Incorporating Monitoring, Modeling, and EI Data into AoH Analysis AoH Meeting, Salt Lake City September 21-22, 2004 Air Resource Specialists, Inc.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Analysis of 12 years of IMPROVE data in the Columbia River Gorge By Dan Jaffe University of Washington Northwest Air Quality Photo from the Wishram IMPROVE.

Advertisements

An Overview of the Big Bend Regional Aerosol and Visibility Observational (BRAVO) Study Marc Pitchford, Ph.D National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

PM 2.5 in the Upper Midwest Michael Koerber Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium.

Weight of Evidence Checklist Review AoH Work Group Call June 7, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.

Integration of PMF Data into AoH Analyses AoH Work Group Call June 7, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.

Phase 2 Attribution “Footprint” Maps show mock ups for how to answer these questions in Phase 2 (data shown is from Phase I) Probably too many colors to.

Tribal Causes of Haze Representativeness Assessment Phase I Mark Green, Alissa Smiley, and Dave DuBois Desert Research Institute.

Reason for Doing Cluster Analysis Identify similar and dissimilar aerosol monitoring sites so that we can test the ability of the Causes of Haze Assessment.

Attribution of Haze Report Status Fire Emissions Joint Forum Meeting December 8, 2004 Tom Moore Marc Pitchford.

Colorado Plateau Sulfate Episode Worst 20% at 5 sites: INGA, BRCA, MEVE, WEMI & SAPE Best 20% at GICL, SACR, CHIR, SIAN, GUMO, TONT, and most California.

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

AoH Report Update Joint DEJF & AoH Meeting, Las Vegas November , 2004 Air Resource Specialists, Inc.

Case study for September 3, 1997-Eastern US sulfate transport to Colorado Plateau 12 spatially coherent sites in TX, NM, AZ, CO 20% worst haze,with sulfate.

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

Causes of Haze Update Prepared by Marc Pitchford for the 5/24/05 AoH conference call.

Causes of Haze Assessment Dave DuBois Desert Research Institute Presented at the RPO National Technical Workgroup Meeting November 5, 2003.

MANE-VU states, Virginia and West Virginia Regional Haze Trend Analyses Latest available (December 2011) IMPROVE DATA (for TSC 5/22/2012) Tom.

AoH/MF Meeting, San Diego, CA, Jan 25, 2006 Source Apportionment Modeling Results and RMC Status report Gail Tonnesen, Zion Wang, Mohammad Omary, Chao-Jung.

AoH Phase I Report Outline AoH Meeting, Salt Lake City September 21-22, 2004 Air Resource Specialists, Inc.

Causes of Haze Assessment Dave DuBois Desert Research Institute.

A comparison of PM 2.5 simulations over the Eastern United States using CB-IV and RADM2 chemical mechanisms Michael Ku, Kevin Civerolo, and Gopal Sistla.

TSS Project Update and Demo of Selected Tools WRAP IWG Meeting Santa Fe, NM December 7, 2006.

Regional Haze SIP Development Overview AQCC Presentation July 2005.

Airmass History Analysis During High and Low Sulfate Days Bret A. Schichtel NPS/CIRA Fort Collins, CO BRAVO Study Data Analysis Meeting San Antonio, TX.

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

Causes of Haze Assessment (COHA) Update. Current and near-future Major Tasks Visibility trends analysis Assess meteorological representativeness of 2002.

Trajectory Calculations Trajectory or backtrajectory analyses use interpolated measured or modeled meteorological fields to estimate the most likely central.

AoH Conference Call October 8, 2004 Air Resource Specialists, Inc.

Regional Air Quality Modeling Results for Elemental and Organic Carbon John Vimont, National Park Service WRAP Fire, Carbon, and Dust Workshop Sacramento,

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

Overview of the Big Bend Regional Aerosol and Visibility Observational (BRAVO) study:  Understand the long-range, trans-boundary transport of visibility-reducing.

Attribution of Haze Project Update Stationary Sources Forum and Implementation Workgroup Meeting, Phoenix December 14, 2004 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource.

Weight of Evidence Discussion AoH Meeting – Tempe, AZ November 16/17, 2005.

WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/04 Introduction to the the RMC Source Apportionment Modeling Effort Gail Tonnesen,

Report to WESTAR Technical Committee September 20, 2006 The CMAQ Visibility Model Applied To Rural Ozone In The Intermountain West Patrick Barickman Tyler.

WRAP Stationary Sources Joint Forum Meeting August 16, 2006 The CMAQ Visibility Model Applied To Rural Ozone In The Intermountain West Patrick Barickman.

WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/04 Results from January/July CMAQ Source Apportionment Modeling Gail Tonnesen,

Overview of ARS Presentations and Review of EI Data Sets AoH Meeting, Salt Lake City September 21-22, 2004 Air Resource Specialists, Inc.

Attribution of Haze Report Update and Web Site Tutorial Implementation Work Group Meeting March 8, 2005 Joe Adlhoch Air Resource Specialists, Inc.

Ambient Monitoring & Reporting Forum Plans for 2005 Prepared by Marc Pitchford for the WRAP Planning Team Meeting (3/9 – 3/10/05)

Attribution of Haze Project Inter-RPO Modeling Discussion Group May 25-26, 2004 Denver, CO.

Causes of Haze Assessment Update for the Haze Attribution Forum Meeting By Marc Pitchford 9/24/04.

AoH Work Group Weight of Evidence Framework WRAP Meeting – Tucson, AZ January 10/11, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.

Causes of Haze Assessment (COHA) Update Jin Xu. Update Visibility trends analysis (under revision) Assess meteorological representativeness of 2002 (modeling.

Sulfate Discussion WRAP Meeting – Tucson, AZ January 10/11, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.

Ambient Monitoring Data Summary: Dust WRAP Workshop on Fire, Carbon, and Dust May 24, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.

Attribution of Haze Project Update Fire Emissions Joint Forum Meeting September 8-9, 2004 Worley, ID.

Weight of Evidence Approach: Soil and Coarse Mass Case Studies WRAP Workshop on Fire, Carbon, and Dust May 24, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists,

Nitrate Discussion WRAP Meeting – Tucson, AZ January 10/11, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.

WRAP Technical Work Overview

National RPO Technical Meeting June 9, 2005 Gary Kleiman, NESCAUM

CENRAP Modeling and Weight of Evidence Approaches

Phase I Attribution of Haze Overview (Geographic Attribution for the Implementation of the Regional Haze Rule) or (an experiment in weight-of evidence)

National Wildlife Refuge

Attribution Of Haze Case Study for Nevada Jarbidge Wilderness Area

The average PM2.5 mass concentration based on IMPROVE data available from September 2000 to December 2002 is 3.3 mg/m3 The highest occurrence of the 20%

Attribution Of Haze Case Study for Nevada Jarbidge Wilderness Area

Reasonable Progress: Chiricahua NM & Wilderness Area

AoH Phase 2 Update AoH Meeting – San Diego, CA January 25, 2006

Evaluating Revised Tracking Metric for Regional Haze Planning

Continuous measurement of airborne particles and gases

Causes of Haze Assessment Brief Overview and Status Report

Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.

Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.

Attribution of Haze Workgroup Organizational Meeting

Air Resource Specialists, Inc. July 23, 2004

Tribal Representativeness Analysis: Phase II

Attribution of Haze Project Update

Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.

Presentation transcript:

Incorporating Monitoring, Modeling, and EI Data into AoH Analysis AoH Meeting, Salt Lake City September 21-22, 2004 Air Resource Specialists, Inc.

Regional Analysis AoH Phase I intended to make assessments that cover broad regions Many Methods of approaching regional/cluster analysis –Similar aerosol composition –Similar emissions source regions/categories –Similar geography –Similar meteorology

Regional Clusters on COHA Website COHA:

IMPROVE Particulate Monitoring Cluster Criteria All Class I areas within 100 km of a current site Site location lies between highest and lowest elevations of all areas in cluster 156 Class I areas combined into 108 clusters

IMPROVE Clusters IMPROVE Sites Class I Areas

Look at CMAQ-TSSA results and group sites that are basically influenced by the same sources Look at trajectories of the 20% worst visibility days and group sites with similar patterns Look at monitoring results Possible Expansion of IMPROVE Clusters

