1. Urbanized MM5 meso-met modeling for the Houston Texas ozone SIP Prof. Bob Bornstein Dept. of Meteorology San Jose State University San Jose, CA USA pblmodel@hhotmail.com presented at Imperial College 16 March 2005

2. OVERVIEW MESO-MET URBANIZATION MESO-MET URBANIZATION FORMULATION FORMULATION REQUIRED INPUTS REQUIRED INPUTS RESULTS RESULTS HOUSTON CASE STUDY HOUSTON CASE STUDY DOMAINS DOMAINS GIS INPUTS GIS INPUTS RESULTS RESULTS

3. From EPA uMM5: Mason + Martilli: by Dupont Within Gayno-Seaman PBL/TKE scheme

4.  Advanced urbanization scheme from Masson (2000) __________ _________ 3 new terms in each prog equation

5. New GIS/RS inputs for uMM5 as f (x, y, z)  land use (38 categories)  roughness elements  anthropogenic heat as f (t)  vegetation and building heights  paved-surface fractions  drag-force coef for buildings & vegetation  building H/W, wall-plan, & impervious-area ratios  building frontal, plan, & and rooftop area-densities  wall and roof: ε, cρ, α, etc.  vegetation: canopies, root zones, stomatal resistances

6. Urbanization  day/nite same-line  not f (Ri) Martilli/EPFL results Non-urban: urban

7. Current SJSU uMM5 Configuration Modified EPA uMM5-96 Modified EPA uMM5-96 5 nested-domains 5 nested-domains Inner urbanized-domain: 134 x 141, 1-km grids Inner urbanized-domain: 134 x 141, 1-km grids GIS/RS sfc-parameters as f(x,y) GIS/RS sfc-parameters as f(x,y) 5-layer soil-model; Gayno-Seaman TKE 5-layer soil-model; Gayno-Seaman TKE Simulation: 8 days Simulation: 8 days 106 SJSU cluster 106 SJSU cluster 1 CPU  15 to 1 1 CPU  15 to 1 96 CPU  0.25 to 1 96 CPU  0.25 to 1

8. Domains: 108, 36, 12, 4, 1 km Pts: 43×53×28,55×55×28,100×100×28,136×151×28, 133×141×48

9. KEY IDEA: IDEAL MESO-MET ATM-MODEL CAPTURES ALL BC FORCINGS O 3 EPISODES OCCUR ON GIVEN DAY: O 3 EPISODES OCCUR ON GIVEN DAY: NOT FROM CHANGES IN: TOPO, Q, OR SFC MESO- FORCING (EXCEPT FOG) NOT FROM CHANGES IN: TOPO, Q +, OR SFC MESO- FORCING (EXCEPT FOG) BUT FROM CHANGES IN UPPER-LEVEL SYN’S, WHICH BUT FROM CHANGES IN UPPER-LEVEL SYN’S, WHICH ARE FROM EXTERNAL-MODEL & WHICH ARE FROM EXTERNAL-MODEL & WHICH ALTER MESO SFC-FORCINGS (i.e., TOPO, LAND/SEA, URBAN) VIA MESO-T AND THUS V ALTER MESO SFC-FORCINGS (i.e., TOPO, LAND/SEA, URBAN) VIA MESO-T AND THUS V THUS EVALUATE (SEQUENTIALLY): THUS EVALUATE (SEQUENTIALLY): UPPER LEVEL Syn Wx patterns: p (via HPGF) & then V UPPER LEVEL Syn Wx patterns: p (via HPGF) & then V TOPOGRAPHY (via grid spacing): channeling of V TOPOGRAPHY (via grid spacing): channeling of V MESO SFC: T (via Fr/Diff) & then V MESO SFC: T (via Fr/Diff) & then V

10. HOUSTON (S. Stetson)

11. 3-PM Coastal-L Episode day Domains: 1-3 L L L

12. Domain 3, 4 PM: cold-core L: (from SST-eddy??) L

13. Domain 4 (3 PM) : L off Houston on O 3 day (25 th ) L L  Episode day day LLLLLLLL

14. Urbanized D-5: near-sfc 3 PM V, 4-days  Max Oday O 3 day

15. Base-case (current) veg cover (urban min) Modeled increased veg cover: urban max values: 0.1 of above

16. Soil moisture increase for: Run 12 (entire area, left) & Run 13 (urban area only, right)

17. Run 12 (urban-max reforestation) minus Run 10 (base case): 4 PM near-sfc ∆T (C) shows: reforested urban-center cools & surrounding deforested rural-areas warm

18. u1u1 seasea ru r u2u2 HOUSTIN-SIP CMAQ-O: 6 tree-planting scenarios  HOUSTIN-SIP CMAQ-O 3 : 6 tree-planting scenarios  reduced UHIs (right) in urban-box 1 (left) for Run 17 Max impact

19. Importance urbanized MM5 + urban tree planting  urbanized MM5 + urban tree planting  ↓ daytime max-UHI  ↓ daytime max-UHI  ↓ reduced a/c  ↓ precursor emissions & slower atm-chem  ↓ reduced a/c  ↓ precursor emissions & slower atm-chem  ↓ lower CMAQ-ozone  ↓ lower CMAQ-ozone  EPA emission-reduction SIP credits EPA emission-reduction SIP credits

20. The End