vistas meteorological modeling november 6, 2003 national rpo meeting st. louis, mo

VISTAS Meteorological Modeling

November 6, 2003National RPO Meeting

St. Louis, MO

Mike AbraczinskasNorth Carolina Division of Air Quality

• Contract with Baron Advanced Meteorological Systems (BAMS)– Formerly known as MCNC– Don Olerud, BAMS Technical Lead– Contract initiated January 2003

Meteorological Modeling Goals

• Phase I: Test model to define the appropriate set up for our region• Investigate -> Model -> Evaluate -> Make decisions

Meteorological Modeling GoalsPhase I

• Summary of recent and relevant MM5 sensitivity studies• Draft delivered: January 2003

• Learn from what others have done– Inter-RPO collaboration

• Will serve a starting point for VISTAS

• Recommend a set of sensitivity tests– Draft delivered: January 2003– Different physics options and inputs proposed

for testing

Meteorological Modeling GoalsPhase I• Evaluation methodologies

– Draft delivered: January 2003, Updated April 2003– Assessing Model Performance

• Conceptual understanding correct?– placement, timing of features

• Are diurnal features adequately captured• Are clouds reasonably well modeled• Are precipitation fields reasonable• Do wind fields generally match observations• Do temperature and moisture fields match observations

• Million dollar question…Do the meteorological fields produce acceptable air quality model results?

Evaluation:• Spatial Products • Spatial Aloft Products • Timeseries Products • Sounding Products • Spatial Statistics Products • Timeseries Statistics Products• Combination Products • Timeseries Statistics Aloft Products • Statistical Tables Form • Profiler Products• Cross Sensitivity products

Meteorological Modeling GoalsPhase I

Meteorological Modeling Goals

• Phase I: Test model to define the appropriate set up for our region• Investigate -> Model -> Evaluate -> Make decisions

• Periods that we’re modeling ?• Geographical extent of testing ?

Sensitivity episodes• January 1 – 20, 2002 Episode 1• July 13 – 27, 2001 Episode 2• July 13 – 21, 1999 Episode 3

Choice of episode periods was based on:– Availability of robust AQ databases– Full AQ cycle (clean-dirty-clean)– Availability of meteorological data – Air quality and meteorological regime

36 km

12 km

Sensitivity Tests

– PX_ACM Pleim-Xiu land-surface model, ACM pbl scheme

– NOAH_MRF NOAH land-surface model,MRF pbl scheme

– Multi_Blkdr Multi-layer soil model, Blackadar pbl scheme

– NOAH ETA M-Y NOAH land-surface model, ETA Mellor-Yamada pbl

BASE CASE

January 2002 – Episode 1

• PX_ACM case significantly cold-biased

• PX_ACM runs are continuous (i.e. soil/moisture values from one modeling segment serves as initial conditions for following segment)

• Significantly better results obtained by making each P-X run independent (PX_ACM2)

T• T

T• T

T• T

T• T

1.5m Temperature stats

12 km domain - All hours - Episode 1 Run Bias abserr IAPX -2.68 3.15 0.854PX2 -1.38 2.25 0.877

T

Daytime CFRAC (alt)

Daytime CFRAC (alt) Diff

Nighttime CFRAC (alt)

Nighttime CFRAC (alt) Diff

24-h Pcp

24-h Pcp Diff

Daytime Pcp

Daytime Pcp Diff

T

PBL HeightsSubjective observations

• NOAH_MRF by far the highest and smoothest• Probably too high

– PX_ACM2 ~= Multi_blkdr• PX_ACM2 subject to some suppressed PBL

heights (in areas) during the day– Some of this may be real ? (over melting snow,

or in presence of clouds/precipitation)– Lack of observations make this nearly

impossible to evaluate• PX_ACM2 very low at night

– NOAH_ETA-MY lowest during day

Time Series Statistics• 3-Panel Plots

– Bias, Error, Index of Agreement for t, q, cld, spd, dir, RH

– Bias, Accuracy, Equitable Threat Score for pcp (0.01, 0.05, 0.10, 0.25, 0.5, 1.0 in)

– Labels sometimes difficult to see, so colors remain consistent• px_acm(2): Blue• noah_mrf: Red• multi_blkdr: Black• noah_eta-my: Purple

– Pcp plots only available for “Full” regions

Temp Stats (Episode 1)

Mixing Ratio

Wind Speed

Wind Direction

Cloud Fraction

Cloud Fraction (Alt)

Relative Humidity

T (~500 m aloft)

T (~1600 m aloft)

T (~3400 m aloft)

Q (aloft)

Q (aloft)

Q (aloft)

D (aloft)

D (aloft)

D (aloft)

Precipitation (0.01 in)

Spatial Statistics• Station-specific statistical ranking

• px_acmpx_acm, , noah_mrfnoah_mrf, , multi_blkdrmulti_blkdr, , noah_eta-mynoah_eta-my

• Best sensitivity displayed• Hourly (Composite UTC day), Total

stats available• PAVE date label just a placeholder• Bias, error, rmse (total only)• Warning: Possibly little difference

between “best” and “worst” sensitivity

T

QV

SPD

DIR

UV

CLD2

RH

Episode 1 summary• PX_ACM2 seems best overall

•Winds best in NOAH_ETA-MY (but PX-ACM2 not bad)

•Mixing ratio best in NOAH_MRF•RH/Temp best in PX_ACM2

• Significant differences in PBL heights (NOAH_MRF > PX_ACM2 > NOAH_ETA-

MY )

