Source Attribution and Source Sensitivity Modeling Studies with CMAQ and CAMx
CRGAQS: Revised CAMx Results
description
Transcript of CRGAQS: Revised CAMx Results
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
CRGAQS:Revised CAMx Results
Presentation to theGorge Study Technical Team
ByENVIRON International Corporation
December 6, 2006
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
Today’s Presentation
• Recap modeling performance issues
• Describe latest CAMx simulations– Model and emission changes
• Performance for PM and light scattering
• Next Steps
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
Modeling Issues
• Episodes– August 10-22, 2004 – November 4-18, 2004
• Identified issues from sensitivity runs– Primary fine/coarse PM over predicted in
both episodes• Dominating modeled light scattering
• Windblown dust vs. fires?
• Nope: construction + agricultural fugitive dust
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
Modeling Issues
– OC over predicted in both episodes• SOA is dominant in Aug (mainly biogenic)
• POA (+EC) is dominant in Nov near Portland (wood smoke)
– Why is modeled scattering nearly zero in mid-November in the Mt Zion area?• Easterly winds accelerate through Gorge and
send Portland emissions offshore
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
Modeling Issues
– Why is modeled scattering so low at the eastern sites in November?• No speciated data at Gorge study sites
• IMPROVE data on Nov 11 indicates dominance of NO3 and OC
– OC, EC, and SO4 performance is good in east– NO3 is under predicted in east
• We rely on modeled RH to generate the nitrate (complex process)
• We use observed RH to translate nitrate mass to nitrate scattering (simple process)
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
Revised Model Configuration
• SOA– Historically under predicted by CMAQ
and CAMx in the western U.S. (e.g., WRAP)• Attributed to the biogenic component
– We employed a chemical improvement in CAMx for biogenic SOA• Same as put into CMAQ for the RPOs• Terpene 2-product mechanism: higher yields,
higher volatility• Should reduce biogenic SOA
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
Revised Model Configuration
• Fugitive dust– 2 SMOKE problems:
• WRAP speciation profiles caused a double-counting of OR/WA dust estimates
– This also impacted OR/WA woodsmoke emissions
• No county-level “canopy escape factor” was applied (as developed and applied in WRAP)
– Both have been fixed and SMOKE re-run• Significant coarse PM reductions
– Note: WRAP has chosen to completely disregard primary coarse PM predictions
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
Performance Evaluation
-2100 -2000 -1900 -1800 -1700800
900
1000
B onnev illeM t.Z ion M em aloose
Sauvie Is land
Tow al R dW ishramCO G O 1
CO RI1
M O H O 1
7 M ile H ill
S te igerw aldStrunk R d
G orge m onitors (9)C ASTN ET (0)IM PR OVE (3)EP A FR M (7)EP A STN (1)
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
August Performance Evaluation
Bscat. 04aug.run7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Observed [1/Mm]
Gorge
Sauvie Island Bscat
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
Bscat [1/M
m]
Bscat, observed Bscat, 04aug.run7
Mt Zion Bscat
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
Bscat [1/M
m]
Bscat, observed Bscat, 04aug.run7
Bonneville Bscat
0102030405060708090
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
Bscat [1/M
m]
Bscat, observed Bscat, 04aug.run7
Wishram Bscat
0102030405060708090
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
Bscat [1/M
m]
Bscat, observed Bscat, 04aug.run7
Gorge Site Bscat
East Portland
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
SO4. 04aug.run7
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0 2 4 6 8
Observed [ug/m̂ 3]
Gorge IMPROVE STN
August Performance EvaluationNO3. 04aug.run7
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Observed [ug/m̂ 3]
Gorge IMPROVE STN
FINE. 04aug.run7
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0 2 4 6
Observed ug/m̂ 3
IMPROVE
PM25. 04aug.run7
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 10 20 30
Observed ug/m̂ 3
IMPROVE FRM
Bonneville
OC. 04aug.run7
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0 5 10
Observed [ug/m̂ 3]
Gorge IMPROVE STN
EC. 04aug.run7
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 1 2 3
Observed [ug/m̂ 3]
Gorge IMPROVE STN
Mt. Zion
Wishram
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
August Performance Statistics
August SO4 NO3 OC EC Fine PM2.5 Improve FB -54 -151 30 25 -64 -7 Improve FE 54 151 55 39 74 30 Gorge FB -72* -83 30 82 Gorge FE 80* 119 43 82 STN FB -57 -111 -37 14 STN FE 57 111 57 45 FRM FB -1 FRM FE 26
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
August Performance EvaluationSO4 at Bonneville
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
[ug
/m^
3]
Observed 04aug.run7
NO3 at Bonneville
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
[u
g/m
^3]
Observed 04aug.run7
OC at Bonneville
0
5
10
15
20
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
[ug
/m^
3]
Observed 04aug.run7
EC at Bonneville
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
[u
g/m
^3]
Observed 04aug.run7
