Heavy metal modelling: Use of different emission inventories - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 11
About This Presentation
Title:

Heavy metal modelling: Use of different emission inventories

Description:

Annual mean concentration in precipitation based on official emissions data (2000) ... Saltation [Marticorena & Bergametti, 1995; Gomes et al., 2003] Sandblasting ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:95
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 12
Provided by: Ole117
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Heavy metal modelling: Use of different emission inventories


1
Heavy metal modellingUse of different emission
inventories
  • Oleg Travnikov
  • EMEP/MSC-E

2
Model results vs. observations
Underestimation of observed concentrations by
65-75
3
Workshop on the review of EMEP MSC-E models on
HMs and POPs
(ECE/EB.AIR/GE.1/2006/4)
  • Workshop concluded
  • Most transport models (including MSC-E Heavy
    Metal model) underestimate air and precipitation
    concentration when using official emission data
  • Reasons of model/measurement discrepancies may
    particularly include
  • Incompleteness and uncertainty of available
    emission inventories of heavy metals
  • Unaccounted secondary emission of heavy metals
    (wind re-suspension)

4
Uncertainty of emission inventories
5
Uncertainty of emission inventories
75 underestimation
35 underestimation
6
Wind re-suspension of HM
  • Dust suspension
  • Saltation
  • Marticorena Bergametti, 1995 Gomes et al.,
    2003
  • Sandblasting
  • Alfaro Gomes, 2001

7
Wind re-suspension of HM
Pb concentration in European soils
  • Default HM concentrations in soil
  • (Eastern Europe, Africa, Asia)

FOREGS (www.gtk.fi/publ/foregsatlas/)
8
Wind re-suspension of HM
Anthropogenic emissions vs. re-suspension of Pb
9
Model results vs. observations (Pb)
Annual mean Pb concentration in precipitation
(2000)
Official
Officialre-suspen.
ESPREMEre-suspen.
Mod 0.35 Obs Corr 0.7
Mod 0.62 Obs Corr 0.66
Mod 0.79 Obs Corr 0.62
20 underestimation
40 underestimation
65 underestimation
10
Model results vs. observations (Cd)
Annual mean Cd concentration in precipitation
(2000)
Official
Officialre-suspen.
ESPREMEre-suspen.
Mod 0.26 Obs Corr 0.76
Mod 0.33 Obs Corr 0.71
Mod 0.71 Obs Corr 0.53
30 underestimation
65 underestimation
75 underestimation
11
Conclusions
  • Use of currently available emissions data leads
    to underestimation of ambient heavy metal
    concentrations by atmospheric transport models
  • Modelling results based on ESPREME estimates
    commonly demonstrate better agreement with
    measurements than those based on official
    emissions data
  • Wind re-suspension of some heavy metals can
    significantly contribute to their ambient
    concentration and depositions in Europe

12
Emission inventories vs. ambient measurements
  • Total emissions vs. measured wet depositions of
    Cd in Europe

Emissions vs. concentration in precip. of Pb in
the United Kingdom
Cd
Emission inventories does not reflect long-term
changes and ambient levels of HMs in Europe
13
Anthropogenic emissions vs.re-suspension
Pb
Pb emissions in European countries
Pb mean concentration in soil
14
Anthropogenic emissions vs. re-suspension
Cd
Cd emissions in European countries
Cd mean concentration in soil
15
Wind re-suspension of HM
Anthropogenic emissions vs. re-suspension of Cd
Re-suspension
Anthropogenic emissions
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com