Comprehensive Particulate Matter Modeling: A One Atmosphere Approach

1
Integrated Assessment Packages for Class I Areas
Jim Boylan Georgia Department of Natural
Resources VISTAS Technical Lead for Air Quality
Modeling VISTAS Planning and Technical Meeting
Charleston, SC December 15, 2004
2
Outline

• Introduction
• Scaling of Model Responses
• CART Episode Weights
• General Integrated Package
• Specific Class I Integrated Package
• Great Smoky Mountains
• Revised NH3 Sensitivities

3
Scaling Model Responses

• Modeling results used in a relative fashion
  rather than absolute fashion
• DC (Mfuture - Mbase) Obase/Mbase
• Scaling is based on typical base year
  simulation, not actual base year modeling.
• Equivalent to applying day specific RRFs to each
  component of PM.
• Scaling factors that were unusually large due to
  species having extremely small concentrations
  were reassigned a weight of 1.0
• ROMA/OKEF/WOLF/EVER
• NO3, Soils, CM

4
CART Weights

• CART episode weighting methodology
• Accounted for the number of Class 1 and 4/5 days
  in each bin relative to the total number of days
  included in the CART analysis (day specific f(rh)
  and overall 20 best and worst days).
• Accounted for the number of W (or B) days
  contained in each bin relative to the total
  number of W (or B) days included in the IMPROVE
  analysis (monthly f(rh) and yearly 20 best and
  worst days).
• Normalized to account for unrepresented bins.
• Adjusted for number of modeled days within a bin.
• Can only assign weights to days with measurements
  (1 in 3 days)
• Each site will use 1 5 days to represent each
  metric

5
Additional Information for Integrated Evaluations

• Mike Abraczinskas - NC DAQ
• Jim Boylan GA DNR
• George Bridgers - NC DAQ
• VISTAS Planning and Technical Analysis Workgroup
  Meeting
• Charleston, South Carolina
• December 15, 2004

6
Additional Information

• Site Locations and Modeling Grid
• CART Weights for Episodes
• Wind Vectors Spatial Plots
• Emissions Charts and Spatial Plots
• Air Quality Spatial Plots
• Sensitivity Charts and Spatial Plots

7
Site Locations and Modeling Grid
8
(No Transcript)
9
VISTAS 12 km Modeling Grid
10
CART Weights for Episodes
11
CART Weights (20 Best)
12
CART Weights (20 Worst)
13
CART Weights (20 Worst) - July
14
Meteorology
15
Modeled Wind Vectors and ObservationsJuly 15,
2001
Early Morning 06Z
Mid Afternoon 18Z
16
Modeled Wind Vectors and ObservationsJuly 18,
2001
Early Morning 06Z
Mid Afternoon 18Z
17
Modeled Wind Vectors and ObservationsJuly 21,
2001
Early Morning 06Z
Mid Afternoon 18Z
18
Modeled Wind Vectors and ObservationsJuly 24,
2001
Early Morning 06Z
Mid Afternoon 18Z
19
Modeled Wind Vectors and ObservationsJuly 27,
2001
Early Morning 06Z
Mid Afternoon 18Z
20
Modeled Wind Vectors and ObservationsJanuary 2,
2002
Early Morning 06Z
Mid Afternoon 18Z
21
Modeled Wind Vectors and ObservationsJanuary 5,
2002
Early Morning 06Z
Mid Afternoon 18Z
22
Modeled Wind Vectors and ObservationsJanuary 8,
2002
Early Morning 06Z
Mid Afternoon 18Z
23
Modeled Wind Vectors and ObservationsJanuary 11,
2002
Early Morning 06Z
Mid Afternoon 18Z
24
Modeled Wind Vectors and ObservationsJanuary 14,
2002
Early Morning 06Z
Mid Afternoon 18Z
25
Modeled Wind Vectors and ObservationsJanuary 17,
2002
Early Morning 06Z
Mid Afternoon 18Z
26
Modeled Wind Vectors and ObservationsJanuary 20,
2002
Early Morning 06Z
Mid Afternoon 18Z
27
Emissions
28
SO2 Emissions - January
29
SO2 Emissions - July
30
NOx Emissions - January
31
NOx Emissions - July
32
NH3 Emissions - January
33
NH3 Emissions - July
34
PM10 Emissions - January
35
PM10 Emissions - July
36
Air Quality
37
PM2.5 on July 15
38
PM2.5 on July 18
39
PM2.5 on July 21
40
PM2.5 on July 24
41
PM2.5 on July 27
42
Sensitivities
43
Domain SO2 Emissions
44
Ground SO2 Emissions
45
Elevated SO2 Emissions
46
VISTAS CPP SO2 Emissions
47
VISTAS OPP SO2 Emissions
48
VISTAS NPP SO2 Emissions
49
Non-VISTAS SO2 Emissions
50
SO4 Boundary Condition
51
GA AL CPP SO2 Emissions
52
FL MS CPP SO2 Emissions
53
NC SC CPP SO2 Emissions
54
KY TN CPP SO2 Emissions
55
VA WV CPP SO2 Emissions
56
20 Best Days (OTB)
Mountain Coastal
Non-VISTAS
57
20 Best Days (OTW)
Mountain Coastal
Non-VISTAS
58
Geographic CPP SO2 Emissions
Mountain Coastal
Non-VISTAS
4
( of days in red)
2
2
2
2
1
2
3
1
1
2
5
1
5
4
4
4
3
3
1
2
0
59
Integrated Evaluation of 20 Best and 20 Worst
Days at Great Smoky Mtns

