1 / 34

Regional Modeling Center Project Update

Regional Modeling Center Project Update. May 22, 2007 Gail Tonnesen, University of California, Riverside Ralph Morris, ENVIRON Corporation Int., Novato, CA Zac Adelman, University of North Carolina WRAP Technical Analysis Forum Meeting, Boise, Idaho. Review of RMC 2007 Work plan

adsila
Download Presentation

Regional Modeling Center Project Update

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Regional Modeling Center Project Update May 22, 2007 Gail Tonnesen, University of California, Riverside Ralph Morris, ENVIRON Corporation Int., Novato, CA Zac Adelman, University of North Carolina WRAP Technical Analysis Forum Meeting, Boise, Idaho

  2. Review of RMC 2007 Work plan Progress on PRP 2018 Case Data Archiving Plan BART Modeling Status Possible Future Work Topics

  3. Several emissions and visibility modeling tasks from 2006 were deferred, funds carried over: emissions processing: $28,500 remaining visibility modeling: $43,000 remaining Alaska BART Modeling: $5,000 remaining Cost overruns on several tasks including: BART CALPUFF Modeling (Substantial) Fire emissions sensitivity studies Tech Support and Data Transfer Project administration, conference calls, travel Carry over from 2006 was $43,424. 2006 Tasks Deferred

  4. Emissions processing with SMOKE: 2018 Preliminary Reasonable Progress (PRP): $14,672 for emisions. Two emissions sensitivity cases: approx $6,400 each (cost will depend on type of sensitivity) Visibility modeling using CMAQ: budget of $6,000 per run, includes techinal memo with analysis of results: $18,000. BART modeling: $8,000 is mostly spent. 2007 Work Plan

  5. Data transfer/support: $12,2410 Data archiving: $13,141 Computer & website and hard disks: $9,100 Project administration, conf calls, travel: $49,000 Total proposed budget for 2007: $132,630 2007 Work Plan (continued)

  6. Closed out old RMC contract as of 3/31/07 6 year, $3.6 million contract: UCR, ENVIRON, UNC simplifies accounting and project management. Processing new contract, backdated to April 1. Significantly reduced budget and scope of work. UC aggreed to waive overhead on sub-contracts. Expect to receive contract from WGA this week. After processing contract, UCR will issue sub-contracts to ENVIRON and UCR (in mid June?) New RMC Contract in 2007

  7. Emissions processing in progress: version PRP18a includes updates in point, area, selected mobile categories, and oil & gas. model ready emissions should be complete by end of May. QA of PRP18a emissions in early June. CMAQ modeling to be completed in mid June Preliminary Reasonable Progress 2018

  8. Built off simulation Base2018b Over the past 3-4 months the RMC collected updated emissions data for 2018 and made corrections to existing data Changes in several sectors to correct mistakes and include new inventories: PRP18a Emissions • WRAP, MRPO, VISTAS, MANE- VU on-road mobile • All US non-road mobile • CENRAP/MRPO ammonia • All US stationary area • All US road dust • All US Fugitive dust • Gulf of Mexico offshore area • Gulf of Mexico/Atlantic commercial shipping • WRAP oil and gas • CENRAP, VISTAS point fires • All US stationary point • All Canadian and Mexican sources

  9. WRAP on-road mobile inventories contain pre-speciated PM (i.e. SO4, EC, OC, PMC) as both pollutant totals and as pollutants by mobile emissions process (i.e. PEC from exhaust, POA from evaporative, etc.) Including both the total PM and process-based values led to errors in these emissions for WRAP on-road mobile sources. PRP18a EmissionsWRAP On-road mobile corrections

  10. PRP18a EmissionsWRAP On-road mobile corrections Differences between annual PRP18a and Base2018b WRAP on-road mobile emissions

  11. PRP18a EmissionsWRAP On-road mobile corrections On-road mobile annual PM2.5 % differences Base2018b vs. PRP18a Base2018b PM2.5 Annual Emissions by Source

  12. VISTAS, MANE-VU, and MRPO inventory updates Canada 2020 inventory and Mexico Phase III 1999 inventory PRP18a Emissionsnon-WRAP On-road mobile corrections Differences between annual PRP18a and Base2018b non-WRAP on-road mobile emissions

  13. Updates to all inventories outside of the WRAP region PRP18a EmissionsNon-road mobile changes Differences between annual PRP18a and Base2018b non-road mobile emissions

  14. During the application of revised PM10/PM2.5 splits, erroneously dropped the PM2.5 fields for road dust Resulted in assigning all dust to coarse PM and missing the PMFINE component of the dust emissions PRP18a EmissionsRoad dust changes and corrections

  15. PRP18a EmissionsRoad dust changes and corrections PM2.5 Annual Emissions by Source Base 2018b with road dust error Base 2018b with corrected road dust

  16. Road dust removed from the Phase III Mexican inventories New 2020 Canadian inventories PRP18a EmissionsRoad dust changes and corrections Differences between annual PRP18a and Base2018b road dust emissions

  17. Adding shipping lane emissions in the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic PRP18a EmissionsOffshore Commercial Shipping Annual PRP18a commercial shipping emissions

  18. Removed shipping lane emissions to avoid double counting with the gridded commercial shipping inventory PRP18a EmissionsGulf of Mexico offshore area sources Differences between annual PRP18a and Base2018b Gulf of Mexico offshore area emissions

