Regional Air Quality Modeling: From Source Identification to Health Impacts Amit Marmur, …, many great students and senior researchers, and Armistead (Ted)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
High-Order DDM Sensitivity Analysis of Particular Matter in CMAQ Wenxian Zhang, Shannon Capps, Yongtao Hu, Athanasios Nenes, and Armistead Russell Georgia.
Advertisements

A numerical simulation of urban and regional meteorology and assessment of its impact on pollution transport A. Starchenko Tomsk State University.
Source Apportionment of PM 2.5 in the Southeastern US Sangil Lee 1, Yongtao Hu 1, Michael Chang 2, Karsten Baumann 2, Armistead (Ted) Russell 1 1 School.
1 Policies for Addressing PM2.5 Precursor Emissions Rich Damberg EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards June 20, 2007.
U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development October 30, 2013 Prakash V. Bhave, Mary K. McCabe, Valerie C. Garcia Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division.
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009 Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009.
Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, CA
Integration of CMAQ into the Western Macedonia environmental management system A. Sfetsos 1,2, J. Bartzis 2 1 Environmental Research Laboratory, NCSR Demokritos.
Evaluation of the AIRPACT2 modeling system for the Pacific Northwest Abdullah Mahmud MS Student, CEE Washington State University.
Next Gen AQ model Need AQ modeling at Global to Continental to Regional to Urban scales – Current systems using cascading nests is cumbersome – Duplicative.
Session 9, Unit 17 UAM and CAMx. UAM and CAMx UAM - Urban Airshed Model Currently available versions:  UAM-V 1.24  UAM-V 1.30  Available from Systems.
CMAQ (Community Multiscale Air Quality) pollutant Concentration change horizontal advection vertical advection horizontal dispersion vertical diffusion.
Air Quality Impact Analysis 1.Establish a relationship between emissions and air quality. AQ past = a EM past + b 2.A change in emissions results in an.
Air Quality, Atmospheric Deposition, and Lake Tahoe October 15, 2003 Western Regional Pollution Prevention Network Grannlibakken, Lake Tahoe Jim Pederson.
Xuexi Tie Xu Tang,Fuhai Geng, and Chunsheng Zhao Shanghai Meteorological Bureau Atmospheric Chemistry Division/NCAR Peking University Understand.
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.
(Impacts are Felt on Scales from Local to Global) Aerosols Link Climate, Air Quality, and Health: Dirtier Air and a Dimmer Sun Emissions Impacts == 
Sensitivity of top-down correction of 2004 black carbon emissions inventory in the United States to rural-sites versus urban-sites observational networks.
Clinton MacDonald 1, Kenneth Craig 1, Jennifer DeWinter 1, Adam Pasch 1, Brigette Tollstrup 2, and Aleta Kennard 2 1 Sonoma Technology, Inc., Petaluma,
01/22/2004 Assessing the Health Effects of Atlanta’s Air Pollution Jennifer L. Peel, PhD, MPH Emory University Rollins School of Public Health 01/22/2004.
EFFICIENT CHARACTERIZATION OF UNCERTAINTY IN CONTROL STRATEGY IMPACT PREDICTIONS EFFICIENT CHARACTERIZATION OF UNCERTAINTY IN CONTROL STRATEGY IMPACT PREDICTIONS.
The Impact of Biogenic VOC Emissions on Tropospheric Ozone Formation in the Mid-Atlantic Region Michelle L. Bell Yale University Hugh Ellis Johns Hopkins.
Georgia Environmental Protection Division Uncertainty Analysis of Ozone Formation and Emission Control Responses using High-order Sensitivities Di Tian,
INCORPORATING UNCERTAINTY INTO AIR QUALITY MODELING & PLANNING – A CASE STUDY FOR GEORGIA 7 th Annual CMAS Conference 6-8 th October, 2008 Antara Digar,
Georgia Institute of Technology PM Modeling and Source Apportionment Amit Marmur, Dan Cohan, Helena Park, Jeameen Baek, Sangil Lee, Mei Zhang, Jim Boylan,
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.
UNCERTAINTIES INFLUENCING HEALTH-BASED PRIORITIZATION OF OZONE ABATEMENT OPTIONS UNCERTAINTIES INFLUENCING HEALTH-BASED PRIORITIZATION OF OZONE ABATEMENT.
Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia Air Quality: A Tale of Four Cities Armistead (Ted) Russell Georgia Power Professor of Environmental Engineering.
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.
