The Canadian Air Quality Modelling Platform for Policy Emission Reduction Scenarios: Year 2010 Configuration Presented by Sophie Cousineau on behalf of.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
EC Regional Air Quality Deterministic Prediction System (RAQDPS) Mike Moran Air Quality Research Division Environment Canada, Toronto, Ontario Mtg on AQ.
Advertisements

EUROPEAN UNION INITIATIVES AND REQUIREMENTS : AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT AS A POLICY MECHANISM Sonja Vidič Meteorological and Hydrological Service of Croatia.
Jacques Rousseau & Dr David Lavoué
Title EMEP Unified model Importance of observations for model evaluation Svetlana Tsyro MSC-W / EMEP TFMM workshop, Lillestrøm, 19 October 2010.
CENRAP Modeling Workgroup Mational RPO Modeling Meeting May 25-26, Denver CO Calvin Ku Missouri DNR May 25, 2004.
A Comparative Dynamic Evaluation of the AURAMS and CMAQ Air Quality Modeling Systems Steven Smyth a,b, Michael Moran c, Weimin Jiang a, Fuquan Yang a,
Integration of CMAQ into the Western Macedonia environmental management system A. Sfetsos 1,2, J. Bartzis 2 1 Environmental Research Laboratory, NCSR Demokritos.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Carolina Environmental Programs Emissions and meteorological Aspects of the 2001 ICAP Simulation Adel Hanna,
Evaluation of the AIRPACT2 modeling system for the Pacific Northwest Abdullah Mahmud MS Student, CEE Washington State University.
ADEQ Uses of ICF Modeling Analysis Tony Davis, Branch Manager – Air Planning Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality Criteria Pollutant Modeling Analysis.
Modelling the impact of three sets of future vehicle emission standards on PM concentrations in the Lower Fraser Valley Weimin Jiang, Éric Giroux, Dazhong.
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.
Comprehensive Air Emissions Inventory Study for the Calgary Region Airshed Zone Xin Qiu 1 and Dennis Stefani 2 1 : Novus Environmental Inc. 2 : Calgary.
Air Quality Management in Mumbai V.K.Phatak MMRDA.
1 Overview of the Emissions Modeling Platform October 17, 2007 NAAQS RIA Workshop Rich Mason EPA/OAQPS/AQAD/EIAG.
Emission processing methodology for the new GEM-MACH model ABSTRACT SMOKE has recently been adapted to provide emissions for the new Meteorological Service.
Simulation of European emissions impacts on particulate matter concentrations in 2010 using Models-3 Rob Lennard, Steve Griffiths and Paul Sutton (RWE.
Background Air Quality in the United States Under Current and Future Emissions Scenarios Zachariah Adelman, Meridith Fry, J. Jason West Department of Environmental.
©2005,2006 Carolina Environmental Program Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions SMOKE Modeling System Zac Adelman and Andy Holland Carolina Environmental.
1 One facility, two very different emissions. Module 5. Air Pollutant Emissions in the Mid-Atlantic United States by K.G. Paterson, Ph.D., P.E. © 2007.
Developing Alternate Anthropogenic Emission Scenarios for Investigating Future Air Quality William G. Benjey, Daniel H. Loughlin*, Christopher G. Nolte.
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.
Models-3 Users’ Workshop Raleigh, North Carolina October 27-23, 2003 New Developments and Applications of Models-3 in Canada J. Wayne Boulton*, Mike Lepage,
COMPARISON OF LINK-BASED AND SMOKE PROCESSED MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS OVER THE GREATER TORONTO AREA Junhua Zhang 1, Craig Stroud 1, Michael D. Moran 1,
TSS Data Preparation Update WRAP TSS Project Team Meeting Ft. Collins, CO March 28-31, 2006.
GEM-MACH Global The Canadian Global Air Quality Modeling/Forecasting System Dr. Sunling Gong Science and Technology Branch January 16-17, 2012.
1 René Parra, Pedro Jiménez and José M. Baldasano Environmental Modeling Laboratory, UPC Barcelona, Spain Models-3 Conference, Chapel Hill, North Carolina,
Impact of Emissions on Intercontinental Long-Range Transport Joshua Fu, Yun-Fat Lam and Yang Gao, University of Tennessee, USA Rokjin Park, Seoul National.
Harikishan Perugu, Ph.D. Heng Wei, Ph.D. PE
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.
Implementation of GEM-MACH10, A New Higher-Resolution Version of the Canadian Operational Air Quality Forecast Model Mike Moran 1, Sylvain Ménard 2, Radenko.
