Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS ON US AIR QUALITY: EXAMINATION OF OZONE AND FINE PARTICULATE MATTER CONCENTRATIONS AND THEIR SENSITIVITY TO EMISSION CHANGES. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS ON US AIR QUALITY: EXAMINATION OF OZONE AND FINE PARTICULATE MATTER
CONCENTRATIONS AND THEIR SENSITIVITY TO EMISSION CHANGES
Tagaris Efthimios1, Kuo-Jen Liao1, Kasemsan Manomaiphiboon1, Armistead G. Russell1,
Jung-Hun Woo2, Shan He2, Praveen Amar2, Lai-Yung (Ruby) Leung3 1School of Civil and Env. Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology,Atlanta, GA
2NESCAUM, Boston, MA3Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA
Regional future O3 and PM2.5 levels & components over US
• Future emissions
• Future climate
grids: 147 x 111
resolution: 36 x 36 km
MethodologySimulating period: Historic yearly data: 2001 Future yearly data: 2050
Air quality modeling conducted using: CMAQ –DDM and Downscaling meteorology (GISS-GCM) using MM5
Emissions: 2001: US: Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) 2001 Canada: Environment Canada 2000 Mexico: US EPA’s 1999 BRAVO
2050: IPCC-A1B emissions scenario and CAIR 2020
Modeling approach
GCM (BASE)GCM (BASE)
GCM (FUTURE)GCM (FUTURE)
EI (BASE)EI (BASE)
EI (FUTURE)EI (FUTURE)
SMOKESMOKE
MM5MM5
CMAQCMAQ
MCIPMCIP
GCM (BASE)GCM (BASE)
GCM (FUTURE)GCM (FUTURE)
EI (BASE)EI (BASE)
EI (FUTURE)EI (FUTURE)
SMOKESMOKE
MM5MM5
CMAQCMAQ
MCIPMCIP
GCM: Global Climate Model
EI: Emission Inventory
Are 2001 and 2050 representative years?
US
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9
1
260 265 270 275 280 285 290 295 300 305
T (K)
CD
F
2000
US
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9
1
260 270 280 290 300 310
T (K)
CD
F
2049
Temperature
Are 2001 and 2050 representative years?
US
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9
1
260 270 280 290 300 310
T (K)
CD
F 2000
2001
US
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9
1
260 270 280 290 300 310
T (K)
CD
F 2049
2050
Temperature
Are 2001 and 2050 representative years?
US
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9
1
260 270 280 290 300 310
T (K)
CD
F
2000
2001
2002
US
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9
1
260 270 280 290 300 310
T (K)
CD
F
2049
2050
2051
Temperature
Are 2001 and 2050 representative years?
US
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9
1
260 270 280 290 300 310
T (K)
CD
F
2049
2050
2051
US
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9
1
260 270 280 290 300 310
T (K)
CD
F
2000
2001
2002
Temperature
US
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9
1
260 270 280 290 300 310
T
CD
F Historic
Future
Temperature
2000 2001 2002
2049 2050 2051
Humidity 2001 2050
US
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9
1
0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014
Q (kg/kg)
CD
F
2049
2050
2051
2000
2001
2002
US
00.10.20.30.40.5
0.60.70.80.9
1
0.000 0.010 0.020 0.030 0.040 0.050 0.060
R (cm)
CD
F
2049
2050
2051
2000
2001
2002
Rain 2001 2050
Evaluation
270
275
280
285
290
295
300
305
West Plains Midwest NorthEast SouthEast US
Regions
T (
K) Observed 2001
Predicted 2001
A general under prediction in 2001 annual temperature
Better performance during summer months and worst during fall, caused by the high mesoscale variability during seasonal transition.
Temperature
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
West Plains Midwest NorthEast SouthEast US
Regions
PM
25 (
μg/
m3)
Observed 2001
Predicted 2001
Mean annual M8hO3 concentration is slightly (10%) over-predicted.
