Summary of CMAQ Results for 1996 Base Year Regional Haze Modeling

1. Summary of CMAQ Results for 1996 Base Year Regional Haze Modeling Gail Tonnesen, Zion Wang, Mohammad Omary, Chao-Jung Chien, Bo Wang University of California, Riverside Bourns College of Engineering Center for Environmental Research and Technology February 12, 2002 WESTAR Annual Technical Meeting, Riverside, CA

2. RMC goals and staff Hardware requirements Training/tech transfer Summary of CMAQ Results Outline

3. WRAP RMC Goals • Provide state of the science regional Air Quality and Visibility Modeling. • Support development of SIPs and TIPs. • Improve accuracy of key model inputs. • Capacity Building - Provide training in use and interpretation of models. • Technology transfer of advanced air quality models and datasets to States/Tribes.

4. RMC Modeling Goals • Section 309 SIPs/TIPs. • Due date: 4/30/02 • Transfer datasets and models to States/Tribes • Section 308 SIPs/TIPs • Improved NH3 Emissions • Improved Aerosol Formation Mechanism • Updated Gas Phase Chemistry (RACM or SAPRC) • Nested Domains

5. Dr. Gail Tonnesen - Project Manager AQ Modeling, Training, and Tech Transfer. Dr. Zion Wang Met Processing and AQ Modeling Dr. Mohammad Omary Emissions Modeling & Processing Dr. Chao-Jung Chien Aerosol Modeling (9/17/01) Mr. Mark Chitjian, Mr. Bo Wang NH3 Emissions, Model Analysis RMC Staff at UC Riverside

6. Mr. Nick Nikkila Training Coordination Dr. James Lents SIPs & TIPs Mr. Ian Robinson Systems Admin Ms. Judy Swineford Admin. Assistant RMC Staff at UC Riverside (cont.)

7. Ralph Morris REMSAD, Model Comparison, SIP Development Chris Emery Meteorological Modeling, REMSAD, CMAQ Gerald Mansell REMSAD, MM5, CMAQ. Gary Wilson Emissions Modeling and Emissions Processing RMC Support Staff at ENVIRON Provides technical support/training in REMSAD, Emissions and Meteorological Modeling, and Development of Model Scenarios.

8. Applied Training – hands on, running the CMAQ and SMOKE models. January 14-18, 2002 (13 participants) February 4-8, 2002 (7 participants) March 11-15, 2002 (14 registered) October 7-11, 2002 Model Evaluation and SIP/TIP Development September …, 2002 October 22-25, 2002 Training Classes: Two Types

9. Coordination of Training with ITEP • Northern Arizona University Institute for Tribal Environmental Professionals (ITEP) • American Indian Air Quality Training Program • Tribal Air Monitoring Support Center • “Bridge course” at ITEP June 3-7, 2002.

10. Distribution of Models and Data • Setting up downloads at RMC website for source code: http://pah.cert.ucr.edu/rmc/ • Files can be shipped by DLT tape or by firewire portable disk drives.

11. List-serv is used for all WRAP RMC mail: https://pah.cert.ucr.edu/mailman/listinfo/wrap-modeling-forum Discussion Board for https://pah.cert.ucr.edu/wrap/ Phone support is desirable but to resource intensive. On-line Support

12. SGI Origin 2000 Emissions processing, testing, and benchmarks Linux PCs to be used for modeling and training. CMAQ Benchmarks: Athlon XP1800 CPU: 2 h/day or 30 days/yr (10 days parallel) Pentium III 1 GHz CPU: 3.2 h/day or 48 days/hr (14 days parallel) Pentium IV 2.2 GHz CPU: 1.4 h/day or 22 days/year (expected). Typical system: Dual CPU, 1 GB RAM, 1 TB IDE RAID: Cost = $4500 UCR/RMC Computing Systems

13. Minimum Disk Requirements for annual modeling: 1 TB RMC Configuration is: 4 x 500 GB RAID5 SCSI disk systems networked to file server. 2 x 500 GB IDE RAID disk systems on each compute server. Networking: Rack mounted fileserver (inexpensive Linux machine) is networked to RAID5 systems and to 4 compute server.. Backup/Archiving: Auto-loading Tape Changer UCR/RMC: Disks and Networking