Soontae Kim and Daewon W. Byun Comparison of Emission Estimates from SMOKE and EPS2 Used for Studying Houston-Galveston Air Quality Institute for Multidimensional.
Presentation by: Dan Goldberg Co-authors: Tim Vinciguerra, Linda Hembeck, Sam Carpenter, Tim Canty, Ross Salawitch & Russ Dickerson 13 th Annual CMAS Conference.
George Pouliot, Christian Hogrefe, Ryan Cleary, Junhua Zhang, Mike Moran,Paul Makar, Shawn Roselle, Rohit Mathur Summary of the Emission Inventories compiled.
Emission Inventories and EI Data Sets Sarah Kelly, ITEP Les Benedict, St. Regis Mohawk Tribe.
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.
Impacts of MOVES2014 On-Road Mobile Emissions on Air Quality Simulations of the Western U.S. Z. Adelman, M. Omary, D. Yang UNC – Institute for the Environment.
Application and assessment of Canadian air quality models in Quebec Region Project team: Gilles Morneau Nedka Pentcheva Jeff Brook Véronique Bouchet/Louis-Philippe.
GEM/AQ Simulations on Intercontinental Transports Science and Technology Branch Environment Canada.
8th annual CMAS conference, Chapel Hill, October 19-21, 2009 Eurasia Institute of Earth Sciences / ITU IMPACTS OF ISTANBUL EMISSIONS ON REGIONAL AIR QUALITY:
Transboundary Air Pollution Plan of Islamic Republic of Iran
CMAS Conference 2009 Johannes Bieser, Institute for Coastal Research – GKSS Science Center CMAS Conference 2009 Enhancing SMOKE to create European emissions.
October 6, 2015 Alison Eyth, Rich Mason (EPA OAQPS EIAG*) Alexis Zubrow (Volpe, DOT) * Emission Inventory and Analysis Group.
Air Quality Forecasting in China using a regional model Bas Mijling Ronald van der A Henk Eskes Hennie Kelder.
Operational Evaluation and Comparison of CMAQ and REMSAD- An Annual Simulation Brian Timin, Carey Jang, Pat Dolwick, Norm Possiel, Tom Braverman USEPA/OAQPS.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division C. Nolte, R. Pinder, W. Benjey, D.
The Canadian Approach To Compiling Emission Projections Marc Deslauriers Environment Canada Pollution Data Division Science and Technology Branch Projections.
A Comparative Performance Evaluation of the AURAMS and CMAQ Air Quality Modelling Systems Steven C. Smyth, Weimin Jiang, Helmut Roth, and Fuquan Yang ICPET,
Evaluation of the VISTAS 2002 CMAQ/CAMx Annual Simulations T. W. Tesche & Dennis McNally -- Alpine Geophysics, LLC Ralph Morris -- ENVIRON Gail Tonnesen.
Three-State Air Quality Study (3SAQS) Three-State Data Warehouse (3SDW) 3SAQS/3SDW Progress Review to the 3SAQS Technical Committee University of North.
A Five-Year Performance Evaluation of Environment Canada’s Operational Regional Air Quality Deterministic Prediction System M.D. Moran 1, J. Zhang 1, R.
A ir Quality Research Branch Meteorological Service of Canada Environment Environnement Canada Performance Evaluation of AURAMS for Multiple Cases Michael.
WRAP SCC Temporal and Speciation Profile Improvement Project Status WRAP Regional Modeling Center Carolina Environmental Program November 4, 2003.
Georgia Institute of Technology SUPPORTING INTEX THROUGH INTEGRATED ANALYSIS OF SATELLITE AND SUB-ORBITAL MEASUREMENTS WITH GLOBAL AND REGIONAL 3-D MODELS:
PAGE 1 An adaptation of SMOKE for Europe Johannes Bieser Armin Aulinger, Volker Matthias, Markus Quante GKSS Research Center Geesthacht, Germany.
Overview of ARS Presentations and Review of EI Data Sets AoH Meeting, Salt Lake City September 21-22, 2004 Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
The application of Models-3 in national policy Samantha Baker Air and Environment Quality Division, Defra.
Western Regional Technical Projects 2011 through 2013
Jeff Vukovich, USEPA/OAQPS/AQAD Emissions Inventory and Analysis Group
Social costs of fuel-vehicle pathways
Mobile Source Contributions to Ambient PM2.5 and Ozone in 2025
B.H. Baek, Alejandro Valencia, and Michelle Snyder
Innovations in projecting emissions for air quality modeling
Improvements to Wintertime Particulate-Matter Forecasting with GEM-MACH15 Michael Moran1, Sylvain Ménard2 Paul Makar1, Radenko Pavlovic2, Mourad Sassi2,
Impact on Recent North American Air Quality Forecasts of Replacing a Retrospective U.S. Emissions Inventory with a Projected Inventory Michael Moran1,
10th CMAS Conference, Chapel Hill, NC 2010 October 11-13
M. Samaali, M. Sassi, V. Bouchet
Steve Griffiths, Rob Lennard and Paul Sutton* (*RWE npower)
Update on 2016 AQ Modeling by EPA
JDS International seminar 2018
Presentation transcript:

The Canadian Air Quality Modelling Platform for Policy Emission Reduction Scenarios: Year 2010 Configuration Presented by Sophie Cousineau on behalf of the REQA team Air Quality Policy-Issue Response Unit, Air Quality Modelling Application Section, National Operation Division Canadian Centre for Meteorological and Environmental Prediction Environment Canada, Dorval, QC, H9P 1J3, Canada. 14 th Annual CMAS Conference, October 7, 2015, Chapel Hill, North Carolina

– Page 2 – October 2015 Talk outline EC’s air quality modelling platform for policy applications Migration to base year platform evaluation Summary & Future Work

– Page 3 – October 2015 Multi-sector Air Pollutants Regulations (BLIERs Phase 1), targeting cement, Boilers & Heaters, Reciprocating Engines published in June 2014 in the Canada Gazette – Part I publication in Part II CAAQS development for SO2 and NO2 TIER3 scenario project (transport regulations) to amend the « On-Road Vehicle and Engine Emission Regulations» and the «Sulphur in Gasoline Regulations». publication in the Canada Gazette Part I in September 2014, Health Canada Fuel assessment project Asses on-road and off-road diesel and retrofit analysis for diesel. Assess on-road and off-road gasoline impact on health (+toxics) Energy sectors projects (oil and gas, coal) Production of AQ modelling

– Page 4 – October 2015 EC Air Quality Modelling Platform AURAMS (particle and gas ambient levels) GEM (meteorological fields) SMOKE (gridded and temporally allocated emissions) O3, NO, NO2, PM (total and speciated), other species, deposition (dry and wet) Health Canada and other EC branches: cost-benefit analysis (health & environment)

– Page 5 – October 2015 Grids : 2006 vs 2010 East 2006 : 22.5km (145x123) West 2006 : 22.5km (124x93) Cont km (143x107) East 2006 : 22.5km (145x123) 2010 : 15km (201x180) West 2006 : 22.5km (124x93) 2010 : 15km (193x135) Cont km (143x107) Grids : 2006 vs 2010 Cont km (141x120)

– Page 6 – October 2015 EC Air Quality Modelling Platform 2006 vs Meteorology -Model -Vertical levels: -Horizontal resolution: GEM eta levels 33 km GEM hybrid levels 15 km Chemistry -CTM (off-line) - Horizontal resolution AURAMS (ADOM-II) 45 km and 22.5 km AURAMS (ADOM-II) 45 km and 15 km Emissions - Anthropogenic -Biogenic SMOKE Can US Mex BEIS 3.09 with 2006 met files SMOKE Can -2007/2008/2010 US Mex BEIS 3.09 with 2010 met files

– Page 7 – October 2015 Emissions Inventories for 2010 Source types CanadaUSAMexico All2010 inventories2010/2008 inventories/data2008 inventories PointNPRI2008 electric and non electric power plants generation (PTIPM and PTNONIPM) 2008 power generation plants AreaDUST (grid-point based TF*), AG, etc. 2008/2007 RWC with 2010 temporal profiles, AG, AGFIRE, C1C2RAIL, AFDUST (grid-point based TF*), etc residential and commercial combustion, agriculture, etc. Transportationon-road ( MOVES & MOBILE6.2c ), off-road ( NONROAD ) 2010 gridded on-road & off- road emissions at 12-km resolution 2008 on-road & off- road * TF = Transportable fraction

