Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Evaluating.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Analysis of CMAQ Performance and Grid-to- grid Variability Over 12-km and 4-km Spacing Domains within the Houston airshed Daiwen Kang Computer Science.
Advertisements

Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Changes in U.S. Regional-Scale Air.
Template Development and Testing of PinG and VBS modules in CMAQ 5.01 Prakash Karamchandani, Bonyoung Koo, Greg Yarwood and Jeremiah Johnson ENVIRON International.
An Assessment of CMAQ with TEOM Measurements over the Eastern US Michael Ku, Chris Hogrefe, Kevin Civerolo, and Gopal Sistla PM Model Performance Workshop,
Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute (EOHSI) 170 Frelinghuysen Road, Piscataway, NJ Presented at CMAS Conference October 17,
The AIRPACT-3 Photochemical Air Quality Forecast System: Evaluation and Enhancements Jack Chen, Farren Thorpe, Jeremy Avis, Matt Porter, Joseph Vaughan,
Integration of CMAQ into the Western Macedonia environmental management system A. Sfetsos 1,2, J. Bartzis 2 1 Environmental Research Laboratory, NCSR Demokritos.
Jenny Stocker, Christina Hood, David Carruthers, Martin Seaton, Kate Johnson, Jimmy Fung The Development and Evaluation of an Automated System for Nesting.
Operational Air Quality and Source Contribution Forecasting in Georgia Georgia Institute of Technology Yongtao Hu 1, M. Talat Odman 1, Michael E. Chang.
CMAQ Sensitivity Testing for the Eastern United States Jeffrey W. Stehr Department of Meteorology University of Maryland October 22, 2002 Durham, NC, Models-3.
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.
Examination of the impact of recent laboratory evidence of photoexcited NO 2 chemistry on simulated summer-time regional air quality Golam Sarwar, Robert.
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.
Modeling Studies of Air Quality in the Four Corners Region National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Cooperative Institute for Research in.
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.
Implementation of the Particle & Precursor Tagging Methodology (PPTM) for the CMAQ Modeling System: Mercury Tagging 5 th Annual CMAS Conference Research.
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.
Georgia Environmental Protection Division Uncertainty Analysis of Ozone Formation and Emission Control Responses using High-order Sensitivities Di Tian,
Impacts of Biomass Burning Emissions on Air Quality and Public Health in the United States Daniel Tong $, Rohit Mathur +, George Pouliot +, Kenneth Schere.
Annual Simulations of Models-3/CMAQ: Issues and Lessons Learned Pat Dolwick, Carey Jang, Norm Possiel, Brian Timin, Joe Tikvart Air Quality Modeling Group.
1 Neil Wheeler, Kenneth Craig, and Clinton MacDonald Sonoma Technology, Inc. Petaluma, California Presented at the Sixth Annual Community Modeling and.
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.
Georgia Environmental Protection Division IMPACTS OF MODELING CHOICES ON RELATIVE RESPONSE FACTORS IN ATLANTA, GA Byeong-Uk Kim, Maudood Khan, Amit Marmur,
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.
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.
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 +,
Application of Models-3/CMAQ to Phoenix Airshed Sang-Mi Lee and Harindra J. S. Fernando Environmental Fluid Dynamics Program Arizona State University.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Using Dynamical Downscaling to Project.
