June 21, 2006 WRF/MM5 Users Workshop Off-line Air Quality Coupling System: WRF-CMAQ Simulation of Houston High Ozone Event

Similar documents
Cloud Correction and its Impact on Air Quality Simulations

IMPACT OF SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY-AMERENUE QUANTUM WEATHER PROJECT MESONET DATA ON WRF-ARW FORECASTS

Titelmasterformat durch Klicken. bearbeiten

Oil & Natural Gas Technology

Can latent heat release have a negative effect on polar low intensity?

Performance Analysis and Application of Ensemble Air Quality Forecast System in Shanghai

Project Title: Quantifying Uncertainties of High-Resolution WRF Modeling on Downslope Wind Forecasts in the Las Vegas Valley

Ozone and Air Quality. Some Selected Research Projects in the Chemical Sciences Division

cloud Impacts on Off-Line AQs

Very High Resolution Arctic System Reanalysis for

Comparative Evaluation of High Resolution Numerical Weather Prediction Models COSMO-WRF

ASSESSMENT OF THE CAPABILITY OF WRF MODEL TO ESTIMATE CLOUDS AT DIFFERENT TEMPORAL AND SPATIAL SCALES

Satellite Appraisal in Texas - A Tutorial

The Wind Integration National Dataset (WIND) toolkit

Sensitivity Modeling to Investigate Modeling Improvements for the June July 2006 Denver Ozone Episode

Evalua&ng Downdra/ Parameteriza&ons with High Resolu&on CRM Data

Developing sub-domain verification methods based on Geographic Information System (GIS) tools

Cloud Model Verification at the Air Force Weather Agency

SOLAR IRRADIANCE FORECASTING, BENCHMARKING of DIFFERENT TECHNIQUES and APPLICATIONS of ENERGY METEOROLOGY

MM5/COSMO-DE Model Inter-Comparison and Model Validation

Mixing Heights & Smoke Dispersion. Casey Sullivan Meteorologist/Forecaster National Weather Service Chicago

IBM Big Green Innovations Environmental R&D and Services

Air Quality Forecasting Activities in Mexico


Climatology and Monitoring of Dust and Sand Storms in the Arabian Peninsula

CHANGES TO THE BIOGENIC EMISSIONS INVENTORY SYSTEM VERSION 3 (BEIS3)

Overview of the IR channels and their applications

Air Quality Modeling Platform for the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard Final Rule Regulatory Impact Analysis

Estimation of satellite observations bias correction for limited area model

AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT AT A BIG INDUSTRIAL PLANT AND POSSIBLE USE OF CAMS PRODUCTS

Comparison of the Vertical Velocity used to Calculate the Cloud Droplet Number Concentration in a Cloud-Resolving and a Global Climate Model

Korea Emissions Inventory Processing Using the US EPA s SMOKE System

STATUS AND RESULTS OF OSEs. (Submitted by Dr Horst Böttger, ECMWF) Summary and Purpose of Document

How To Write A New Vertical Diffusion Package

P3.8 INTEGRATING A DOPPLER SODAR WITH NUCLEAR POWER PLANT METEOROLOGICAL DATA. Thomas E. Bellinger

Forecaster comments to the ORTECH Report

Meteorological Forecasting of DNI, clouds and aerosols

Basics of weather interpretation

Inverse modelling of emissions using in situ and satellite (OMI, GOME2, IASI) data

What the Heck are Low-Cloud Feedbacks? Takanobu Yamaguchi Rachel R. McCrary Anna B. Harper

Emission Inventory in Medellín (Colombia) city. An Approximation *

Cloud/Hydrometeor Initialization in the 20-km RUC Using GOES Data

Triple eyewall experiment of the 2012 typhoon Bolaven using cloud resolving ensemble forecast

6. Biogenic Sources PM Periodic Emission Inventory 181 Maricopa County, AZ

H45-TAMU Page 1 of 17 Report 2. Report 2 Data Assimilation/Ensemble Techniques

Wind resources map of Spain at mesoscale. Methodology and validation

MOGREPS status and activities

DESWAT project (Destructive Water Abatement and Control of Water Disasters)

163 ANALYSIS OF THE URBAN HEAT ISLAND EFFECT COMPARISON OF GROUND-BASED AND REMOTELY SENSED TEMPERATURE OBSERVATIONS

Page 1. Weather Unit Exam Pre-Test Questions

Convective Clouds. Convective clouds 1

Stan Benjamin Eric James Haidao Lin Steve Weygandt Susan Sahm Bill Moninger NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory, Boulder, CO