– Page 8 – October Canadian inventory comparison Source types On-road sourcesMOBILE6.2C-MOVES for HDDV and HDGV emissions -MOBILE6.2C for the rest Point sources -Stack information -Individual VOC speciation temporal profiles -Oil Sands fleet emissions -Mean characteristics -Based on SCC -Allocation over the whole province -Detailed facility-characteristics -Facility-specific -Allocation using facilities’ geographic location Area sources: -Agriculture : spatial allocation of NAESI emissions -Fugitive dust emissions -4 surrogates -Average sector- based TF -54 detailed surrogates -Improved estimates based on gridded land use TF

– Page 9 – October 2015 Observation Network TypeCountryNetworkSpecies Continuous (hourly) (* Near real-time observations) Canada NAPS (National Air Pollution Surveillance)* O3, PM2.5, CO, NO, NO2, and SO2 USA AirNow*O3, PM2.5 and PM10 AIRSPM2.5, PM10, CO, NO2, SO2 Non- continuous Canada CAPMoN (Canadian Air and Precipitation Monitoring Network) HNO3, NH4+, NO3-, SO4=, etc. USA AIRSPM2.5, PM10, EC, HNO3, NH4+, NO3-, SO4=, etc CASTNetHNO3, NH4, NO3, SO2, SO4, etc. IMPROVEPM2.5, PM10 and other PM components

– Page 10 – October 2015 Platform Performance Evaluation: O 3 YEARCOUNTRYNMBNME 2010 Canada-5%37% USA3%34% 2010* Canada-5%37% USA3%34% 2006 Canada5%38% USA11%35% by station by region

– Page 11 – October 2015 Platform Performance Evaluation : PM 2.5 YEARCOUNTRYNMBNME 2010 Canada-32%77% USA-43%67% 2010* Canada-31%77% USA-43%67% 2006 Canada-18%69% USA-37%61% by station by region

– Page 12 – October 2015 Platform Performance Evaluation : NO 2 YEARCOUNTRYNMBNME 2010 Canada-40%72% USANA 2010* Canada-40%72% USANA 2006 Canada-42%70% USA-35%66% by station by region

– Page 13 – October 2015 Platform Performance Evaluation : monthly O 3 analysis USA Canada

– Page 14 – October 2015 USA Canada Platform Performance Evaluation : monthly PM 2.5 analysis BC

– Page 15 – October 2015 Platform Performance Evaluation : O 3 and PM 2.5 daily time series O3O3 PM 2.5 Canada USA

– Page 16 – October 2015 Platform Performance Evaluation : O 3

– Page 17 – October 2015 Platform Performance Evaluation: O 3 and PM 2.5

– Page 18 – October 2015 Platform Performance Evaluation : O 3 and PM 2.5

– Page 19 – October 2015 Conclusion -Preliminary results indicate that for O 3 and NO 2 results are comparable to Changes done seems to have impacted more PM 2.5 -New tools will help us dig more to understand better our model behavior.

– Page 20 – October 2015 Future Work -Evaluate 15-km resolution base case runs using near real time observations -Evaluate 45 km continental run and the 15 km run using QA/QC datasets -Compare model performance at different grid resolution: 45km vs 22.5 km vs 15 km -Evaluate intermediate steps to isolate the main source of change (meteorology, emissions, model updates)

– Page 21 – October 2015 Ackowlegment to the REQA team Thank you for your attention! Calin Zaganescu, Jacinthe Racine, Nedka Pentcheva, (me), Annie Duhamel, Mourad Sassi, Mehrez Samaali, Rodrigo Munoz-Alpizar. Not in picture Sylvain Ménard.

– Page 22 – October 2015 NAPS station typePM 25 O3O3 Residential4296 Commercial1642 Industrial56 Agricultural423 Forest523 Undeveloped418

– Page 23 – October 2015 Number of stations and ‘’obs-mod’’ pairs: O *2010*-2010 Prov./countrynstatnnpntnstatnnpntnpnt*diffdiff (%) BC AB SK MB ON QC NB PE NS NL NT CAN USA * Values above 150 ppbv were eliminated

– Page 24 – October 2015 Number of stations and ‘’obs-mod’’ pairs: PM *2010*-2010 Prov./countrynstatnnpntnstatnnpntnpnt*diffdiff (%) BC AB SK MB ON QC NB PE NS NL NT N/A CAN USA * Values above 200 µg/m 3 were eliminated

– Page 25 – October 2015 Number of stations and ‘’obs-mod’’ pairs: NO *2010*-2010 Prov./countrynpntnstatn npntnpnt*diffdiff (%) BC AB SK MB ON QC NB PE NS NL NT N/A CAN USA N/A * Values above 150 ppbv were eliminated