CAMx-PSAT Source Apportionment Modeling Results
68
CAMx-PSAT Source Apportionment Modeling Results Stationary Sources Joint Forum Salt Lake City, UT August 17, 2006
description
CAMx-PSAT Source Apportionment Modeling Results. Stationary Sources Joint Forum Salt Lake City, UT August 17, 2006. Source Apportionment Technique. CAMx air quality model with PM Source Apportionment Technology (PSAT) PSAT being completed for 2 cases: Plan 2002c Base 2018b - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of CAMx-PSAT Source Apportionment Modeling Results
CAMx-PSATSource Apportionment
Modeling Results
Stationary Sources Joint Forum
Salt Lake City, UT
August 17, 2006
Source Apportionment Technique
• CAMx air quality model with PM Source Apportionment Technology (PSAT)
• PSAT being completed for 2 cases:– Plan 2002c– Base 2018b
• Tracks sources of sulfate and nitrate• Tracking organic carbon too computationally
intensive. However, data is available that delineates primary OC, from biogenic SOA, and anthropogenic SOA.
18 Source Regions on a 36 km Grid
- 2 7 3 6 - 2 4 1 2 - 2 0 8 8 - 1 7 6 4 - 1 4 4 0 - 1 1 1 6 - 7 9 2 - 4 6 8 - 1 4 4 1 8 0 5 0 4 8 2 8 1 1 5 2 1 4 7 6 1 8 0 0 2 1 2 4 2 4 4 8- 2 0 8 8
- 1 8 7 2
- 1 6 5 6
- 1 4 4 0
- 1 2 2 4
- 1 0 0 8
- 7 9 2
- 5 7 6
- 3 6 0
- 1 4 4
7 2
2 8 8
5 0 4
7 2 0
9 3 6
1 1 5 2
1 3 6 8
1 5 8 4
1 8 0 0
26
9
1 2
4
58
1 3
1 13
1 7
1 5
1 5
1 6
1 6
1 6
1 8 1 8
1 4
1 7
1 4
1 0
Eight Source Categories
• Examples of PSAT “sources”:– MV_CO = mobile sources in Colorado– PT_CE = point sorces in CENRAP– BCON = transport from modeling domain boundaries (derived from
GEOS-CHEM)
ICON Initial conditions
BCON Boundary conditions
PT Point sources
MV Mobile sources
ANF WRAP anthropogenic fires
Natural WRAP natural fires and biogenics
NWF Elevated fires in other RPOs
AR All other sources (non-elevated fires in other RPOs, area sources, offshore, oil & gas area sources, etc.)
Status of Modeling
• Plan 2002c just completed• Base 2018b to be completed by end of August
– Several months currently completed• Results currently available for daily and monthly
averages• Results will be provided for 20% best and worst
visibility days at each Class I area
Alternative Formats forPresenting Results
• All examples are for July SO4• All examples pair 2002 and 2018 on same chart• Format 1: Top 10 sources (TONT, GRCA, ROMO, BADL)
• Format 2: By source region (BADL)
• Format 3: By source category (BADL)
• Format 4: By source “controlability” (BADL)
Current Format
Tonto Monthly Average CAMx/PSAT SO4 Concentrations (July 2002)
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
BCON
MX_P
T
EA_PT
CE_PT
OF_Are
a
AZ_PT
AZ_MV
OF_PT
MX_A
rea
NV_PT
SUM_O
THER
SO
4 C
on
cen
trat
ion
(u
g/m
3)
2002 2018
Alternate Format 1 – Top 10 Sources
Grand Canyon Monthly Average CAMx/PSAT SO4 Concentrations (July 2002)
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
BCON
MX_P
T
OF_Are
a
NV_PT
EA_PT
AZ_PT
CE_PT
OF_PT
MX_A
rea
NM_P
T
SUM_O
THER
SO
4 C
on
cen
trat
ion
(u
g/m
3)
2002 2018
Alternate Format 1 – Top 10 Sources
Rocky Mountain Monthly Average CAMx/PSAT SO4 Concentrations (July 2002)
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
CO_PT
BCON
CE_PT
EA_PT
WY_P
T
MX_P
T
CO_MV
UT_PT
CO_Are
a
UT_Nat
ural
SUM_O
THER
SO
4 C
on
cen
trat
ion
(u
g/m
3)
2002 2018
Alternate Format 1 – Top 10 Sources
Badlands Monthly Average CAMx/PSAT SO4 Concentrations (July 2002)
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
CE_PT
EA_PT
BCON
CN_PT
ND_PT
MX_P
T
CE_Are
a
CE_MV
WY_P
T
CN_Are
a
SUM_O
THER
SO
4 C
on
cen
trat
ion
(u
g/m
3)
2002 2018
Alternate Format 1 – Top 10 Sources
Badlands Monthly Average CAMx/PSAT Sulfate Concentration (July 2002)
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
AZ
BCON CA CE CN CO EAIC