Special Session on Air Quality Modeling Applications 10 th Annual CMAS Conference October 24, 2011 in memory of Dr. Daewon Byun
Evaluation of Emission Control Strategies for Regional Scale Air Quality: Performance of Direct and Surrogate Techniques Presented at the 6 th Annual CMAS.
Evaluation of the VISTAS 2002 CMAQ/CAMx Annual Simulations T. W. Tesche & Dennis McNally -- Alpine Geophysics, LLC Ralph Morris -- ENVIRON Gail Tonnesen.
Overview of the Climate Impact on Regional Air Quality (CIRAQ) Project Ellen J. Cooter *, Alice Gilliland *, William Benjey *, Robert Gilliam * and Jenise.
Session 5, CMAS 2004 INTRODUCTION: Fine scale modeling for Exposure and risk assessments.
Applications of Models-3 in Coastal Areas of Canada M. Lepage, J.W. Boulton, X. Qiu and M. Gauthier RWDI AIR Inc. C. di Cenzo Environment Canada, P&YR.
U.S. EPA and WIST Rob Gilliam *NOAA/**U.S. EPA
Modeling Regional Haze in Big Bend National Park with CMAQ Betty Pun, Christian Seigneur & Shiang-Yuh Wu AER, San Ramon Naresh Kumar EPRI, Palo Alto CMAQ.
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.
Effects of Emission Adjustments on Peak Ground-Level Ozone Concentration in Southeast Texas Jerry Lin, Thomas Ho, Hsing-wei Chu, Heng Yang, Santosh Chandru,
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,
Diagnostic Study on Fine Particulate Matter Predictions of CMAQ in the Southeastern U.S. Ping Liu and Yang Zhang North Carolina State University, Raleigh,
Seasonal Modeling of the Export of Pollutants from North America using the Multiscale Air Quality Simulation Platform (MAQSIP) Adel Hanna, 1 Rohit Mathur,
Evaluating temporal and spatial O 3 and PM 2.5 patterns simulated during an annual CMAQ application over the continental U.S. Evaluating temporal and spatial.
Opening Remarks -- Ozone and Particles: Policy and Science Recent Developments & Controversial Issues GERMAN-US WORKSHOP October 9, 2002 G. Foley *US EPA.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division October 21, 2009 Evaluation of CMAQ.
Peak 8-hr Ozone Model Performance when using Biogenic VOC estimated by MEGAN and BIOME (BEIS) Kirk Baker Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium October.
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.
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.
Daiwen Kang 1, Rohit Mathur 2, S. Trivikrama Rao 2 1 Science and Technology Corporation 2 Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division ARL/NOAA NERL/U.S. EPA.
Evaluations of CMAQ Simulations in southern Taiwan
Development of a Multipollutant Version of the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Modeling System Shawn Roselle, Deborah Luecken, William Hutzell,
Statistical Methods for Model Evaluation – Moving Beyond the Comparison of Matched Observations and Output for Model Grid Cells Kristen M. Foley1, Jenise.
CRC NARSTO-Northeast Modeling Study
16th Annual CMAS Conference
C. Nolte, T. Spero, P. Dolwick, B. Henderson, R. Pinder
Photochemical Model Performance and Consistency
SELECTED RESULTS OF MODELING WITH THE CMAQ PLUME-IN-GRID APPROACH
Deborah Luecken and Golam Sarwar U.S. EPA, ORD/NERL
J. Burke1, K. Wesson2, W. Appel1, A. Vette1, R. Williams1
Simulation of Ozone and PM in Southern Taiwan
Steve Griffiths, Rob Lennard and Paul Sutton* (*RWE npower)
WRAP Modeling Forum, San Diego
Presentation transcript:

Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Evaluating Ozone Predictions from Photochemical Models Using NE-OPS 1999 Observations Qing Sun, Anatharaman Chandrasekar, Panos G. Georgopoulos Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, a joint project of UMDNJ — R. W. Johnson Medical School and Rutgers University 170 Frelinghuysen Road, Piscataway, New Jersey C. Russell Philbrick Penn State University, Department of Electrical Engineering and Applied Research Laboratory, University Park, Pennsylvania Bruce Doddridge University of Maryland, Department of Meteorology, College Park, Maryland One Atmosphere, One Community, One Modeling System: Models-3 Users’ Workshop October 27-29, 2003 Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Outline Summary of the NE-OPS 1999 study Applications of and evaluation of CMAQ and CAMx Discussions and future work

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Summary of the NE-OPS Study North East - Oxidant and Particle Study (NE-OPS), sponsored by EPA Objectives: –Determine conditions leading to high O3 and PM –Local vs distant sources –Roles of meteorological properties Participants: Penn State, Millersville, Harvard SPH, Univ Maryland, SUNY at Albany, Rutgers, Brookhaven Nat Lab, PNNL, etc Location: centered at the Baxter water treatment plant in north Philadelphia Time span: 1999 – 2001 (this study uses data from July 11-25, 1999) Included both meteorological and air quality measurements Measurements approaches: instrumented airplanes; Radar wind profiler/RASS sounder; Lidar atmospheric profile sensor; tethered balloons; ozonesondes, rawinsondes, and ground based measurements of PM compositions.

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Nested Modeling Domain

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Monitor Stations and NE-OPS Flight Tracks

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Problem specifications Modeling period: 7/11/1999 to 7/25/1999 Three levels of nested grids (36km, 12km and 4km) Grid dimensions: 72×60, 69×54 and 63×72 14 Layers for CMAQ, 8 for CAMx Meteorology prepared with MM5 Emissions prepared from USEPA’s 1998 NET inventory, using SMOKE

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC NOx and VOC Emissions

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Model Configuration CMAQCAMx AdvectionBott schemeSmolarkiewicz scheme TurbulenceK-theory based eddy formulation ChemistryRADM2 or CB4CB4 mechanism with updated isoprene chemistry Number of gas-phase chemical species 59 (RADM2); 36 (CB4) 25 Number of chemical reactions 157 (RADM2); 93 (CB4) 96

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Run Time Comparison CMAQCAMx Nesting1-way nesting2-way nesting Type of machine used Sun Fire 280R with dual 750 Hz UltraSPARC-III CPU and 4GB memory Linux PC with single AMD Athlon XP 1800 and 1GB memory Run Time3-4 hours per model day for each grid About 0.5 hour per model day for the 3-level nested grid

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Daily maxima of ground level ozone for 7/18/1999 CMAQ CAMx AirNow

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Daily maxima of ground level ozone for 7/19/1999 CMAQ CAMx AirNow

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Daily maxima of ground level ozone for 7/20/1999 CMAQ CAMx AirNow

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Space-time paired comparisons of ground level ozone with observation CMAQ CAMx

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Quantile-quantile comparisons of ground level ozone with observation CMAQ CAMx

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Model-to-model comparison

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Ozone Time Series Comparison between Model Predictions and Observations at Middlesex, NJ

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Ozone Time Series Comparison between Model Predictions and Observations at Philadelphia

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Selected NEOPS Flights

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Comparison with flight measurements (I)

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Comparison with flight measurements (II)

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Conclusions The two models, CMAQ and CAMx, predicted similar general patterns of pollutant spatial and temporal distributions There is considerable discrepancy of predictions by the two models for surface ozone: –CAMx significantly over-predicting ozone peaks for certain days during the high ozone hours –CAMx predicts close-to-zero ozone during the nights, probably reflecting the failure of the model to sufficiently account for the effects of an upper layer ozone reservoir accumulated during the daytime hours for the high ozone days

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC On-going and future work Parallel processing on Linux cluster Emissions from 1999 and projected 2001(?) NEI Seasonal or annual runs of CMAQ and CAMx Linking the annual air quality applications with MENTOR/SHEDS for exposure/dose analyses MENTOR – Modeling Environment for Total Risk SHEDS – Stochastic Human Exposure and Dose Simulation

Computational Chemodynamics Laboratory EOHSI - Exposure Measurement & Assessment Division Models-3 Users’ Workshop 2003 Research Triangle Park, NC Acknowledgements State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) funded Ozone Research Center (ORC) U.S. EPA Center for Exposure and Risk Modeling (CERM) (EPAR ) U.S. EPA funded NorthEast Oxidant and Particle Study (NE-OPS) (EPA-TPSU-UMDNJ )