A new version of the Community Multiscale Air Quality Model: CMAQv5.1 EPA CMAQ Development Team Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division National Exposure.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Some recent studies using Models-3 Ian Rodgers Presentation to APRIL meeting London 4 th March 2003.
Advertisements

Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Changes in U.S. Regional-Scale Air.
EPA CMAQ Development Team
N emissions and the changing landscape of air quality Rob Pinder US EPA Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division.
Jared H. Bowden Saravanan Arunachalam
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009 Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009.
Incorporation of the Model of Aerosol Dynamics, Reaction, Ionization and Dissolution (MADRID) into CMAQ Yang Zhang, Betty K. Pun, Krish Vijayaraghavan,
4-km AIRPACT vs 12-km AIRPACT Both with dynamic boundary conditions from MOZART-4 Figures created on 5/29/2011 (corrected corrupted JPROC input file)
The AIRPACT-3 Photochemical Air Quality Forecast System: Evaluation and Enhancements Jack Chen, Farren Thorpe, Jeremy Avis, Matt Porter, Joseph Vaughan,
Atmospheric modelling activities inside the Danish AMAP program Jesper H. Christensen NERI-ATMI, Frederiksborgvej Roskilde.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Jonathan Pleim and the CMAQ Development.
The AIRPACT-3 Photochemical Air Quality Forecast System: Evaluation and Enhancements Jack Chen, Farren Thorpe, Jeremy Avis, Matt Porter, Joseph Vaughan,
Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Simple urban parameterization for.
Next Gen AQ model Need AQ modeling at Global to Continental to Regional to Urban scales – Current systems using cascading nests is cumbersome – Duplicative.
CMAQ (Community Multiscale Air Quality) pollutant Concentration change horizontal advection vertical advection horizontal dispersion vertical diffusion.
Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Application and evaluation of the.
A Modeling Investigation of the Climate Effects of Air Pollutants Aijun Xiu 1, Rohit Mathur 2, Adel Hanna 1, Uma Shankar 1, Frank Binkowski 1, Carlie Coats.
Modelling the Canadian Arctic and Northern Air Quality using GEM-MACH Wanmin Gong and Stephen Beagley Science and Technology Branch Environment Canada.
Examination of the impact of recent laboratory evidence of photoexcited NO 2 chemistry on simulated summer-time regional air quality Golam Sarwar, Robert.
Center for Environmental Research and Technology University of California, Riverside Bourns College of Engineering Evaluation and Intercomparison of N.
WRAP Update. Projects Updated 1996 emissions QA procedures New evaluation tools Model updates CB-IV km MM5 Fugitive dust NH 3 emissions Model.
Importance of Lightning NO for Regional Air Quality Modeling Thomas E. Pierce/NOAA Atmospheric Modeling Division National Exposure Research Laboratory.
1 Recent Advances in the Modeling of Airborne Substances George Pouliot Shan He Tom Pierce.
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.
Ozone MPE, TAF Meeting, July 30, 2008 Review of Ozone Performance in WRAP Modeling and Relevance to Future Regional Ozone Planning Gail Tonnesen, Zion.
Presentation by: Dan Goldberg Co-authors: Tim Vinciguerra, Linda Hembeck, Sam Carpenter, Tim Canty, Ross Salawitch & Russ Dickerson 13 th Annual CMAS Conference.
Preliminary Study: Direct and Emission-Induced Effects of Global Climate Change on Regional Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter K. Manomaiphiboon 1 *, A.
Source-Specific Forecasting of Air Quality Impacts with Dynamic Emissions Updating & Source Impact Reanalysis Georgia Institute of Technology Yongtao Hu.
Development and Preliminary Results of Image Processing Tools for Meteorology and Air Quality Modeling Limei Ran Center for Environmental Modeling for.
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.
Application of the CMAQ-UCD Aerosol Model to a Coastal Urban Site Chris Nolte NOAA Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division Research Triangle Park, NC 6.
Evaluation of the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Model Version 5.1 K. Wyat Appel, Sergey Napelenok, Christian Hogrefe, Kristen M. Foley, George.
Session 5, CMAS 2004 INTRODUCTION: Fine scale modeling for Exposure and risk assessments.
