosol water concentration in the continental U.S. Thien Khoi V. Nguyen 1 Annmarie G. Carlton.
Assessment of the Impacts of Global Change on Regional U.S. Air Quality: A synthesis of climate change impacts on ground-level ozone An Interim Report.
Wildland Fire Impacts on Surface Ozone Concentrations Literature Review of the Science State-of-Art Ned Nikolov, Ph.D. Rocky Mountain Center USDA FS Rocky.
U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development, Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division Columbus Day 2010 Prakash Bhave U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Regional Air Quality Modeling Results for Elemental and Organic Carbon John Vimont, National Park Service WRAP Fire, Carbon, and Dust Workshop Sacramento,
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.
William G. Benjey* Physical Scientist NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division Research Triangle Park, NC Fifth Annual CMAS.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling Division Photo image area measures 2” H x 6.93” W and can.
Diagnostic Study on Fine Particulate Matter Predictions of CMAQ in the Southeastern U.S. Ping Liu and Yang Zhang North Carolina State University, Raleigh,
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division 16 October 2012 Integrating source.
Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and Emission Reduction An FAA/NASA/TC-sponsored Center of Excellence Matthew Woody and Saravanan Arunachalam Institute.
Yunseok Im and Myoseon Jang
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division October 21, 2009 Evaluation of CMAQ.
2/5/2016 Anthropogenic Impacts on Organic Aerosol during the 2007 BAQS-Met Field Study Craig Stroud, Michael Moran, Paul Makar, Junhua Zhang, Wanmin Gong,
Office of Research and Development | National Exposure Research Laboratory Atmospheric Sciences Modeling and Analysis Division |Research Triangle Park,
Organic aerosol composition and aging in the atmosphere: How to fit laboratory experiments, field data, and modeling together American Chemical Society.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division 26 October 2011 Diagnostic Evaluation.
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.
Development and Initial Applications
Global Simulation of Secondary Organic Carbon Aerosols Hong Liao California Institute of Technology GEOS-CHEM meeting, April 2005.
Source apportionment of submicron organic aerosols at an urban site by linear unmixing of aerosol mass spectra V. A. Lanz 1, M. R. Alfarra 2, U. Baltensperger.
Understanding the impact of isoprene nitrates and OH reformation on regional air quality using recent advances in isoprene photooxidation chemistry Ying.
Informed NPS Air Quality Management Decisions in Response to a Changing Climate.
Simulation of PM2.5 Trace Elements in Detroit using CMAQ
Mobile Source Contributions to Ambient PM2.5 and Ozone in 2025
Emerging Science EPA’s ORD Supports Regional Haze Program
Havala O. T. Pye1 With contributions from:
16th Annual CMAS Conference
Simulation of primary and secondary (biogenic and anthropogenic) organic aerosols over the United States by US EPA Models-3/CMAQ: Evaluation and regional.
17th Annual CMAS Conference, Chapel Hill, NC
Karsten Baumann, Mei Zheng, Michael Chang, and Ted Russell
Organic Aerosol is Ubiquitous in the Atmosphere
Stephen Mueller & Jonathan Mallard Tennessee Valley Authority
Yongtao Hu, Jaemeen Baek, M. Talat Odman and Armistead G. Russell
Secondary Organic Aerosol Contributions during CalNex – Bakersfield
M. Samaali, M. Sassi, V. Bouchet
Steve Griffiths, Rob Lennard and Paul Sutton* (*RWE npower)
On-going developments of SinG: particles
Potential Anthropogenic Controls on Biogenic Organic Aerosol
Presentation transcript:

Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory Atmospheric Modeling Division, Research Triangle Park, NC September 17, 2015 Annmarie Carlton, Rob Pinder, Prakash Bhave, George Pouliot CMAS – Chapel HIll, NC To What Extent Can Biogenic SOA be Controlled?

