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.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
POMI Po Valley Model Intercomparison Exercise CAMx model overview In cooperation with AMA - MI.
Advertisements

Some recent studies using Models-3 Ian Rodgers Presentation to APRIL meeting London 4 th March 2003.
Uma Shankar 1 and Prakash Bhave 2 Sixth Annual CMAS Conference October 1-3, UNC Institute for the Environment 2 Atmospheric Modeling Division, NOAA.
N emissions and the changing landscape of air quality Rob Pinder US EPA Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division.
Photochemical Model Performance for PM2.5 Sulfate, Nitrate, Ammonium, and pre-cursor species SO2, HNO3, and NH3 at Background Monitor Locations in the.
Preliminary Results CMAQ and CMAQ-AIM with SAPRC99 Gail Tonnesen, Chao-Jung Chien, Bo Wang, UC Riverside Max Zhang, Tony Wexler, UC Davis Ralph Morris,
Modeled Trends in Impacts of Landing and Takeoff Aircraft Emissions on Surface Air-Quality in U.S for 2005, 2010 and 2018 Lakshmi Pradeepa Vennam 1, Saravanan.
Incorporation of the Model of Aerosol Dynamics, Reaction, Ionization and Dissolution (MADRID) into CMAQ Yang Zhang, Betty K. Pun, Krish Vijayaraghavan,
CMAQ and REMSAD- Model Performance and Ongoing Improvements Brian Timin, Carey Jang, Pat Dolwick, Norm Possiel, Tom Braverman USEPA/OAQPS December 3, 2002.
Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, CA
1 Modelling Activities at LAC (PSI) in Switzerland Ş. Andreani-Aksoyo ğ lu, J. Keller, I. Barmpadimos, D. Oderbolz, A.S.H. Prévôt Laboratory of Atmospheric.
CENRAP Modeling Workgroup Mational RPO Modeling Meeting May 25-26, Denver CO Calvin Ku Missouri DNR May 25, 2004.
Future Inorganic Aerosol Levels 4th GEOS-Chem Users’ Meeting 9 April 2009 Havala Pye* 1, Hong Liao 2, Shiliang Wu 3,5, Loretta Mickley 3, Daniel Jacob.
Environmentally Conscious Design & Manufacturing (ME592) Date: March 29, 2000 Slide:1 Environmentally Conscious Design & Manufacturing Class 11: Air Quality.
Evaluation of Two Numerical Algorithms in Simulating Particle Condensational Growth and Gas/Particle Mass Transfer Yang Zhang and Christian Seigneur Atmospheric.
REFERENCES Maria Val Martin 1 C. L. Heald 1, J.-F. Lamarque 2, S. Tilmes 2 and L. Emmons 2 1 Colorado State University 2 NCAR.
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.
EVALUATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF GAS/PARTICLE MASS TRANSFER TREATMENTS FOR 3-D AEROSOL SIMULATION AND FORECAST Xiaoming Hu and Yang Zhang North Carolina State.
Center for Environmental Research and Technology University of California, Riverside Bourns College of Engineering Evaluation and Intercomparison of N.
PM2.5 Model Performance Evaluation- Purpose and Goals PM Model Evaluation Workshop February 10, 2004 Chapel Hill, NC Brian Timin EPA/OAQPS.
WRAP Update. Projects Updated 1996 emissions QA procedures New evaluation tools Model updates CB-IV km MM5 Fugitive dust NH 3 emissions Model.
Tore Flatlandsmo Berglen EACE workshop June 2007 Air quality, ozone and aerosols in Asia. A model study Tore Flatlandsmo Berglen 1,2, Terje K. Berntsen.
Presents:/slides/greg/PSAT_ ppt Effects of Sectional PM Distribution on PM Modeling in the Western US Ralph Morris and Bonyoung Koo ENVIRON International.
Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and Emission Reduction An FAA/NASA/TC-sponsored Center of Excellence A Comparison of CMAQ Predicted Contributions.
Ozone MPE, TAF Meeting, July 30, 2008 Review of Ozone Performance in WRAP Modeling and Relevance to Future Regional Ozone Planning Gail Tonnesen, Zion.
Evaluation of the CMAQ Model for Size-Resolved PM Composition Prakash V. Bhave, K. Wyat Appel U.S. EPA, Office of Research & Development, National Exposure.
1 Comparison of CAMx and CMAQ PM2.5 Source Apportionment Estimates Kirk Baker and Brian Timin U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
On the Model’s Ability to Capture Key Measures Relevant to Air Quality Policies through Analysis of Multi-Year O 3 Observations and CMAQ Simulations Daiwen.
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.
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.
Comparing Modal and Sectional Approaches in Modeling Particulate Matter in Northern California K. Max Zhang 1, Jinyou Liang 2, Anthony S. Wexler 1 and.