Photo image area measures 2” H x 6.93” W and can be masked by a collage strip of one, two or three images. The photo image area is located 3.19” from left.
An Exploration of Model Concentration Differences Between CMAQ and CAMx Brian Timin, Karen Wesson, Pat Dolwick, Norm Possiel, Sharon Phillips EPA/OAQPS.
William G. Benjey* Physical Scientist NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division Research Triangle Park, NC Fifth Annual CMAS.
1 Impact on Ozone Prediction at a Fine Grid Resolution: An Examination of Nudging Analysis and PBL Schemes in Meteorological Model Yunhee Kim, Joshua S.
Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Simple urban parameterization for.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling Division Photo image area measures 2” H x 6.93” W and can.
Evaluation of Models-3 CMAQ I. Results from the 2003 Release II. Plans for the 2004 Release Model Evaluation Team Members Prakash Bhave, Robin Dennis,
THE MODELS-3 COMMUNITY MULTI- SCALE AIR QUALITY (CMAQ) MODEL: 2002 RELEASE – NEW FEATURES Jonathan Pleim, Francis Binkowski, Robin Dennis, Brian Eder,
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.
Opening Remarks -- Ozone and Particles: Policy and Science Recent Developments & Controversial Issues GERMAN-US WORKSHOP October 9, 2002 G. Foley *US EPA.
New Features of the 2003 Release of the CMAQ Model Jonathan Pleim 1, Gerald Gipson 2, Shawn Roselle 1, and Jeffrey Young 1 1 ASMD, ARL, NOAA, RTP, NC 2.
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.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division October 21, 2009 Evaluation of CMAQ.
Impact of dimethylsulfide chemistry on sulfate Golam Sarwar, Kathleen Fahey, Kristen Foley, Brett Gantt, Deborah Luecken, Rohit Mathur October 7, 2015.
Evaluation of CMAQ Driven by Downscaled Historical Meteorological Fields Karl Seltzer 1, Chris Nolte 2, Tanya Spero 2, Wyat Appel 2, Jia Xing 2 14th Annual.
Georgia Institute of Technology SUPPORTING INTEX THROUGH INTEGRATED ANALYSIS OF SATELLITE AND SUB-ORBITAL MEASUREMENTS WITH GLOBAL AND REGIONAL 3-D MODELS:
Peak 8-hr Ozone Model Performance when using Biogenic VOC estimated by MEGAN and BIOME (BEIS) Kirk Baker Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium October.
Office of Research and Development | National Exposure Research Laboratory Atmospheric Sciences Modeling and Analysis Division |Research Triangle Park,
AoH/MF Meeting, San Diego, CA, Jan 25, 2006 WRAP 2002 Visibility Modeling: Summary of 2005 Modeling Results Gail Tonnesen, Zion Wang, Mohammad Omary, Chao-Jung.
Operational Evaluation and Model Response Comparison of CAMx and CMAQ for Ozone & PM2.5 Kirk Baker, Brian Timin, Sharon Phillips U.S. Environmental Protection.
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.
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 Species to Emissions in the Southeast Sun-Kyoung Park and Armistead G. Russell Georgia Institute of Technology Sensitivity of PM.
Although this work was reviewed by EPA and approved for publication, it may not necessarily reflect official Agency policy Jonathan Pleim, Shawn Roselle,
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Examining the impact of aerosol direct.
Robin L. Dennis, Jesse O. Bash, Kristen M. Foley, Rob Gilliam, Robert W. Pinder U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Exposure Research Laboratory,
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Office of Research and Development.
Updates to model algorithms and inputs for the Biogenic Emissions Inventory System (BEIS) model Jesse Bash, Kirk Baker, George Pouliot, Donna Schwede,
Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory WRF-CMAQ 2-way Coupled System: Part II Jonathan.
Donna Schwede U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Development of a Multipollutant Version of the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Modeling System Shawn Roselle, Deborah Luecken, William Hutzell,
The 96th AMS Annual Meeting
A model of sea salt aerosol for Cape Grim Preliminary investigations
Changes to the Multi-Pollutant version in the CMAQ 4.7
Deborah Luecken and Golam Sarwar U.S. EPA, ORD/NERL
Current Research on 3-D Air Quality Modeling: wildfire!
Presentation transcript:

A new version of the Community Multiscale Air Quality Model: CMAQv5.1 EPA CMAQ Development Team Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division National Exposure Research Laboratory Office of Research and Development 1 CMAS Conference October 5, 2015