Atmospheric Modeling and its Application to Energy and the Environment: From Local Impacts to Climate Change Amit Marmur, …, K. Manomaiphiboon, …, and.
Wildland Fire Impacts on Surface Ozone Concentrations Literature Review of the Science State-of-Art Ned Nikolov, Ph.D. Rocky Mountain Center USDA FS Rocky.
New Techniques for Modeling Air Quality Impacts of DoD Activities Talat Odman and Ted Russell Environmental Engineering Department Georgia Institute of.
TEMIS user workshop, Frascati, 8-9 October 2007 TEMIS – VITO activities Felix Deutsch Koen De Ridder Jean Vankerkom VITO – Flemish Institute for Technological.
Evaluation of the VISTAS 2002 CMAQ/CAMx Annual Simulations T. W. Tesche & Dennis McNally -- Alpine Geophysics, LLC Ralph Morris -- ENVIRON Gail Tonnesen.
Session 5, CMAS 2004 INTRODUCTION: Fine scale modeling for Exposure and risk assessments.
Georgia Institute of Technology Adaptive Grid Modeling for Predicting the Air Quality Impacts of Biomass Burning Alper Unal, Talat Odman School of Civil.
GEOS-CHEM Modeling for Boundary Conditions and Natural Background James W. Boylan Georgia Department of Natural Resources - VISTAS National RPO Modeling.
1. How is model predicted O3 sensitive to day type emission variability and morning Planetary Boundary Layer rise? Hypothesis 2.
1 Aika Yano, Yongtao Hu, M. Talat Odman, Armistead Russell Georgia Institute of Technology October 15, th annual CMAS conference.
May 22, UNDERSTANDING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PRECURSOR REDUCTIONS IN LOWERING 8-HOUR OZONE CONCENTRATIONS Steve Reynolds Charles Blanchard Envair 12.
Types of Models Marti Blad Northern Arizona University College of Engineering & Technology.
Opening Remarks -- Ozone and Particles: Policy and Science Recent Developments & Controversial Issues GERMAN-US WORKSHOP October 9, 2002 G. Foley *US EPA.
Robert W. Pinder, Alice B. Gilliland, Robert C. Gilliam, K. Wyat Appel Atmospheric Modeling Division, NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, in partnership with.
Georgia Institute of Technology SAMI Aerosol Modeling: Performance Evaluation & Future Year Simulations Talat Odman Georgia Institute of Technology SAMI.
Georgia Tech Georgia Power Environmental Engineering Fellows at (and beyond) Georgia Tech.
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.
CHARGE QUESTIONS: ENDPOINTS  anthropogenic emissions   air pollution   climate OK, but can we be more specific?  Intercontinental transport of.
Intro to Modeling – Terms & concepts Marti Blad, Ph.D., P.E. ITEP
NPS Source Attribution Modeling Deterministic Models Dispersion or deterministic models Receptor Models Analysis of Spatial & Temporal Patterns Back Trajectory.
June 15, 2011 Bob Dulla Sierra Research. Fairbanks PM 2.5 Design Values* ( ) * 98 th Percentile Concentrations 2.
Breakout Session 1 Air Quality Jack Fishman, Randy Kawa August 18.
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.
Georgia Institute of Technology Evaluation of the 2006 Air Quality Forecasting Operation in Georgia Talat Odman, Yongtao Hu, Ted Russell School of Civil.
Accuracy of multi-parameter response surfaces generated from sensitivity coefficients Daniel Cohan and Antara Digar CMAS Conference 2009 October 19, 2009.
Implementation of a direct sensitivity method into CMAQ Daniel S. Cohan, Yongtao Hu, Amir Hakami, M. Talat Odman, Armistead G. Russell Georgia Institute.
Applicability of CMAQ-DDM to source apportionment and control strategy development Daniel Cohan Georgia Institute of Technology 2004 Models-3 Users’ Workshop.
7. Air Quality Modeling Laboratory: individual processes Field: system observations Numerical Models: Enable description of complex, interacting, often.
Mobile Source Contributions to Ambient PM2.5 and Ozone in 2025
Air Pollution and Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
Sunil Kumar TAC, COG July 9, 2007
EASIUR: A Reduced-Complexity Model Derived from CAMx
Sensitivity Analysis of Ozone in the Southeast
Stephen Mueller & Jonathan Mallard Tennessee Valley Authority
Uncertainties influencing dynamic evaluation of ozone trends
Georgia Institute of Technology
U.S. Perspective on Particulate Matter and Ozone
Diagnostic and Operational Evaluation of 2002 and 2005 Estimated 8-hr Ozone to Support Model Attainment Demonstrations Kirk Baker Donna Kenski Lake Michigan.
Presentation transcript:

Regional Air Quality Modeling: From Source Identification to Health Impacts Amit Marmur, …, many great students and senior researchers, and Armistead (Ted) Russell Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, Georgia USA

With Special Thanks to: Paige Tolbert and the Emory crew –As part of ARIES, SOPHIA, and follow on studies NIEHS, US EPA, FHWA, Southern Company, SAMI –Financial assistance JGSEE of Thailand And more…

Issues Approximately 799,000 excess deaths per year occur per year due to air pollution –487,000 in Asia (S, SE and W. Pacific) Variety of health impacts in Thailand tied to air pollutants –Primarily due to: PM2.5: small particles, Range of health impacts, visibility impairment, … Ozone PAPA Studies show strong associations with PM and ozone in Asia Most of PM 2.5 burden comes from combustion to transform energy –Primary and secondary emissions Need reliable approaches to identify how energy sources impact air quality: Source Apportionment –Air quality management –Health impact assessment

Ozone Formation h (sunlight) O3O3 NO x oxides of nitrogen (NO + NO 2 ) VOCs Volatile organic compounds E VOC E NOx Low O 3 High O 3 Ozone Isopleth

PM Formation h (sunlight) PM NO x VOCs, OC & EC SO 2 Sulfur dioxide

Particulate Matter Complex mixture of solid and liquid particles suspended in the ambient air Size classifications –“super-coarse” > 10μm –“coarse” (PM 10 ) < 10μm –“fine” (PM 2.5 ) < 2.5μm –“ultrafine” < 0.1μm Many sources Many chemical species:

Fine Particles: Why should we care ? Airway Inflammation Effects on Lung Function RESPIRATORY EFFECTS CARDIOVASCULAR EFFECTS Effects on Cardiovascular Function Vascular Inflammation Image courtesy of the U.S. EPA

Outline Atmospheric modeling –Types –Basics –Approaches Advanced approaches Applications –Source impacts –health impact assessment

PM (Source Apportionment) Models (those capable of providing some type of information as to how specific sources impact air quality) PM Models Emissions- Based Receptor Lag.Eulerian (grid) CMBFA PMF UNMIX Molec. Mark.Norm. “Mixed PM” Source Specific* Hybrid First-principle Statistical

Role of Atmospheric Modeling In Air Quality Assessment Emissions Air Quality/Health Impacts Control s Pollutant Distributions Air Quality Model Air Quality Goals or

Receptor Models Obsserved Air Quality C i (t) Source Impacts S j (t) C i - ambient concentration of specie i (  g/m 3 ) f i,j - fraction of specie i in emissions from source j S j - contribution (source-strength) of source j (  g/m 3 )

