A 1 year simulation of atmospheric concentrations and deposition over europe and uk
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 30

A 1-year simulation of atmospheric concentrations and deposition over Europe and UK PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 44 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

A 1-year simulation of atmospheric concentrations and deposition over Europe and UK. Alan Cocks, Vicky Lucas, Ian Rodgers, and Ian Teasdale RWEInnogy Environment. Air Quality in Europe and UK. UNECE Gothenburg Protocol Emission ceilings on SO 2 , NO x , VOC, and NH 3

Download Presentation

A 1-year simulation of atmospheric concentrations and deposition over Europe and UK

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


A 1 year simulation of atmospheric concentrations and deposition over europe and uk

A 1-year simulation of atmospheric concentrations and deposition over Europe and UK

Alan Cocks, Vicky Lucas, Ian Rodgers, and Ian TeasdaleRWEInnogy Environment


Air quality in europe and uk

Air Quality in Europe and UK

  • UNECE Gothenburg Protocol

    • Emission ceilings on SO2, NOx, VOC, and NH3

  • EU Air Quality Framework directive

  • NECD

  • LCPD

  • New model required for new issues….

  • ….to open up a wider debate


Why did we choose models3

Why did we choose Models3

  • Modular and future-proofed

  • Covers a range of spatial and temporal scales

  • Flexible

  • Complete

  • Available


Development strategy

Development strategy

  • Choose a suitable domain

  • Build the key inputs (emissions, meteorology)

  • Build and test the model (hard wired features !)

  • Develop a methodology and tools

  • Validate the ‘vanilla’ model for one month

  • A key hurdle is the simulation of air quality and wet deposition statistics for a full year - was it feasible ?


Development strategy 2

Development strategy 2

  • Achieved through a joint JEP/EA project - the subject of this presentation

  • Currently looking at ozone and secondary particulates

  • Investigated aggregation schemes

  • Stakeholder workshop in April 2003

  • Results are being made available

  • Achieved by a small team and minimal effort


Location of monitoring sites used

Location of monitoring sites used


Data availability at each monitoring site

Data availability at each monitoring site


Models 3 grids

MODELS-3: grids


Practical matters

Practical Matters

  • CMAQ: April 2001 (version 4.1) without front end

  • SMOKE v1.4b (MEPPS couldn’t be used)

  • Hardware: 2* Sun SPARC II Dual Processor (400MHz)

  • Sun Solaris OS5 and f90 compiler

  • Options:

