Sensitivity of PM 2.5 Species to Emissions in the Southeast Sun-Kyoung Park and Armistead G....
-
Upload
vanessa-powers -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Sensitivity of PM 2.5 Species to Emissions in the Southeast Sun-Kyoung Park and Armistead G....
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 Species to Emissions in the Southeast
Sun-Kyoung Park and Armistead G. RussellGeorgia Institute of Technology
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
OVERVIEW
Contents
• Model Domain• Meteorological Input • Input of SMOKE and Modules in CMAQ• CMAQ 4.2.2 vs. 4.3• Sensitivity of PM 2.5 to Emissions• Conclusion
• Comparison between CMAQ 4.2.2 and 4.3• Sensitivity of PM 2.5 to emissions in the Southeast for July 2001 and
January 2002 using Models-3 (CMAQ 4.3/MM5/SMOKE)
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
1. Model Domain14,500 m (=0.0)
7,200 m (=0.3)
70 m (=0.99)
2,940 m (=0.65)
1,550 m (=0.80)
740 m (=0.90)
300 m (=0.96)
140 m (=0.98)
18 m (=0.9975)
CMAQ horizontal domain and the vertical structure.
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
Model CMAQ MM5
Grid size 36 km 12 km 36 km 12 km
Dimension 147 x 111 21 x 18 164 x 128 27 x 24
Coordinate of the origin (-2,628, -1,980 km) (1,044, -720 km) (-2,952, -2,304 km) (1,008, -756 km)
Number of vertical layer 9 25
Top pressure of the model domain 100 hPa 100 hPa
2. Meteorological Input
MM5 version 3.5.3:Simple ice microphysicsKain-Fritsch cumulus scheme Rapid radiative transfer modelPleim Chang planetary boundary layerPleim-Xiu land surface model
Four Dimensional Data Assimilation:
NCEP Eta model outputs for the GCIP project NCEP ADP Observational data
Evaluation:
TDL surface hourly data
Temperature(K)
SpecificHumidity
(g/kg)
WindSpeed
(m/sec)
WindDirection
(deg)
MBEJuly 2001(36 km) -0.333 -0.82 -0.092 11.59
July 2001(12 km) 0.2 -0.504 0.148 35.7
January 2002(36 km) -1.161 0.101 0.135 21.62
January 2002(12 km) -1.34 0.051 0.011 8.64
RMSEJuly 2001(36 km) 1.65 1.806 1.297 58.05
July 2001(12 km) 1.998 1.156 1.41 78.72
January 2002(36 km) 2.053 0.524 1.412 64.6
January 2002(12 km) 2.48 0.396 1.629 54.18
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
2. Meteorological Input
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
Temperature (K) Specific Humidity (g/kg) Wind Speed (m/sec)July 2001
January 2002
RMSE
Temperature
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
July2001
(36 km)
July2001
(12 km)
January2002
(36 km)
January2002
(12 km)
K
Wind Speed
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
July2001
(36 km)
July2001
(12 km)
January2002
(36 km)
January2002
(12 km)
m/s
ec
Specific Humidity
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
July2001
(36 km)
July2001
(12 km)
January2002
(36 km)
January2002
(12 km)
g/kg
Statistical benchmark (Emery et al., (2001))
Emery, C., E. Tai and G. Yarwood, 2001. “Enhanced meteorological modeling and performance evaluation for two Texas episodes”, report to the Texas National Reesources Conservation Commision, prepared by ENVIRON, International Corp, Novato, CA
2. Meteorological Input
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
3. Input of SMOKE and Modules in CMAQ
• Input of SMOKE
• Emissions inventory developed by GA Tech for the state of Georgia and 1999 National emissions inventory for other states
• EGAS 4.0 growth factors and existing control strategy to project the 1999 emissions to 2001 and 2002 emissions
• Modules in CMAQ
• Chemical mechanism: SAPRC-99
• Chemistry solver: modified Euler backward iterative (MEBI) method
• Cloud: the regional acid deposition model (RADM)
• Aerosol dynamics: AERO3
• Deposition velocities of aerosols: AERO_DEPV2
• Horizontal and vertical advection: piecewise parabolic method (PPM)
• Minimum vertical eddy coefficient: 0.3 m2/sec.