1 Important Findings CMAQ Simulations indicate anthropogenic pollution enhances predicted biogenic SOA concentrations in the U.S. substantially ~ 50% –Effects are largest in eastern U.S. –POC and NOx are largest individual pollutant classes contributing to overall biogenic SOA

2 Non-fossil (biogenic) carbon is a dominant component of atmospheric organic aerosol Substantial portion of PM 2.5 carbon is ‘modern’ even in urban areas (Lewis et al., 2004; Szidat et al., 2006; Bench et al., 2007; Gelencsér, et al., 2007) Tracer-based ambient SOA ‘measurements’ dominated by contributions from biogenic hydrocarbons (Edney et al., 2003; Kleindienst et al., 2007) Ambient WSOC, AMS OOA spectra and other indicators of SOA correlate strongly with tracers of anthropogenic pollution (Weber et al., 2007; de Gouw et al., 2005; Goldstein et al., 2009) If anthropogenic pollution is enhancing biogenic SOA how can this contribution be quantified? MOTIVATION

3 controllable emissions (e.g., anthropogenic VOCs) non-controllable (e.g., biogenic VOCs) POA anthropogenic VOCs oxidants biogenic VOCs oxidants SVOC POA SOA A SOA B SOA A SOA B Anthropogenic/Biogenic Interactions in SOA Formation H + effects not shown

4 Estimating Anthropogenic Contribution to “Biogenic” SOA Difficult to directly measure in the atmosphere –O 3, OH ambient measurements – no insight as to whether the precursor was anthropogenic or biogenic –PM mass - can make estimates only about organic precursors with detailed chemical analysis Can investigate large scale trends and relationships with an atmospheric model (CMAQ) by manipulating emissions

5 accumulation mode organic PM AOLGB AISO3 H+H+ AORGC ∙OH dissolution cloud water glyoxal methylglyoxal VOCs EMISSIONS isoprene sesquiterpenes monoterpene EMISSIONS Non-volatile EMISSIONS POA SV_TRP1 SV_TRP2 SV_ISO1, SV_ISO2 SV_SQT O 3 P, NO 3 O 3,O 3 P, or NO 3 ∙ OH Pathways do not contribute to SOA ∙ OH,O 3, or NO 3 ∙OH,O 3 ASQT ATRP1, ATRP2 AISO1, AISO2

6 Modeling experiment Simulation of August 15 - September 4, 2003 Continental US Time period has high biogenic contribution to SOA Emissions: controllable versus not controllable Not ControllableControllable Wildfire Prescribed burning VOCs from plants / trees Soil NO x Lightning NO x Everything else: Power plants Vehicles Agricultural burning Area sources

7 Percent of emitted species from controllable and uncontrollable sources controllable sources – gray uncontrollable sources - white Carlton et al., ES&T (2010)

8 Base CMAQ simulation all emissions Fraction of biogenic SOA from controllable pollution non-controllable emissions = biogenic emissions + wildfires + prescribed burns Biogenic SOA at the Surface (<~34 m): 18 day average Results averaged from Aug. 18 th – Sep. 4 th, 2003 Carlton et al., ES&T (2010) fraction

9 Additional simulations to estimate effects and contributions of individual species POC, NO x, VOC, SO 2, NH 3 Difference in predicted biogenic SOA mass concentrations Maxima for time periodAverage for time period On Average ~ 1 ug/m3 of Biogenic SOA in SE is from controllable sources

10 To control biogenic SOA – what should regulators focus on? What emitted species are most important? What locations are most impacted? Group the anthropogenic emissions into –VOC: Volatile Organic Carbon –POC: Primary Organic Carbon Particles –NO x Remove one of these species at a time Calculate change in biogenic SOA

11 Regional Influence of Controllable Emissions on “Biogenic” SOA Surface (<~34 m) Concentration; 18 day average Controllable SO 2 Controllable NO x Controllable POC

12 Change in population-weighted AQ metrics

Monthly-Averaged CMAQ Results at RTP Cloud SOA

14 glyoxal 2003 Monthly-Averaged CMAQ Results at RTP methylglyoxal Cloud SOA Precursors

15 ∙ OH Cloud SOA Precursors SOA formation is photochemistry

16 Conclusions Used CMAQ to estimate fraction of biogenic SOA that is controllable. In the Eastern US, ~50% of the biogenic SOA can be controlled by reducing anthropogenic emissions To reduce concentrations of biogenic SOA, focus on –primary organic carbonaceous particles (POC) and NO x –SO 2 impacts biogenic SOA in the southeastern US Cloud-produced SOA exhibits seasonal cycle similar to ∙ OH and biogenic VOCs

17 Acknowledgements Sergey Napelenok Marc Houyoux Alice Gilliland Rohit Mathur Golam Sarwar Ed Edney, Tad Kleindist, John Offenburg, Michael Lewandowski Charles Chang & Ryan Cleary