Results from 2018 Preliminary Reasonable Progress Modeling

TSS Meeting, Denver, CO 7/19/2007

Results from 2018 Preliminary Reasonable Progress Modeling

Gail Tonnesen, University of California, Riverside

Ralph Morris, ENVIRON Corporation Int., Novato, CA

Zac Adelman, University of North Carolina

TSS Meeting, Denver, CO, June 19, 2007


Topics

• Comparison of emissions changes:– PRP18a, Base18b and Plan02c

• Comparison of CMAQ visibility results:– PRP18a versus Base18b CMAQ spatial plots

for PM species.– visibility projections for PRP18a & Base18b.– PRP18a versus Plan02c CMAQ spatial plots

for PM species.


2018 Preliminary Reasonable Progress CasePRP18 version A

• Data Sources:– WRAP info is from the states.– some changes in other RPOs are error

corrections and adding new data sets.


Updates in PRP18, not yet addressed in Plan02 modeling analysis

• Some errors and differences from the Plan02c case have been corrected in the PRP18 case

• Those same types of changes will need to be included in the next, final round of 2002 (Plan02d) modeling:– Expanded list of fugitive dust sources - moved these emissions from the

area to the fugitive dust sector, this move creates a net change of zero. These changes are related to transport factors and the PM10/PM2.5 ratio.

– Inclusion of Phase III 1999 Mexico inventories (whole nation of MX now has emissions) and update of Mexican spatial surrogates

– Addition of Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic shipping lanes’ emissions– Correction of Elemental Carbon and Organic Aerosol double-counting in

the WRAP mobile source sector – this lowers EC, OA, and PMfine emissions in the WRAP states

– Area source fire emissions were double-counted in the CENRAP region, lowers CENRAP emissions


Domain Total Emissions ComparisonTotal WRAP Annual Emissions

Simulation Comarisons

0

5000000

10000000

15000000

20000000

25000000

30000000

35000000

CO NOX VOC NH3 SO2 PM10 PM2_5 PMC

tons

/yr

Plan02cBase18bPRP18a


WRAP States Total Emissions ComparisonTotal WRAP Annual Emissions

Simulation Comarisons

0

5000000

10000000

15000000

20000000

25000000

30000000

35000000

CO NOX VOC NH3 SO2 PM10 PM2_5 PMC

tons

/yr



PM2.5 Emissions Comparison by Source CategoryWRAP Annual Total PM2.5 Emissions

0 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 700000

Fires

Area

Point

Non Road

Onroad

Biogenic

WOG

Road Dust

Fugitive Dust

Wind-Blown Dust

Offshore Platforms

Offshore Shipping

Ag Ammonia

(tons/yr)

Plan02cBase18bPrp18a


PM2.5 State Total Emissions ComparisonWRAP Annual Total PM2.5 Emissions

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

350000

AZ CA CO ID MT NV NM ND OR SD UT WA WY

ton

s/yr Plan02c

Base18b

PRP18a


NOx Emissions Comparison by Source CategoryWRAP Annual Total NOx Emissions

0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 1200000 1400000 1600000 1800000

Fires

Area

Point

Non Road

Onroad

Biogenic

WOG

Road Dust

Fugitive Dust

Wind-Blown Dust

Offshore Platforms

Offshore Shipping

Ag Ammonia

(tons/yr)



NOx State Total Emissions ComparisonWRAP Annual Total NOx Emissions

0

200000

400000

600000

800000

1000000

1200000

1400000


ton

s/yr Plan02c

Base18b

PRP18a


SO2 Emissions Comparison by Source CategoryWRAP Annual Total SO2 Emissions

0 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 700000 800000 900000

Fires

Area

Point

Non Road

Onroad

Biogenic

WOG

Road Dust

Fugitive Dust

Wind-Blown Dust

Offshore Platforms

Offshore Shipping

Ag Ammonia

(tons/yr)



SO2 State Total Emissions ComparisonWRAP Annual Total SO2 Emissions

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

180000


ton

s/yr Plan02c

Base18b

PRP18a


NH3 Emissions Comparison by Source CategoryWRAP Annual Total NH3 Emissions

0 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 700000 800000 900000

Fires

Area

Point

Non Road

Onroad

Biogenic

WOG

Road Dust

Fugitive Dust

Wind-Blown Dust

Offshore Platforms

Offshore Shipping

Ag Ammonia

(tons/yr)



