Georgia Institute of Technology Sensitivity of Future Year Results to Boundary Conditions Jim Boylan, Talat Odman, Ted Russell February 6, 2001.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Development and Application of PM2.5 Interpollutant Trading Ratios to Account for PM2.5 Secondary Formation in Georgia James Boylan and Byeong-Uk Kim Georgia.
Advertisements

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.
Georgia Institute of Technology Evaluation of CMAQ with FAQS Episode of August 11 th -20 th, 2000 Yongtao Hu, M. Talat Odman, Maudood Khan and Armistead.
1 Recent PM 2.5 Trends in Georgia André J. Butler Mercer University EVE 290L 14 April, 2008.
Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, CA
SECONDARY ORGANIC AEROSOLS WORKSHOP OVERVIEW John G. Watson Desert Research Institute, Reno, NV February 5, 2002.
Talat Odman and Yongtao Hu, Georgia Tech Zac Adelman, Mohammad Omary and Uma Shankar, UNC James Boylan and Byeong-Uk Kim, Georgia DNR.
Spatial Variability of Seasonal PM2.5 Interpollutant Trading Ratios in Georgia James Boylan and Byeong-Uk Kim Georgia EPD – Air Protection Branch 2014.
Operational Air Quality and Source Contribution Forecasting in Georgia Georgia Institute of Technology Yongtao Hu 1, M. Talat Odman 1, Michael E. Chang.
Environmental Protection Division 1 AWMA Georgia Air Update August 10, 2007 Heather Abrams, Branch Chief.
The Sensitivity of Aerosol Sulfate to Changes in Nitrogen Oxides and Volatile Organic Compounds Ariel F. Stein Department of Meteorology The Pennsylvania.
Trends in the Wet and Dry Deposition of Nitrogen and Sulfur Species
Modeling Studies of Air Quality in the Four Corners Region National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Cooperative Institute for Research in.
BRAVO Results of CMAQ-MADRID Betty Pun, Christian Seigneur & Shiang-Yuh Wu AER, San Ramon Naresh Kumar EPRI, Palo Alto 10 October 2002.
Development of PM2.5 Interpollutant Trading Ratios James Boylan and Byeong-Uk Kim Georgia EPD – Air Protection Branch 2012 CMAS Conference October 16,
Lessons Learned: One-Atmosphere Photochemical Modeling in Southeastern U.S. Presentation from Southern Appalachian Mountains Initiative to Meeting of Regional.
PM2.5 Model Performance Evaluation- Purpose and Goals PM Model Evaluation Workshop February 10, 2004 Chapel Hill, NC Brian Timin EPA/OAQPS.
Weekday/Weekend O 3 and PM Differences in Three Cities Outside California CRC Project A-36B Betty K. Pun and Christian Seigneur AER, San Ramon, CA Warren.
Ozone MPE, TAF Meeting, July 30, 2008 Review of Ozone Performance in WRAP Modeling and Relevance to Future Regional Ozone Planning Gail Tonnesen, Zion.
Georgia Environmental Protection Division Uncertainty Analysis of Ozone Formation and Emission Control Responses using High-order Sensitivities Di Tian,
Ozone Monitoring in Wyoming Cara Casten Wyoming Dept. of Environmental Quality – Air Quality Division March 10, 2004.
UNCERTAINTIES INFLUENCING HEALTH-BASED PRIORITIZATION OF OZONE ABATEMENT OPTIONS UNCERTAINTIES INFLUENCING HEALTH-BASED PRIORITIZATION OF OZONE ABATEMENT.
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.
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.
Corrections to 2018 Projections and O 3 sensitivities Talat Odman (GT), Yongtao Hu (GT), Zac Adelman (UNC), Uma Shankar (UNC) and Jim Boylan (GA EPD) SEMAP.
PM Model Performance & Grid Resolution Kirk Baker Midwest Regional Planning Organization November 2003.
Sulfate Ion Wet Deposition
Ammonium Ion Wet Deposition
Georgia Institute of Technology Air Pollutant Transport, Control and Modeling Issues in the Eastern United States Ted Russell Air Resources Engineering.
Classificatory performance evaluation of air quality forecasting in Georgia Yongtao Hu 1, M. Talat Odman 1, Michael E. Chang 2 and Armistead G. Russell.
Evaluation of the VISTAS 2002 CMAQ/CAMx Annual Simulations T. W. Tesche & Dennis McNally -- Alpine Geophysics, LLC Ralph Morris -- ENVIRON Gail Tonnesen.
Continued improvements of air quality forecasting through emission adjustments using surface and satellite data & Estimating fire emissions: satellite.
Georgia Institute of Technology Assessing the Impacts of Hartsfield- Jackson Airport on PM and Ozone in Atlanta Area Alper Unal, Talat Odman and Ted Russell.
Georgia Institute of Technology Adaptive Grid Modeling for Predicting the Air Quality Impacts of Biomass Burning Alper Unal, Talat Odman School of Civil.
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.
Air Quality Modeling for SAMI: July 1995 Episode Talat Odman, Ted Russell, Jim Wilkinson, Yueh-Jiun Yang, Jim Boylan, Alberto Mendoza.
Georgia Institute of Technology Estimation of NH 4 + /SO 4 2- Molar Ratios Using URM Modeling Outputs Jim Boylan, Talat Odman, Ted Russell April 10, 2001.
GEOS-CHEM Modeling for Boundary Conditions and Natural Background James W. Boylan Georgia Department of Natural Resources - VISTAS National RPO Modeling.
Georgia Institute of Technology Comprehensive evaluation on air quality forecasting ability of Hi-Res in southeastern United States Yongtao Hu 1, M. Talat.
DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION OF MADRID: A NEW AEROSOL MODULE IN MODELS-3/CMAQ Yang Zhang*, Betty Pun, Krish Vijayaraghavan, Shiang-Yuh Wu and Christian.
Georgia Institute of Technology SAMI Aerosol Modeling: Performance Evaluation & Future Year Simulations Talat Odman Georgia Institute of Technology SAMI.
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.
Western Air Quality Study (WAQS) Intermountain Data Warehouse (IWDW) WAQS Workplan and Modeling Update University of North Carolina (UNC-IE) Ramboll-Environ.
Impacts of Meteorological Variations on RRFs (Relative Response Factors) in the Demonstration of Attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality for 8-hr.
Emission reductions needed to meet proposed ozone standard and their effect on particulate matter Daniel Cohan and Beata Czader Department of Civil and.
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.
Western Air Quality Study (WAQS) Intermountain Data Warehouse (IWDW) Model Performance Evaluation CAMx and CMAQ 2011b University of North Carolina (UNC-IE)
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.
Georgia Institute of Technology Air Quality Impacts from Airport Related Emissions: Atlanta Case Study M. Talat Odman Georgia Institute of Technology School.
Institute for Environment and Sustainability1 Date & Time 09: :30Status review and improvements  BaseCase (1) problem review and actions taken (20’)
VISTAS 2002 MPE and NAAQS SIP Modeling
SEMAP 2017 Ozone Projections and Sensitivities / Contributions Prepared by: Talat Odman - Georgia Tech Yongtao Hu - Georgia Tech Jim Boylan - Georgia.
Performance of CMAQ for Inorganic Aerosol Compounds in Greater Tokyo
Byeong-Uk Kim and Jim Boylan Planning and Support Program
2017 Projections and Interstate Transport of Ozone in Southeastern US Talat Odman & Yongtao Hu - Georgia Tech Jim Boylan - Georgia EPD 16th Annual.
Sensitivity Analysis of Ozone in the Southeast
Development of a 2007-Based Air Quality Modeling Platform
Yongtao Hu, Jaemeen Baek, M. Talat Odman and Armistead G. Russell
Monitoring Data Sets and Analysis Tools for the VIEWS/TSS Web Sites
Exercise – Site Identification (1 of 2)
Georgia Institute of Technology
Statistical analysis of the secondary inorganic aerosol in Hungary using background measurements and model calculations Zita Ferenczi   Hungarian Meteorological.
WRAP Modeling Forum, San Diego
EURODELTA Preliminary results
PM2.5 Soil/Crustal Sensitivity Runs
Results from 2018 Preliminary Reasonable Progress Modeling
Summary of discussion (1)
Presentation transcript:

