1 / 30

Outline

State Collaborative Modeling Update James Boylan (Georgia EPD – Air Protection Branch) 2009 Spring Grants/Planning Meeting May 21, 2009. Outline. Background Attainment Modeling Source Apportionment Modeling Addressing Interstate Transport. Background.

basil
Télécharger la présentation

Outline

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. State Collaborative Modeling UpdateJames Boylan(Georgia EPD – Air Protection Branch)2009 Spring Grants/Planning MeetingMay 21, 2009

  2. Outline • Background • Attainment Modeling • Source Apportionment Modeling • Addressing Interstate Transport

  3. Background • VISTAS is part of a joint study with MRPO/LADCO and MANE-VU/OTC to analyze regional particulate matter (PM) and ozone transport in the Eastern U.S. • The purpose of the “State Collaborative” is to… • Support states response to the CAIR remand • Assess additional controls needed for the new ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS • Quantify interstate impacts (Section 110(a)(2)(D))

  4. Modeling Overview • CAMx v4.51 is being used to simulate future year PM2.5 and ozone levels and PSAT & OSAT are being used to perform source apportionment • 2009 Planning year for ozone moderate nonattainment areas and PM2.5 nonattainment areas (attainment date 2010) • 2012 Planning year for ozone moderate nonattainment areas and PM2.5 nonattainment areas, with 3-year extension • 2018 First milestone year for regional haze planning

  5. Modeling Domain 36-km PM2.5 domain 12-km Ozone domain

  6. CAUTION! This modeling provides ballpark estimates and is NOT intended for regulatory or legal purposes.

  7. Attainment Modeling

  8. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT PM2.5 Annual Concentrations 2009 2012 2018 Based on 2005 meteorology

  9. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT PM2.5 Daily Concentrations 2009 2012 2018 Based on 2005 meteorology

  10. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Ozone 8-Hour Concentrations 2009 2012 2018 Based on 2005 meteorology

  11. NOx SO2 Eastern U.S. Annual EGU Emissions (TPY) • 2007 2009-C 2012-C 2018-C • 2012-E 2018-F • 2007 2009-C 2012-C 2018-C • 2012-E 2018-F Reference: “Options for EGU Controls in the Eastern U.S.: White Paper”, October 3, 2008, State Collaborative Technical Workgroup EGU Control Strategies Scenario E Scenario F (2012) (2018) NOx 0.125 lb/MMBTU 0.07 lb/MMBTU SO2 0.250 lb/MMBTU 0.10 lb/MMBTU

  12. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT PM2.5 Annual: Air Quality Improvement (relative to Scenario C) Scenario E (2012) Scenario F (2018) v. Scenario C (2012) v. Scenario C (2018) Average Improvement: PM2.5 Annual = 1.0 ug/m3 (Scen. E); 1.1 ug/m3 (Scen. F) Based on 2005 meteorology

  13. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Ozone: Air Quality Improvement (relative to Scenario C) Scenario E (2012) Scenario F (2018) v. Scenario C (2012) v. Scenario C (2018) Average Improvement: Ozone = 1.6 ppb (Scen. E); 2.4 ppb (Scen. F) Based on 2005 meteorology

  14. Source Apportionment Modeling

  15. 32 PSAT Source Regions 6 PSAT Source Categories EGU Point Non-EGU Point Ammonia + Biogenics Non-Road (w/ Marine) On-Road Mobile Area Sources PSAT Modeling

  16. PSAT Contribution from GA

  17. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Ozone Source Apportionment Results: Source Sectors (2005 base) New York, NY Key Finding: Contributions dominated by mobile sources (at least 60%) Holland, MI Atlanta, GA

  18. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Ozone Source Apportionment Results: Source Regions (2005 base) New York, NY Key Finding: Contributions dominated by “home” state and neighboring states Holland, MI Atlanta, GA 55% Based on 2005 meteorology

  19. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT PM2.5 Annual Source Apportionment Results: Source Sectors (2012 Scenario C) New York, NY • Key Findings: • All source categories are important contributors • Relative amount of contribution varies by area Detroit MI Atlanta, GA Based on 2005 meteorology

  20. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT PM2.5 Annual Source Apportionment Results: Source Regions (2012 Scenario C) New York, NY 12% Key Finding: Contributions dominated by “home” state and neighboring states 55% Detroit MI Atlanta, GA 13% 45% 54% Based on 2005 meteorology

  21. Addressing Interstate Transport Section 110(a)(2)(D)

  22. Proposed 3-Step Approach • Identify areas of interest • Areas not meeting the standards and those struggling to maintain the standards • Identify upwind states which contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance in these areas • Based on specific criteria • Implement a multi-sector approach, as necessary, to provide an appropriate remedy to meet Clean Air Act requirements.

  23. Areas of Interest • Significance Contribution Test • Current (’06-’08) monitored design value > NAAQS, and • Future modeled value (2009, 2012, 2018, other?) > NAAQS • Interference with Maintenance Test • Accounts for historic variability in meteorology Option 1 • Current (’06-’08) monitored design value > 0.95 x NAAQS, and • Future modeled value > 0.95 x NAAQS Option 2 • Maximum monitored design value > NAAQS, and • Maximum future modeled value > NAAQS Option 3 • Statistical analysis of the year-to-year variation in meteorology (e.g., Cox methodology)

  24. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT PM2.5 Areas of Interest (based on criteria for significant contribution)

  25. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Ozone Areas of Interest (based on criteria for significant contribution)

  26. Significance Thresholds • Used to determine if an upwind state significantly contributes to nonattainment or interferes with maintenance in a downwind state • Option 1: Use 1% of the NAAQS • Annual PM2.5 = 0.15 mg/m3 • Daily PM2.5 = 0.35 mg/m3 • Ozone = 0.75 ppb • Option 2: Use 1% of total contribution • Option 3: Use CAIR thresholds • Annual PM2.5 = 0.2 mg/m3 • Ozone = 2.0 ppb

  27. “Significant” Contributionsto Annual PM2.5 NOTE: All results are PRELIMINARY.

  28. Remedy Options • Implement national/regional baseline control program • CAIR-like program for EGUs • Federal control measures for other sectors • State-led efforts to develop, adapt, and implement appropriate attainment plans for each area of interest • Estimate state-by-state contributions from each upwind state using PSAT • Combination of two options above

  29. Summary • Attainment Modeling • Only a few areas not meeting annual/daily PM2.5 and 85 ppb ozone standards • Lots of areas not meeting for 75 ppb ozone standard • Additional EGU emission reductions effective in lowering PM2.5 and ozone • Options for addressing 110(a)(2)(D) • No consensus on best approach • Source Apportionment • Source Regions • Home state generally has the largest impact • Neighbor states generally have next largest impact • Source Sectors • Mobile sources dominate for ozone • Point/mobile/area all important for PM2.5

  30. Contact Information Jim Boylan, Ph.D.Georgia Dept. of Natural Resources4244 International Parkway, Suite 120Atlanta, GA 30354James.Boylan@dnr.state.ga.us 404-362-4851

More Related