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

Causes of Haze Assessment – 2005 Plan Task Overviews (completion date) –Trends analysis of extinction & aerosol components – (6/05) –Assess meteorological representativeness of 2002 (modeling base year) compared to 2000 through 2004 (RH baseline period) – (8/05) –Evaluate winds used in back-trajectory analysis – (9/05) –Continue case-study analysis of worst case days – (on-going) & conduct regional PMF analysis (12/05) –Communicate results via COHA web-site and WRAP (especially AoH) meeting participation – (on-going)

Causes of Haze Assessment – 2005 Plan Trends analysis (complete by 6/05) –Perform trends analysis of reconstructed extinction and major aerosol components for sites with 10 years of data, 1994 to 2003 (29 sites) –Identify the direction, magnitude, and level of statistical significance of all trends –Plot individual site trends and produce summary maps –Prepare descriptions of trends and explanations where possible and document in a new Trends section of the COHA web-site

Trend Analysis for 20% Worst Days in WRAP

Trend Analysis for 20% Worst Days in WRAP Sites with More Than 10 Years of Data ( ) Increase – statistically significant (P<0.05) Decrease - statistically significant (P<0.05) Increase - statistically insignificant Decrease - statistically insignificant * Size of the arrow is in proportion to the change rate (slope, unit/year) Bep Soil CM

Trend Analysis for 20% Worst Days in WRAP Sites with More Than 10 Years of Data ( ) - Continue OC EC SNitrate

Causes of Haze Assessment – 2005 Plan Meteorological representativeness (complete by 8/05) –Generate 8-day back-trajectories of all WRAP IMPROVE aerosol monitoring sites (every 3 hrs, from 3 starting heights) for 2003 and 2004 to give 5 years of trajectories –Produce residence time maps for 2002 and the 5-year period (2000 – 2004), plus maps of ratios and of differences of 2002 and the 5-year period for each site for the warm and for the cold periods of the year (warm defined as April through September) –Interpret the maps for each monitoring site and document on the COHA web site

Causes of Haze Assessment – 2005 Plan Evaluate winds used in back-trajectory analysis (complete by 9/05) –Obtain upper air wind measurements from about 12 sites (radiosonde, radar wind profiler & NEXRAD) throughout WRAP for 2000 to 2004 –Compare winds used in back-trajectory analyses to measurements –For 2002 also compare MM5 and trajectory winds to measurements and each other (presumes that the RMC will provide MM5 wind profiles for measurement sites) –Communicate results to the appropriate WRAP organizations and document on the COHA web site

Candidate Upper Air Monitoring Sites for Checking Trajectory & MM5 Wind Fields

Example Wind Field Analysis from the BRAVO Study

Figure 9 ‑ 1. Comparisons of MM5 and EDAS wind direction frequencies versus radar wind profiler measurements, by level above ground, for July-September 1999 at Big Bend National Park.

Causes of Haze Assessment – 2005 Plan Continue case-study analysis of worst case days –Continue to do episode analysis (use of available data to understand extreme haze events) –Conduct PMF analysis on particle species data for groups of sites to statistically identify common factors (interpreted as effective source profiles) Assess the contributions, frequency, seasonality, etc of PMF factors to worst haze days for all WRAP sites Associate factors with transport pathways using trajectory analysis Document in a new PMF section of the COHA web-site – (complete by 11/05)

Positive Matrix Factorization PMF is a statistical method that identifies a user specified number of source profiles (i.e. relative composition particle species for each source) and source strengths for each sample period that reduce the difference between measured and PMF fitted PM 2.5 mass concentration In matrix notation, X = GF + E where X is the matrix of measured composition for each sample period, F is the source profile, G is the source strength or factor scores for each sample period, and E is the residual or error matrix.

Site groupings from the TSSA attribution analysis in the Phase I AoH Report Will test use of these groups plus Alaska and Hawaii groups Plan is to run all data for group sites in a single PMF, then analyze the results separately for each site Comparisons of factors among sites in the groups and between different groups may help identify local, regional, and continental scale of factor influence Trajectory analysis may help identify source regions associated with various factors

Haleakula and Hawaii Volcano National Park Monitoring Sites

Hawaii Volcano Plume is Still Intense Hundreds of Miles from its Source – Satellite Image

Smoke Dust Volcano Coarse Mass/Nitrate Sea Salt Sulfate/Nitrate

Contributions to dry extinction by PMF factors show that: Hawaii Volcano has much greater impacts from the “volcano” PMF factor The “volcano” PMF factor is responsible for most of the haze impacts on worst visibility days at Hawaii Volcano and many, but not all of the worst case days at Haleakula Haleakula has greater impacts from “smoke”, “dust”, and “sulfate/nitrate” PMF factors compared to Hawaii Volcano

Causes of Haze Assessment 2006 Activities Update assessment for each site for entire 5- year baseline, & document to COHA web site –Aerosol description, hazagon maps, etc –Trajectory summary maps & trajectory regression –PMF & episode analyses Assess representativeness of current IMPROVE sites to visibility-protected class I areas in WRAP Summarize & document attribution findings in conceptual models for each site

Causes of Haze Assessment Out-Year Activities Maintain, update, & enhance the COHA web site –Continue to operate & provide user support for the COHA web site, –Setup a schedule that updates attribution assessments at least every two years –Create new data assessment displays and tools Conduct a new assessment each year (e.g. effects of climate on smoke or dust impact trends, or impacts of urban areas at near-urban sites, etc.)