    • PPM for advection; QSSA for chemistry,

    • RADM2_AQ_AE; no PING; AERO1

  • Run times: around 158 hrs CPU for 1 month simulation


Meteorological data processing

Meteorological Data Processing

  • Used external data from UKMO rather than MM5

  • Analysis fields from NWP

    • Archive of initial (T+0) fields from forecast runs

    • Have observed data assimilated

    • Best estimate of historical 3D weather data

  • Met Office format

    • Latitude/Longitude horizontal grid

    • Eta levels in the vertical

    • Had to be re-gridded

    • 3 hour time steps, linearly interpolated to 1 hour for CMAQ


Met office mesoscale model domain

Met Office Mesoscale model domain


Sources of meteorological data

Sources of meteorological data

  • Global meteorological data

    • Grid length approximately 60km at mid-latitudes

    • Global coverage

    • For this study Europe 30W to 45E, 29N to 69N

    • Used for the 108km CMAQ runs

  • Mesoscale meteorological data

    • Grid length approximately 12km

    • Covers UK and France

    • Used for the 36, 12 and 4km CMAQ runs


Emission modelling

Emission modelling

  • Aim to take the data from readily available source

  • 24 species for RADM2_AE_AQ

  • EMEP database: 50km x 50km by sector

    • NOx, SO2, CO, NH3, NMVOC, particulates

    • used for 108 km grid

  • GEIA database

    • natural emissions: isoprenes, terpenes, volcanic

  • NAEI database: 1km x 1km for UK by source type

  • UK Power station data


Verification test sulphate deposition

Verification test: Sulphate deposition


Aq time series

AQ time series

a

b

c

Bottesford: daily a) SO2 b) NO2c)PM10


Model measurement comparison for aq

Correlation

Mean Annual Modelled/Measured

SO2

NO2

PM10

NH3

SO2

NO2

PM10

NH3

Bottesford

0.69

0.84

0.56

1.13

1.18

0.84

Eskdalemuir

0.46

-0.58

2.29

3.14

Harwell

0.46

0.51

2.40

1.37

High Muffles

-0.40

1.93

Lady Bower

0.51

0.67

1.16

1.61

Lullington Heath

0.47

0.76

-0.47

2.05

1.49

4.09

Narbeth

0.65

0.68

0.42

0.51

1.15

0.64

Redcar

-0.15

0.28

0.34

1.25

1.40

0.54

Rochester

0.21

0.76

0.46

1.73

1.55

1.00

Wicken Fen

0.75

0.85

1.85

0.85

Yarner Wood

0.33

0.36

0.44

1.68

Model – measurement comparison for AQ


Air quality hourly no2

Air Quality: Hourly NO2


Air quality so2 annual averages

Air Quality: SO2 Annual Averages


Air quality no2 annual averages

Air Quality: NO2 Annual Averages


Wet deposition weekly totals

WetDepositionWeeklytotals


Model measurement comparison for wet deposition

Correlation

Mean Annual Modelled/Measured

Rainfall

SO42-

NO3-

NH4+

Rainfall

SO42-

NO3-

NH4+

Barcombe Mills

0.62

0.62

0.39

0.47

0.69

0.69

1.03

1.64

Bannisdale

0.71

0.44

0.14

-0.01

0.83

0.58

0.65

0.75

Bottesford

0.82

0.74

0.70

0.72

1.41

0.92

1.05

1.11

Compton

0.85

0.78

0.82

0.78

1.07

0.65

0.81

0.83

Eskdalemuir

0.83

0.58

0.50

0.51

0.98

1.06

1.55

2.11

Flatford Mill

0.68

0.59

0.59

0.19

1.25

0.75

0.92

1.04

High Muffles

0.87

0.68

0.70

0.71

0.95

0.57

0.68

0.78

Preston

0.80

0.73

0.73

0.74

1.15

0.80

0.93

0.91

Tycanol Wood

0.57

0.61

0.61

0.31

1.15

0.63

1.12

1.76

Yarner Wood

0.78

0.61

0.72

0.62

1.10

0.85

1.13

1.84

Model – measurement comparison for wet deposition.


Annual comparison precipitation

Annual comparison: precipitation


Annual comparison wet deposition of s

Annual comparison: wet deposition of S


Annual comparison wet deposition of oxidised n

Annual comparison: wet deposition of oxidised N


Annual comparison wet deposition of reduced n

Annual comparison: wet deposition of reduced N


Spatial distribution deposition of oxidised sulphur

Spatial distribution : Deposition of oxidised Sulphur


Budgets

Budgets


Comparison with emep results

Comparison with EMEP results


Comparison of measured and modelled ozone and associated species

Comparison of measured and modelled Ozone and associated species


Summary of conclusions from study

Summary of conclusions from study

  • Successful annual simulation carried out using freely available UK data

  • Ratio of modelled to measured for Annual wet deposition is 0.7 (sulphate), 1.0 (nitrate) and 1.2 (ammonium). Acceptable correlation for sulphate and nitrate.

  • For air quality the modelled/measured ratio is 1.3 for SO2, 1.4 for NO2, and 0.8 for particulate. Time series correlation is 0.72 for NO2

  • Models-3 performance compares favourably with the EMEP Lagrangian model.

  • Total wet deposition maps are in fair agreement with interpolated measurements.

  • Some usability issues

  • Some modelling issues to resolve

  • Models-3 is a suitable model for use as a high-resolution long-range transport model for the UK and Europe.


  • Login