• Mike Abraczinskas - NC DAQ
• Jim Boylan GA DNR
• George Bridgers - NC DAQ
• VISTAS Planning and Technical Analysis Workgroup
  Meeting
• Charleston, South Carolina
• December 15, 2004

60
(No Transcript)
61
Integrated Evaluations

• Ambient Monitoring Data Summary
• CART Meteorological Characterization and
  Conceptual Design
• Meteorological Modeling Performance Summary
• Air Quality Modeling Performance Summary
• 2018 OTB and 2018 OTW Simulations
• Evaluation of Reasonable Progress Goals
• Emission Sensitivity Results
• Level 1, 2, and 3
• Geographic Sensitivities

62
Ambient Monitoring Data Summary
63
20 Best Visibility Days (2000)
64
20 Best Visibility Days (2001)
65
20 Best Visibility Days (2002)
66
20 Worst Visibility Days (2001)
67
20 Worst Visibility Days (2002)
68
CART Meteorological Characterization and
Conceptual Design
69
Categorical Comparisons
Surface Characteristics All Days (2000-2003)/5
Ex. Coeff. Categories

Knoxville
70
Categorical Comparisons
Upper-Air Characteristics All Days (2000-2003)/5
Ex. Coeff. Categories

71
Visibility Bin ComparisonsLow Extinction
Bin 4 (47 days) January 5, 14 (88.0) Bin 13 (9
days) January 11 (5.0) Bin 12 (16 days)
January 8 (7.0)
Surface Characteristics All Days (2000-2003)/5
Ex. Coeff. Categories

Knoxville
72
Visibility Bin ComparisonsLow Extinction
Bin 4 (47 days) January 5, 14 (88.0) Bin 13 (9
days) January 11 (5.0) Bin 12 (16 days)
January 8 (7.0)
Upper-Air Characteristics All Days (2000-2003)/5
Ex. Coeff. Categories

73
Visibility Bin Comparisons High Extinction
Bin 39 (7 days) July 18 (31.3) Bin 38 (11
days) July 21 (68.7)
Surface Characteristics All Days (2000-2003)/5
Ex. Coeff. Categories

Knoxville
74
Visibility Bin Comparisons High Extinction
Bin 39 (7 days) July 18 (31.3) Bin 38 (11
days) July 21 (68.7)
Upper-Air Characteristics All Days (2000-2003)/5
Ex. Coeff. Categories

75
Compositional Analysis For Key Visibility Bins

76
Conceptual Description

• In general, poor visibility for GRSM is
  associated with
• High temperatures
• High relative humidity
• High PM2.5 on the previous day (at potential
  upwind sites) and recirculation
• Low wind speeds near the surface and aloft
• Southwesterly wind directions, on average, near
  the surface and aloft

77
Conceptual Description (cont.)

• Key low extinction coefficient bins have
  differences for several parameters Bin 13
  appears to be associated with precipitation
• High extinction coefficient bins show some
  differences in WS, WD, and RH the wind direction
  differences indicate that different upwind areas
  contribute to poor visibility at GRSM on
  different days
• Higher extinction bins are dominated by sulfate,
  the contribution from OM varies by bin

