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

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Mercury in SF Bay The 8-Minute Conceptual Model California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region RMP Annual Meeting May 4, 2004.

Advertisements

Modeling Atmospheric Mercury Deposition to the Sounds and Other Water Bodies O. Russell Bullock, Jr. NOAA Air Resources Laboratory (On assignment to the.

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.

Using the Clean Water Act to Reduce Mercury in the Northeast Susy King September 8, 2010.

Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, CA

Atmospheric modelling activities inside the Danish AMAP program Jesper H. Christensen NERI-ATMI, Frederiksborgvej Roskilde.

Global Transport of Mercury (Hg) Compounds Noelle Eckley EPS Second Year Symposium September 2003 Photo: AMAP & Geological Museum, Copenhagen.

Mercury in the Great Lakes Region Sponsored by the Commission for Environmental Cooperation’s Environment, Economy and Trade and Pollutants and Health.

Atmospheric Mercury Simulation with CMAQ Version Russ Bullock - NOAA Air Resources Laboratory* Kathy Brehme - Computer Sciences Corp. 5 th Annual.

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.

Wet Deposition of Mercury In The U.S. Results from the NADP Mercury Deposition Network, David Gay Illinois State Water Survey, Champaign, IL,

(work funded through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative)

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.

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)

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.

Plume-in-Grid Modeling for PM & Mercury Prakash Karamchandani, Krish Vijayaraghavan, Shu-Yun Chen & Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, CA 5th Annual CMAS.

Examination of the impact of recent laboratory evidence of photoexcited NO 2 chemistry on simulated summer-time regional air quality Golam Sarwar, Robert.

Trans-Pacific Chemical Transport of Mercury: Sensitivity Analysis on Asian Emission Contribution to Mercury Deposition in North America Using CMAQ-Hg C.-J.

Mercury in the West* Land and Water Fund of the Rockies and Rocky Mountain Office of Environmental Defense January 2003 *The information in this presentation.

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

O. Russell Bullock, Jr. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division (in partnership with the U.S. Environmental.

2004 Workplan WRAP Regional Modeling Center Prepared by: Gail Tonnesen, University of California Riverside Ralph Morris, ENVIRON Corporation Zac Adelman,

Importance of Lightning NO for Regional Air Quality Modeling Thomas E. Pierce/NOAA Atmospheric Modeling Division National Exposure Research Laboratory.

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.

Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and Emission Reduction An FAA/NASA/TC-sponsored Center of Excellence A Comparison of CMAQ Predicted Contributions.

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

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

Predicting Effects of Point Source Controls on Escambia Bay using CMAQ and Watershed Models by Jo Ellen Brandmeyer, Steve Beaulieu, Randy Dodd, and Michele.

Fine scale air quality modeling using dispersion and CMAQ modeling approaches: An example application in Wilmington, DE Jason Ching NOAA/ARL/ASMD RTP,

Global Modeling of Mercury in the Atmosphere using the GEOS-CHEM model Noelle Eckley, Rokjin Park, Daniel Jacob 30 January 2004.

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

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.

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.

Modeling the Atmospheric Deposition of Mercury to Lake Champlain (from Anthropogenic Sources in the U.S. and Canada) Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources.

4. Atmospheric chemical transport models 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Box model 4.3 Three dimensional atmospheric chemical transport model.

Sensitivity Evaluation of Gas-phase Reduction Mechanisms of Divalent Mercury Using CMAQ-Hg in a Contiguous US Domain Pruek Pongprueksa a, Che-Jen Lin a,

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.

1 Modeling the Atmospheric Transport and Deposition of Mercury Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Silver Spring, Maryland Mercury Workshop, Great.

Evaluation of pollution levels of lead and PCB-153 over Central Asian (CA) countries within CAPACT project (preliminary results) Ilia Ilyin, EMEP/MSC-E.

William G. Benjey* Physical Scientist NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division Research Triangle Park, NC Fifth Annual CMAS.

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

GEOS-CHEM Modeling for Boundary Conditions and Natural Background James W. Boylan Georgia Department of Natural Resources - VISTAS National RPO Modeling.

Estimating background ozone in surface air over the United States with global 3-D models of tropospheric chemistry Description, Evaluation, and Results.

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

1 Prakash Karamchandani 1, David Parrish 2, Lynsey Parker 1, Thomas Ryerson 3, Paul O. Wennberg 4, Alex Teng 4, John D. Crounse 4, Greg Yarwood 1 1 Ramboll.

Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Silver Spring, Maryland

The Atmospheric Transport and Deposition of Mercury to the Great Lakes Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Silver Spring, Maryland Collection.

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

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

Organization of Course INTRODUCTION 1.Course overview 2.Air Toxics overview 3.HYSPLIT overview HYSPLIT Theory and Practice 4.Meteorology 5.Back Trajectories.

Photochemical grid model estimates of lateral boundary contributions to ozone and particulate matter across the continental United States Kirk Baker U.S.

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.

Source-apportionment for atmospheric mercury deposition: Where does the mercury in mercury deposition come from? Mark Cohen, Roland Draxler, and Richard.