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MODEL (July 2001) OBS (July 2001) MODEL (January2002)
OBS (January 2002)
SULFATE(ug/m3) NITRATE(ug/m3) AMMONIUM(ug/m3) EC(ug/m3) OC(ug/m3) Others
YRK station
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
MODEL(July2001)
OBS(July2001)
MODEL(January
2002)
OBS(January
2002)ug
/m3
BHM station
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
MODEL(July2001)
OBS(July2001)
MODEL(January
2002)
OBS(January
2002)
ug/m
3
4. CMAQ 4.2.2 vs. 4.3 (daily PM 2.5)The performance of CMAQ was evaluated with measured data of SEARCH and ASACA stations
JST
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 2 4 6
OBS (ug/m3)
MO
DEL
(ug/
m3)
4. CMAQ 4.2.2 vs. 4.3 (daily PM 2.5, July 2001)
• 36 km (version 4.2.2) • 36 km (version 4.3) • 12 km (version 4.2.2) • 12 km (version 4.3)
Sulfate AmmoniumNitrate
PM 2.5Organic Carbon
Elemental Carbon
OBS x 2
OBS x 0.5
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
OBS (ug/m3)
MO
DEL
(ug/
m3)
0
0.5
1
1.5
0 0.5 1 1.5
OBS (ug/m3)M
OD
EL (u
g/m
3)
0
1
2
3
0 1 2 3
OBS (ug/m3)
MO
DEL
(ug/
m3)
0
5
10
15
20
0 5 10 15 20
OBS (ug/m3)
MO
DEL
(ug/
m3)
0
10
20
30
40
0 10 20 30 40
OBS-TEOM (ug/m3)
MO
DEL
(ug/
m3)
0
1
2
3
0 1 2 3
OBS (ug/m3)
MO
DEL
(ug/
m3)
4. CMAQ 4.2.2 vs. 4.3 (daily PM 2.5, January 2002)
Sulfate Nitrate Ammonium
Elemental Carbon
Organic Carbon PM 2.5
OBS x 2
OBS x 0.5
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
• 36 km (version 4.2.2) • 36 km (version 4.3) • 12 km (version 4.2.2) • 12 km (version 4.3)
0
1
2
3
4
5
0 1 2 3 4 5
OBS (ug/m3)
MO
DEL
(ug/
m3)
0
1
2
3
4
0 1 2 3 4
OBS (ug/m3)M
OD
EL (u
g/m
3)
0
1
2
3
4
5
0 1 2 3 4 5
OBS (ug/m3)
MO
DEL
(ug/
m3)
0
5
10
15
20
0 5 10 15 20
OBS (ug/m3)
MO
DEL
(ug/
m3)
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 10 20
OBS-TEOM (ug/m3)M
OD
EL (u
g/m
3)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
0 500 1000 1500 2000
OBS (ppb)
MO
DEL
(ppb
)
4. CMAQ 4.2.2 vs. 4.3 (hourly gas phase species, July 2001)
CO
HNO3NOy PM 2.5
O3 MBE (ppb)
MNB (%)
MGE (ppb)
MNGE (%)
Version 4.2.2
5.38 13.7 24.83 44.35
Version 4.3
11.16 21.6 20.24 38.1
Statistics of O3 (12 km domain)O3
OBS x 2
OBS x 0.5
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
• 36 km (version 4.2.2) • 36 km (version 4.3) • 12 km (version 4.2.2) • 12 km (version 4.3)
0
50
100
150
0 50 100 150
OBS (ppb)
MO
DEL
(ppb
)
0
50
100
150
200
0 50 100 150 200
OBS (ppb)
MO
DEL
(ppb
)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
OBS (ppb)
MO
DEL
(ppb
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
OBS (ug/m3)M
OD
EL (u
g/m
3)
Performance of CMAQ for PM 2.5 species
• Sulfate: overestimated in July 2001 good in January 2002
• Nitrate: overestimated
• Ammonium: good
• Elemental Carbon: overestimated
• Organic carbon: from version 4.2.2 to 4.3, the performance is improved markedly after the secondary organic aerosol algorithm has been modified to make the gas-particle partitioning of semi-volatiles reversible
• PM 2.5: overestimated mainly due to the overestimation of the crustal elements (primary PM 2.5)
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
4. CMAQ 4.2.2 vs. 4.3 (hourly gas phase species, July 2001)