Recent CMAQ Versions Periodic Public Release of Improved versions of the Modeling System CMAQv4.7 (Fall 2008) and CMAQv4.7.1 (June 2010) – Supporting evaluation: Foley et al, Geoscientific Model Development, 2010 CMAQv5.0 (Feb. 2012) –Updates to gas-aqueous-aerosol chemistry and photolysis –Improved advective and turbulent transport –Major structural upgrades that improve flexibility and maintainability –2-way coupling between WRF-CMAQ –Bi-directional exchange: NH 3 and Hg CMAQv5.0.2 (May 2014) –Instrumented Models (Direct Decoupled Method (DDM), Source Apportionment, Sulfur Tracking) –Community Contributions (Volatility Basis Set (VBS)) CMAQv5.1 (October 2015) 2

Drivers: Multi-scale modeling 3 Hemispheric model needed to provide LBCs for US Domain – Intercontinental input increases importance as NAAQS are reduced Fine scales: – Urban Environments – Linkage with human exposure & health studies – Residual non-attainment Hemispheric model at 108 km provides LBCs for 12 km CONUS with nests to 4 km and 1 km

CMAQv5.1 Chemistry updates Moving towards improved integration of chemistry across all phases – Updates to CB05 to improve nitrogen cycling and nitrogen deposition – Additional sources of secondary organic aerosol (see talk by Pye) – Restructuring heterogeneous reactions and link with gas phase chemistry more transparency and higher accuracy in fast reactions on aerosols and soil surfaces – Expanded capability for aqueous organic chemistry (see Fahey poster) – Updates to photochemistry for effects of BC aerosol and improved representation of clouds (see talk by Hutzell) Updates to all three chemical mechanisms (CB05, SAPRC07, and RACM2) – Standard mechanisms more consistent with current research and reviews – Added first order marine depletion parameterized from halogens reduces ozone over marine environments and coastal regions 4

CMAQv5.1 Updates: Organic Nitrogen Chemistry and Deposition Issue: All organic nitrates are lumped into one species in CB05, but they can vary widely in physical and chemical properties. CMAQv5.1 has 7 modeled organic nitrate species 5 Better characterization of alkyl nitrates can improve predictions of NOy species and organic nitrogen deposition Alkyl nitrates PANs Measurements (Discover AQ) CMAQv5.02 CB05e51 CB05e51 with hydrolysis ParameterRepresentative valuesCMAQ v5.02CMAQ v5.1 (7 species) Henry’s Law coef. (M/atm)0.6 to 40, to 17,000. Reaction rate with OH (cm3/molecule-sec) 1.8e-13 to 1.1e-101.8e-131.1e-12 to 3.3e-11 Example (07/10/11) results for NOy

CMAQv5.1 Updates: Improving representation of marine environments Issue: Impact of deposition to seawater, simple halogen chemistry, and boundary conditions on O 3 over the CONUS domain. Boundary conditions accounting the effect of halogen chemistry is important 6 halogen chemistry effect Enhanced deposition effect Boundary condition effect Combined effect

CMAQv5.1 Updates: Aqueous chemistry with Rosenbrock Solver and kinetic mass transfer: AQCHEM-KMT Available for both standard AQCHEM chemistry as well as expanded mechanism that includes SOA formation from IEPOX/MPAN – Readily expandable for new chemistry or processes – Reduced potential for coding error (KPP-generated code) – Increased linkage between aqueous chemistry and cloud microphysical parameters – Increased computational requirements 7

CMAQv5.1 Updates: Secondary Organic Aerosols 8 AERO6 module updated SOA from isoprene updated  SOA from ISOPRENE + NO 3 added  Acid catalyzed SOA (AISO3J) updated to form from IEPOX [Pye et al ES&T] SOA from PAHs (naphthalene) added [Pye and Pouliot 2012 ES&T] SOA from alkanes added (CB05) or updated (SAPRC) [Pye and Pouliot 2012 ES&T] New AERO6i module Works with detailed isoprene chemistry (saprc07tic) Speciated epoxide SOA SOA from BVOC nitrates (see Pye talk) SOA from GLY/MGLY uptake on particles (see Pye talk)