Model performance for the mean annual PM2.5 concentrations is region dependent
Evaluation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
West Plains Midwest Northeast Southeast US
Regions
M8h
O3
(ppb
)
Observed 2001
Predicted 2001
O3
PM2.5
Emissions
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
NOX VOC PM25 SO2 NH3
Em
issio
ns (
mill
ion t
ons p
er
year)
2001
2050
NOx: -50% VOC’s: +2% PM2.5: -10% SO2: -50% NH3: +7%PM2.5
Composition (%)
2001 2050
EC 10 5
OC 30 28
OTHER 60 67
260
265
270
275
280
285
290
295
300
305
West Plains Midwest NorthEast SouthEast US
Regions
Tem
per
atu
re (
K)
2001
2050
+2.3K +1.4K +1.5K +2.0K +1.3K +1.7K
Maximum warming during fall months (up to 4.8 degrees in the West region)
PredictionTemperature
Prediction
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
West Plains Midwest Northeast Southeast US
Regions
M8
hO
3 (p
pb
)
2001
2050
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
West Plains Midwest Northeast Southeast US
Regions
PM
2.5
(μg
/m3 )
2001
2050PM2.5
O3
M8hO3 (%) PM2.5 (%) SO4 (%) NO3 (%) NH4 (%) OC (%)
West -6.5 -9 -20 -41 -25 4
Plains -7.9 -22 -29 -45 -32 -3
Midwest -10.5 -23 -22 -48 -29 -9
Northeast -10.0 -29 -37 -46 -33 -13
Southeast -14.8 -31 -42 -55 -37 -15
US -9.2 -23 -31 -48 -32 -6
O3_2001 O3_2050
O3_2050 - O3_2001
O3_2001 O3_2050
O3_2050 - O3_2001 O3_2050 - O3_2050np
np: Emission Inventory 2001, Climate 2050
PM2.5_2050PM2.5_2001
PM2.5_2050 - PM2.5_2001
PM2.5_2050PM2.5_2001
PM2.5_2050 - PM2.5_2001 PM2.5_2050 - PM2.5_2050np
np: Emission Inventory 2001, Climate 2050
SensitivityOzone to anthropogenic NOx
0
4
8
12
16
20
West Plains Midwest Northeast Southeast US
Se
nsi
tivity
(p
pb
V)
2001
2050
Ozone to biogenic VOCs
0
4
8
12
16
20
West Plains Midwest Northeast Southeast US
Sen
sitiv
ity (p
pbV
)
2001
2050
O3
US
-2
0
2
4
6
SO4_SO2 SO4_NH3 SO4_NOX_A NO3_NOX_A NO3_NH3 NO3_SO2 NH4_NH3 ORGB_VOC_B
Sen
sitiv
ity (μ
g/m
3 )2001
2050
Southeast
-2
0
2
4
6
SO4_SO2 SO4_NH3 SO4_NOX_A NO3_NOX_A NO3_NH3 NO3_SO2 NH4_NH3 ORGB_VOC_B
Sen
sitiv
ity (
μg
/m3 )
2001
2050
PM2.5
Conclusions• Combining both emission changes and climate change future O3 and PM2.5
concentrations over the US are expected to be lower but the effects are more pronounced for regional PM2.5 concentrations
• The contributions of anthropogenic NOx to O3 formation are more important than biogenic VOCs. Reduction in anthropogenic NOx emissions will continue to be effective for reducing regional ozone concentrations
• Organic carbon as the most important PM2.5 component
• Contributions of biogenic VOC emissions to PM2.5 formation are simulated to be more important in the future
• Regionally the Eastern US benefits more than the rest of the regions
• Emission controls have larger impact than climate change
Future plans
• Uncertainties in regional air quality and its sensitivities due to climate change uncertainties
Acknowledgement
This work was supported by the US EPA
for STAR grant RD-83096001
Supporting materials
E
C
Eo
Co
Cp
Ep
p
o
+
+
E
∆C
DDMBrute Force (BF): S = ∆C / ∆EDecoupled Direct Method (DDM): S = C / E
NO2_2001 NO2_2050
NO2_2050 - NO2_2001
NOx_Jun 2001 NOx_Jun 2050
VOC_Jun 2001 VOC_Jun 2050
Emissions
SouthEast_2050