78
Meteorological Modeling Performance Summary
79
(No Transcript)
80
(No Transcript)
81
Air Quality Modeling Performance Summary
82
Sulfate - July 2001
83
Sulfate - January 2002
84
Nitrate - July 2001
85
Nitrate - January 2002
86
Ammonium - July 2001
87
Ammonium - January 2002
88
Organic Carbon - July 2001
89
Organic Carbon - January 2002
90
Elemental Carbon - July 2001
91
Elemental Carbon - January 2002
92
Soils - July 2001
93
Soils - January 2002
94
Coarse Mass - July 2001
95
Coarse Mass - January 2002
96
Speciated PM Performance
97
Speciated Bext Performance
98
2018 OTB and 2018 OTW Simulations
99
Future PM Simulations
100
Future Bext Simulations
101
Bext Response (OTB - Typical)
BEXT is the scaled modeled 2018 light extinction
with monthly f(rh)
102
Bext Response (OTW - OTB)
BEXT is the scaled modeled 2018 light extinction
with monthly f(rh)
103
Evaluation of Reasonable Progress Goals
104
Reasonable Progress Goal
29.8 dV 196.88 Mm-1
25.08 dV 122.80 Mm-1
105
Reductions at GRSM (20 Worst)
Bext2002 Bext2018 196.88 Mm-1 122.80 Mm-1
74.08 Mm -1 On the Books
Regulations reduces extinction by 70.80 Mm
-1 Need an additional reduction of 74.08 Mm
-1 - 70.80 Mm -1 3.28 Mm -1
106
Level 1 Emission Sensitivities
107
Level 1 Sensitivity Acronyms

• OTB-TYP ? 2018 OTB 2002 Typical
• OTW-OTB ? 2018 OTW 2018 OTB
• ASO2 ? 30 reduction in all SO2 domain-wide
• ANOX ? 30 reduction in all NOX domain-wide
• ANH3 ? 30 reduction in all NH3 domain-wide
• ASO2NOXNH3 ? 30 reduction in all SO2/NOX/NH3
  domain-wide
• AMVOC ? 30 reduction in all Anthropogenic VOCs
  domain-wide
• ABVOC ? 30 reduction in all Biogenic VOCs
  domain-wide
• APRIC ? 30 reduction in all Primary Carbon
  domain-wide

108
OTB Sensitivities 20 Worst
109
OTW Sensitivities 20 Worst
110
OTB Sensitivities 20 Best
111
OTW Sensitivities 20 Best
112
OTB Sensitivities
113
OTW Sensitivities
114
OTB Scaled Sensitivity to SO2
115
OTW Scaled Sensitivity to SO2
116
OTB Scaled Sensitivity to NOx
117
OTW Scaled Sensitivity to NOx
118
OTB Scaled Sensitivity to NH3
119
OTW Scaled Sensitivity to NH3
120
OTB Scaled Sens. to SO2/NOx/NH3
121
OTW Scaled Sens. to NOx/NH3
122
OTB Scaled Sensitivity to AVOCs
123
OTB Scaled Sensitivity to BVOCs
124
OTB Scaled Sensitivity to PC
125
Level 2 3 Emission Sensitivities
126
Level 23 Sensitivity Acronyms

• GSO2ALL? 30 reduction in all ground SO2
  domain-wide
• ESO2ALL? 30 reduction in all point SO2
  domain-wide
• ESO2VCPP (CPP) ? 30 reduction in all VISTAS
  point coal-fired power plant SO2
• ESO2VNPP (NPP) ? 30 reduction in all VISTAS
  point non power plant SO2
• ESO2VOPP (OPP) ? 30 reduction in all VISTAS
  point non coal-fired power plant SO2
• ESO2nonV ? 30 reduction in all non VISTAS point
  SO2
• BCSO2 ? 30 reduction in all SO2 boundary
  conditions
• BCSO4 ? 30 reduction in all SO4 boundary
  conditions

