1 / 22

2006 Annual Operational Evaluation of the Environment Canada Air Quality Modelling System - AURAMS

2006 Annual Operational Evaluation of the Environment Canada Air Quality Modelling System - AURAMS Jack Chen, L.Boucher, S.Cousineau, D.Davignon, A.Duhamel, S.Gilbert, J.Racine, M.Sassi, M.Samaali Air Quality Modelling Applications Section, Environment Canada, Montreal, QC.

bsharp
Télécharger la présentation

2006 Annual Operational Evaluation of the Environment Canada Air Quality Modelling System - AURAMS

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. 2006 Annual Operational Evaluation of the Environment Canada Air Quality Modelling System - AURAMS Jack Chen, L.Boucher, S.Cousineau, D.Davignon, A.Duhamel, S.Gilbert, J.Racine, M.Sassi, M.Samaali Air Quality Modelling Applications Section, Environment Canada, Montreal, QC 10th CMAS Conference, Chapel Hill, NC 2010 October 11-13

  2. Outline • Modelling platform for policy scenarios • Model configuration for 2006 annual simulation • Integrated model evaluation database • Preliminary annual model evaluation results • O3, PM2.5, NO2, Speciated PM2.5 • Evaluation by geospatial attribute • Future work

  3. Air Quality Modelling Platform • Comprehensive modelling platform for emission scenario simulations • Quantify air quality impacts across different regions and cities in Canada with respect to policy and regulatory proposals (e.g. Biodiesel fuel) • Results to be used for health impact assessments, and ecosystem impact analysis (e.g. acid deposition critical load)

  4. AQ Modelling Framework • Model verification • Emission scenario comparisons • Health impact analysis • Ecosystem impact analysis

  5. AURAMS CTM / Emissions • AURAMS v1.4 • modified ADOM-II gas-phase and aqueous-phase chemical mechanism; ISORROPIA inorganic aerosol module • sectional representation of PM size distribution (12 bins from 0.01 to 41 µm diameter) • nine PM chemical components: SO4, NO3, NH4, EC, POM, SOM, CM, SS, H2O • Monthly varying O3 BCON with dynamic tropopause adjustment • Emissions (SMOKE v2.4) • Canada: 2006 NPRI • USA: 2005 NEI version 4 (EPA emissions clearinghouse) • Mexico: 1999 from (EPA emissions clearinghouse) • Biogenic with BEIS v3.09 integrated online

  6. Domain and Simulation Setup GEM meteorology (rotated lat/lon proj.): - variable resolution (575 x 641) - uniform core (432 x 565) at ~15km - 58 vertical layers AURAMS CTM (polar stereo. proj.):- outer domain 45-km at 60oN - Inner domains: 22.5-km - 28 vertical layers AURAMS run in 3 segments(1) 2005-12-10 to 2006-06-01(2) 2006-05-01 to 2006-10-01(3) 2006-06-01 to 2006-12-31

  7. Model Evaluation Database System • Goal: a systematic, comprehensive model evaluation tool that allows traceability, reproducibility and automation • Central storage of measured and modelled data in a relational database • Open source software: • PostgreSQL + PostGIS spatial extension • Visualization: Quantum GIS, Google Earth, or direct connection to DB • Dynamic data queries base on chemical species, time, location, obs. measurement methods, and any geospatial attributes

  8. Measurement Data In DB • O3 – Hourly measurements from EC NAPS (194 stations) and EPA AQS (1147 stations) • NO2 – Hourly measurements from EC NAPS (136 stations) and from EPA AQS (399 stations) • PM2.5 – Hourly measurements from EC NAPS (173 stations) and from EPA AQS (520 stations) • Also hourly SO2, CO, NO, PM10 • No 24-hr speciated PM2.5 yet

  9. O3 Mean Bias (ppbv) NO2 Mean Bias (ppbv) PM2.5 Mean Bias (μg/m3) Spatial Comparison – 45km domain

  10. Annual Evaluation – Hourly O3(45km domain) • Similar NME in US abd Canada • Correlation: 0.5 – 0.7 • Best NME in Spring, worse NME in Fall avg. obs: 25 ppb avg. obs: 35 ppb

  11. Annual Evaluation – Hourly NO2 (45km domain) • Conc. variability decrease with increase temperature • Correlation: 0.5 – 0.6 • Best NME in Winter, worse NME in Summer avg. obs: 8 ppb avg. obs: 10 ppb

  12. Annual Evaluation – Hourly PM2.5 (45km domain) • Conc. variability increase with increase temperature • Poorer correlation: 0.1 – 0.4 • Best NME in Summer, worse NME in Fall (Canada), Winter (US) avg. obs: 6 μg/m3 avg. obs: 8 μg/m3

  13. Preliminary Speciated PM2.5(22.5km domains) • Daily averaged measurements from EC NAPS • Sample once every two days • 32-36 stations for PNO3, PSO4, PNH4 • 12 stations for PEC and POC • “No speciated PM2.5 from IMPROVE and EPA AQS”

  14. Speciated PM2.5 – Ammonium (22.5km domains)

  15. Speciated PM2.5 – Sulfate (22.5km domains)

  16. Speciated PM2.5 – Nitrate (22.5km domains) • High conc. variability in winter, model under-predicts but good correlation • Very poor performance as temperature increases ** There are known biases in NAPS PNO3 from sample loss

  17. Speciated PM2.5 – Total EC2.5 (22.5km domains)

  18. Speciated PM2.5 – Total OC2.5 (22.5km domains) • Under prediction in all season, poor correlation • 2 product SOA module, with constant yield • No semi volatile organic • Under represent biogenic SOA

  19. Geospatial Evaluation by Population Density (22.5km domains)

  20. Current / Future work • Continue with verification DB development • speciated PM2.5 from NAPS, IMPROVE, EPA AQS • additional measurements: wet/dry deposition (NADP, CAPMoN, CASTNet etc.) • Explore other geospatial criteria to examine measurement data and model performance (i.e. by distance from road network, LULC, etc.) • Emission scenario modelling with the model platform • Impacts of biodiesel fuels on air quality • Canadian AQ impacts from US Transport Rule

  21. Thank you!

More Related