ON ID MT
MX ND
NM NV OFOR SD UT
WA
WY
SO
4 C
on
cen
trat
ion
(u
g/m
3)
2002 2018
Alternate Format 2 – By Region
Badlands Monthly Average CAMx/PSAT Sulfate Concentration (July 2002)
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
ANF Area MV Natural NWF PT BCON
SO
4 C
on
cen
trat
ion
(u
g/m
3)
2002 2018
Alternate Format 3 – By Category
Badlands Monthly Average CAMx/PSAT Sulfate Concentration (July 2002)
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
BCON
Canad
a
CENRAPEas
t
Mex
ico
Pacific
_Offs
hore
WRAP_A
nth
WRAP_N
at
SO
4 C
on
cen
trat
ion
(u
g/m
3)
2002 2018
Alternate Format 4 – By “Controlability”
Slight Decrease in WRAP SO2
2002 and 2018 Base Case Emissions
2002 2018 % Diff 2002 2018 % DiffWRAP (13-States) 1,600,638 1,541,458 -3.7 5,435,028 3,920,338 -27.9 CENRAP 2,697,271 1,944,086 -27.9 5,744,502 3,320,231 -42.2 VISTAS 4,668,107 1,700,254 -63.6 5,505,986 2,532,720 -54.0 MWRPO 3,258,891 2,004,623 -38.5 3,249,972 1,576,097 -51.5 MANE-VU 2,324,216 788,285 -66.1 2,712,780 1,219,770 -55.0 US 14,592,973 8,023,177 -45.0 22,967,136 12,909,057 -43.8 Canada 2,591,763 2,591,763 0.0 3,039,078 3,039,078 0.0 Mexico 801,693 809,369 1.0 531,733 565,528 6.4 TOTAL 17,986,429 11,424,309 -36.5 26,537,947 16,513,662 -37.8
SO2 NOx
Slight Decrease Due ToLarge Mobile Source Reduction +
Modest Point/Area Source Increase13-State WRAP Region2002 and 2018 Base Case Emissions
2002 2018 % Diff 2002 2018 % DiffPoint 785,552 798,536 1.7 927,448 947,086 2.1 Area 94,282 117,983 25.1 263,838 314,684 19.3 Non Road 70,152 2,037 -97.1 970,486 297,198 -69.4 Onroad 30,029 5,933 -80.2 1,591,639 519,090 -67.4 Fires 55,777 55,777 0.0 212,729 212,729 0.0 Biogenic 0 0 0.0 286,996 286,996 0.0 Oil & Gas Area 3,763 108 -97.1 132,365 293,028 121.4 Pacific Shipping* 561,084 561,084 0.0 1,049,526 1,049,526 0.0 TOTAL 1,600,638 1,541,458 -3.7 5,435,028 3,920,338 -27.9 * Emissions may double in 2018.
SO2 NOx
WRAP Stationary Area Source SO2 Emissions (2002 tons)AZ CA CO ID MT ND NM NV OR SD UT WA WY Total
Industrial Fuel Comb.Distillate Oil 1,117 249 2,920 90 1,450 3,068 878 7,301 1,453 1,769 3,200 3,461 26,956Bit/Subbit Coal 918 1,746 1,095 508 4,935 6,966 0 750 9,111 26,031Residual Oil 55 2,555 7 254 2,913 396 2,693 752 1,377 11,002
Comm/Inst. Fuel Comb.Bit/Subbit Coal 2 2,054 106 30 63 11 1 1,749 186 1,872 6,076Distillate Oil 361 9 870 16 173 234 257 127 989 225 840 1,076 369 5,548
Other 223 5,501 714 951 550 2,192 1,940 184 4,797 453 992 2,176 1,712 22,384Total 2,677 8,314 6,559 2,916 3,299 5,748 6,559 12,954 9,932 10,167 3,581 7,388 17,902 97,996
Why Do Area Sources Increase?
The 12 Power Plants Are:Springerville -9,766Coronado -4,249Apache -2,502Comanche -9,837Craig -6,019Cherokee -9,285Arapahoe -1,985Valmont -3,078Mohave -31,646Four Corners -9,415San Juan -2,726Centralia -12,653Total -103,160
Why Do Point Sources Increase?
AZ Point Source ChangesSpringerville+Coronado+Apache -16,516Irvington 2,200Future Coal (AZ) 3,350Future Coal (Navajo-AZ) 1,675Copper 4,562Industrial Gas Boilers -500Mineral Products (cement+lime) 900Total -4,329
Most Significant Changes in WRAPPoint Source SO2 Inventory (13 States)
2002 2018 DiffIndustrial Boilers 44,799 35,413 -9,386Power Plants - 12 Existing 203,753 100,593 -103,160Power Plants - Other Existing 376,948 401,115 24,167Power Plants - New 0 41,750 41,750Primary Copper Smelting 25,043 32,700 7,657Oil & Gas Production 30,958 43,482 12,524Mineral Products 17,113 23,669 6,557Aluminum Ore Reduction 11,061 19,034 7,973TOTAL -11,919
11-State EGU SO2 Trend
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
1998 2002 2005 2018b 2018 BART
SO
2 (t
py)
PSAT Modeling Cases
• For further background information and data on PSAT:
• http://pah.cert.ucr.edu/aqm/308/cmaq.shtml#CAMxBase18b