127
OTB Sensitivities 20 Worst
128
OTW Sensitivities 20 Worst
129
OTB Sensitivities
130
OTW Sensitivities
131
OTB Scaled Sensitivity to SO2
132
OTW Scaled Sensitivity to SO2
133
OTB Scaled Sensitivity to GSO2
134
OTW Scaled Sensitivity to GSO2
135
OTB Scaled Sensitivity to ESO2
136
OTW Scaled Sensitivity to ESO2
137
OTB Scaled Sensitivity to VCPP SO2
138
OTW Scaled Sensitivity to VCPP SO2
139
OTB Scaled Sensitivity to VNPP SO2
140
OTW Scaled Sensitivity to VNPP SO2
141
OTB Scaled Sensitivity to VOPP SO2
142
OTW Scaled Sensitivity to VOPP SO2
143
OTB Scaled Sensitivity to nonV SO2
144
OTW Scaled Sensitivity to nonV SO2
145
OTB Scaled Sensitivity to BC SO2
146
OTW Scaled Sensitivity to BC SO2
147
OTB Scaled Sensitivity to BC SO4
148
OTW Scaled Sensitivity to BC SO4
149
CPP Geographic Emission Sensitivities
150
OTB Sensitivities 20 Worst
151
OTB Sensitivities
152
OTB Scaled Sens. to AL CPP SO2
153
OTB Scaled Sens. to FL CPP SO2
154
OTB Scaled Sens. to GA CPP SO2
155
OTB Scaled Sens. to KY CPP SO2
156
OTB Scaled Sens. to MS CPP SO2
157
OTB Scaled Sens. to NC CPP SO2
158
OTB Scaled Sens. to SC CPP SO2
159
OTB Scaled Sens. to TN CPP SO2
160
OTB Scaled Sens. to VA CPP SO2
161
OTB Scaled Sens. to WV CPP SO2
162
NPP Geographic Emission Sensitivities
163
OTB Sensitivities 20 Worst
164
OTB Sensitivities
165
OTB Scaled Sens. to AL NPP SO2
166
OTB Scaled Sens. to FL NPP SO2
167
OTB Scaled Sens. to GA NPP SO2
168
OTB Scaled Sens. to KY NPP SO2
169
OTB Scaled Sens. to MS NPP SO2
170
OTB Scaled Sens. to NC NPP SO2
171
OTB Scaled Sens. to SC NPP SO2
172
OTB Scaled Sens. to TN NPP SO2
173
OTB Scaled Sens. to VA NPP SO2
174
OTB Scaled Sens. to WV NPP SO2
175
Revised NH3 Sensitivities
176
Revised NH3 Sensitivities

• Purpose was to evaluate how the scaled model
  responses changed with more accurate NH3
  emissions in the January episode
• New emission profiles show that NH3 emissions
  should be approximately 60 lower
• Reduced NH3 emissions on a state-by-state basis
• Boundary NH3 and NH4 unchanged
• New Simulations
• 2002 actual, 2002 typical, 2018 OTB
• 30 SO2, 30 NOx, 30 NH3

177
OTB vs. OTB with Revised NH3
178
OTB vs. OTB with Revised NH3
179
OTB vs. OTB with Revised NH3
180
OTB vs. OTB with Revised NH3
181
30 SO2 Reduction
Absolute Change (Unscaled Response) Relative
Change (Scaled Response)
182
30 SO2 Reduction
Absolute Change (Unscaled Response) Relative
Change (Scaled Response)
183
30 SO2 Reduction
Absolute Change (Unscaled Response) Relative
Change (Scaled Response)
184
30 SO2 Reduction
Absolute Change (Unscaled Response) Relative
Change (Scaled Response)
185
30 NOx Reduction
Absolute Change (Unscaled Response) Relative
Change (Scaled Response)
186
30 NOx Reduction
Absolute Change (Unscaled Response) Relative
Change (Scaled Response)
187
30 NOx Reduction
Absolute Change (Unscaled Response) Relative
Change (Scaled Response)
188
30 NOx Reduction
Absolute Change (Unscaled Response) Relative
Change (Scaled Response)
189
30 NH4 Reduction
Absolute Change (Unscaled Response) Relative
Change (Scaled Response)
190
30 NH4 Reduction
Absolute Change (Unscaled Response) Relative
Change (Scaled Response)
191
30 NH4 Reduction
Absolute Change (Unscaled Response) Relative
Change (Scaled Response)
192
30 NH4 Reduction
Absolute Change (Unscaled Response) Relative
Change (Scaled Response)
193
Chassahowitzka (FL)
194
Chassahowitzka (FL)
195
Swanquarter (NC)
196
Swanquarter (NC)
197
Cape Romain (SC)
198
Cape Romain (SC)
199
Okefenokee (GA)
200
Okefenokee (GA)
201
Mingo (MO)
202
Mingo (MO)
203
Hercules Glades (MO)
204
Hercules Glades (MO)
205
Brigantine (NJ)
206
Brigantine (NJ)
207
Everglades (FL)
208
Everglades (FL)
209
Revised NH3 Summary

• Minimal impact on SO2 sensitivities
• Slight impact on NOx sensitivities
• Significant impact on NH3 sensitivitie
• Largest impact at BRIG and EVER
• Likely will not alter control strategy
  development on 20 worst days at most Class I
  areas