14. Minimum Configuration: Dual CPU Linux Machine with 9x120 GB IDE disks, with SCSI attached RAID5 disk system and a tape backup. Total cost is approx $12k. High Performance Configuration: File server connected by SCSI card to RAID5 disk systems and connected by Giga-bit ethernet to multiple dual CPU Linux machines, with tape changer for backup. Cost range is $20k to $60k. Sample Hardware Configurations

15. NCAR/Penn State MM5 simulations performed by MCNC for 1996 using nested 108, 36 and 12 km grids. (Figure from EPA/OAQPS.) Meteorological Modeling

16. Clean boundary conditions and initial conditions using EPA defaults with some updates. CMAQ Domain

17. Emissions Processing • SMOKE is used for emissions processing. • Ported SMOKE to Linux – still fixing a few bugs. • Quality Assurance: • SMOKE QA reports • Post processing to total emissions subcategories for all layers and all hours. • Houyoux et al. will describe emissions.

18. CMAQ Results • Runs were completed for 1996 base year on January 16, 2002. • Some minor errors in emissions have been found. • Model Evaluation is ongoing using AIRS data and IMPROVE data.

19. Evaluation Overview • IMPROVE database: • Raw and Reconstructed (Recon) • Analysis period: • Year 1996, total of 104 days available ambient data. • Raw: ~53 stations • Recon: 32 stations • CMAQ vs. REMSAD

20. CMAQ Aerosol Species • Particles are treated in three lognormal subdistributions – modes • Aitken mode (i-mode) • Accumulation mode (j-mode) • Coarse mode • PM2.5 is sum of i, j mode species • PM10 is coarse mode species + PM2.5 • Extinction coefficient (Visibility) • Mie theory; “Bext_Mie” • Reconstructed extinction; “Bext_Recon” • based on aerosol mass concentration

21. IMPROVE Species • Reconstructed mass species: • Sulfates (SO4), as ammonium sulfates; • Nitrates (NO3), as ammonium nitrates; • Fine soil (SOIL), sum of several inorganic elements; • Fine mass (FM), as measured PM25; • Reconstructed fine mass (RCFM); sum of (SO4+NO3+LAC+1.4*OC+SOIL) • Coarse mass (CM); PM10-PM25 • MT, as PM10 • Visibility • Bext=3*fRH*([SO4]+[NO3])+4*[OMC]+10*[LAC]+ [SOIL]+0.6*[CM]

22. CMAQ to IMPROVE Species Mapping

23. Software Package for Modeling Analysis • The programs can automatically … • Extract species info from observation data file (ASCII) and compute daily average conc. from 1st layer of model output files (IOAPI/NetCDF). • Identify monitoring sites within WRAP domain (converting lat. lon. into domain grid cell). • Match model predictions with measured species on days for which measurements are reported. • Generate both scatter and time series plots of models vs. observation.

24. Outputs from Evaluation Program • Time series data • Scatter plots • All Site and All Days • All Site for One Day • All Days for One Site • All Days for Defined Sub-regions • Statistical analysis • Regression (r-squared) • Mean normalized bias (MNB) and error (MNE)

25. Subregion Groupings for Evaluation

27. O3 Comparison

28. O3 Scatter plots

29. NO3 Scatter plots: normal scale

30. NO3 Scatter plots: log-log scale

31. NO3 Time-series Plots

32. PM composition at Grand Canyon Nat’l Park, AZ

33. PM composition at Grand Canyon Nat’l Park, AZ

34. PM composition at Bryce Canyon Nat’l Park, UT

35. PM composition at Bryce Canyon Nat’l Park, UT

37. Yearly comparison of Bext(based on Raw database)

38. CMAQ visibility predictions: Best and Worst 20% of days

39. CMAQ Evaluation Summary • Predictions are best for summer, over predicts winter (model appears to be “flat”). • CMAQ over predicts NO3 for winter, possibly due to lack of seasonally correct NH3 emissions. • CMAQ greatly under predicts the concentrations of coarse mass particles but partitioning looks better for other components. • Still in the process of generating and refining the plots and the analysis method.