Receptor Models Strengths –Results tied to observed air quality –Less resource intensive (provided data is available) Weaknesses –Data dependent (accuracy, availability, quantity, etc.) Monitor Source characteristics –Not apparent how to calculate uncertainties –Do not add “coverage” directly

Emissions-based Air Quality Model Representation of physical and chemical processes –Numerical integration routines Scientifically most sound method to link future emissions changes to air quality Computational Planes Air Quality Model 200 species x hor. grids x 20 layers= 40 million coupled, stiff non-linear differential equations Atmospheric Diffusion Equation Discretize Operator splitting Emissions Chemistry Meteorology Numerics C=AxB+E

Air Quality Model Air Quality Temperature Radiation Cloud Cover Wind Emissions 1. Anthropogenic 2. Geogenic 3. Biogenic Sources Transported Pollutants Sources (E,S, BCs) Geographical Features Transport (U, K, V d ) Turbulence Numerical Solution Techniques Surface Deposition Sink Processes Topography & Land use Photochemical Reactions Thermochemical Reactions Homogeneous Processes Heterogeneous Processes Computed Concentrations Meteorology Aerosol Dynamics Chemical Processes (R) Chemistry and Aerosol Dynamics

Atmospheric Modeling Process Foundation Pollutant Distributions Evolving: Sensitivities Uncertainties Emissions Model Meteorological Inputs Historical 2- or 3-D winds; Ground level T, RH; Mixing height, Land use Evolving: 3-D Winds, Diffusivities, Temp., RH, D, Solar Insolation (UV & total solar)... Chemical Mechanism Historical: Specified Evolving: Compiler Numerical Routines Historical: Advection Chem. Kinet. Evolving Sens. Anal. Proc. Integ. Unc. Anal. Air Quality Model Emissions Inputs Historical: NO, NO 2, HONO Lumped VOCs CO, SO 2 Evolving: PM, NH 3, Detailed VOCs, Adv. Biogenics Inputs: Emissions Inventory Population Roads Land Use Industry Meteorology Model Parameter Calculation Temperature, Solar Insolation Chemical Mechanism Specification Chemical Mechanism Specification Air Quality Data Analysis and Processing Meteorological Model (Diagnostic or Prognostic) Meteorological Model (Diagnostic or Prognostic) Model Evaluation Air Quality Observations Air Quality Observations Meteorological Observations Meteorological Observations Emissions, Industry and Human Activity Data Emissions, Industry and Human Activity Data Topographical Data Topographical Data Emissions Inventory Development Emissions Inventory Development

Grids Nested Multiscale (Odman et al.) Adaptive (Odman et al.) About 15 vertical Layers up to 15 km (many in first 1 km)

How well do they work?* *Performance relies on quality of inputs. US has spent decades on emissions inventory development. Meteorological modeling also contributes significantly to errors

Source-based Models Strengths –Direct link between sources and air quality –Provides spatial, temporal and chemical coverage Weaknesses –Result accuracy limited by input data accuracy (meteorology, emissions…) –Resource intensive

Hybrid: Inverse Model Approach* Emissions (E ij (x,t)) C i (x,t), F ij(x,t), & S j (x,t) Air Quality Model + DDM-3D Receptor Model Observations taken from routine measurement networks or special field studies New emissions: E ij (x,t) Other Inputs INPUTS Main assumption in the formulation: A major source for the discrepancy between predictions and observations are the emission estimates

What’s next? Emissions-based air quality models work pretty well, how might we use them: –Identify, quantitatively, how specific sources impact air quality. –Develop and test control strategies Decoupled direct method (implemented in CIT, URM, MAQSIP, CMAQ, CAMX) –Dunker: initial applications –Yang et al.: large scale application, comp. efficient (CIT, URM) –Hakami et al.,Cohan et al: Higher order, with applications (MAQSIP, CMAQ) –Napelenok eet al., : PM Control strategy assessment –Least cost approach to attainment for Macon, GA (Cohan et al.) Assessing impacts of individual sources Area of Influence analysis (AOI) (similar information as developing the adjoint) –Or AOPI (potential influence) Application to health assessment

