Attribution of Haze Phase 2 and Technical Support

Attribution of Haze Phase 2 and Technical Support System Project Update Combined Session – Emissions and Fire Emissions Joint Forums – Missoula, MT September 28, 2005 Thomas Dzomba – US Forest Service Tom Moore – WGA/WRAP

Overview n Ao. H Phase 2/TSS work plan http: //wrapair. org/forums/aoh/meetings/050817 c/Ao. H_Phase. II_Work_plan_draft_081705. pdf Review of data summary products and suggested modifications for Phase 2 n IWG input from August meeting n Ao. H workgroup discussion from September 1415 n TSS scoping study n Weight of evidence approach n Critical milestones n Example graphics n

Goals of the Ao. H Phase 2 Analysis n n Refine Phase 1 techniques for use in Phase 2. Reduce uncertainty and address the remaining uncertainty in modeled data and attribution results. Analyze the differences between modeled results for 2002 and the projected 2018 base case and various other control strategy scenarios. Develop additional analytical approaches (e. g. , receptor modeling, trends analysis, determination of the representativeness of baseline data set).

Goals of the Ao. H Phase 2 TSS Project n n n Provide a single web-based location for access and display of technical data, display of analytical results, and the reference location for related documentation to support the regional haze implementation plans. Provide specific analysis tools to synthesize technical and contextual data and GIS layers, conduct analyses, and store results for subregional/local/Class I areaspecific regional haze planning. Provide the analysis and display tools for Phase 2 analyses, and the technical support documentation for WRAP region SIPs and TIPs for regional haze.

Team Members and Responsibilities

Work Plan Tasks – Analysis Project n n n Task 1: Solicit and define user requirements from the appropriate WRAP work groups. Task 2: Prepare suite of data products based on final 2002 emissions, modeling, and attribution results. Task 3: Define the weight of evidence (WOE) approach to be applied to Ao. H Phase 2 data. Task 4: Interpret 2018 results and implications for showing progress under the Regional Haze Rule. Task 5: Prepare draft and final Ao. H Phase 2 analysis report. (Task 11: Travel to provide progress reports and solicit project feedback at WRAP meetings. )

Work Plan Tasks – TSS Project n n n n Task 6: Perform TSS requirements analysis and scoping study. Task 7 a: Acquire and prepare the relevant databases. Task 7 b: Summarize and evaluate WRAP Dust inventory. Task 8: Develop data review interfaces based on user requirements. Task 9: Develop data exchange protocols and guidelines. Task 10: Develop method to capture on-line user feedback. Task 11: Travel to provide progress reports and solicit project feedback at WRAP meetings.

Project Timing by Task

TSS Data Summary Products n n n Emissions, monitoring, modeling, and attribution results will be housed in on-line databases User requests will combine data with contextual information and/or GIS layers (if appropriate) ARS and Ao. H work group will develop a Weight of Evidence (WOE) approach for integrating results Scoping study (Task 6) will determine the level of sophistication achievable for data products during project All data used for 2007 SIPS/TIPS will be version controlled to keep it separate from new data and information added to the TSS over time

IWG SIP Outline n n n Revised SIP outline developed at August 2930 meeting Items in red are directly supportable by TSS and are required products of TSS Each of these items exists from Phase 1 or is planned for the TSS

IWG Flow Chart #1

IWG Flow Chart #2 2018 Control Strategy Evaluation Process WRAP evaluation of 2018 baseline and alternative control measures. State evaluates and selects alternative control measures based on the four factors. Establish reasonable progress goals based on all control measures to be implemented. Do reasonable progress goals achieve the Uniform Rate of Progress? YES Consult with other States and FLMs on selected reasonable progress goals. NO Explain why it is not reasonable to achieve the Uniform Rate of Progress by 2018.

Highlights of Ao. H 9/14 -15 Meeting (1): TSS Scoping Study Schedule Scoping study (task 6) must be completed before most of the remaining TSS tasks (7 -10) can be started n Expected completion: November 2005 n Ao. H work group will receive a detailed update at November meeting n

Highlights of Ao. H 9/14 -15 Meeting (2): Ao. H Feedback on TSS should include emissions data from EDMS and SMOKE n Attribution map products should show “footprint” of a state’s impact (essentially an isopleth map of particulate mass/extinction/dv impact for each state) n Discussion of necessity to link TSS products to the Implementation Work Group SIP outline/template n Request for some sort of TSS/WOE tutorial n

Highlights of Ao. H 9/14 -15 Meeting (3): Upcoming Ao. H Calls/Meetings Call: October 19 @ 2: 30 MDT n Meeting: November 16 -17 (Tempe, AZ) n Present Scoping Study update (should be near completion) n Present strawman WOE approach n Meeting: November 16 -17 (Tempe, AZ) n Call: December 13 @ 2: 30 MDT) n Meeting: January 24 -26 (San Diego, CA) n n Present beta version of TSS