2.4, 29%
1.1, 13%
0.7, 9%
2.1, 25%
0.2, 2%
1.8, 22%
SO4
NH4
NO3
OC
EC
OTHER
SouthEast_2001
4.2, 35%
1.8, 14%1.7, 13%
2.5, 20%
0.3, 3%
1.9, 15%
SO4
NH4
NO3
OC
EC
OTHER
M8hO3 (%) PM2.5 (%) SO4 (%) NO3 (%) NH4 (%) OC (%)
2050 2050np 2050 2050np 2050 2050np 2050 2050np 2050 2050np 2050 2050np
West -6.5 0.2 -9.2 2.9 -20.2 4.8 -41.4 -17.6 -24.9 -3.4 4.0 8.9
Plains -7.9 1.4 -22.0 -0.8 -29.2 5.5 -45.3 -17.9 -31.7 -3.2 -3.4 4.7
Midwest -10.5 -0.2 -22.7 4.2 -22.2 12.6 -48.5 -7.7 -28.7 4.2 -9.3 6.6
NorthEast -10.0 -0.5 -28.5 6.5 -37.4 10.3 -45.6 -4.3 -32.6 5.9 -13.0 10.7
SouthEast -14.8 2.3 -31.4 -2.4 -41.5 0.5 -54.9 -12.4 -37.0 -1.7 -14.9 -3.6
US -9.2 0.9 -23.4 1.1 -30.8 6.2 -47.8 -12.4 -31.6 -0.2 -6.4 4.4
np: Emission Inventory 2001, Climate 2050
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
NOX VOC PM25 SO2 NH3
Em
issio
ns (
mill
ion t
ons p
er y
ear)
2001
2050
2050_np
np: Emission Inventory 2001, Climate 2050
SO4-_2001 SO4
-_2050
SO4-_2050 - SO4
-_2001
EC_2001
OC_2050OC_2001
EC_2050
The A1 storyline and scenario family describes a future world of very rapid economic growth, global population that peaks in mid-century and declines thereafter, and the rapid introduction of new and more efficient technologies. Major underlying themes are convergence among regions, capacity building, and increased cultural and social interactions, with a substantial reduction in regional differences in per capita income. The A1 scenario family develops into three groups that describe alternative directions of technological change in the energy system. The three A1 groups are distinguished by their technological emphasis: fossil intensive (A1FI), non-fossil energy sources (A1T), or a balance across all sources(A1B)
The A2 storyline and scenario family describes a very heterogeneous world. The underlying theme is self-reliance and preservation of local identities. Fertility patterns across regions converge very slowly, which results in continuouslyincreasing global population. Economic development is primarily regionally oriented and per capita economic growth and technological change are more fragmented and slower than in other storylines
The B1 storyline and scenario family describes a convergent world with the same global population that peaks in midcentury and declines thereafter, as in the A1 storyline, but with rapid changes in economic structures toward a service and information economy, with reductions in material intensity, and the introduction of clean and resource-efficient technologies. The emphasis is on global solutions to economic, social, and environmental sustainability, including improved equity, but without additional climate initiatives
The B2 storyline and scenario family describes a world in which the emphasis is on local solutions to economic, social, and environmental sustainability. It is a world with continuously increasing global population at a rate lower than A2, intermediate levels of economic development, and less rapid and more diverse technological change than in the B1 and A1 storylines. While the scenario is also oriented toward environmental protection and social equity, it focuses on local and regional levels