Emissions reductions lead to about a 12 ppb ozone reduction: Atlanta and Macon do not attain ozone standard (Macon by 6ppb) Example Results : Impact of Planned Controls: 2000 vs. 2007

Sensitivity analysis Given a system, find how the state (concentrations) responds to incremental changes in the input and model parameters: Inputs (P) Model Parameters (P) Model Sensitivity Parameters: State Variables: If P j are emissions, S ij are the sensitivities/responses to emission changes, e.g.., the sensitivity of ozone to Atlanta NOx emissions

Define first order sensitivities as Take derivatives of Solve sensitivity equations simultaneously Sensitivity Analysis with Decoupled Direct Method (DDM): The Power of the Derivative AdvectionDiffusionChemistryEmissions

3-D Air Quality Model NO o NO 2 o VOC i o... T K u, v, w E i k i BC i... O 3 (t,x,y,z) NO(t,x,y,z) NO 2 (t,x,y,z) VOC i (t,x,y,z)... DDM-3D Sensitivity Analysis DDM-3D J decoupled

DDM compared to Brute Force Emissions of SO 2 Sulfate EBEB EAEA CBCB CACA

Consistency of first-order sensitivities Brute Force (20% change) DDM-3D R 2 > 0.99 Low bias & error

Advantages of DDM-3D Computes sensitivities of all modeled species to many different parameters in one simulation –Can “tell” model to give sensitivities to 10s of parameters in the same run Captures small perturbations in input parameters –Strangely wonderful Avoids numerical errors sometimes present in sensitivities calculated with Brute Force Lowers the requirement for computational resources

Evidence of Numerical Errors in BF NH 4 sensitivity to domain-wide SO 2 reductions NOx reductions at a point

Efficiency of DDM-3D

Control Strategy Development Macon out of attainment by 6 ppb in 2007 Want to identify least cost control strategy Process: –Identify possible controls and costs ($/ton of VOC or NOx) –Simulate response to controls (  [O 3 ]/ton VOC or NOx) –Calculate control effectiveness(  [O 3 ]/$) –Choose most effective controls until get 6 ppb –Test strategy

Sources of Macon’s ozone Macon Scherer Atlanta Branch 8-hr ozone, Aug. 17, 2000 (2007 emissions) M A S B

Sensitivity of 8-hr Ozone in Macon

NO x emission rates (tpd) Macon ozone sensitivity (ppt/tpd) 2007 Emissions and Sensitivities

Source-Receptor Response Marginal Abatement Costs by Region Cost-optimization Choose options with least marginal $/impact until: (1) attain a.q. goal, or (2) reach budget constraint Cost Impact

Strategies for Macon attainment (need 6.5 ppb) Key Measures Zero-cost options (PRB coal, burning ban,...): 1.72 ppb, $0 Bibb industrial NO x : 0.82 ppb, $2.6 million Locomotive controls: 0.77 ppb, $7.3 million SCRs at Scherer: 1.63 ppb, $20.9 million Vehicle I&M in Bibb: 0.25 ppb, $4.9 million

Provide a technique to evaluate the impacts from a single large emissions source on regional air quality, incorporating non-linear processes and multi-day effects in estimating pollutant responses to relatively small emissions perturbations. Single-Source Impact Analysis (Bergin et al.)

Motivation and Application The ability to evaluate regional secondary pollution impacts from large single sources would provide a valuable tool for more effective air quality management practices, such as refining programs (e.g. emissions trading, regional planning), and supporting more effective compliance enforcement. Typical modeling approach (removing the emissions from a single source) has numerical errors. Court case led to need to assess impact of a single power plant (Sammis) in Ohio on downwind areas (a distance of up to about 1000 km)

Average Day Elevated NO x Emissions W. H. Sammis Power Plant (court estimated emissions) May-95Jul-95Aug-00 Ohio Elevated EGU Jul-95 Model Inventory NOx Emissions (avg tons/day) excess allowable Court Estimated from W.H. Sammis Plant

