WRAP RMC Phase II Wind Blown Dust Project - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – WRAP RMC Phase II Wind Blown Dust Project PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 16ff8e-Y2UyY



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

WRAP RMC Phase II Wind Blown Dust Project

Description:

Improve vacant land characterization. Disturbance. Land use type. Reservoirs ... Land Use/Dust Categories. WRAP Modeling Forum ... Agricultural land adjustments ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:37
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 30
Provided by: ChaoJun7
Learn more at: http://pah.cert.ucr.edu
Category:
Tags: rmc | wrap | blown | dust | land | phase | project | vacant | wind

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: WRAP RMC Phase II Wind Blown Dust Project


1
WRAP RMC Phase II Wind Blown Dust Project
  • Gerard Mansell
  • ENVIRON International Corporation
  • And
  • Mohammad Omary
  • University of California, Riverside

WRAP Modeling Forum Meeting, San Francisco, CA
March 8-9 , 2005
2
Phase II Project Overview
  • Develop improved general methodology based on
    Phase I recommendations and recent literature
    review
  • Update gridded PM inventory of WB Dust for 2002
    using the Inter-RPO regional modeling domain
  • Develop of surface friction velocities and
    threshold friction velocities
  • Develop improved emission flux relationships
  • Improve vacant land characterization
  • Disturbance
  • Land use type
  • Reservoirs
  • Conduct model performance evaluation

3
General Formulation for Emissions Estimation
  • Dust f(LULC,z0,u,uth,SC)
  • LULC Land Use Land Cover
  • SC Soil Conditions
  • u f(u,z0)
  • uth f(z0)
  • z0 f(LULC)

4
Threshold Friction Velocities
  • uth determined from relations developed by
    Marticorena, et al, (1997)

5
Soil Characteristics
6
Emission Rates
  • Depends on soil type based on results of Alfaro
    and Gomes (2001)

7
Data Sources
  • Land Use/Land Cover
  • National Land Cover Database (NLCD)
  • Biogenic Emissions Landcover Database (BELD3)
  • Soils
  • State Soil Geographic Database (STATSGO)
  • Soil Landscape of Canada (SLC)
  • International Soil Reference and Information
    Centre
  • Meteorology
  • 2002 36-km Gridded MM5
  • 2002 12-km Gridded MM5

8

9
NLCD Summary
10
Land Use/Dust Categories
11
Characteristics of Dust Categories
12

13
Reservoir Characteristics
  • All soils assumed loose, undisturbed
  • Dust events limited to 10hrs/day
  • Sensitivity simulations conducted based on above
    assumptions
  • Rain events Dust re-initiated after set number
    of days dependent on soil texture, amount of
    rainfall and season

14
Model Sensitivity Simulations
  • Run a No limitation on dust event duration All
    soils considered loose undisturbed
  • Run b Dust events limited to 10 hrs/day All
    soils considered loose undisturbed
  • Run c No limitation on dust event duration
    Assume 10 of barren, grass shrublands area is
    disturbed
  • Threshold velocity for grass shrublands 0.5
    undisturbed value barren lands .27
    undisturbed value
  • Run d Dust events limited to 10 hrs/day for
    undisturbed soils Assume 10 of barren, grass
    shrublands area is disturbed

15
Model Results
16
Total Wind Blown Dust for WRAP States tons/year
17
Annual PM10
18
Comparison of Monthly Dust Emissions
19
Summary of Sensitivity Simulations
  • Sensitivity simulations conducted to investigate
    model assumptions reservoir characteristics,
    soil disturbance
  • Unlimited dust event duration gt increased dust
    emissions
  • Assumed soil disturbance gt increased dust
    emissions
  • Limited event duration more realistic assumption
    lacking detailed soil data
  • Assumed disturbance for sensitivity only
    assumed disturbance and reduction in Uth based
    on very limited data
  • Recommend Scenario b for further analysis
    evaluation

20
PM10 WB Dust Comparisons
21
PM10 WB Dust Comparisons
22
PM10 WB Dust Comparisons
23
PM10 WB Dust Comparisons
24
PM10 WB Dust Comparisons
Annual PM10 Emissions for Dust Code 3
400,000
350,000
36-km
300,000
12-km
250,000
tons/yr
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
Utah
Idaho
Arizona
Nevada
Oregon
Colorado
Montana
California
Wyoming
Washington
New Mexico
North Dakota
South Dakota
State
25
Annual 12-km WB Dust PM Emissions
26
Model Limitations
  • Grid resolution
  • Coarse resolution of met data cant resolve high
    wind events wind gusts
  • LULC and Soils data
  • LULC not detailed enough on a regional-scale
  • Soils data lacks depth of layers, moisture data
  • Agricultural land adjustments
  • More detailed Agricultural data for Eastern
    states (prepared for WRAP CENRAP regions only)
  • Data gaps in Ag Census

27
Model Performance Evaluation
  • Evaluate model results for reasonableness and
    accuracy
  • Compare predicted WB dust emissions near IMPROVE
    monitors with measured IMPROVE dust extinction
    (Bdust)
  • Enhancements to CMAQ to track WB and other dust
  • Evaluate model CMAQ model performance with and
    without WB dust emissions
  • Refined model performance evaluation using
    results of Etyemezian, et al.
  • For events characterized as wind blown dust
    events, determine whether dust model predicts
    impacts

28
Model Performance Evaluation
  • Enhancements to CMAQ to track WB and other dust
    emissions separately
  • Run CMAQ w/ and w/o WB Dust emissions
  • Evaluate CMAQ model results with and with out WB
    dust emissions

29
Next Steps
  • Complete Model Performance Evaluation (end of
    year)
  • Address deficiencies in Ag data for the Eastern
    States
  • Assume constant crop canopy
  • Develop generic crop calendars, crop canopy ,
    etc.
  • Collect detailed Ag data from Eastern States
  • Apply to small region for verification of
    methods, assumptions
About PowerShow.com