Georgia Institute of Technology Sensitivity of Future Year Results to Boundary Conditions Jim Boylan, Talat Odman, Ted Russell February 6, 2001

Georgia Institute of Technology Overview July 1995 Episode with 2040 BWC emissions –Initial and Boundary Conditions reduced by the same ratio that domain-wide emissions were reduced NOx reduced 50% SO2, SO4, and NH4 reduced 63% Comparison of Results –Basecase Results vs BWC Results (original BCs) –2040 BWC with Original BCs vs BWC with Reduced BCs –Spatial and Station Plots Ozone Sulfate, Nitrate, and Ammonium Aerosols Sulfate, Nitrate, and Ammonium Wet Deposition

Georgia Institute of Technology Ozone on July 16, 2040 (1:00 PM)

Georgia Institute of Technology Ozone Change on July 16 (1:00 PM)

Georgia Institute of Technology Ozone on July 16, 2040 (9:00 PM)

Georgia Institute of Technology Ozone Change on July 16 (9:00 PM)

Georgia Institute of Technology Ozone at Great Smoky Mountains

Georgia Institute of Technology Ozone at Shenandoah National Park

Georgia Institute of Technology Ozone at Atlanta

Georgia Institute of Technology Average Sulfate on July 15, 2040

Georgia Institute of Technology Average Sulfate Change on July 15

Georgia Institute of Technology Sulfate at Great Smoky Mountains

Georgia Institute of Technology Sulfate at Shenandoah National Park

Georgia Institute of Technology Average Nitrate on July 15, 2040

Georgia Institute of Technology Average Nitrate Change on July 15

Georgia Institute of Technology Nitrate at Great Smoky Mountains

Georgia Institute of Technology Nitrate at Shenandoah National Park

Georgia Institute of Technology Average Ammonium on July 15, 2040

Georgia Institute of Technology Average Ammonium Change on July 15

Georgia Institute of Technology Ammonium at Great Smoky Mountains

Georgia Institute of Technology Ammonium at Shenandoah National Park

Georgia Institute of Technology Weekly Sulfate Deposition (2040)

Georgia Institute of Technology Weekly Sulfate Deposition Change

Georgia Institute of Technology Weekly Sulfate Deposition Change

Georgia Institute of Technology Weekly Nitrate Deposition (2040)

Georgia Institute of Technology Weekly Nitrate Deposition Change

Georgia Institute of Technology Weekly Nitrate Deposition Change

Georgia Institute of Technology Weekly Ammonium Deposition (2040)

Georgia Institute of Technology Weekly Ammonium Deposition Change

Georgia Institute of Technology Weekly Ammonium Deposition Change

Georgia Institute of Technology Summary of Reducing BCs Ozone –decrease 5 -8 ppb off daily maximum –additional % reduction from basecase Aerosols –Sulfate decrease 2 -3  g/m 3 off daily average additional % reduction from basecase –Nitrate changed by less than 0.5  g/m 3 (+ or -) –Ammonium decrease  g/m 3 off daily average additional % reduction from basecase

Georgia Institute of Technology Summary of Reducing BCs Wet Deposition –Sulfate additional 15% reduction from basecase –Nitrate little change –Ammonium additional % reduction from basecase