Modeling of Ammonia and PM 2.5 Concentrations Associated with Emissions from Agriculture Megan Gore, D.Q. Tong, V.P. Aneja, and M. Houyoux Department of.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Carey Jang, Air Quality Modeling Group USEPA/OAQPS CMAS Workshop, RTP, 10/20/2004 CMAS Workshop, RTP, 10/20/2004 Applications of CMAQ over the Pacific.
Advertisements

European Nitrogen Assessment: Supplementary Material: Powerpoint Graphics to Chapter 5. Source: Sutton, M.A., Howard, C.M., Erisman J.W., Bealey J.W.,
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.
Incorporation of the Model of Aerosol Dynamics, Reaction, Ionization and Dissolution (MADRID) into CMAQ Yang Zhang, Betty K. Pun, Krish Vijayaraghavan,
Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, CA
Climate, Fire and Air Quality Climate Impacts Group June 1, 2006.
Air Quality-Climate Interactions Aijun Xiu Carolina Environmental Program.
CLARIS WP4.3 : Continental-scale air Pollution in South America.
CMAQ (Community Multiscale Air Quality) pollutant Concentration change horizontal advection vertical advection horizontal dispersion vertical diffusion.
Modeling the Co-Benefits of Carbon Standards for Existing Power Plants STI-6102 Stephen Reid, Ken Craig, Garnet Erdakos Sonoma Technology, Inc. Jonathan.
The Sensitivity of Aerosol Sulfate to Changes in Nitrogen Oxides and Volatile Organic Compounds Ariel F. Stein Department of Meteorology The Pennsylvania.
Beta Testing of the SCICHEM-2012 Reactive Plume Model James T. Kelly and Kirk R. Baker Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards US Environmental Protection.
Background Air Quality in the United States Under Current and Future Emissions Scenarios Zachariah Adelman, Meridith Fry, J. Jason West Department of Environmental.
October 17, 20065th Annual CMAS Conference1 Photochemical Modeling Investigation of an Extended Winter PM Episode in Central California 1. Air Resources.
Muntaseer Billah, Satoru Chatani and Kengo Sudo Department of Earth and Environmental Science Graduate School of Environmental Studies Nagoya University,
Krish Vijayaraghavan, Prakash Karamchandani Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, CA 3rd Annual CMAS Models-3 Conference October 18-20, 2004 Chapel Hill, NC.
Examination of the impact of recent laboratory evidence of photoexcited NO 2 chemistry on simulated summer-time regional air quality Golam Sarwar, Robert.
1 Nitrogen in the Environment David Gay 1 & Bob Hall 2 1 NADP Program Office, (217) U.S. Environmental.
National/Regional Air Quality Modeling Assessment Over China and Taiwan Using Models-3/CMAQ Modeling System Joshua S. Fu 1, Carey Jang 2, David Streets.
Contribution from Natural Sources of Aerosol Particles to PM in Canada Sunling Gong Scientific Team: Tianliang Zhao, David Lavoue, Richard Leaitch,
EVALUATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF GAS/PARTICLE MASS TRANSFER TREATMENTS FOR 3-D AEROSOL SIMULATION AND FORECAST Xiaoming Hu and Yang Zhang North Carolina State.
Importance of Lightning NO for Regional Air Quality Modeling Thomas E. Pierce/NOAA Atmospheric Modeling Division National Exposure Research Laboratory.
1 Using Hemispheric-CMAQ to Provide Initial and Boundary Conditions for Regional Modeling Joshua S. Fu 1, Xinyi Dong 1, Kan Huang 1, and Carey Jang 2 1.
Community Multiscale Air Quality Modeling System CMAQ Air Quality Data Summit February 2008.
Annual Simulations of Models-3/CMAQ: Issues and Lessons Learned Pat Dolwick, Carey Jang, Norm Possiel, Brian Timin, Joe Tikvart Air Quality Modeling Group.
Evaluating ammonia (NH 3 ) predictions in the NOAA National Air Quality Forecast Capability (NAQFC) using in situ aircraft measurements William Battye,
WRAP Experience: Investigation of Model Biases Uma Shankar, Rohit Mathur and Francis Binkowski MCNC–Environmental Modeling Center Research Triangle Park,
Preliminary Study: Direct and Emission-Induced Effects of Global Climate Change on Regional Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter K. Manomaiphiboon 1 *, A.