The impact of window size on AMV

Simulating the urban heat island of Greater Houston, Texas

The Beijin2008 FDP/RDP project

Use of numerical weather forecast predictions in soil moisture modelling

Application of Numerical Weather Prediction Models for Drought Monitoring. Gregor Gregorič Jožef Roškar Environmental Agency of Slovenia

IOMASA DTU Status October 2003

A limited area model (LAM) intercomparison study of a TWP-ICE active monsoon mesoscale convective event

REDUCING VERTICAL TRANSPORT OVER COMPLEX TERRAIN IN PHOTOCHEMICAL GRID MODELS

Real-time Ocean Forecasting Needs at NCEP National Weather Service

Introduction to the forecasting world Jukka Julkunen FMI, Aviation and military WS

Large Eddy Simulation (LES) & Cloud Resolving Model (CRM) Françoise Guichard and Fleur Couvreux

REGIONAL CLIMATE AND DOWNSCALING

USING THE GOES 3.9 µm SHORTWAVE INFRARED CHANNEL TO TRACK LOW-LEVEL CLOUD-DRIFT WINDS ABSTRACT

Evaluation of clouds in GCMs using ARM-data: A time-step approach

COSMO Data Assimilation. Applications for Romanian Territory

Climate Models: Uncertainties due to Clouds. Joel Norris Assistant Professor of Climate and Atmospheric Sciences Scripps Institution of Oceanography

Monsoon Variability and Extreme Weather Events

Urban heat islands and summertime convective thunderstorms in Atlanta: three case studies

SIXTH GRADE WEATHER 1 WEEK LESSON PLANS AND ACTIVITIES

Armenian State Hydrometeorological and Monitoring Service

VALIDATION OF SAFNWC / MSG CLOUD PRODUCTS WITH ONE YEAR OF SEVIRI DATA

Solar and PV forecasting in Canada

CAUSES. (Clouds Above the United States and Errors at the Surface)

SAFNWC/MSG Cloud type/height. Application for fog/low cloud situations

Air Quality Modeling Technical Support Document: Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and Standards

4.4 GRAPHICAL AND ANALYTICAL SOFTWARE VISUALIZATION TOOLS FOR EVALUATING METEOROLOGICAL AND AIR QUALITY MODEL PERFORMANCE

RESULTS FROM A SIMPLE INFRARED CLOUD DETECTOR

Mediterranean use of Medspiration: the CNR regional Optimally Interpolated SST products from MERSEA to MyOcean

Chapter 6: Cloud Development and Forms

Fundamentals of Climate Change (PCC 587): Water Vapor

Eric M. Kemp and Randall J. Alliss Northrop Grumman Information Technology/TASC, Chantilly, Virginia

ASR CRM Intercomparison Study on Deep Convective Clouds and Aerosol Impacts

6.9 A NEW APPROACH TO FIRE WEATHER FORECASTING AT THE TULSA WFO. Sarah J. Taylor* and Eric D. Howieson NOAA/National Weather Service Tulsa, Oklahoma

Towards assimilating IASI satellite observations over cold surfaces - the cloud detection aspect

Colorado Front Range air quality 2014 AQAST update. David Edwards and Gabriele Pfister National Center for Atmospheric Research Boulder, CO

This chapter discusses: 1. Definitions and causes of stable and unstable atmospheric air. 2. Processes that cause instability and cloud development

Solarstromprognosen für Übertragungsnetzbetreiber

Financing Community Wind

Denver/NFR Air Quality Modeling to Support Ozone SIP Development

Simulations of Clouds and Sensitivity Study by Wearther Research and Forecast Model for Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Case 4

MATTHEW CHARLES CERVARICH THESIS

Development of an Integrated Data Product for Hawaii Climate

Roelof Bruintjes, Sarah Tessendorf, Jim Wilson, Rita Roberts, Courtney Weeks and Duncan Axisa WMA Annual meeting 26 April 2012

Traffic Management Systems with Air Quality Monitoring Feedback. Phil Govier City & County of Swansea

Texas Department of Public Safety Texas Division of Emergency Management. Texas State Operations Center

Parameterization of Cumulus Convective Cloud Systems in Mesoscale Forecast Models

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE RAPID EIA STUDY

BPA Rider 8 Air Quality Modeling Planning Thomas C. Ho, Director Air Quality Research Laboratory Lamar University

Transcription:

June 21, 2006 WRF/MM5 Users Workshop Off-line Air Quality Coupling System: WRF-CMAQ Simulation of Houston High Ozone Event Fong Ngan, Daewon Byun and Soontae Kim IMAQS, University of Houston, Houston, TX

Introduction WRF-ARW (Advanced Research WRF) new generation operational & research weather forecasting model Providing met. input for air quality modeling CMAQ (Community Multiscale Air Quality model) state-of-science air quality model developed by US EPA designed for multiple-pollutant modeling use fully compressible eq. written in generalized coordinates Off-line air quality modeling system Meteorological and chemical models are treated independently. Through the Meteorology-Chemistry Interface Processor (MCIP version 3) hourly meteorological data is transformed into the CMAQ. Complex air quality issues are studied by examining individual scientific problems of meteorology, chemical transport, emission etc independently.