Qualitative Analysis• Uses only the Time Series Statistics• Based on overall trend and model

performance• Not based on any quantitative values,

although bias and error trends are considered

goodfair-good

fair Correct trend for the most part, significant errors or biases for some or much of the time periodpoor-fair

poor Incorrect trend or large errors for some or most of the time period

Correct trends and overall errors and biases are small for most of the time period

Qualitative Analysis

Variable PX-ACM PX-ACM2 NOAH MRF Multi Blackadar NOAH ETA MYwind speed Fair-Good Fair-Good Poor Poor-Fair Fair-Good

wind direction Good Good Good Good Goodtemperature Poor-Fair Fair-Good Fair Poor Poor-Fair

humidity Fair Fair Fair Poor PoorMixing Ratio N/A Good Good Fair Fair

Variable PX-ACM NOAH MRF Multi Blackadar NOAH ETA MYwind speed Fair Poor Poor Fair-Good

wind direction Fair-Good Good Good Fair-Goodtemperature Good Good Good Fair

humidity Fair-Good Fair Good GoodMixing Ratio Fair-Good Fair Fair-Good Good

Episode 1

January 2002

VISTAS 12 KM

Episode 2

July 2001

VISTAS 12 KM

Episode 3

July 1999

VISTAS 12 KM

Variable PX-ACM NOAH MRF Multi Blackadar NOAH ETA MYwind speed Fair-Good Poor Poor-Fair Fair

wind direction Fair-Good Fair Fair Goodtemperature Fair Good Fair-Good Poor-Fair

humidity Good Poor-Fair Fair-Good Poor-FairMixing Ratio Fair-Good Poor-Fair Fair-Good Good

T• T

Peachtree City, GA 00Z soundings

T• T

Nashville, TN 00Z soundings

T• T

Greensboro, NC12Z soundings

T• T

Tampa, FL00Z soundings

Conclusions• No definite winner… but…• PX-ACM probably “best” overall

– No very poor statistical quantity– PBL behavior a concern– PX-ACM or PX-ACM2 ?

• More air quality results likely needed before “best and final” sensitivity– NOAH_ETA-MY likely to show significantly different

air quality results due to different PBL behavior– Wind performance a concern for NOAH_MRF– Temperature/precip performance a concern for

NOAH_ETA-MY

Aug 2003:Emissions InventoryBase 2002

Dec 2003:RevisedEm InvBase 2002

Jan 2004:Modeling Protocol

Mar 2004:DraftEm Inv 2018

July 2004:Revised State Em InvBase 2002

Sept 2004:Annual Base YearModel Runs

Dec 2004:Annual Run 2018

Apr 2004:DDM in CMAQ

Oct 2004:SensitivityRuns 20183 episodes

Jan 2004:Met, Em, AQmodel testing3 episodes

Sept 2004:Revised Em Inv2018

Oct-Dec 2004:Control Strategy Inventories

Jan 2005:Sensitivity Runs 2018 episodes

Jan-Jun 2005:Control Strategy Runs 2018

Mar 2004:CART:selectsensitivityepisodes

July-Dec 2005:ObservationsConclusionsRecommendations

After Jun 2005Model Runs: e.g. Power Plant Turnover

Before Jun 2005Other Inventory: e.g. Power Plant Turnover

Meteorological, Emissions, and Air Quality Modeling Deliverables

State Regulatory Activities

Jan-Mar 2004Define BART sources

Optional Optional

June 2004Identify BART controls

Draft 10/31/03

EPA- approvedModeling Protocol

Due date Run Domain Vert layers Soil Model PBL Cloud Microphysics Input SST SST Treatemt FDDA Evaluation period36km12km36km12km36km12km36km12km36km12km36km12km36km12km36km12km36km12km36km12km36km12km36km12km36km12km36km12km36km12km

Standard

Jan 2 - Jan 20, 2002

July 13 - July 27, 2001

July 13 - July 21, 1999

Standard

StandardETA Constant

ETA Constant

KF2

KF2

Mixed phase

Mixed phaseNOAH

34

34

ETA M-Y

ETA M-Y

ETA M-Y

09/22/03

08/21/03

10/29/03

34

Standard July 13 - July 27, 2001

ETA Constant

ETA Constant34 Multi-layer Standard July 13 - July 21, 1999

Standard Jan 2 - Jan 20, 2002

ETA10/20/03

34 Multi-layer Blackadar (w/ Ziliti) KF2 Mixed phase Constant

Standard July 13 - July 21, 1999

08/12/0334 Multi-layer Blackadar (w/ Ziliti) KF2 Mixed phase ETA Constant

KF2 Mixed phase ETA Constant

ETA Constant Standard July 13 - July 27, 2001NOAH MRF KF2 Mixed phase

Standard July 13 - July 21, 1999

Standard8/1/003

34 NOAH MRF KF2 Mixed phase ETA

Standard July 13 - July 27, 2001

07/03/0334 P-X ACM KF2 Mixed phase ETA Constant

KF2 Mixed phase ETA Constant

Constant Standard Jan 2 - Jan 20, 200206/13/03

1a 34 P-X ACM KF2 Mixed phase ETA

1b

1c

07/21/0334 P-X ACM

2a

2b

Constant Jan 2 - Jan 20, 2002

10/08/0334

2c

3a

09/08/0334 NOAH MRF

3b

3c Blackadar (w/ Ziliti) KF2 Mixed phase09/15/03

4a

4b

NOAH

NOAH

KF2 Mixed phase

4c

5a Jan 2 - Jan 20, 2002

5b July 13 - July 27, 2001

5c July 13 - July 21, 1999

Reserved for "best and final" configuration if it is determined that some combination of the above configurations is desired.

Contact information

• http://vistas-sesarm.org/

• http://www.baronams.com/projects/VISTAS/

Michael.Abraczinskas@ncmail.net

919-715-3743