TSS Scoping Study Outline n Identify, understand, and refine the user/system requirements n n n Explore the architectural options n n Match products types with user needs (e. g. , SIP outline) Identify a set of case studies that illustrate the system’s use Select and evaluate a candidate architecture (feasibility, available expertise) Revisit system requirements – changes needed? Finalize selection: create set of documents and diagrams that describe system architecture, team member roles Generate a detailed project plan n What is feasible with available time/funds? What cannot be done at this time? Minimum requirement: MUST support SIP preparation

TSS Scoping Study Schedule Scoping study (task 6) must be completed before most of the remaining TSS tasks (7 -10) can be started n Expected completion: November 2005 n Ao. H work group will receive a detailed update at November meeting n

Weight of Evidence Approach n Recipe for assessment of reasonable progress: n n n Checklist containing each products type: n n Succinct description of what information product displays Relative uncertainty of each product Relative importance or weight of each product Assessment of how well various analyses “agree”: n n Comparison between 2000 -04 baseline and 2018 base case Review alternate methods of calculating 2000 -04 baseline (exclude fire, etc. ? ) Review of alternate 2018 control scenarios Justification of why a site does or does not show reasonable progress Do all attribution methods tend toward similar results? Do EIs combined with back trajectory analyses support attribution results? Do changes in EIs support reasonable rate of progress demonstration? Prepare tutorial for users – several case studies which require somewhat different approaches

Highlights of 9/14 -15 Ao. H Meeting: Emissions Data and Modeling n Final 2002 emissions inventories available When will these be put into EDMS? n Do we need to wait for EI data to be put into EDMS? n n Attribution modeling to be done with CAMx/PSAT: Planning to run for SO 4, NO 3, NH 4 n May test for SOA, EC, OC, Soil, CM n n 2002 modeling done by Oct 10 (? ), attribution results available by Oct 31 (? )

Highlights of Ao. H Meeting 9/14 -15: Causes of Haze Project Update n Some new trends products on COHA web site (http: //coha. dri. edu/web/general/tools_trendanaly. html) PMF analysis (source apportionment) will be completed ~1 month after release of 2004 IMPROVE aerosol data n Will run PMF for groups of sites (possibly based on earlier attribution results or carbon mass) n Discussion about DRI running evaluations of EDAS met fields (details need to be resolved) n

Weight of Evidence Approach (from Ralph Morris – WRAP RMC) Glide paths and modeled RPG test (EPA) n Eliminate days dominated by “natural” events in modeled RPG test (e. g. , fires, dust) n 2018 projections for species dominated by anthropogenic emissions (e. g. , SO 4, NO 3) n 2018 projections for modeled worst visibility days, worst sulfate days, etc. n Other? ? ? n

Review of Ao. H Project Schedule Phase 2 Report

Draft TSS Home Page

Emissions Data n n Use EDMS as data source Summary of emissions data will be available by source type, point, county, and grid cell Provide summaries of projected changes in emissions from 2002 to 2018 Include GIS information

Monitoring/Modeling Data n n Display visibility based on monitoring or modeling results Include RHR and other monitoring data sets Tie in 2000 -2004 baseline and glide path results Include GIS information

Attribution Data n n Attribution results will include: PSAT, TRA, PMF Integrate results with EIs Provide more results with map products than in Phase 1 Review attribution groupings

Supporting Data n n n Assess what supporting data is needed for SIP/TIP preparation and WOE Regional assessments included in Phase 1? Back trajectory summaries? Integrate with GIS data? Links to data web sites

Display States, Class I Areas Home extent set to 36 km grid

Zoom rectangle tool

Class I Areas labeled when zoomed beyond 1: 5, 000 Counties appear when zoomed beyond 1: 5, 000

Zoom further in

Roads appear when zoomed beyond 1: 2, 000

Turn on gridded emissions layer for VOC

Zoom to Bay Area to test identify tool

Identify by grid cell to get gridded emissions values (all pollutants shown)

Turn on gridded emissions layer for NOX

Zoom in and identify by grid cell to get gridded emissions values (all pollutants shown)

Turn on county-based SMOKE emissions layer for SO 2

Zoom in and identify by county to get county emissions values (all pollutants shown)

View zoomed area with grid cells displayed; could be used for selecting a grid cell but actually querying county-based emissions

New Data Summary Products n n n Presentation of control strategies – may be descriptive text with bar charts showing anticipated reductions Projected 2018 emissions, visibility, modeling, and attribution results – will be able display just like 2002 results; will also include display of 2002 -2018 changes Historical trend and future glide slope analyses – may include multiple data sets (RHR, “raw”) and extinction equations (current and proposed) – both VIEWS and COHA projects working on versions of these products Weight of evidence approach Ability for users to add data/GIS layers/analyses to TSS

Thanks Questions/comments? n n