1 / 11

Heavy metal modelling: Use of different emission inventories

Heavy metal modelling: Use of different emission inventories. Oleg Travnikov EMEP/MSC-E. Annual mean concentration in precipitation based on official emissions data (2000). Lead. Cadmium. Mod = 0.35 Obs Corr = 0.70. Cd. Pb. Mod = 0.26 Obs Corr = 0.76. Model results vs. observations.

rowa
Download Presentation

Heavy metal modelling: Use of different emission inventories

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. Heavy metal modelling:Use of different emission inventories Oleg Travnikov EMEP/MSC-E

  2. Annual meanconcentration in precipitation based on official emissions data (2000) Lead Cadmium Mod = 0.35 Obs Corr = 0.70 Cd Pb Mod = 0.26 Obs Corr = 0.76 Model results vs. observations Underestimation of observed concentrations by 65-75%

  3. Workshop on the review of EMEP MSC-E models on HMs and POPs (ECE/EB.AIR/GE.1/2006/4) Workshop concluded: • Most transport models (including MSC-E Heavy Metal model) underestimate air and precipitation concentration when using official emission data Reasons ofmodel/measurement discrepancies may particularly include: • Incompleteness and uncertainty of available emission inventories of heavy metals • Unaccounted secondary emission of heavy metals (wind re-suspension)

  4. Comparison of official emissions data, and ESPREME estimates (2000) Lead Cadmium Uncertainty of emission inventories

  5. Annual mean Cdconcentration in precipitation based on official and ESPREME estimates (2000) Official data ESPREME estimates Cd Mod = 0.26 Obs Corr = 0.76 Cd Mod = 0.64 Obs Corr = 0.56 Uncertainty of emission inventories 75% underestimation 35% underestimation

  6. Wind re-suspension of HM Dust suspension: • Saltation [Marticorena & Bergametti, 1995; Gomes et al., 2003] • Sandblasting [Alfaro & Gomes, 2001]

  7. Wind re-suspension of HM Pb concentration in European soils Default HM concentrations in soil (Eastern Europe, Africa, Asia) FOREGS (www.gtk.fi/publ/foregsatlas/)

  8. Re-suspension Anthropogenic emissions Wind re-suspension of HM Anthropogenic emissions vs. re-suspension of Pb

  9. Model results vs. observations (Pb) Annual mean Pb concentration in precipitation (2000) ESPREME+re-suspen. Official Official+re-suspen. Mod = 0.35 Obs Corr = 0.7 Mod = 0.62 Obs Corr = 0.66 Mod = 0.79 Obs Corr = 0.62 65%underestimation 40% underestimation 20% underestimation

  10. Model results vs. observations (Cd) Annual mean Cd concentration in precipitation (2000) ESPREME+re-suspen. Official Official+re-suspen. Mod = 0.26 Obs Corr = 0.76 Mod = 0.33 Obs Corr = 0.71 Mod = 0.71 Obs Corr = 0.53 75%underestimation 65%underestimation 30% underestimation

  11. Conclusions • Use of currently available emissions data leads to underestimation of ambient heavy metal concentrations by atmospheric transport models • Modelling results based on ESPREME estimates commonly demonstrate better agreement with measurements than those based on official emissionsdata • Wind re-suspension of some heavy metals can significantly contribute to their ambient concentration and depositions in Europe

More Related