Rick Saylor 1, Barry Baker 1, Pius Lee 2, Daniel Tong 2,3, Li Pan 2 and Youhua Tang 2 1 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Air Resources Laboratory.
GEM/AQ Simulations on Intercontinental Transports Science and Technology Branch Environment Canada.
PM 2.5 Response to Different Emissions Reductions Scenarios Over São Paulo State, Brazil. Taciana T. de A. Albuquerque a, J. Jason West b, Rita Yuri Ynoue.
8th annual CMAS conference, Chapel Hill, October 19-21, 2009 Eurasia Institute of Earth Sciences / ITU IMPACTS OF ISTANBUL EMISSIONS ON REGIONAL AIR QUALITY:
A detailed evaluation of the WRF-CMAQ forecast model performance for O 3, and PM 2.5 during the 2006 TexAQS/GoMACCS study Shaocai Yu $, Rohit Mathur +,
Operational Evaluation and Comparison of CMAQ and REMSAD- An Annual Simulation Brian Timin, Carey Jang, Pat Dolwick, Norm Possiel, Tom Braverman USEPA/OAQPS.
Application of the CMAQ-UCD Aerosol Model to a Coastal Urban Site Chris Nolte NOAA Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division Research Triangle Park, NC 6.
Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Evaluating.
October 1-3, th Annual CMAS Meeting1 Effects of Liquid Water on Secondary Inorganic Aerosol in Central California During a Winter Episode 1 Planning.
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.
October 1-3, th Annual CMAS Meeting1 Impacts of Ethanol Fuel on PM Concentrations in Northern California during a Winter Episode 1 Planning and Technical.
GEOS-CHEM Modeling for Boundary Conditions and Natural Background James W. Boylan Georgia Department of Natural Resources - VISTAS National RPO Modeling.
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations Global Warming and Air Pollution.
Diagnostic Study on Fine Particulate Matter Predictions of CMAQ in the Southeastern U.S. Ping Liu and Yang Zhang North Carolina State University, Raleigh,
Extending Size-Dependent Composition to the Modal Approach: A Case Study with Sea Salt Aerosol Uma Shankar and Rohit Mathur The University of North Carolina.
Robert W. Pinder, Alice B. Gilliland, Robert C. Gilliam, K. Wyat Appel Atmospheric Modeling Division, NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, in partnership with.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Office of Research and Development.
Peak 8-hr Ozone Model Performance when using Biogenic VOC estimated by MEGAN and BIOME (BEIS) Kirk Baker Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium October.
VISTAS Modeling Overview Oct. 29, 2003
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.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development Implementation of an Online Photolysis Module in CMAQ 4.7 Christopher G. Nolte.
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.
MRPO Technical Approach “Nearer” Term Overview For: Emissions Modeling Meteorological Modeling Photochemical Modeling & Domain Model Performance Evaluation.
Development and Initial Applications
Advances in Support of the CMAQ Bidirectional Science Option for the Estimation of Ammonia Flux from Agricultural cropland Ellen Cooter U.S. EPA, National.
February 11, 2016 Nitrogen Oxides (NO x ) Emissions from U.S. Shale Plays using an Integrated Top-down and Bottom-up Approach Speaker: Andy Chang, PhD.
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,
CMAS Annual Conference, October 24-26, 2016, Chapel Hill, NC
Performance of CMAQ for Inorganic Aerosol Compounds in Greater Tokyo
Kristen Olsen and Yang Zhang
Chris Misenis*, Xiaoming Hu, and Yang Zhang
Continuous measurement of airborne particles and gases
Deborah Luecken and Golam Sarwar U.S. EPA, ORD/NERL
M. Samaali, M. Sassi, V. Bouchet
Steve Griffiths, Rob Lennard and Paul Sutton* (*RWE npower)
WRAP Modeling Forum, San Diego
Update on specifying boundary conditions for regional-scale air quality models Mike Barna, NPS-ARD RTOWG call 9/10/19.
Presentation transcript:

Modeling of Ammonia and PM 2.5 Concentrations Associated with Emissions from Agriculture Megan Gore, D.Q. Tong, V.P. Aneja, and M. Houyoux Department of Marine, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences North Carolina State University Raleigh, NC th Annual CMAS Conference October 6-8, 2008

Outline ٥ Introduction – Ammonia in North Carolina (NC) ٥ Model Configuration ٥ Preliminary Results ٥ O 3, NH 3, PM 2.5, NH 4 + ٥ Conclusions ٥ Future Work NH 3

Why do we care about Ammonia? Elevated levels of NH x (=NH 3 + NH 4 + ) can lead to: ٥ Nitrogen enrichment and eutrophication in aquatic ecosystems ٥ Impacts on crop and forest production ٥ Particulate matter (PM) formation ٥ Visibility degradation ٥ Odor

Nitrogen Emissions in N.C. NH 3 Agricultural Sources Total ~ 40% of Nitrogen 138,843 NH 3 tons/yr Swine 68,540 (49%) Cattle 24,952 (18%) Broilers 13,669 (10%) Turkeys 16,486 (12%) Fertilizer 8,720 (6%) Other 6,476 (5%) (Aneja et al., 1998)

Hog Farms in N.C.

Ammonia Atmospheric Chemistry Atmospheric Reactions: ٥ NH 3 (aq) + H 2 0 NH 4 OH(aq) ٥ NH 3 (g) + H 2 SO 4 (aq) NH 4 HSO 4 (aq) ٥ NH 3 (g) + NH 4 HSO 4 (aq) [NH 4 ] 2 SO 4 (s or aq) ٥ NH 3 (g) + HNO 3 (g) NH 4 NO 3 (s or aq) ٥ NH 3 (g) + HCl(g) NH 4 Cl(s or aq) ٥ NH 3 (g) + OH · (g) N · H 2 (g) + H 2 O(g)

Model Configuration ٥ Model: Community Multi-Scale Air Quality (CMAQ) Model ٥ Episode: January 1 – December 31, 2002 ٥ Domain:Continental U.S., N. Mexico, S. Canada 36 km, 24 layers ٥ Meteorology: MM5 - Pleim-Xiu Land Surface module on ٥ Emissions: 2002 National Emissions Inventory ٥ I/B Conditions: MOZART-2 for lateral BC ٥ Gas-phase mechanism: Carbon Bond (CB05) ٥ Aerosol module: AE4

Preliminary Results Ozone space January Base Run – Ozone Monthly Average January Reduced Run* – Ozone Monthly Average *Reduced Run – NH 3 Emissions turned off ppbv

Preliminary Results Ozone July Base Run – Ozone Monthly Average July Reduced Run* – Ozone Monthly Average *Reduced Run – NH 3 Emissions turned off ppbv

Preliminary Results – NH 3 January Base Run – NH 3 Monthly Average January Reduced Run* – NH 3 Monthly Average *Reduced Run – NH 3 Emissions turned off ppbv

Preliminary Results – NH 3 July Base Run – NH 3 Monthly Average July Reduced Run* – NH 3 Monthly Average *Reduced Run – NH 3 Emissions turned off ppbv

Preliminary Results PM 2.5 January Base Run – PM 2.5 Monthly Average January Reduced Run* – PM 2.5 Monthly Average *Reduced Run – NH 3 Emissions turned off

Preliminary Results PM 2.5 Base Run – January 2002, NC Monthly Average

Preliminary Results PM 2.5 Reduced Run – January 2002, NC Monthly Average

Preliminary Results PM 2.5 July Base Run – PM 2.5 Monthly Average July Reduced Run* – PM 2.5 Monthly Average *Reduced Run – NH 3 Emissions turned off

Preliminary Results PM 2.5 Base Run – July 2002, NC Monthly Average

Preliminary Results PM 2.5 Reduced Run – July 2002, NC Monthly Average

Preliminary Results–NH 4 + Aerosol January Base Run – NH 4 + Monthly Average January Reduced Run – NH 4 + Monthly Average *Reduced Run – NH 3 Emissions turned off

Preliminary Results–NH 4 + Aerosol July Base Run – NH 4 + Monthly Average July Reduced Run – NH 4 + Monthly Average *Reduced Run – NH 3 Emissions turned off

Conclusions ٥ Agricultural NH 3 emissions have a significant impact on PM 2.5 and NH 4 aerosol predicted concentrations

Future Work  Additional model runs turning off emissions from the various agricultural sectors  Evaluate the effect of ammonia emissions of aerosol composition  Model evaluation using observed values of pollutants  Meteorological analysis

Acknowledgements ٥ USDA ٥ USEPA ٥ NCSU Air Quality Research Group

Atmospheric emissions, transport, transformation & deposition of trace gases *Indirect deposition is direct deposition to land followed by runoff or seepage through groundwater to a surface water body.

Preliminary Results Ozone Base Run – January 2002, NC Monthly Average ppbv

Preliminary Results Ozone Reduced Run – January 2002, NC Monthly Average ppbv

Preliminary Results Ozone Difference Between Base Run and Reduced Run January 2002, NC - Monthly Average ppbv

Preliminary Results Ozone Base Run – July 2002, NC Monthly Average ppbv

Preliminary Results Ozone Reduced Run – July 2002, NC Monthly Average

Preliminary Results Ozone Difference Between Base Run and Reduced Run January 2002, NC - Monthly Average ppbv

Preliminary Results – NH 3 Base Run – January 2002, NC Monthly Average ppbv

Preliminary Results – NH 3 Reduced Run – January 2002, NC Monthly Average

Preliminary Results – NH 3 Difference Between Base Run and Reduced Run January 2002, NC - Monthly Average ppbv

Preliminary Results – NH 3 Base Run – July 2002, NC Monthly Average ppbv

Preliminary Results – NH 3 Reduced Run – July 2002, NC Monthly Average

Preliminary Results – NH 3 Difference Between Base Run and Reduced Run July 2002, NC - Monthly Average ppbv

Preliminary Results PM 2.5 Difference Between Base Run and Reduced Run January 2002, NC - Monthly Average

Preliminary Results PM 2.5 Difference Between Base Run and Reduced Run July 2002, NC - Monthly Average

Preliminary Results–NH 4 + Aerosol Base Run – January 2002, NC Monthly Average

Preliminary Results–NH 4 + Aerosol Reduced Run – January 2002, NC Monthly Average

Preliminary Results–NH 4 + Aerosol Difference Between Base Run and Reduced Run January 2002, NC - Monthly Average

Preliminary Results–NH 4 + Aerosol Base Run – July 2002, NC Monthly Average

Preliminary Results–NH 4 + Aerosol Reduced Run – July 2002, NC Monthly Average

Preliminary Results–NH 4 + Aerosol Difference Between Base Run and Reduced Run July 2002, NC - Monthly Average