CMAQv5.1 Updates: Aerosol Size Distribution Motivation: –Accurate aerosol size distribution is needed for estimating impacts on human health, ecosystems, visibility, and climate –Previous (limited) studies indicate particle number underestimated Updates: –Correction of current binary nucleation scheme (Vehkamaki et al., 2002) –Update PM emissions modal mass fractions and size distribution based on modern measurements (Ellerman and Covert, 2010) –Added gravitational settling of aerosols Impacts: –Small impact on mass concentrations, as expected –Compared to Pittsburgh Air Quality Study SMPS measurements, simulated number distributions better represent the observed magnitude and size distribution of particles Courtesy: Kathleen Fahey 9

CMAQv5.1 Updates: Sea-salt Emissions Model updates –Added dependency on sea surface temperature Better reflects recent measurements and findings –Reduced the size of the surf zone emissions Early Results –Less coarse mode sea salt aerosols In agreement with size resolved observations –More fine scale sea salt emissions In agreement with recent observations –Results in more aerosol nitrate in coastal areas As indicated by CALNex observations (Kelly et al JGR) Improves model biases but non-volatile NO 3 aerosol concentrations are still underestimated (Gantt et al GMDD) Improves evaluation against base cation wet deposition observations Courtesy: Jesse Bash Summer

Updates to the BEIS – BEIS Canopy Model Two layer model with leaf temperature parameterization Integrated with metrological model surface energy balance – BELD data Updated to NLCD, MODIS, and Forest Inventory Analysis (FIA) data Finer (grid cell versus county) spatial allocation of tree species Early Results – Improvements in evaluation against AQS hourly isoprene observations ~30% reduction in NMB and 15% reduction in NME – Small, ~1%-5%, Reduction bias and error in modeled PM 2.5 and O 3 estimates CMAQv5.1 Updates: Biogenic Emissions 11 For details see, Bash et al GMDD

CMAQv5.1 Updates: Dry Deposition and Bidirectional Exchange Redesign of dry deposition and vertical diffusion codes Utilizes a shared data module for meteorological and calculated environmental variables Shares data and calculated parameters between vertical diffusion, deposition, bidirectional exchange, and emissions Easier to maintain, update and modify code Revised O 3 deposition to vegetation Measurements indicate that it is not governed by O 3 solubility Set wet cuticular resistance to 385 s/m (Altimir et al. 2006) Scaled cuticular resistance at physisorbed H 2 O at RH > 70% Altimir et al. (2006) between dry and wet values Dry cuticular resistance of Wesley (1989) Results in approximately a 25% increase in nighttime O 3 deposition velocity and lower background O 3 concentration 12

Model structure and numerics Parallel I/O (Talk by Wong) More efficient PBL solver for ACM2 Run-time optimization – Optimized code in horizontal advection, aerosols, and chemistry – Large run time improvements in chemistry (~60%) and Aerosols (~15%) Run Time Results – Approximately 25% faster model run time over beta – Approximately 15% faster than v5.0.2 – Despite larger chemical mechanism (CB05TUCL vs CB05e51) – Despite more gas species in the CONC file (86 versus 91) 13 Beta V5.0 V5.1 Simulation days Run time (h)

Updates to Meteorology Modeling Improvement to WRFv3.7 (released April 2015) – Improvements in land surface and atmospheric boundary layer processes (PX LSM, ACM2) – Consistent changes in ACM2 in CMAQ more accurate representation of surface meteorology and pollutant concentrations day and night – Improved treatment of wetlands in PX LSM – Simple parameterization for urban development better prediction of effects of urban heat islands 14 Advanced data and assimilation techniques – Iterative data assimilation techniques for high resolution (i.e. 1 – 4 km grids) improved fine-scale simulations – High resolution SST, and snow analyses Re-calculation of Monin-Obukhov length in CMAQ to be consistent with ACM2 in WRF – Tends to reduce stability in CMAQ run and increase ozone concentrations Base New ACM2 and PX LSM

Evaluation Teaser See Wyat Appel’s talk on Wednesday for thorough evaluation CMAQv5.1/WRF3.7 compared to CMAQv5.0.2/WRFv3.4 for ozone CONUS July

