1. 2007 Group Meeting Global Climate and Air Pollution (GCAP) at Harvard University Nicky Lam and Joshua Fu University of Tennessee October 12, 2007

2. GCAP Update UT Team 1.Find best MM5 schemes for GISS data Sensitivity analysis Best scenario for whole domain Best scenario for Northeastern States, Southeastern States, Central States, & West States 2.Preliminary run using Barry Lynn suggested base on the Best MM5 schemes in Northeastern States and other schemes combinations 3.CMAQ runs for 2001 and 2050

3. Highlighted scenario are the preliminary runs GISS/MM5 Downscale Modeling

4. Case 24 ( Kain-Fritsch 2, Eta, Reisner 2, RRTM) has closer temperature compared to others Similar wind speed were found on all cases Similar wind direction were found on all cases

5. Noted: Noah LSM is not available due to lack of soil layers May need to discuss with Loretta to reprocessing the output from GEOS-Chem

6. Case 24 is used in all preliminary simulation.Case 24 is used in all preliminary simulation. This setting was suggested by Barry Lynn claimed to be the best scenario for Northeastern StatesThis setting was suggested by Barry Lynn claimed to be the best scenario for Northeastern States MM5 Scheme Evaluation

7. MM5 Setting LAMBERT CONFORMAL NO COARSE DOMAIN EXPANSION TRUE LATITUDE 1 (degree) => 33 degrees TRUE LATITUDE 2 (degree) => 45 degrees Time increment between analysis times (s)=> 3 hrs data Top pressure used in analysis, model lid (Pa) => 10000.00 No FDDA Number of half-sigma layers => 34 layers Simulation duration for each run => 6 days with 12 hrs spinoff Simulation time step => 90 seconds

8. MM5 Sigma Level => from INTERPF Noted: MCIP extracts the highlighted sigma level for CMAQ

9. CMAQ Modeling

10. Current Case Study 2001 meteorology with 2001 emission 2050 meteorology with 2001 emission –Find the effect that contributed from the change of GISS meteorology Time period: June 1 to October 1 (Ozone season)

11. CMAQ 14 layers (from the previous sigma levels) ICON and BCON from GEOS-Chem from 3 hrs to one hour average GISS meteorological Inputs Input emission is compatible with 2001 EPA emission

12. MM5 Comparison between GISS_2001, GISS_2050 and NCEP_2001(FDDA)

13. Temperature Average

14. Temperature Maximum

15. PBL Average

16. Air Density Average

17. Wind Speed Average

18. Pressure Average

19. Precipitation Average

20. Total Cloud Fraction Average

21. Dry Dep. Velocity Average

22. Conv. Velocity Scale Average

23. CMAQ comparison 2001 GISS data 2050 GISS data

24. O 3 concentration vs. Temperature Relationship

25. Maximum O 3 At the same location

26. Avg NO x & Avg VOCs More VOCs, but less O 3, Main effect => T NO x limited Area, no big diff.

27. PM 2.5 & DCV 7.2 m 391 m

28. Visual Range Parameters: Deciview (dv) : dV = 10 ln (b / 0.01), b [km -1 ] : extinction coeff. Koschmieder Visual Range : Vr = 3.91 / b [km] dV Vr [km]  km -1 ] 60 1.04.0 40 7.20.55 20 530.07 10 1440.03 0 3910.01

29. SO 2 & Total Sulfur Dep. very minimal Effect

31. Comparison between 2050 and 2001 (2050 – 2001) Average Temp. & Average O 3 Conc.

32. Comparison between 2050 and 2001 (2050 – 2001) Max Temp. & Max O 3 Conc.