Approach Two air quality models and grids, three ozone episodes, and three sensitivity techniques (brute-force, DDM, higher order DDM) CMAQ, 36x36 km Aug , ord. DDM URM, multiscale from 24x24 km 2 July and May 24-29, 1995 DDM

Maximum increase in 1-hr avg O 3 Comparison of the maximum increase in hourly-averaged ozone concentrations due to excess NO x emissions from the Sammis plant. (a)July 11-19, 1995(b) May 24-29, 1995(c) August 12-20, 2000 URM with DDM CMAQ with 2 nd order DDM

When O 3 > ppm 1-hr O 3 cell responses to excess emissions All hours Max. increases Max. decreases maximum = 2.2 minimum = -3.6 minimum = -1.2 CMAQ, 2 nd ord DDM, August

Conclusions Single-source simulation results agree with past field experiments, indicating that appropriate modeling techniques are available for quantifying single-source regional air quality impacts.

Air Quality Models and Health Impact Assessment (How) Can we use “air quality models” to help identify associations between ozone PM sources and health impacts? –Species vs. sources –Very different than for traditional air quality management

Epidemiology Identify associations between air quality metrics and health endpoints: Sulfate Health endpoints Statistical Analysis Association

Epidemiologic Analysis log{E(CVD)} =  +  [PM 2.5 ] + covariate terms Covariates: time trend (mo. knots), day-of-week, holidays, hospital entry/exit, temperature, dew point Exposure: daily PM 2.5 (  g/m 3 ); lag 0, 1, 2 Outcome: daily ED visit counts for CVD

Association between CVD Visits and Air Quality (Tolbert et al., 2004)

Issues May not be measuring the species primarily impacting health –Observations limited to subset of compounds present Many species are correlated – Inhibits correctly isolating impacts of a species/primary actors Inhibits identifying the important source(s) Observations have errors –Traditional: Measurement is not perfect –Representativeness (is this an error? Yes, in an epi-sense) Observations are sparse –Limited spatially and temporally Multiple pollutants may combine to impact health –Statistical models can have trouble identifying such phenomena Ultimately want how a source impacts health –We control sources

Use AQ Models to Address Issues: Link Sources to Impacts Data Air Quality Model Source Impacts S(x,t) Health Endpoints Statistical Analysis Association between Source Impact and Health Endpoints

Source Impacts on Air Quality (Nov 1998 – Aug 2000) CMB Source Impacts

Power-plant derived SO 4 -2

Diesel Elemental Carbon Particulate Matter

Source-specific RRs: Wood burning RR 95% CI All respiratory (263 daily ED visits)All cardiovascular (86 daily ED visits) RR significant if CI does not cross unity (RR=1.0)

Source-specific RRs: Wood burning RR All respiratory (263 daily ED visits)All cardiovascular (86 daily ED visits) Wood- PMF K Wood- CMB-LGO OC PM 2.5

Source-specific RRs: Mobile sources All respiratory (263 daily ED visits) All cardiovascular (86 daily ED visits) Diesel- PMF,CMB-LGO Mobile- PMF PM 2.5 CO EC Fe Gas- PMF CO

Source-specific RRs: Soil dust Soil- CMB-LGO All resp. (263 ED visits) All CVD (86 ED visits) Asthma (54 ED visits) Soil- PMF Si Soil- CMB-LGO PM 2.5

Source-specific RRs: “Other” OC “Other” OC OC PM 2.5

Summary Air quality models provide powerful tools to link how energy conversion and utilization impact air quality, health and the environment. –Emissions-based (First principles) –Receptor (statistical) models Advanced techniques provide means to efficiently assess impacts from individual sources and non-linear interactions –DDM Application of PM Source apportionment models in health studies more demanding than traditional modeling –Provide additional power and insight to identifying which sources impact health, not just which species Particularly important for organic carbon that comes from many sources

Thanks… Questions?