Further Development and Application of the CMAQ Ozone and Particle Precursor Tagging Methodologies (OPTM & PPTM) 7 th Annual CMAS Conference Chapel Hill,

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Development and Application of PM2.5 Interpollutant Trading Ratios to Account for PM2.5 Secondary Formation in Georgia James Boylan and Byeong-Uk Kim Georgia.

Advertisements

Implementation of the Particle & Precursor Tagging Methodology (PPTM) for the CMAQ Modeling System: Sulfur & Nitrogen Tagging 5 th Annual CMAS Conference.

COMPARATIVE MODEL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF CMAQ-VISTAS, CMAQ-MADRID, AND CMAQ-MADRID-APT FOR A NITROGEN DEPOSITION ASSESSMENT OF THE ESCAMBIA BAY, FLORIDA.

Template Development and Testing of PinG and VBS modules in CMAQ 5.01 Prakash Karamchandani, Bonyoung Koo, Greg Yarwood and Jeremiah Johnson ENVIRON International.

Title EMEP Unified model Importance of observations for model evaluation Svetlana Tsyro MSC-W / EMEP TFMM workshop, Lillestrøm, 19 October 2010.

Air Quality Impacts from Prescribed Burning Karsten Baumann, PhD. Polly Gustafson.

Talat Odman and Yongtao Hu, Georgia Tech Zac Adelman, Mohammad Omary and Uma Shankar, UNC James Boylan and Byeong-Uk Kim, Georgia DNR.

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

Center for Environmental Research and Technology/Air Quality Modeling University of California at Riverside Modeling Source Apportionment Gail Tonnesen,

Jenny Stocker, Christina Hood, David Carruthers, Martin Seaton, Kate Johnson, Jimmy Fung The Development and Evaluation of an Automated System for Nesting.

1 icfi.com | 1 HIGH-RESOLUTION AIR QUALITY MODELING OF NEW YORK CITY TO ASSESS THE EFFECTS OF CHANGES IN FUELS FOR BOILERS AND POWER GENERATION 13 th Annual.

Defining Air Quality: The Standard-Setting Process Chapter 10.

Modeling the Co-Benefits of Carbon Standards for Existing Power Plants STI-6102 Stephen Reid, Ken Craig, Garnet Erdakos Sonoma Technology, Inc. Jonathan.

Air Quality and Conformity Issues James M. Shrouds, Director Office of Natural and Human Environment Federal Highway Administration AASHTO SCOE Meeting.

Background Air Quality in the United States Under Current and Future Emissions Scenarios Zachariah Adelman, Meridith Fry, J. Jason West Department of Environmental.

North Carolina Division of Air Quality Report on Control of Mercury Emissions from Coal-Fired Electric Generating Units In response to 15 NCAC 02D.2509(b)

Development of PM2.5 Interpollutant Trading Ratios James Boylan and Byeong-Uk Kim Georgia EPD – Air Protection Branch 2012 CMAS Conference October 16,

Ams/awma_ PROCESS-BASED ANALYSIS OF THE ROLE OF THE GULF BREEZE IN SIMULATING OZONE CONCENTRATIONS ALONG THE EASTERN GULF COAST Sharon G. Douglas.

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

The Impact of Biogenic VOC Emissions on Tropospheric Ozone Formation in the Mid-Atlantic Region Michelle L. Bell Yale University Hugh Ellis Johns Hopkins.

Implementation of the Particle & Precursor Tagging Methodology (PPTM) for the CMAQ Modeling System: Mercury Tagging 5 th Annual CMAS Conference Research.

Community Multiscale Air Quality Modeling System CMAQ Air Quality Data Summit February 2008.

Georgia Environmental Protection Division Uncertainty Analysis of Ozone Formation and Emission Control Responses using High-order Sensitivities Di Tian,

Presentation by: Dan Goldberg Co-authors: Tim Vinciguerra, Linda Hembeck, Sam Carpenter, Tim Canty, Ross Salawitch & Russ Dickerson 13 th Annual CMAS Conference.

Preparation of Control Strategies October 18, 2007 NAAQS RIA Workshop Darryl Weatherhead, Kevin Culligan, Serpil Kayin, David Misenheimer, Larry Sorrels.