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
August Performance EvaluationSO4 at Mt Zion
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
[ug
/m^
3]
Observed 04aug.run7
NO3 at Mt Zion
0
0.51
1.52
2.5
33.5
4
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
[ug
/m^
3]
Observed 04aug.run7
OC at Mt Zion
0
5
10
15
20
25
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
[ug
/m^
3]
Observed 04aug.run7
EC at Mt Zion
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
[ug
/m^
3]
Observed 04aug.run7
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
Gorge Study vs. IMPROVEAt Mt. Zion
Gorge vs. IMPROVE OC at Mt Zion
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
232 310 313 316 319 322
2004 Julian Date
[ug
/m^3
]
Gorge OC
IMPROVE
Gorge vs. IMPROVE EC at Mt Zion
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
232 310 313 316 319 322
2004 Julian Date
[u
g/m
^3]
Gorge EC
IMPROVE
Organic and Elemental Carbon
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
Gorge Study vs. IMPROVEAt Mt. Zion
Sulfate and Nitrate
Gorge vs. IMPROVE SO4 at Mt Zion
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
232 310 313 316 319 322
2004 Julian Date
[ug
/m^
3]
Gorge SO4
IMPROVE SO4
Gorge vs. IMPROVE NO3 at Mt Zion
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
232 310 313 316 319 322
2004 Julian Date
[ug
/m^
3]
Gorge NO3
IMPROVE NO3
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
August Summary
• Overall good performance for– Total PM2.5– Light scattering
• Low SO4/NH4 and primary fine– Questionable Gorge measurements– NO3 insufficient to worry about
• High carbon– SOA modification ineffective– What is underlying cause?
• Model over predicts diurnal variation
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
November Performance Evaluation
Gorge Site Bscat
Bscat. 04nov.run7
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
0 100 200 300 400 500
Observed [1/Mm]
Gorge
Sauvie Island Bscat
050
100150200250300350400450
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
Bscat [1/M
m]
Bscat, observed Bscat, 04nov.run7
Mt Zion Bscat
0
100
200
300
400
500
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
Bscat [1/M
m]
Bscat, observed Bscat, 04nov.run7
Bonneville Bscat
020406080
100120140160180
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
Bscat [1/M
m]
Bscat, observed Bscat, 04nov.run7
Wishram Bscat
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
Bscat [1/M
m]
Bscat, observed Bscat, 04nov.run7
Portland
Eastern Gorge
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
EC. 04nov.run7
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 5 10
Observed [ug/m̂ 3]
Gorge IMPROVE STN
OC. 04nov.run7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 20 40 60
Observed [ug/m̂ 3]
Gorge IMPROVE STN
NO3. 04nov.run7
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0 5 10 15
Observed [ug/m̂ 3]
Gorge IMPROVE STN
SO4. 04nov.run7
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 5 10
Observed [ug/m̂ 3]
Gorge IMPROVE STN
November Performance Evaluation
Bonneville
Mt. Zion
Mt. Zion
FINE. 04nov.run7
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 5 10 15
Observed ug/m̂ 3
IMPROVE
PM25. 04nov.run7
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 50 100
Observed ug/m̂ 3
IMPROVE FRM
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
November Performance Statistics
November SO4 NO3 OC EC Fine PM2.5 Improve FB 11 5 -3 25 144 30 Improve FE 35 105 51 67 144 55 Gorge FB -70* 25 14 67 Gorge FE 80* 113 59 71 STN FB -24 2 54 107 STN FE 57 86 54 107 FRM FB 47 FRM FE 66
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
November Performance EvaluationSO4 at Bonneville
0123456789
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
[ug
/m^
3]
Observed 04nov.run7
NO3 at Bonneville
0
2
4
6
8
10
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
[ug
/m^
3]
Observed 04nov.run7
OC at Bonneville
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
[ug
/m^
3]
Observed 04nov.run7
EC at Bonneville
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
[ug
/m^
3]
Observed 04nov.run7
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
November Performance EvaluationSO4 at Mt Zion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
[ug
/m^
3]
Observed 04nov.run7
NO3 at Mt Zion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
[ug
/m^
3]
Observed 04nov.run7
OC at Mt Zion
0102030405060708090
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
[ug
/m^
3]
Observed 04nov.run7
EC at Mt Zion
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
[ug
/m^
3]
Observed 04nov.run7
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
November Summary
• Generally high total PM2.5– Dominated by carbon and primary fine
• Bifurcated performance for light scattering– Over predicted in Portland area: high carbon
and primary fine– Under predicted in eastern Gorge: low
SO4/NO3/NH4
• Need more humidity/clouds:– Generate more SO4– Condense more NO3
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt
Next Steps
• Recommendations:– Focus on August episode
• 2018 Case
• PSAT
• “What-if” scenarios
• Use model trends in relative sense to scale IMPROVE observations
– Relegate November episode• Revisit with possible follow-on funding?