Introduction Off-line modeling for air quality assessment with WRF-CMAQ WRF-ARW was demonstrated to have accurate numerics and high quality mass conservation characteristics. The governing set of equations, coordinate system, numerical algorithms, and computational framework of WRF-ARW are closer to CMAQ than MM5. Objective Improve WRF simulation for air quality studies: Sensitivity tests have been performed to obtain better results representing the boundary layer parameters that are critical for air quality simulations. 1) employing the update of PBL scheme and LSM in version 2.1 2) tuning on Grell-Devenyi ensemble scheme to capture temperature decrease caused by the development of clouds. Evaluate WRF-CMAQ results with TexAQS 2000 experiment data: The WRF-ARW simulations were utilized for the offline modeling of air quality with CMAQ for high ozone events in Houston. The simulation results were evaluated with the OBS during the TexAQS 2000 experiment.

Model Configuration WRF domain Time period: 2000/8/22 00UTC ~ 9/2 00UTC IC/BC: From 40 km Eta reanalysis data (AWIP) Grid size: 161*145*43 layers (WRF) 83*65*23 layers (CMAQ) Resolution: 4 km Nudging: None CMAQ domain Physical options for control run Microphysics: WSM 3-class simple ice scheme Radiation: RRTM (longwave), Dudhia (shortwave) Surface layer: Monin-Obukhov scheme LSM: Noah land-surface model PBL: MRF scheme Cumulus: None

Simulations Design Description ARW-WRF CMAQ Control run of v2.0.3.1 W_v2 CMAQ1 Control run of v2.1 (No sub-grid cloud & MRF PBL scheme) WRF v2.1 with Grell-Devenyi ensemble & YSU scheme W_v2.1 W_v2.1_cu / CMAQ2 Anthropo. Emission generated by SMOKE v2.1 with CB4 and NEI 99 v3 of base EI. plume rise from SMOKE laypoint Biogenic Emission generated by BEIS 3.12 in SMOKE ~provided by Dr. Soontae Kim Houston OBS of temp, wind & O3 conc. Continuous Ambient Monitoring Stations (CAMS), TCEQ OBS of PBL height NOAA Profiler Network (NPN)

Review the comparison of MM5 & WRF Mulit-nesting simulation failed because of the lack of grid-nudging tool in the ARW-WRF model. WRF is able to simulate comparable meteorological features as MM5 when the same physical options and inputs are used in the simulations.. Larger warm bias in 2m temperature simulated by WRF than MM5. Both models overestimated PBL heights, WRF s result was closer to OBS. Both models simulated similar wind patterns; had difficulties simulating correct wind directions under light wind conditions. Root mean square error (RMSE) & mean gross bias (BIAS) for all OBS in TexAQS 2000 during the simulation period WRF RMSE BIAS MM5 RMSE 2m temperature 2.05 0.56 1.92 0.79 10m wind speed 1.35 0.21 1.3 0.5 BIAS 10m wind dir 85.54-5.75 86.37-7.31 PBL height 374.05 189.19 424.69 247.69

Comparison of different WRF versions Time-series of 1.5m Temperature Different runs: v2.0.3.1, v2.1, v2.1 using GD ensemble & YSU scheme Urban site Rural site Nighttime cold bias was reduced substantially in v2.1 It affected the urban area (C603) more than the rural area (C611) 3 2.5 2 1.5 T_RMSE(C) In the run W_v2.1_cu, temperature dropped in the afternoon on August 24 th due to the thunderstorm activities simulated. 1 0.5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Time (hr in CST) W_v2 W_v2.1 W_v2.1_cu

Comparison of different WRF versions Time-series of PBL Height Different runs: v2.0.3.1, v2.1, v2.1 using GD ensemble & YSU scheme During the stable condition, PBL top was reported to be the height of the first layer, around 34 m (sigma=0.996). At daytime, all versions simulated development of PBL height well; W_v2.1 showed the best agreement with OBS. RMSE W_v2 374.05 BIAS 189.19 W_v2.1 334.28 115.56 W_v2.1_cu 355.23 139.09