IMPROVE Sites Class I Areas

Monitoring Results July and January, 2002 preliminary results presented at July, 2004 AoH meeting –1 st look at site groupings: July 20% worst modeled extinction days NOx

Rocky Mountain National Park CMAQ- TSSA NOx

Mount Zirkel WA CMAQ-TSSA NOx

White River WA CMAQ-TSSA NOx

Trajectory Analysis HYSPLIT calculated back trajectories matching July 2002 days from modeled data Model ParameterValue Trajectory duration72 hours (3 days) Top of model domain14,000 meters Vertical motion optionused model data Receptor height500 meters EDAS meteorological data was used for trajectories Note: CMAQ modeled data uses MM5 meteorological data

ROMO HYSPLIT Back Trajectories July 1, 2,8,9,10, 23 (2002)

MOZI HYSPLIT Back Trajectories July 1, 2,8,9,10, 23 (2002)

WHRI HYSPLIT Back Trajectories July 1, 2,8,9,10, 23 (2002)

ROMO, MOZI, and WHRI Back Trajectories July 1, 2,8,9,10, 23 (2002)

Monitoring Results IMPROVE aerosol samplers –24-hour integrated aerosol sample every 3 days –Analytical results can be characterized by visibility contribution of individual species

ROMO MOZI WHRI IMPROVE Aerosol Extinction Data 20% Worst Days

IMPROVE Sites Class I Areas

Weminuche WA CMAQ-TSSA NOx

Great Sand Dunes NP CMAQ-TSSA NOx

WEMI HYSPLIT Back Trajectories July 1, 2,8,9,10, 23 (2002)

GRSA HYSPLIT Back Trajectories July 1, 2,8,9,10, 23 (2002)

WEMI and GRSA Back Trajectories July 1, 2,8,9,10, 23 (2002)

GRSA WEMI IMPROVE Aerosol Extinction Data 20% Worst Days

Mesa Verde NP CMAQ-TSSA NOx

MEVE HYSPLIT Back Trajectories July 1, 2,8,9,10, 23 (2002)

WEMI, GRSA, and MEVE Back Trajectories July 1, 2,8,9,10, 23 (2002)

MEVE WEMI IMPROVE Aerosol Extinction Data 20% Worst Days GRSA

IMPROVE Sites Class I Areas Similar Approach for Tribal CIAs Pine Mountain Mazatzal Sycamore Canyon Supersition Yavapai-Apache

DRI residence time maps and trajectory regression analyses Temporal Resolution of Aerosol Data –Total Extinction –Mass –Worst and best days Summary of particulate and visibility data, and attributable emissions What else would be helpful for States and Tribes for Phase I? Other Tools for Attribution Analysis

Residence Time Plots Based on 20% Worst and Best Extinction Flat Tops 20% Worst Flat Tops 20% Best Great Sand Dunes 20% Worst COHA: Great Sand Dunes 20% Best

Residence Time Plots – Flat Tops Based on 20% Worst Species Mass SulfateNitrate Organic CarbonElemental Carbon COHA:

Residence Time Plots – Great Sand Dunes Based on 20% Worst Species Mass SulfateNitrate Organic CarbonElemental Carbon COHA:

19% 0.2% 2.9% 3.1% Contribution to Sulfate at Grand Canyon Based on Transport Regression Modeling COHA: DRI AoH presentation July, 2004

20% Worst Extinction (2002) – Northern CO VIEWS:

20% Worst Extinction (2002) – Southern CO VIEWS:

Extinction Amm. Sulfate Amm. Nitrate Organic Mass Elemental Carbon Extinction Amm. Sulfate Amm. Nitrate Organic Mass Elemental Carbon VIEWS: 20% Worst Extinction/Mass (2002) Rocky MountainMesa Verde

Extinction Amm. Sulfate Amm. Nitrate Organic Mass Elemental Carbon Extinction Amm. Sulfate Amm. Nitrate Organic Mass Elemental Carbon VIEWS: 20% Worst Extinction/Mass (2002) Mount ZirkelMesa Verde

Avg. Aerosol for ROMO, MOZI and WHRI (ug/m 3 ) Total Emissions for CO,UT and WY (millions tons/year) Average Light Extinction for ROMO, MOZI and WHRI (Mm -1 )