INCORPORATING UNCERTAINTY INTO AIR QUALITY MODELING & PLANNING – A CASE STUDY FOR GEORGIA 7 th Annual CMAS Conference 6-8 th October, 2008 Antara Digar,

Estimate of Air Emissions from Shale Gas Development and Production in North Carolina July 8, 2015 Presented to the Environmental Management Commission.

1 PM2.5 Redesignation Request for the Metropolitan Washington,D.C. Region Joan Rohlfs Chief, Air Quality Planning Metropolitan Washington COG.

1 Comparison of CAMx and CMAQ PM2.5 Source Apportionment Estimates Kirk Baker and Brian Timin U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,

Center for Environmental Research and Technology/Air Quality Modeling University of California at Riverside CMAQ Tagged Species Source Apportionment (TSSA)

Overview and Status of the Emissions Data Analysis and Modeling Portions of the Virginia Mercury Study 1 st Technical Meeting Richmond, VA 31 May 2007.

Impacts of MOVES2014 On-Road Mobile Emissions on Air Quality Simulations of the Western U.S. Z. Adelman, M. Omary, D. Yang UNC – Institute for the Environment.

Missoula Air Quality Conformity Analysis Required by Federal and Montana Clean Air Act – Transportation-specific air quality requirements enacted in Federal.

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

TEMIS user workshop, Frascati, 8-9 October 2007 TEMIS – VITO activities Felix Deutsch Koen De Ridder Jean Vankerkom VITO – Flemish Institute for Technological.

2005 WRAP Work Plan WRAP Board Meeting Salt Lake City, UT November 10, 2004.

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.

Evaluation of the VISTAS 2002 CMAQ/CAMx Annual Simulations T. W. Tesche & Dennis McNally -- Alpine Geophysics, LLC Ralph Morris -- ENVIRON Gail Tonnesen.

National and Regional Programs to Reduce Ozone Transport Metropolitan Washington Air Quality Committee April 27, 2005.

1 Results of 2010/2015 Post-CAIR Ozone Source Apportionment Modeling August 2005 OAR/OAQPS/EMAD/AQMG.

Evaluation and Application of AMSTERDAM: Focus on Plume In Grid Prakash Karamchandani, Krish Vijayaraghavan, Shu-Yun Chen and Rochelle Balmori Atmospheric.

Three-State Air Quality Study (3SAQS) Three-State Data Warehouse (3SDW) 3SAQS Phase II -- Task Source Apportionment Modeling Study Design University.

Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and Emission Reduction An FAA/NASA/TC-sponsored Center of Excellence Matthew Woody and Saravanan Arunachalam Institute.

Opening Remarks -- Ozone and Particles: Policy and Science Recent Developments & Controversial Issues GERMAN-US WORKSHOP October 9, 2002 G. Foley *US EPA.

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

Implementation Workgroup Meeting December 6, 2006 Attribution of Haze Workgroup’s Monitoring Metrics Document Status: 1)2018 Visibility Projections – Alternative.

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

Operational Evaluation and Model Response Comparison of CAMx and CMAQ for Ozone & PM2.5 Kirk Baker, Brian Timin, Sharon Phillips U.S. Environmental Protection.

V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt CRGAQS: CAMx 2004 PSAT Results Presentation to the Gorge Study Technical Team By ENVIRON International Corporation.

Template Comparison of PM Source Apportionment and Sensitivity Analysis in CAMx Bonyoung Koo, Gary Wilson, Ralph Morris, Greg Yarwood ENVIRON Alan Dunker.

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.

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

Response of fine particles to the reduction of precursor emissions in Yangtze River Delta (YRD), China Juan Li 1, Joshua S. Fu 1, Yang Gao 1, Yun-Fat Lam.

Krish Vijayaraghavan, Rochelle Balmori, Shu-Yun Chen, Prakash Karamchandani and Christian Seigneur AER, San Ramon, CA Justin T. Walters and John J. Jansen.

1 Emission and Air Quality Trends Review Wisconsin July 2013.

1 Long Range Transport of Air Pollution Air pollution can travel hundreds of miles and cause multiple health and environmental problems on regional or.