5. Sensitivity of PM 2.5 to Emissions
Sulfate: Major species of the PM 2.5 in the Southeast. Sources: anthropogenic emissions
Sensitivity of emissions to sulfate sensitivity of emissions to PM 2.5
• 20% reduction of SO2
• 20% reduction of NH3
• 20% reduction of NH3 and SO2
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
-18
-12
-6
0sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
5
10
15
conc
entr
atio
n (u
g/m
3)
-18
-12
-6
0sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
5
10
15co
ncen
trat
ion
(ug/
m3)
Sulfate Nitrate
0
20
40
60sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
5
10
conc
entr
atio
n (u
g/m
3)
0
20
40
60sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
5
10
conc
entr
atio
n (u
g/m
3)
July 2001
January 2002
5. Sensitivity of PM 2.5 to Emissions (20% reduction of SO2)
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
: sensitivity, •: concentration
-10
-5
0sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
2
4
conc
entr
atio
n (u
g/m
3)
-10
-5
0sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
2
4co
ncen
trat
ion
(ug/
m3)
Ammonium PM 2.5
July 2001
January 2002
5. Sensitivity of PM 2.5 to Emissions (20% reduction of SO2)
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
: sensitivity, •: concentration
-2
-1
0GFP
OAKOLE CTR
PNSBHM
YRKFTM
JST
SDKTUCD
mas
s (u
g/m
3)
0
30
60
conc
entra
tion
(ug/
m3)
-2
-1
0GFP
OAKOLE CTR
PNSBHM
YRKFTM
JST
SDKTUCD
mas
s (u
g/m
3)
0
30
60
conc
entra
tion
(ug/
m3)
D mass
Sulfate Nitrate
5. Sensitivity of PM 2.5 to Emissions (20% reduction of NH3)
-6
-3
0 GFP
OA
K
OLE
CTR
PNS
BH
MYR
K
FTM
JST
SDK
TUC
sen
sitiv
ity (%
)
0
5
10
15
conc
entr
atio
n (u
g/m
3)
-6
-3
0 GFP
OA
K
OLE
CTR
PNS
BH
M
YRK
FTM
JST
SDK
TUC
sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
5
10
15co
ncen
trat
ion
(ug/
m3)
July 2001
January 2002
-60
-40
-20
0 GFP
OA
KO
LEC
TRPN
S
BH
MYR
KFTMJSTSD
KTU
C
sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
5
10
conc
entr
atio
n (u
g/m
3)
-60
-40
-20
0 GFP
OA
K
OLE
CTR
PNS
BH
M
YRK
FTM
JST
SDK
TUC
sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
5
10
conc
entr
atio
n (u
g/m
3)
: sensitivity, •: concentrationSensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
5. Sensitivity of PM 2.5 to Emissions (20% reduction of NH3) PM 2.5Ammonium
July 2001-20
-10
0 GFP
OA
K
OLE
CTR
PNS
BH
M
YRK
FTM
JST
SDK
TUC
sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
2
4
conc
entr
atio
n (u
g/m
3)
-20
-10
0 GFP
OA
K
OLE
CTR
PNS
BH
M
YRK
FTM
JST
SDK
TUC
sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
2
4
conc
entr
atio
n (u
g/m
3)
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
: sensitivity, •: concentration
-2
-1
0 GFP
OA
KO
LEC
TRPN
SB
HM
YRK
FTMJSTSD
KTU
C
D m
ass
(ug/
m3)
0
30
60
conc
entra
tion
(ug/
m3)
-2
-1
0 GFP
OA
KO
LEC
TRPN
S
BH
MYR
KFTMJSTSD
KTU
C
D m
ass
(ug/
m3)
0
30
60
conc
entra
tion
(ug/
m3)
D mass
January 2002
Sulfate NitrateJuly 2001
January 2002
-18
-12
-6
0 GFP
OA
K
OLE
CTR
PNS
BH
MYR
KFTMJST
SDK
TUC
sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
5
10
15
conc
entr
atio
n (u
g/m
3)
-18
-12
-6
0 GFP
OA
KO
LEC
TR
PNS
BH
MYR
K
FTMJSTSD
K
TUC
sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
5
10
15
conc
entr
atio
n (u
g/m
3)
-40
-20
0 GFP
OA
KO
LEC
TR
PNS
BH
MYR
K
FTMJSTSD
K
TUC
sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
5
10
conc
entr
atio
n (u
g/m
3)
-40
-20
0 GFP
OA
KO
LEC
TR
PNS
BH
MYR
K
FTMJSTSD
K
TUC
sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
5
10
conc
entr
atio
n (u
g/m
3)
5. Sensitivity of PM 2.5 to Emissions (20% reduction of NH3 and SO2)
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
: sensitivity, •: concentration
Ammonium PM 2.5July 2001
-30
-20
-10
0 GFP
OA
K
OLE
CTR
PNS
BH
M
YRK
FTM
JST
SDK
TUC
sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
2
4
conc
entr
atio
n (u
g/m
3)
-30
-20
-10
0 GFP
OA
K
OLE
CTR
PNS
BH
M
YRK
FTM
JST
SDK
TUC
sens
itivi
ty (%
)
0
2
4
conc
entr
atio
n (u
g/m
3)
5. Sensitivity of PM 2.5 to Emissions (20% reduction of NH3 and SO2)
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
: sensitivity, •: concentration
-3
-2
-1
0 GFP
OA
KO
LEC
TRPN
S
BH
MYR
KFTMJSTSD
KTU
C
D m
ass
(ug/
m3)
0
30
60
conc
entra
tion
(ug/
m3)
-3
-2
-1
0 GFP
OA
KO
LEC
TRPN
SB
HM
YRK
FTMJSTSD
KTU
C
D m
ass
(ug/
m3)
0
30
60
con
cent
ratio
n (u
g/m
3)
D mass
January 2002
5. Sensitivity of PM 2.5 to Emissions
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
BASE SO2_20 NH3_20 NH3_SO2_20
SULFATE(ug/m3) NITRATE(ug/m3) AMMONIUM(ug/m3) EC(ug/m3) OC(ug/m3) Others(ug/m3)
Yorkville (January 2002)
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
BA
SE
SO
2_20
NH
3_20
NH
3_SO
2_20
ug/m
3
Tucker (July 2001)
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
BA
SE
SO
2_20
NH
3_20
NH
3_SO
2_20
ug/m
3
Tucker (January 2002)
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45B
AS
E
SO
2_20
NH
3_20
NH
3_SO
2_20
ug/m
3
Yorkville (July 2001)
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
BA
SE
SO
2_20
NH
3_20
NH
3_SO
2_20
ug/m
3
• The sensitivity of PM 2.5 to a 20% reduction of NH3: high in January 2002 SO2: high in July 2001 NH3 and SO2: high in both January 2002 and July 2001
20 % of SO2 20 % of NH3 20 % of NH3 and SO2
July 2001
-6.0 % ( -1.61 g/m3)
-2.19 % (-0.59 g/m3)
-8.01 % (-2.15 g/m3)
January 2002
-0.96 % (-0.26 g/m3)
-5.62 % (-1.53 g/m3)
-6.4 % (-1.74 g/m3)
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast
5. Sensitivity of PM 2.5 to Emissions
6. Summary• CMAQ 4.3 improved markedly in simulation of organic carbon concentration. However, model still overestimates primary PM 2.5 species.
• When SO2 is reduced, sulfate concentrations decreased, but nitrate concentrations increased. Thus, only SO2 reduction was not efficient way to reduce the PM 2.5 in winter time, when the nitrate concentrations are relatively high.
• When NH3 is reduced, nitrate and ammonium decreased, but sulfate concentrations did not change much. Thus, NH3 reduction did not decrease PM 2.5 in summer time, when the sulfate concentrations are relatively high.
• When NH3 and SO2 are both reduced, nitrate, sulfate and ammonium concentrations decreased significantly both summer and winter.
• Future research will include the sensitivity of emissions for different geographic locations.
Sensitivity of PM 2.5 species to Emissions in the Southeast