1 / 13

Here are some “final” results for 2005, based on adding up just the time periods in 2005

Here are some “final” results for 2005, based on adding up just the time periods in 2005. Location of modeled power plant. Methodology. Simulations of RGM air emissions from 30 power plants in the 4-state region Simulations with HYSPLIT-Hg for Oct-2004 through Dec-2005

josephine-fischer
Download Presentation

Here are some “final” results for 2005, based on adding up just the time periods in 2005

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. Here are some “final” results for 2005, based on adding up just the time periods in 2005

  2. Location of modeled power plant

  3. Methodology • Simulations of RGM air emissions from 30 power plants in the 4-state region • Simulations with HYSPLIT-Hg for Oct-2004 through Dec-2005 • Oct-2004 through Dec-2004 used as model “spin-up” • Results for Jan-2005 through Dec-2005 are presented, i.e., the entire year 2005 • Unit emissions runs were carried out; then results multiplied by actual emissions • Individual runs done for each plant; results added together in post-processing • RGM emissions estimates from EPA’s 2005 National Emissions Inventory • Emissions from plants have not been constant; this is a “snapshot” for one year • Results were tabulated on a 0.5o x 0.5o grid (~50km) Results and Discussion • Pattern of deposition makes “sense” relative to plants modeled • Maximum deposition grid cell ~15 ug/m2-yr • Several cells have grid-cell fluxes of between 1-10 ug/m2-year • All values are average deposition flux over a given grid cell, i.e., a 50km x 50km area • Localized deposition can be significantly higher • These results are just for the 30 power plants; there are other sources in the region • Sources outside the region will also contribute to deposition • So, results just the estimated deposition from the RGM emissions from the 30 plants

  4. For completeness, here are some intermediate results, that were developed to check the procedures

  5. CONCPLOT map of the combined “bin” output files, for the 15-month “totrun” period Closeup of 4-state region

  6. Map of the combined “bin” output files, for the 15-month “totrun” period, processed with Con2asc and imported into ArcGIS… This map is plotting the same data as the CONCPLOT map on the previous page… Scales and intervals are different, but the pattern is seen to be similar… This means the post-processing and other manipulations were “correct”

  7. Cell by cell comparison between the “totrun” processed files and the sum of each time period in the “temporal” grid files… This was another check to ensure that the post-processing and other data manipulations were “correct”

  8. Just in case its helpful, here’s something I did a few weeks earlier… These are illustrative overall and time-series results just for one plant (Big Cajun) First map is for the overall simulation, over 15 months The second set of slides shows the time-series of deposition, on a finer-grid close-in to the source, that demonstrates how things evolve… for a unit emissions of RGM from the plant, for 3-hr time steps… This “movie” might be interesting to show?

  9. Movie showing illustrative simulation of deposition arising • from 1 g/hr emissions of RGM from Big Cajun II power plant • each frame represents 3 hours; four weeks shown • actual plant emits ~9 g/hr RGM (according to 2005 National Emissions Inventory)

More Related