Projections and Sensitivity to NO x & VOC Emissions Prepared by: - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
projections and sensitivity to no x voc emissions
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Projections and Sensitivity to NO x & VOC Emissions Prepared by: - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Aug 30, 2023 362 likes •1.13k views

SEMAP 2018 Ozone Projections and Sensitivity to NO x & VOC Emissions Prepared by: Talat Odman - Georgia Tech Yongtao Hu - Georgia Tech Uma Shankar - UNC Jim Boylan - Georgia EPD Presented to: SEMAP Air Quality Modeling Workgroup April 2,

slide-1
SLIDE 1

SEMAP 2018 Ozone Projections and Sensitivity to NOx & VOC Emissions

Prepared by: Talat Odman - Georgia Tech Yongtao Hu - Georgia Tech Uma Shankar - UNC Jim Boylan - Georgia EPD

Presented to: SEMAP Air Quality Modeling Workgroup April 2, 2014

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

Modeling Overview

  • 2007 and 2018 annual modeling with

CMAQv5.01

– 36 km (CONUS) and 12 km grids – Updated mixing coefficients – Updated land-water interface

  • 2018 future year projections with

MATS software (RRFs and DVFs)

– Ozone - presented here – PM2.5 - will be available soon… – Regional Haze - will be available soon…

slide-3
SLIDE 3

SEMAP 12-km Modeling Domain

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Calculation of DVF

  • Ran MATS with 2007 typical as “baseline” and

2018 base-case as “forecast” to get RRFs

– RRF = (2018base/2007typ)

  • DVF = DVC  RRF
  • Calculated four different ways:

– Design Value Current (DVC)

  • 2007 DV (2005-2007)
  • 5-year (2005-2009) weighted average

– Relative Response Factor (RRF)

  • Monitor (1 x 1) cell
  • 3 x 3 cell maximum

4

slide-5
SLIDE 5

2018 DVFs: 33 RRF & 2005-2009 DVC

5

slide-6
SLIDE 6

2018 DVFs: 33 RRF & 2005-2009 DVC

(with UAA)

6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

2018 DVFs: 11 RRF & 2005-2009 DVC

7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

2018 DVFs: 11 RRF & 2005-2009 DVC

(with UAA)

8

slide-9
SLIDE 9

2007 vs. 5-year weighted average DVC

9

slide-10
SLIDE 10

33 Max vs. 11 Cell RRFs

10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

Ozone Sensitivities

  • Start with 2018 modeling results
  • Perform emission sensitivity runs

– Ozone season (5 months) on 12-km grid – Statewide 30% emission reductions

  • NOx and VOCs individually

– 14 geographic regions

  • Ten individual SEMAP states
  • Maryland
  • MANE-VU (minus MD), LADCO, CENRAP

– 2 precursors x 14 regions = 28 model runs

slide-12
SLIDE 12

12

VOC/NOx Sensitivity Updates

Previous Sensitivity Modeling New Sensitivity Modeling

CMAQv4.4 CMAQv5.01 1-Month summer episode 5-Month ozone season VISTAS 2009 OTW BaseD SEMAP 2018 SEMAP-wide VOC reductions State-wide VOC reductions County/state NOx reductions State-wide NOx reductions MOBILE6 MOVES Absolute difference Absolute difference RRF approach (MATS) >70 ppb cutoff (based on modeled base year values) >70 ppb cutoff (based on modeled future year values)

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Sensitivity Charts

http://semap.ce.gatech.edu/node/1841

Charts of Ozone Sensitivities

  • Daily 8-hr maximum ozone responses to 30% NOx reductions

– By site

  • All days
  • Days with typical 2007 8-hr maximum ozone above 75 ppb
  • Days with baseline 2018 8-hr maximum ozone above 70 ppb

– By state

  • Site averages of all days
  • Site averages of days with typical 2007 8-hour maximum ozone above 75 ppb
  • Site averages of days with baseline 2018 8-hour maximum ozone above 70 ppb
  • Daily 8-hr maximum ozone responses to 30% VOC reductions

– By site

  • All days
  • Days with typical 2007 8-hour maximum ozone above 75 ppb
  • Days with baseline 2018 8-hr maximum ozone above 70 ppb

– By state 1313

  • Site averages of all days
  • Site averages of days with typical 2007 8-hour maximum ozone above 75 ppb
  • Site averages of days with baseline 2018 8-hour maximum ozone above 70 ppb

13

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Sensitivity Charts (continued)

http://semap.ce.gatech.edu/node/1841

Charts of Ozone Sensitivities

  • Design value responses to 30% NOx reductions

– By state

  • Sites with at least one day of baseline 2018 8-hr maximum ozone above

70 ppb

  • Design value responses to 30% VOC reductions

– By state

  • Sites with at least one day of baseline 2018 8-hr maximum ozone above

70 ppb

14

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Site Sensitivities

  • For each of the 674 ozone monitoring sites in the domain
  • NOx sensitivities

– All days (updated) – Days above 75 ppb in 2007 (updated) – Days above 70 ppb in 2018 (new)