NH3 State Total Emissions ComparisonWRAP Annual Total NH3 Emissions

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000


ton

s/yr Plan02c

Base18b

PRP18a


VOC Emissions Comparison by Source CategoryWRAP Annual Total VOC Emissions

0 2000000 4000000 6000000 8000000 10000000 12000000 14000000 16000000 18000000 20000000

Fires

Area

Point

Non Road

Onroad

Biogenic

WOG

Road Dust

Fugitive Dust

Wind-Blown Dust

Offshore Platforms

Offshore Shipping

Ag Ammonia

(tons/yr)



VOC State Total Emissions ComparisonWRAP Annual Total VOC Emissions

0

1000000

2000000

3000000

4000000

5000000

6000000


ton

s/yr Plan02c

Base18b

PRP18a


PCM Emissions Comparison by Source CategoryWRAP Annual Total PMC Emissions

0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 1200000 1400000 1600000 1800000

Fires

Area

Point

Non Road

Onroad

Biogenic

WOG

Road Dust

Fugitive Dust

Wind-Blown Dust

Offshore Platforms

Offshore Shipping

Ag Ammonia

(tons/yr)



PMC State Total Emissions ComparisonWRAP Annual Total PMC Emissions

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

350000

400000


ton

s/yr Plan02c

Base18b

PRP18a


Emissions Comparison

• PAVE QA plots comparing PRP18a vs. Base18b:– red colors showed increased emissions in PRP18a

– blue colors showed reduced emissions in PRP18a

• Additional emissions QA and visibility modeling plots available at RMC website:

www.cert.ucr.edu/aqm/308


NO Annual emissions difference PRP18a - Base18b


SO2 Annual emissions difference PRP18a - Base18b


NH3 Annual emissions difference PRP18a - Base18b


EC Annual emissions difference PRP18a - Base18b


VOC Annual emissions difference PRP18a - Base18b


PMFINE Annual emissions difference PRP18a - Base18b


PRP18a vs. Base18b CMAQ Results Comparison

• PAVE plots comparing:– Plots show change in conc, PRP18a minus Base18b.– Blue colors show area with lower mass in PRP18a.– Annual average change shown here, monthly

average changes are available on webpage.


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Base18bSulfate Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Base18bNitrate Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Base18bAmmonium Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Base18bNH3 Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Base18bOC Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Base18bEC Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Base18bSoil Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Base18bPMFINE Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Base18bOzone Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Base18bCoarse Matter Annual Average change


Visibility Projections

• Visibility projections calculated using new IMPROVE equation for two cases:– PRP18a & Base18b (previously used old equation)– dot plots show % deciviews of progress goal

achieved.


EPA Specific Day method: Predictions for Colorado Plateau and Desert Southwest sites (% dcv goal)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

BR

CA

1

CA

NY

1

GR

CA

2

ME

VE

1

SA

PE

1

WE

MI1

ZIO

N1

BA

ND

1

BO

AP

1

CH

IR1

GIC

L1

GR

SA

1

IKB

A1

SA

CR

1

SA

GU

1

SIA

N1

WH

IT1

WH

PE

1

Pe

rcen

t o

f ta

rget

red

uct

ion

ach

iev

ed

base18b new

prp18a new

Colorado Plateau Desert Southwest


EPA Specific Day method: Predictions for North, Great Basin and Rockies sites (% dcv goal)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

BA

DL1

CA

BI1

GA

MO

1

LOS

T1

ME

LA1

MO

NT

1

SU

LA1

TH

RO

1

UL

BE

1

WIC

A1

CR

MO

1

JAR

B1

SA

WT

1

BR

ID1

NO

AB

1

RO

MO

1

WH

RI1

YE

LL2

Pe

rcen

t o

f ta

rget

red

uct

ion

ach

iev

ed

base18b new

prp18a new

North Great Basin Rockies


EPA Specific Day method: Predictions for Pacific Northwest and California sites (% dcv goal)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

160%

180%

200%H

EC

A1

KA

LM1

MO

HO

1

MO

RA

1

NO

CA

1

OLY

M1

PA

SA

1

SN

PA

1

ST

AR

1

TH

SI1

WH

PA

1

AG

TI1

BLI

S1

DO

ME

1

HO

OV

1

JOS

H1

LAV

O1

PIN

N1

RE

DW

1

SA

GA

1

SA

GO

1

YO

SE

1

Per

cen

t o

f ta

rget

red

uct

ion

ach

ieve

d

base18b new

prp18a new

Pacific Northwest California


Bar Plots of change in visibility

• Available for all sites show PM component changes in bext:– PRP18a vs Plan02c– Base18b vs Plan02c– PRP18a vs Base18b

• These plots show change weighted by RRF.