Jeff Vukovich, USEPA/OAQPS/AQAD Emissions Inventory and Analysis Group

Predicting PM2.5 Concentrations that Result from Compliance with National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) James T. Kelly, Adam Reff, and Brett Gantt.

Mobile Source Contributions to Ambient PM2.5 and Ozone in 2025

Development of a Multipollutant Version of the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Modeling System Shawn Roselle, Deborah Luecken, William Hutzell,

Source Apportionment Modeling to Investigate Background, Regional, and Local Contributions to Ozone Concentrations in Denver, Phoenix, Detroit, and Atlanta.

Maryland's Air Quality: Nitrogen Reductions and the Healthy Air Act

Stephen Mueller & Jonathan Mallard Tennessee Valley Authority

Issues on Ozone Planning in the Western United States

J. Burke1, K. Wesson2, W. Appel1, A. Vette1, R. Williams1

Emission and Air Quality Trends Review

M. Samaali, M. Sassi, V. Bouchet

U.S. Perspective on Particulate Matter and Ozone

CRGAQS: CAMx PSAT Results

Emission and Air Quality Trends Review

Presentation transcript:

Further Development and Application of the CMAQ Ozone and Particle Precursor Tagging Methodologies (OPTM & PPTM) 7 th Annual CMAS Conference Chapel Hill, NC 6-8 October 2008 Presented by Sharon Douglas ICF International, San Rafael, CA

Co-Authors: Tom Myers Yihua Wei Jay Haney Tom Braverman, ICF EPA OAQPS

Presentation Outline Overview of CMAQ/OPTM & PPTM source attribution methods Application of CMAQ/OPTM & CMAQ/PPTM to support ozone & PM2.5 designations (example for Milwaukee) Application of CMAQ/PPTM to characterize CAAA-related reductions in PM2.5 for cost/benefit analysis Next steps

OPTM & PPTM: General Concepts Emissions (or IC/BC) species are tagged in the input files and continuously tracked throughout the simulation Tags can be applied to source regions, source categories, individual sources, and/or IC/BCs Tagged species have the same properties and are subjected to the same processes (e.g., advection, chemical transformation, deposition) as the actual species

OPTM & PPTM: General Concepts OPTM species include ozone, NOx & VOC PPTM species include PM-related S, N, SOA, POC, EC & other inorganic particulates* Base simulation results not affected by tagging OPTM & PPTM quantify the contribution of tagged sources to simulated species concentrations & deposition *PPTM has also been implemented for mercury

Implementation of OPTM for CMAQ (Overview(1)) Total emissions of both NOx and VOC from the desired sources or source categories are tagged (e.g., NOx_t1, NOx_t2, VOC_t1, VOC_t2) Oxidant tracers (OXN_t1, OXV_t1, OXN_t2, OXV_t2) correspond to the oxidant produced from NOx & VOC for each tagged category

Implementation of OPTM for CMAQ (Overview(2)) Advection/Diffusion: Use standard CMAQ algorithms Gas Phase Chemistry: Chemistry step called as usual Changes in NOx, VOC & oxidant (ΔVOC, ΔNOX & ΔOX) are calculated and apportioned to tags Deposition: Calculated for the tags based on fractional change in total NOx, VOC & oxidant due to deposition

Implementation of PPTM for CMAQ (Overview) Within CMAQ, tagging is accomplished by adding duplicate species (e.g., ANO3_t1, ANO3_t2) More than 50 (gas & aerosol phase) species per tag required to track total PM2.5 (e.g., for nitrogen: ANH4I, ANH4J, ANO3I, ANO3J, NO, NO2, NO3, N2O5 …) Key considerations/assumptions: Linear processes simulated directly Potentially non-linear processes calculated for total species and apportioned to tags PPTM can also be used to estimate contributions to N and other forms of deposition

Application of CMAQ/OPTM & PPTM for the Milwaukee Area Objective: To identify the source regions that potentially contribute to high ozone and high PM2.5 concentrations in the Milwaukee, WI area Specs: Regional-scale modeling domain 2002 base year; limited simulation periods (1 month for ozone; 4 months for PM2.5) 13 tagged source regions (county level)