  19. Moved from 2000 to 2020 Canadian inventories for all emissions source categories in PRP18a Phase III Mexico inventory for stationary area, nonroad, onroad, and point sources Updates to the emissions in the six Northern Mexican states Includes all of Mexico Updates to the spatial allocation information for allocating the Mexican emissions to modeling grids PRP18a EmissionsCanada and Mexico Updates

  20. Coverage States (32) Municipal (2,443) Sources (#SCC’s) Point (28) Area (46) On road mobile (7) Nonroad (2) Natural sources (2) Pollutants CO, NOx, SOx, PM10, PM2.5, VOC and NH3 20 spatial surrogates Improvement over the 5 surrogates previously used Characteristics of the MNEI, 1999

  21. Currently working on modeling the PRP2018 WRAP point, area, and oil & gas inventories received last week. The fugitive and road dust inventories require the application of revised PM10/PM2.5 splits and transport factors before these data can be modeled. As these emissions are modeled through SMOKE, QA/QC plots will be posted on the RMC website. QC of the emissions focuses on picking out expected trends in the results based on known changes and looking for unexpected trends that may reveal errors in the data/processing. Expect to merge all sources to create the final PRP18a CMAQ-ready emissions by the week of May 28. PRP18a Emissions

  22. Complete copy of all key input data and scripts will be stored at two sites. Data archive planning document describes data to be archive. Hard disks will be use to store and distribute data – some data available now, other disks will be prepared when current modeling is complete. Data Archiving Plan

  23. WRAP RMC BART Modeling • 7 WRAP States Requested RMC BART CALPUFF Modeling Assistance • AK, AZ, MT, NM, NV, SD and UT • Set up Webpage where Data and Information can be obtained: • www.cert.ucr.edu/aqm/308/bart.shtml • WRAP RMC Modeling Protocol • Numerous revisions starting February 2006 • Final version dated August 15, 2006 • www.cert.ucr.edu/aqm/308/bart/WRAP_RMC_BART_Protocol_Aug15_2006.pdf

  24. All inputs posted – Major CALPUFF rerun in April. AZ: 6 revisions to date,14 sources -- Just received new emissions for one source. MT: 2 revisions, provided to EPA Region 8. NM: 5 revisions, 11 sources – completed/posted. NV: 7 revisions, 6 sources – completed and posted. SD: 4 revisions, 2 sources – currently EPA Reg 7 running one source using CAMx due to long distances. UT: 6 revisions, 2 sources – pre- and post-control runs done, not posted. WRAP BART CALPUFF Modeling Status – May 2007

  25. MM5 Windowed Processing Domains

  26. Example CALMET/CALPUFF Modeling Domains: Arizona, New Mexico and Utah showing sources (red dots) and Class I area receptors (green)

  27. Error found in CALPUFF reading emission inputs (limited to 132 characters – card reader), potential incorrect primary PM emission inputs Took opportunity to update two other aspects of CALMET/CALPUFF modeling Increase maximum mixing height from EPA-default 3,000 m AGL to 4,500 m AGL as in Protocol Post-processing CALPUFF output with POSTUTIL prior to calculating visibility impacts using CALPOST Corrects potential “double counting” of background ammonia Note that CALPUFF assumption of spatially and temporally invariant constant background highly suspect April 2007 Modeling Revision

  28. 11 potential BART-eligible sources Preliminary modeling indicated 10 did not contribute significantly to visibility impairment (change in dv < 0.5 dv) One source (PNM San Juan w/ 36,000 TPY SO2 and 39,000 TPY NOx) did contribute significantly New Mexico Example

  29. Preliminary (pre-April revision) NM SRC02 PNM SJ 6 highest visibility impacts at Class I areas within 300 km of source. Max 3-Yr Avg 98th percentile del-dv = 8 dv Revised Max 3-Yr Avg 98th del-dv = 5 dv Differences mainly due to use of POSTUTIL; other sources exhibit very small changes

  30. Modeling Protocol CALMM5 Input Data. CALMET Inputs. CALPUFF Inputs. CALPOST Inputs. Summary Results for AK, NM and NV. Results for other states forthcoming. WRAP RMC BART Webpage • CALMET/CALPUFF downloaded by several contractors: • BART and PSD/NSR modeling. • Numerous requests for help in running CALPUFF. • WRAP RMC BART resources more than expended.

  31. Rerun final AZ sources with revised SO2 emissions for SRC02. MT being reviewed by EPA Region 8 (preliminary results posted). SD eastern BART source being evaluated by CAMx due to long source-receptor distances (waiting for results from EPA Region 7). AK, MT, NM and NV results posted. Waiting for permission from other states to post results. All WRAP RMC CALPUFF BART modeling completed in May 2007. Next Steps: WRAP BART CALPUFF

  32. Summarized in PPT file from April 17, 2007. Includes guidance on NAAQS for: 8 hour average ozone Annual and 24 hour average PM2.5 Regional haze unmonitored area and local area/hot spot guidance. Supplemental analyses/weight of evidence. Mid course review and future modeling. Required documentation. EPA Final Modeling Guidance

  33. RMC team can readily build on existing modeling activities to address other topics: distribution and fate of mercury. acid and nitrogen deposition. 8 hour average ozone, and 24 hr and annual PM2.5. urban scale modeling with <= 12 km resolution. regional & global background contributions to ozone and PM2.5 non-attainment in urban areas. visibility modeling for other years, e.g., 2005, 2008. Possible Future Work

More Related