  • VOC sensitivities

– All days (updated) – Days above 75 ppb in 2007 (updated) – Days above 70 ppb in 2018 (new)

  • Here:

– 13-121-0055 (Confederate Ave., Atlanta, GA) – 24-025-1001 (Baltimore, MD)

15

slide-16
SLIDE 16

16

(All Days)

slide-17
SLIDE 17

17

(All Days with 2007 model > 75 ppb)

slide-18
SLIDE 18

18

(All Days with 2018 model > 70 ppb)

slide-19
SLIDE 19

19

(All Days)

slide-20
SLIDE 20

20

(All Days with 2007 model > 75 ppb)

slide-21
SLIDE 21

21

(All Days with 2018 model > 70 ppb)

slide-22
SLIDE 22

22

(All Days)

slide-23
SLIDE 23

23

(All Days with 2007 model > 75 ppb)

slide-24
SLIDE 24

24

(All Days with 2018 model > 70 ppb)

slide-25
SLIDE 25

25

(All Days)

slide-26
SLIDE 26

26

(All Days with 2007 model > 75 ppb)

slide-27
SLIDE 27

27

(All Days with 2018 model > 70 ppb)

slide-28
SLIDE 28

State Summaries

  • For each of the 31 states in the domain

– For sites with 2018 days above 70 ppb

  • NOx and VOC sensitivities

– Absolute sensitivity

  • DO3 averaged over 2018 days above 70 ppb

– Relative sensitivity

  • DDVF using MATS

28

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Calculation of DO3

(Absolute Sensitivity)

  • Difference of daily max. 8-hr O3 between

2018 sensitivity case and 2018 base case

  • DO3 = 2018sens  2018base
  • Averaged over days with 2018base daily max.

8-hr O3 above 70 ppb

29

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Calculation of DDVF

(Relative Sensitivity)

  • Ran MATS
  • 2018 base case as “baseline” and 2018 sensitivity

as “forecast”

  • 5-year weighted average DVC and monitor (1  1)

cell RRF

  • For each site in the state with at least one day

above 70 ppb in 2018

  • RRF = (2018sens/2018base)
  • DDVF = (DVF*RRF) – DVF = DVF*(RRF1)

30

slide-31
SLIDE 31

31

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-32
SLIDE 32

32

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-33
SLIDE 33

33

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-34
SLIDE 34

34

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-35
SLIDE 35

35

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-36
SLIDE 36

36

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-37
SLIDE 37

37

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-38
SLIDE 38

38

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-39
SLIDE 39

39

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-40
SLIDE 40

40

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-41
SLIDE 41

41

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-42
SLIDE 42

42

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-43
SLIDE 43

43

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-44
SLIDE 44

44

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-45
SLIDE 45

45

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-46
SLIDE 46

46

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-47
SLIDE 47

47

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-48
SLIDE 48

48

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-49
SLIDE 49

49

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-50
SLIDE 50

50

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-51
SLIDE 51

51

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-52
SLIDE 52

52

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-53
SLIDE 53

53

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-54
SLIDE 54

54

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-55
SLIDE 55

55

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-56
SLIDE 56

56

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-57
SLIDE 57

57

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-58
SLIDE 58

58

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-59
SLIDE 59

59

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-60
SLIDE 60

60

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-61
SLIDE 61

61

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-62
SLIDE 62

62

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-63
SLIDE 63

63

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-64
SLIDE 64

64

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-65
SLIDE 65

65

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-66
SLIDE 66

66

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-67
SLIDE 67

67

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-68
SLIDE 68

68

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-69
SLIDE 69

69

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-70
SLIDE 70

70

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-71
SLIDE 71

71

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-72
SLIDE 72

72

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-73
SLIDE 73

73

(Absolute Sensitivity)

slide-74
SLIDE 74

74

(Relative Sensitivity with MATS)

slide-75
SLIDE 75

75

Summary

  • In general, anthropogenic NOx emission

reductions are much more effective at reducing 8-hour ozone concentrations compared to anthropogenic VOC emission reductions.

  • The home state typically has the largest

impact on its own monitors. Neighboring states have the next largest impact.

  • Absolute sensitivities (DO3) and relative

sensitivities (DDVF) are very similar.

slide-76
SLIDE 76

76

Next Steps

  • Run MATS to generate 2018 projections

for PM2.5

– RRF approach based on EPA guidance – Average 33 array and monitor (11) cell – 2007 DV and 5-year weighted 2005-2009 DV

  • Run MATS to generate 2018 projections

for Regional Haze

– RRF approach based on EPA guidance – Average 33 array and monitor (11) cell – 5-year (2005-2009) straight average 20% Worst and 20% Best days