Application of CMAQ/OPTM & PPTM for the Milwaukee Area: Domain 12-km resolution

Application of CMAQ/OPTM & PPTM for the Milwaukee Area: Tags T1: Milwaukee Co., WI T2: Washington Co., WI T3: Ozaukee Co., WI T4: Waukesha Co., WI T5: Racine Co., WI T6: Sheboygan & Fond du Lac Co., WI T7: Dodge, Jefferson & Walworth Co., WI T8: Kenosha Co., WI T9: Cook Co., IL T10: Lake, McHenry, Kane, Dupage Co.,IL T11: Will Co., IL & Lake & Porter Co., IN T12: Remainder of 12-km grid T13: IC/BCs

CMAQ/OPTM Results for the Milwaukee Area: NOx Average Contribution to Maximum 8-Hour Ozone Tag 1: Milwaukee Co.Tag 9: Cook Co.Tag 10: 4 Other IL Co.

CMAQ/OPTM Results for the Milwaukee Area: VOC Average Contribution to Maximum 8-Hour Ozone Tag 1: Milwaukee Co.Tag 9: Cook Co.Tag 10: 4 Other IL Co.

CMAQ/OPTM Results for a Monitoring Site: NOx & VOC Milwaukee Bayside Milwaukee Co.12-km grid IC/BCs Average Contribution to Maximum 8-Hour Ozone

Summary CMAQ/OPTM Results for All Monitoring Sites: NOx & VOC

CMAQ/PPTM Results for a Monitoring Site Milwaukee Virginia Fire Station Milwaukee Co. 12-km gridIC/BCs

CMAQ/PPTM Results for a Monitoring Site Waukesha Milwaukee Co. 12-km gridIC/BCs Waukesha Co.

Summary CMAQ/PPTM Results for All Monitoring Sites

Summary for Milwaukee OPTM & PPTM can be used to quantify the contribution of emissions (by species) from specified source regions to CMAQ-derived concentrations the potential for sources/source regions to contribute to nonattainment in a given area Contributions vary by location and are different for the different species (NOx, VOC and PM species) Ozone & PM2.5 nonattainment issues in the Milwaukee area are the combined result of local emissions as well as intra- & inter-state transport

§ 812 Cost/Benefit Analysis: PM2.5 Modeling Component

Application of CMAQ/PPTM to Support the § 812 Cost/Benefit Analysis Objectives: Quality assurance To quantify and compare the source category contributions to PM2.5 both with and without the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) Specs: National-scale modeling domain Annual simulation period; two scenarios (2010 without CAAA and 2010 with CAAA) 7 tagged source categories

Application of CMAQ/PPTM for the § 812 Modeling Analysis: Domains 36-km resolution for PM2.5

Application of CMAQ/PPTM for the § 812 Modeling Analysis: Tags T1: EGU sources (U.S.) T2: Non-EGU point sources (U.S.) T3: On-road mobile sources (U.S.) T4: Non-road mobile sources (U.S.) T5: Area (non-point, non-mobile) sources (U.S.) T6: Initial and boundary conditions (IC/BCs) T7: All other sources (natural emissions, offshore sources, and non-U.S. sources)

CMAQ/PPTM Results: Contribution from EGU Sources (Tag 1) 2010 without CAAA2010 with CAAA Annual Average PM2.5

CMAQ/PPTM Results: Contribution from Non-EGU Point Sources (Tag 2) 2010 without CAAA2010 with CAAA Annual Average PM2.5

CMAQ/PPTM Results: Contribution from On-Road Sources (Tag 3) 2010 without CAAA2010 with CAAA Annual Average PM2.5

CMAQ/PPTM Results for a Monitoring Site Philadelphia

Summary of PPTM Results for the § 812 Modeling Analysis PPTM used as a probing tool to attribute the overall reductions in PM2.5 (due to the CAAA measures) to specific source categories Total simulated PM2.5 concentration is lower under the CAAA scenario, primarily due to reductions in area- & point-source (EGU & non-EGU) emissions (relative importance varies by region and by location) Health benefits can be similarly attributed to source categories, sources, or specific measures

Next Steps Incorporate OPTM & PPTM (for ozone and PM2.5) into CMAQv4.7 Incorporate PPTM (for mercury and 10 additional toxic pollutants) into CMAQv4.7 Distribute OPTM & PPTM codes through CMAS