vistas meteorological modeling november 6, 2003 national rpo meeting st. louis, mo
DESCRIPTION
VISTAS Meteorological Modeling November 6, 2003 National RPO Meeting St. Louis, MO Mike Abraczinskas North 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. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
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/
919-715-3743