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

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
UC Riverside Attribution of Haze Meeting, June 22, 2005, Seattle, WA UNC/CEPENVIRON Corp. Spatial Processing and Display of WRAP Emissions Data, and Source.
Advertisements

Inventory Issues and Modeling- Some Examples Brian Timin USEPA/OAQPS October 21, 2002.
Attribution of Haze Workgroup & Technical Support System Report Fire Emissions Joint Forum Meeting July
Technical Support System Review / / RPO Monitoring/Data Analysis Workgroup Conference.
Weight of Evidence Checklist Review AoH Work Group Call June 7, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
Technical Support System Review Board Meeting March 8, 2007.
WRAP Regional Haze Analysis & Technical Support System IMPROVE Steering Committee Meeting September 27, 2006.
Center for Environmental Research and Technology/Air Quality Modeling University of California at Riverside Modeling Source Apportionment Gail Tonnesen,
WRAP Decision and Data Support Systems Tom Moore | Western Governors’ Association Shawn McClure | Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere.
2004 Technical Summit Overview January 26-27, 2004 Tempe, AZ.
Attribution of Haze Report Status Fire Emissions Joint Forum Meeting December 8, 2004 Tom Moore Marc Pitchford.
AoH Report Update Joint DEJF & AoH Meeting, Las Vegas November , 2004 Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
Fire Emissions Joint Forum –Section 308 Strategies for Fire Coordinating efforts of states changing or developing smoke management strategies for regional.
WRAP 2004 Technical Work Elements Tom Moore March 24, 2004 Air Managers’ Committee §308/§309(g) Implementation Workgroup.
2004 Workplan WRAP Regional Modeling Center Prepared by: Gail Tonnesen, University of California Riverside Ralph Morris, ENVIRON Corporation Zac Adelman,
UC Riverside FEJF Meeting, Las Vegas, NV Dec 8, 2004 UNC/CEPENVIRON Corp. WRAP/RMC Fire Sensitivity Modeling Project Mohammad Omary, Gail Tonnesen WRAP.
Implementation of the Particle & Precursor Tagging Methodology (PPTM) for the CMAQ Modeling System: Mercury Tagging 5 th Annual CMAS Conference Research.
An Update on the Colorado Regional Haze SIP Process and Outcomes Presented at: WRAP – Implementation Work Group San Francisco, CA March 2005.
Case Study: Using the AoH Report for a Preliminary Look at Glacier National Park Trista Glazier March 2005 WRAP Implementation Workgroup Meeting San Francisco,
Status of Technical Analysis Technical Oversight Committee September 14, 2006.
WRAP Committee and Forum Updates WRAP Board Meeting Salt Lake City, UT October 15, 2003.
WRAP CAMx-PSAT Source Apportionment Modeling Results Implementation Workgroup Meeting August 29, 2006.
Ozone MPE, TAF Meeting, July 30, 2008 Review of Ozone Performance in WRAP Modeling and Relevance to Future Regional Ozone Planning Gail Tonnesen, Zion.
AoH/MF Meeting, San Diego, CA, Jan 25, 2006 Source Apportionment Modeling Results and RMC Status report Gail Tonnesen, Zion Wang, Mohammad Omary, Chao-Jung.
AoH Phase I Report Outline AoH Meeting, Salt Lake City September 21-22, 2004 Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
Center for Environmental Research and Technology/Air Quality Modeling University of California at Riverside CMAQ Tagged Species Source Apportionment (TSSA)
Regional Haze SIP Development Overview AQCC Presentation July 2005.
An Integrated Systems Solution to Air Quality Data and Decision Support on the Web GEO Architecture Implementation Pilot – Phase 2 (AIP-2) Kickoff Workshop.
Causes of Haze Assessment Update for Fire Emissions Joint Forum -12/9/04 Meeting Marc Pitchford.
Conceptual Description – Next Generation of Regional Modeling & Analysis Center Workshop on Regional Emissions & Air Quality Modeling Studies July 30,
§309 Technical Support Document “Table of Contents” First Draft Tom Moore WESTAR Fall Technical Conference September 19, 2002.
Draft, 2 June NATURAL HAZE LEVELS SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT 1. Project Overview Ivar Tombach Regional Haze Data Analysis Workshop 8 June 2005.
2005 WRAP Work Plan WRAP Board Meeting Salt Lake City, UT November 10, 2004.
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.
Technical Projects Update WRAP Board Meeting Salt Lake City, UT November 10, 2004.
AoH Conference Call August 10, 2004 Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
Attribution of Haze Project Update Stationary Sources Forum and Implementation Workgroup Meeting, Phoenix December 14, 2004 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource.
Weight of Evidence Discussion AoH Meeting – Tempe, AZ November 16/17, 2005.
Implementation Workgroup Meeting December 6, 2006 Attribution of Haze Workgroup’s Monitoring Metrics Document Status: 1)2018 Visibility Projections – Alternative.
WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/04 Results from January/July CMAQ Source Apportionment Modeling Gail Tonnesen,
AoH/MF Meeting, San Diego, CA, Jan 25, 2006 WRAP 2002 Visibility Modeling: Summary of 2005 Modeling Results Gail Tonnesen, Zion Wang, Mohammad Omary, Chao-Jung.
Attribution of Haze Report Update and Web Site Tutorial Implementation Work Group Meeting March 8, 2005 Joe Adlhoch Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
Attribution of Haze Project Inter-RPO Modeling Discussion Group May 25-26, 2004 Denver, CO.
WRAP Activities Overview §308 Technical Work Outline June 3, 2003.
Work Items for §309 SIPs WESTAR Fall Technical Conference September 19, 2002 Tom Moore & Brian Finneran.
WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/04 December WRAP Modeling Forum Conf Call Call Information: December 20, 1pm.
AoH Work Group Weight of Evidence Framework WRAP Meeting – Tucson, AZ January 10/11, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
Attribution of Haze Project Update Fire Emissions Joint Forum Meeting September 8-9, 2004 Worley, ID.
Key Findings from May & July 2008 WRAP Technical Workshops September 30, 2008 Steve Arnold, Colorado DPHE & Bob Kotchenruther, EPA R10 (Co-Chairs, WRAP.
WRAP Technical Work Overview
Phase I Attribution of Haze Overview (Geographic Attribution for the Implementation of the Regional Haze Rule) or (an experiment in weight-of evidence)
Alternative title slide
BART Overview Lee Alter Western Governors’ Association
AoH Phase 2 Update AoH Meeting – San Diego, CA January 25, 2006
Evaluating Revised Tracking Metric for Regional Haze Planning
Tom Moore (WESTAR and WRAP) and Pat Brewer (NPS ARD)
Western Regional Air Partnership 2003 Technical Workplan Elements
Adjusting the Regional Haze Glide path using Monitoring and Modeling Data Trends Natural Conditions International Anthropogenic Contributions.
Causes of Haze Assessment Brief Overview and Status Report
Attribution of Haze Workgroup Organizational Meeting
WRAP Overview and Role of Dust Forum
Air Resource Specialists, Inc. July 23, 2004
Results from 2018 Preliminary Reasonable Progress Modeling
Attribution of Haze Project Report
Fire/Carbon/Dust Workshop Report
Technical Review Workshop
Regional Modeling for Stationary Source Control Strategy Evaluation
Attribution of Haze Project Update
Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
CRGAQS: CAMx PSAT Results
Presentation transcript:

WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/04 Introduction to the the RMC Source Apportionment Modeling Effort Gail Tonnesen, University of California, Riverside Tom Moore, Western Governors’ Association Who else? WRAP Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver, CO July 22, 2004

WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/04 AoH Work Group Deliverables Geographic source areas of emissions that contribute to impairment at each mandatory federal Class I area (also including existing and potential tribal Class I areas); Mass and species distributions of emissions by source categories within each contributing geographic source area; and The amount of natural and manmade emissions affecting each Class I area

WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/04 Definitions Sensitivity to a source: predicts the effect of a change in emissions on the change in concentration at a receptor site: –Sensitivities can be non-linear and non-additive. –Can result in underestimate of importance of small sources. Source attribution: explain PM concentration at a receptor site by indicating the sources that contribute. Source Apportionment: to divide and share out according to a plan. (Apportion responsibility?)

WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/04 Conceptual Model Reality Attribution of Haze Project Existing 2002 EIs Receptor Modeling Analyses Gridded Dispersion Model Analyses Apportionment Attribution Pure, Idle Speculation

WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/ AoH Project Data Sources Source apportionment modeling simulations from the Regional Modeling Center Receptor-oriented source contribution analyses of aerosol and meteorological monitoring data from the Causes of Haze Assessment project Existing and refined emissions inventories from the Dust, Emissions, and Fire Forums Special-purpose source attribution studies such as BRAVO, et cetera EPA technical guidance documents and analyses Journal publications, and workshop/conference reports addressing emissions and visibility impairment

WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/ AoH Project Deliverables Identify: –Geographic source areas of emissions that contribute to impairment at each mandatory federal and tribal Class I area –Mass and species distributions of emissions by source categories within each contributing geographic source area –The amount of natural and manmade emissions affecting each Class I area

WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/ AoH Project Deliverables Provide: –Documentation of the assumptions, methods, and uncertainties used in the integrated analyses of modeling, monitoring, and emissions data. –Succinct, clear summaries for policymakers, of the estimated areas and sources of impairment for each Class I area, including the associated uncertainty

WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/04 RMC Activities for AoH The RMC work plan includes support for AoH in two modeling studies: –Source apportionment modeling uses tracers in CMAQ to attribute mass at receptor sites to emissions source regions & source categories. Budget in 2004 work plan: $61,717 –Modeling of natural emissions and visibility in CMAQ. Budget in 2004 work plan: $18,194 Related RMC activities: –CMAQ sensitivity simulations with alternate emissions scenarios, e.g., fires can be used to assess source attributions.

WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/04 Lessons of 309 work WRAP states have low PM and relatively good visibility. No single control measure in 309 produced large visibility benefits: –Long-range transport (BC) and natural PM believed to be important contributors. –Several PM species contribute to poor visibility. –Difficult to get large improvements in visibility.

WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/04 CMAQ TSSA Results Results are presented in two ways: –Animations of plumes of PM produced from emissions of individual source categories and source regions –Bar plots showing largest species contributor at each site. Regions are resolved at the state level and by major emissions category: Area, Point, Mobile, Fire Results show small contributions from multiple source and low concentrations. Results indicate that local emissions are dominant.

WRAP Regional Modeling Center, Attribution of Haze Meeting, Denver CO 7/22/04 Current Results CMAQ Tagged species source apportionment simulations are being completed for 2002: –Results are currently complete for January & July. –Model requires many tracers to track reactive species, especially NOy and NO3. Results in large data sets and slow run times. –Multiple simulations needed to apply tracers to all species of interest. –Although expensive, this is much less costly than running large numbers of sensitivity simulations.