Percent change in extinction components from 2002 baseline to 2018 projectedat Colorado Plateau sites using prp18a/plan02c RRFs

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

BRCA1 CANY1 GRCA2 MEVE1 SAPE1 WEMI1 ZION1

IMPROVE site

Pe

rcen

t ch

ang

e in

bE

XT

bSO4

bNO3

bOC

bEC

bSOIL

bCM


Percent change in extinction components from 2002 baseline to 2018 projectedat Desert Southwest sites using prp18a/plan02c RRFs

-100%

-50%

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

BAND1 BOAP1 CHIR1 GICL1 GRSA1 IKBA1 SACR1 SAGU1 SIAN1 WHIT1 WHPE1

IMPROVE site

Pe

rcen

t ch

ang

e in

bE

XT

bSO4

bNO3

bOC

bEC

bSOIL

bCM


Percent change in extinction components from 2002 baseline to 2018 projectedat Northern sites using prp18a/plan02c RRFs

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

BADL1 CABI1 GAMO1 LOST1 MELA1 MONT1 SULA1 THRO1 ULBE1 WICA1

IMPROVE site

Pe

rcen

t ch

ang

e in

bE

XT

bSO4

bNO3

bOC

bEC

bSOIL

bCM


Percent change in extinction components from 2002 baseline to 2018 projectedat Great Basin & Rockies sites using prp18a/plan02c RRFs

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

CRMO1 JARB1 SAWT1 BRID1 NOAB1 ROMO1 WHRI1 YELL2

IMPROVE site

Pe

rcen

t ch

ang

e in

bE

XT

bSO4

bNO3

bOC

bEC

bSOIL

bCM


Percent change in extinction components from 2002 baseline to 2018 projectedat Pacific Northwest sites using prp18a/plan02c RRFs

-60%

-50%

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

HECA1 KALM1 MOHO1 MORA1 NOCA1 OLYM1 PASA1 SNPA1 STAR1 THSI1 WHPA1

IMPROVE site

Pe

rcen

t ch

ang

e in

bE

XT

bSO4

bNO3

bOC

bEC

bSOIL

bCM


Percent change in extinction components from 2002 baseline to 2018 projectedat California sites using prp18a/plan02c RRFs

-80%

-60%

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

AGTI1 BLIS1 DOME1 HOOV1 JOSH1 LAVO1 PINN1 REDW1 SAGA1 SAGO1 YOSE1

IMPROVE site

Pe

rcen

t ch

ang

e in

bE

XT

bSO4

bNO3

bOC

bEC

bSOIL

bCM


PRP18a vs. Plan02cEmissions Comparison

• PAVE QA plots comparing PRP18a vs. Plan02c:– red colors showed increased emissions in PRP18a

– blue colors showed reduced emissions in PRP18a


NO Annual emissions difference PRP18a – Plann02c


SO2 Annual emissions difference PRP18a – Plann02c


NH3 Annual emissions difference PRP18a – Plann02c


EC Annual emissions difference PRP18a – Plann02c


VOC Annual emissions difference PRP18a – Plann02c


PMFINE Annual emissions difference PRP18a – Plann02c


CMAQ Results Comparison

• PAVE plots comparing PRP18a vs. Plan02:– Plots show change in conc as PRP18a minus Plan02c– Blue colors show area with lower mass in PRP18a.– Annual average change shown here, monthly

average changes are available on webpage.– coarse material is not being used


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Plan02cSulfate Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Plan02cNitrate Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Plan02cAmmonium Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Plan02cNH3 Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Plan02cOC Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Plan02cEC Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Plan02cSoil Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Plan02cTotal PM2.5 Annual Average change


CMAQ Difference Plots PRP18a minus Plan02cOzone change

July Average Annual Average


Conclusions

• PRP18a shows improvement in achieving visibility goals compared to Base18b at most sites: reductions in SOx NOx emissions.

• Some sites have worse visibility in PRP18a than in Base18b because of dust projections.

• Most IMPROVE sites are at less than 60% of visibility goal in PRP18a.


Next Steps

• Planned revisions to PRP18a:– Final RP19 early 2008.– fix all known emissions projection errors.

• Final Plan02d run correcting same errors.

• Optional model studies during 2007:– Sensitivity simulations with emissions reductions?– Do a new “model floor” simulation with all

anthropogenic emissions zeroed out?

Documents

Results from 2018 Preliminary Reasonable Progress Modeling