PM2.5 in January

NO x in July

Conclusions Advanced science in chemistry (gas, aerosol, aqueous and heterogeneous), dry deposition, photolysis, boundary layer, biogenic emissions Improved computational efficiency Improved capabilities at large (hemispheric) and small (urban) scales Preliminary evaluation shows improved statistics for most metrics except increased mean ozone bias but also increased ozone correlation 2-way WRF/CMAQ has been updated to CMAQv5.1 and WRFv3.7 18

Extra 19

Drivers: Better Representation of concentration range (background to extreme) Scale Interactions: Tightening NAAQS and greater importance of characterizing “background” air pollution “FT” boundary contribution to surface O Hour Ozone Design Values across the U.S ppb 71-75ppb >75ppb 20 Modelled Apr-Oct mean US Background O 3 Air quality modeling suggests that an appreciable portion of the ozone in the western U.S. can be the result of sources other than U.S. anthropogenic emissions. Apportionment modeling suggests that much of this transport of ozone into the western U.S. from outside the domain occurs within the free troposphere. Plots courtesy of Kirk Baker and Pat Dolwick.

CMAQv5.1 Updates: Improving representation of marine environments Issue: Halogen chemistry and deposition to water are key sinks for O 3 in marine environments; their accurate representation impacts predictions of both long-range transport and ambient levels in coastal areas. 21

WRF/CMAQ 4 km comparison EC Aerosol Error difference: New ACM2 – Old ACM2 Small differences in Max 8-h Ozone Error in both direction (not shown) Reduction in EC error at most CSN sites but little difference at IMPROVE sites Very little difference in other aerosol species The new ACM2 results in substantial reductions in NO 2 error and bias, particularly in the Washington through New York urban corridor Number of Model/Obs Pairs NO 2 Error difference: New ACM2 – Old ACM2

Reduction in Error Increase in Error Enabling Fine-scale Applications: Improvements in Dynamics GHRSST(daily; 1km) Impervious Surface Fraction Improving representation of urban areas  Higher surface heat capacity of impervious surfaces  Greater heat storage  warmer nighttime temp.  Less stable nocturnal boundary layer  Urban heat island effects on pollutant mixing RMSE and bias reduced with GHRSST. Reduction is even greater compared to NAM 12-km SST data.  Implications for representing Bay Breeze and pollutant transport 23

CMAQv5.1 Updates: Gas-Phase Chemistry Mechanism Options: CB05, SAPRC07, and RACM2 Sarwar et al., ACP, (a) Predicted mean fromm CB05TU, (b) percent differences in mean HO between RACM2 and CB05TU, (c) a comparison of predicted median HO to observed median data from the 2006 Texas Air Quality Study A comparison of predicted daily maximum 8 h O3 with observations from the Air Quality System (when 8 h O3 > 75 ppbv). Error bars represent minimum and maximum values

2-way coupled WRF-CMAQ Coupled Meteorology and Air Quality model – Affords tighter temporal coupling between meteorological and chemical processes – Facilitates feedback effects where gas and aerosol concentrations can affect meteorological processes which then feedback to Air Quality – Last released version was based on WRFv3.4 and CMAQv5.0.2 – New release is updated to WRFv3.7 and CMAQv5.1 25

CMAQ 5.1 Run Time Optimization Profiled CMAQ 5.1 subroutines Model Changes – Optimized code in horizontal advection, aerosols, and chemistry – Large run time improvements in chemistry (~60%) and Aerosols (~15%) Run Time Results – Approximately 25% faster model run time over beta – Approximately 15% faster than v5.0.2 Despite larger chemical mechanism (CB05TUCL vs CB05e51) Despite more gas species in the CONC file (86 versus 91) 26 Beta V5.0 V5.1 Simulation days Run time (h)

Scale Interactions: Examining U.S. air quality in context of the global atmosphere Drivers: CMAQ Evolution 27

CMAQv5.1 Updates: Heterogeneous Chemistry When particle contain Cl, uptake of N 2 O 5 can also produce ClNO 2 Current model: Uptake of N 2 O 5 on aerosols Alters partitioning of reactive nitrogen, impacts oxidant chemistry, and thus impacts production of secondary pollutants (Sarwar et al., GRL, 2014) Average change in winter-time predictions due to ClNO 2 Chemistry TNO3 O 3 SO

WRF  x = 12 km: revised PX LSM and ACM2 vs Base New Model with Revised LSM Revised PBL Base Model Significant improvements in 2-m T and Q bias and error August 2006