Comparison of W_v2.1_cu & W_v2.1 Spatial plot of cloud fraction & horizontal wind at 21 UTC on 8/24 Thunderstorm on 8/24, 2000 At the afternoon larger area of shower moved to Houston from SE. Ctl. Radar imagery at 21 UTC 8/24 More clouds were generated & area covered by thunderstorm was larger with W_v2.1_cu. lower PBL height at the north-western edge of Harries County gust front moved further north Ctl. diff

Variation of wind on 8/25 in Ctl. run of v2.1 Snap shot of simulated wind and OBS Time-series of wind speed & direction on 8/25 360 5 AVE_WD(W_v2.1) AVE_WD(OBS) AVE_WS(W_v2.1) AVE_WS(OBS) 270 12UTC 19UTC 4 WD (degree) 180 90 0 82500 82501 82502 82503 82504 82505 82506 82507 82508 82509 82510 82511 Time (hr in CST) 82512 82513 82514 82515 82516 82517 82518 82519 82520 82521 82522 82523 Lack of northerly component in the morning. Delay in tuning of wind direction from E to SE in the afternoon 3 2 1 0 WS (m/s)

Comparison of CMAQ simulations with WRF v2.0 & v2.1 Time-series of O3 & NOx The CMAQ1 run with WRF old version estimated PBL height at nighttime too high that maybe one of the reason causing nighttime ozone bias. In CMAQ2 run, the nighttime O3 bias was reduced at urban sites (C22, C120, C53, C408). Due to low PBL top (height of lowest layer) assigned by ARW-WRF v2.1 increased titration of ozone with nitrogen oxides (NOx).

Comparison of CMAQ simulations with WRF v2.0 & v2.1 Spatial plot of O3 at 21 UTC on 8/25 The simulations could capture the general changes of ozone observed during the period. O3 peak, such as a very high ozone level observed at some of the CAMS sites in Houston downtown area on August 25 th, was underestimated. Max O3 was predicted at north of Houston instead of Houston downtown where was recorded O3 peak by CAMS sites. CMAQ2 CMAQ with multi-nesting MM5 ~ provided by Fang-Yi Cheng

OBS (C603) High O3 event on 8/25 WRF v2.1 The high O3 event was caused by emissions sent out to the Galveston Bay and Gulf areas by the land breeze in the morning then returned by the sea breeze in the afternoon. Turning of wind direction in the morning was not simulated properly caused the underestimation of ozone peak.

Summary In WRF v2.1, nighttime cold bias was reduced PBL height was reported as the height of first layer under stable conditions. CMAQ result revealed that the estimation of ozone level was sensitive to the surface temperature, wind and PBL height. Off-line coupling system is able to isolate failure of air quality predictions caused by inadequate meteorological modeling. Nighttime high PBL height bias from ARW v2.0.3.1 caused unrealistic high ozone at night. Prediction of light wind in the morning is critical for the estimation of maximum value and location of O3 concentration. lack of grid-nudging tool in the ARW model is one of critical shortcomings for air quality assessment study.

Comparison of W_v2.1_cu & W_v2.1 Spatial plot of cloud fraction & horizontal wind on 8/24 Radar imagery More clouds were generated & area covered by thunderstorm was larger with W_v2.1_cu. lower PBL height at the north-western edge of Harries County gust front moved further north

Comparison of W_v2.1_cu & W_v2.1 Spatial plot of PBL height & horizontal wind at 21 UTC on 8/24. lower PBL height at the north-western edge of Harries County gust front moved further north

Content: Introduction objective, introduce CMAQ, emphasize advantage linking WRF to CMAQ, show benefit to use off-line system for Houston high O3 which met involved much. (2p) Review previous study no nudging no nesting, WRF generates comparable met field as MM5, show statistical analysis, conclusions are consistent with CA study. (1p) Domain configuration & physics settings (1p) Numerical experiment & OBS, emission is provided by STkim(1p) Time-series of TEMP1P5 & PBLH improvement of nighttime temperature, PBLH in new WRF, better match to OBS of temp drop on 8/24 (1p) Spatial plot of CFRAC & HWIND 8/24 show satellite & radar imagery (1p) Spatial plot of HWIND 8/25 new version WRF have faster wind at afternoon. Wind tuning problem on 8/25 (2p) CMAQ time-series of O3, NOx, OBS records of peak, improvement of nighttime bias (1p) Spatial plot at nighttime of O3, NOx (1p) Conclusion (1p) Future work (1p)