WRAP Experience: Investigation of Model Biases Uma Shankar, Rohit Mathur and Francis Binkowski MCNC–Environmental Modeling Center Research Triangle Park,
GEM/AQ Simulations on Intercontinental Transports Science and Technology Branch Environment Canada.
Gas and Aerosol Partitioning Over the Equatorial Pacific Wenxian Zhang April 21, 2009.
Using CMAQ-AIM to Evaluate the Gas-Particle Partitioning Treatment in CMAQ Chris Nolte Atmospheric Modeling Division National Exposure Research Laboratory.
Prakash Bhave, Shawn Roselle, Frank Binkowski, Chris Nolte, Shaocai Yu, Jerry Gipson, & Ken Schere CMAS Conference – Paper #6.8 Chapel Hill, NC, October.
Model Evaluation Comparing Model Output to Ambient Data Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, California.
Operational Evaluation and Comparison of CMAQ and REMSAD- An Annual Simulation Brian Timin, Carey Jang, Pat Dolwick, Norm Possiel, Tom Braverman USEPA/OAQPS.
Application of the CMAQ-UCD Aerosol Model to a Coastal Urban Site Chris Nolte NOAA Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division Research Triangle Park, NC 6.
Prakash V. Bhave, Ph.D. Physical Scientist PM Model Performance Workshop February 10, 2004 Postprocessing Model Output for Comparison to Ambient Data.
Evaluation of the VISTAS 2002 CMAQ/CAMx Annual Simulations T. W. Tesche & Dennis McNally -- Alpine Geophysics, LLC Ralph Morris -- ENVIRON Gail Tonnesen.
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.
GEOS-CHEM Modeling for Boundary Conditions and Natural Background James W. Boylan Georgia Department of Natural Resources - VISTAS National RPO Modeling.
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,
THE MODELS-3 COMMUNITY MULTI- SCALE AIR QUALITY (CMAQ) MODEL: 2002 RELEASE – NEW FEATURES Jonathan Pleim, Francis Binkowski, Robin Dennis, Brian Eder,
Seasonal Modeling of the Export of Pollutants from North America using the Multiscale Air Quality Simulation Platform (MAQSIP) Adel Hanna, 1 Rohit Mathur,
DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION OF MADRID: A NEW AEROSOL MODULE IN MODELS-3/CMAQ Yang Zhang*, Betty Pun, Krish Vijayaraghavan, Shiang-Yuh Wu and Christian.
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.
Georgia Institute of Technology SAMI Aerosol Modeling: Performance Evaluation & Future Year Simulations Talat Odman Georgia Institute of Technology SAMI.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division October 21, 2009 Evaluation of CMAQ.
Operational Evaluation and Model Response Comparison of CAMx and CMAQ for Ozone & PM2.5 Kirk Baker, Brian Timin, Sharon Phillips U.S. Environmental Protection.
Simulation of the indirect radiative forcing of climate due to aerosols by the two-way coupled WRF-CMAQ model over the continental United States: Preliminary.
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.
Evaluation of CAMx: Issues Related to Sectional Models Ralph Morris, Bonyoung Koo, Steve Lau and Greg Yarwood ENVIRON International Corporation Novato,
A Comparison Study of CMAQ Aerosol Prediction by Two Thermodynamic Modules: UHAERO V.S. ISORROPIA Case study for January 2002 episode Fang-Yi Cheng 1,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development Implementation of an Online Photolysis Module in CMAQ 4.7 Christopher G. Nolte.
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,
Krish Vijayaraghavan, Rochelle Balmori, Shu-Yun Chen, Prakash Karamchandani and Christian Seigneur AER, San Ramon, CA Justin T. Walters and John J. Jansen.
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt CRGAQS: CAMx Sensitivity Results Presentation to the Gorge Study Technical Team By ENVIRON International Corporation.
Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory WRF-CMAQ 2-way Coupled System: Part II Jonathan.
Development of a Multipollutant Version of the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Modeling System Shawn Roselle, Deborah Luecken, William Hutzell,
A model of sea salt aerosol for Cape Grim Preliminary investigations
Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division,
Changes to the Multi-Pollutant version in the CMAQ 4.7
Using CMAQ to Interpolate Among CASTNET Measurements
Stephen Mueller & Jonathan Mallard Tennessee Valley Authority
Deborah Luecken and Golam Sarwar U.S. EPA, ORD/NERL
Simulation of Ozone and PM in Southern Taiwan
Presentation transcript:

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 Carolina Environmental Program Presented at the 2003 Models-3 Users’ Workshop, October 27-29, 2003

Acknowledgments Studies performed under EPA STAR Grant No. GR (PI: R. Mathur) Jeff Vukovich: Sea salt emissions data Frank Binkowski and Shawn Roselle for useful feedback in the early stages of the development

Outline Motivation for Development MAQSIP Modifications Study Description Analysis of Results –Inter-model and model-obs comparisons the effect of coarse mode chemistry and sea salt species on other secondary inorganic aerosol constituents modeled aerosol concentrations vs. CASTNet and IMPROVE observations Conclusions Next steps

Motivation for Development The modal aerosol modules in the MAQSIP and CMAQ models have to date used a bulk equilibrium approach to determine aerosol composition. The semi-volatile species concentrations after equilibrium are partitioned among the fine modes proportional to the sulfate concentration in each mode. The coarse mode has been treated as chemically non- interactive with the fine modes. This is not an inherent limitation of the modal approach, but a limitation of the model implementation

Motivation (cont’d) Sea salt particles emitted in coastal areas can interact with anthropogenic secondary aerosol species (SO 4, NO 3 ) Much of the sea salt is emitted in the coarse particle size range Chemistry in the coarse mode needs to be included in the model

MAQSIP Modifications: First Cut HCl in the gas phase and fine and coarse Na + and Cl - in the aerosol/droplet phase have been added -HCl produced by heterogeneous reaction of NaCl with HNO 3 Aqueous chemical mechanism expanded to include dissolution/dissociation of HCl in cloud water and the entrainment of Na + and Cl - in cloud droplets

MAQSIP Modifications: First Cut (cont’d) The ISORROPIA thermodynamic model is used in the bulk equilibrium sense to determine aerosol composition A mass transfer scheme has been added for condensation or evaporation of semi-volatile species in each mode The Whitby scheme for partitioning condensing sulfate and organic mass among the modes has been extended to partition mass transferred from/to particles among all modes (Whitby et al, EPA Report # NTIS PB /AS, 1991; Binkowski and Shankar, JGR 1995). Partitioning factors use a surface-area based growth law similar to that used in sectional models

MAQSIP simulations over the eastern U.S. for a 12- day episode (June 19-30, 1996) including a 3-day spin-up period Episode characterized by relatively dry conditions – used in NC O 3 SIP modeling Domain consists of a 72 x 75 horizontal grid at 36-km resolution and 26 vertical layers Meteorological inputs are from MM5 Emissions inputs are from the NEI 1996 inventory processed by SMOKE Sea salt emissions modeled according to the method of Monahan (in Oceanic Whitecaps, 1986) and Gong et al. (JGR, 1997); fine-coarse splits as in AER’s EPRI BRAVO study Study Description

Fine and Coarse Sodium (  g/m 3 ) Fine ModesCoarse Mode

Fine and Coarse  SO 4 (  g/m 3 ) (Sea Salt – No Sea Salt) Fine ModesCoarse Mode

Fine and Coarse  NO 3 (  g/m 3 ) (Sea Salt – No Sea Salt) Fine ModesCoarse Mode

 NH 4 (  g/m 3 ) and  HNO 3 (ppbV) (Sea Salt – No Sea Salt)  NH 4  HNO 3

Measurement Networks CASTNetIMPROVE

Evaluation Against Network Data Spatially complementary distribution of CASTNet and IMPROVE sites, many more CASTNet sites in the eastern U.S. CASTNet samplers non-size selective CASTNet measurements are weekly averages for total SO 4, NO 3 and NH 4 IMPROVE measurements are 24-hr averages reported twice weekly for all fine PM species modeled except NH 4 Model results compared on an event-average basis with the measurements

Aerosol Species Fractions of Total vs. CASTNet w/ Sea Saltw/o Sea Salt

Aerosol Species Concentrations vs. CASTNet

Fine Aerosol Concentrations vs. IMPROVE

Analysis Reasonable agreement between predicted aerosol compositional characteristics and CASTNet Total nitrate in the system is over predicted, while sulfate and ammonium are under predicted both with and without sea salt emissions Sulfate is non-volatile, thus it changes very little due to introduction of sea salt / coarse mode chemistry Fine sodium severely under predicted at almost all IMPROVE sites → possible sources of the bias could be the sea salt emissions and/or BL meteorology at the land/water sites Nitrate response to sea salt and coarse mode chemistry is a little more pronounced in coastal locations due to some HNO 3 mass transfer occurring to coarse mode particles Fine mode ammonium reductions collocated with coarse sodium nitrate formation

Conclusions Model behaves self-consistently, but performance needs improving relative to observations, particularly in the prediction of total nitrate Effects of sea salt chemistry are slight possibly because the region is dominated by sulfate; evaluation could benefit from studies where nitrate is the dominant aerosol component Adaptation in CMAQ’s modal aerosol module should be straightforward

Next … Adapt the hybrid approach of Capaldo et al. (AE 2000) to improve simulation of condensation/evaporation for coarse particles relative to the strict bulk equilibrium approach of this study Address the HNO 3 over prediction Examine meteorological and BC influences on production of coarse mode nitrate in the interior of the domain Examine the emissions vs. meteorological influences on the under prediction of fine mode sodium