UNEP Global Partnership on Mercury Air Transport and Fate Research - Canadian Contribution - Grace Howland Environment Canada, Chemicals Management Division.

Informed NPS Air Quality Management Decisions in Response to a Changing Climate.

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,

Japan’s recent activities on mercury

Impact on Recent North American Air Quality Forecasts of Replacing a Retrospective U.S. Emissions Inventory with a Projected Inventory Michael Moran1,

M. Samaali, M. Sassi, V. Bouchet

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:

Application of the CMAQ Particle and Precursor Tagging Methodology (PPTM) to Support Water Quality Planning for the Virginia Mercury Study 6 th Annual CMAS Conference Chapel Hill, NC 1-3 October 2007 Presented by Sharon Douglas ICF International, San Rafael, CA

Co-Authors: Tom Myers Yihua Wei Jay Haney Mike Kiss Patty Buonviri ICF Virginia DEQ

Presentation Outline Background & objectives Overview of CMAQ/PPTM Application of CMAQ/PPTM modeling for the Virginia Mercury Study

Background Atmospheric deposition of mercury is a source of mercury contamination in surface waters In the U.S., more than 8,500 bodies of water have been identified as mercury impaired Within Virginia, fish consumption advisories have been issues for several bodies of water located primarily along the coastal plain susceptible to mercury methylation & bioaccumulation of mercury in fish

Virginia Mercury Study Air Quality Modeling Objectives Review & update the Virginia mercury point source inventory Prepare “conceptual description” of mercury deposition characteristics for Virginia Conduct air quality modeling to simulate and quantify the contribution of regional and local emissions, and to provide information for TMDL assessments Evaluate the effectiveness of future national and state control measures to meet water quality goals

Mercury Deposition Modeling Approach: Baseline Modeling 2001 Meteorological Inputs2002 Criteria Pollutant & Mercury Emissions Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Model, Version 4.6 AERMOD Gaussian Model CMAQ Performance Evaluation CMAQ Sensitivity Analysis CMAQ Particle & Precursor Tagging Methodology (PPTM) Identification of Sources with Significant Local Contributions AERMOD Sensitivity Analysis Assessment of Global, National, Regional, and Source-Specific Contributions

Mercury Deposition Modeling Approach: Future-Year Modeling 2001 Meteorological Inputs Future-Year Criteria Pollutant & Mercury Emissions 2010, 2015 & 2018 CMAQ, Version 4.6 w/PPTM AERMOD Expected Future Changes in Local Contributions Assessment of Future Control Measure Effectiveness Future-Year Projections Future-Year Mercury Contribution Analysis Information for Water Quality Modeling, TMDL…

CMAQ Version 4.6 w/Mercury Three species: elemental mercury (Hg 0 ), reactive gaseous mercury (RGM or Hg 2+ ), and particulate mercury (PHg) Gaseous & aqueous reactions involving mercury (Bullock & Breme, 2002) Recent enhancements include: improved dry deposition algorithm & natural emissions

Overview of the CMAQ Particle & Precursor Tagging Methodology (PPTM) PPTM can be applied for all PM species and for mercury (OPTM for ozone) Emissions (or initial/boundary condition) species are tagged in the emissions (or IC/BC) files and continuously tracked throughout the simulation Tags can be applied to source regions, source categories, individual sources, and/or IC/BCs PPTM quantifies the contribution of tagged sources to simulated species concentrations & deposition

Overview of PPTM For mercury, tagged elements include HG, HGIIGAS, HGIIAER, APHGI, APHGJ Within the model, tagging is accomplished by the addition of duplicate species (e.g., HG_t1, HG_t2) Tagged species have the same properties and are subjected to the same processes (e.g., advection, chemical transformation, deposition) as the actual species Base simulation results not affected by tagging

Application of CMAQ/PPTM for the Virginia Mercury Study PPTM #1 Tag 1: All anthropogenic Hg sources in VA Tag 2: All other Hg sources in the 12-km grid PPTM #2 Tag 1: EGU sources in VA Tag 2: Other EGU sources in the 12-km grid Tag 3: All other Hg sources in the 12-km grid

Virginia Mercury Study CMAQ Modeling Domain 36 km 12 km

CMAQ Base Results: Total Hg Deposition Results shown here are for July

CMAQ Base Results: Wet & Dry Hg Deposition Results shown here are for July DryWet

Results for PPTM#1: Total Hg Deposition Results shown here are for July VAOther

Regional Mercury Emissions Based on 2002 VDEQ and NEI Version 3 emissions

Results for PPTM#2: Total Hg Deposition Results shown here are for July VA EGUOther EGU

Results for PPTM#2: Total Hg Deposition Results shown here are for July Other

Summary CMAQ/PPTM can be used to track the fate of mercury emissions from selected sources & quantify their contribution to CMAQ-derived concentration and deposition estimates Preliminary results for the Virginia Mercury Study indicate that Wet & dry deposition vary with meteorology and have distinctly different patterns Both local and regional sources contribute to Hg deposition in VA Transport from outside of the 12-km domain is an important contributor to mercury deposition in VA