1 Neil Wheeler, Kenneth Craig, and Clinton MacDonald Sonoma Technology, Inc. Petaluma, California Presented at the Sixth Annual Community Modeling and Analysis System (CMAS) Conference October 1-3, 2007 Chapel Hill, North Carolina STI-3229 Innovative Methods for Evaluating Meteorological Model Performance during the Central California Air Quality Studies
32
Embed
1 Neil Wheeler, Kenneth Craig, and Clinton MacDonald Sonoma Technology, Inc. Petaluma, California Presented at the Sixth Annual Community Modeling and.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1
Neil Wheeler, Kenneth Craig, and Clinton MacDonaldSonoma Technology, Inc.
Petaluma, California
Presented at theSixth Annual Community Modeling and Analysis
System (CMAS) ConferenceOctober 1-3, 2007
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
STI-3229
Innovative Methods for Evaluating Meteorological Model
Performance during the Central California Air Quality Studies
2
Introduction
• Prior Measurement, Analysis, and Modeling Studies
• The Question
• The Central California Air Quality Studies (CCAQS)– California Regional PM10/PM2.5 Air Quality
Study (CRPAQS)– Central California Ozone Study (CCOS)
3
The Central Valley of California
4
Central California Air Quality Studies
• Multi-year• Meteorological and Air Quality Monitoring• Quality Assurance and Quality Control• Data Analysis• Emission Inventory Development• Meteorological and Air Quality Modeling
• Back to basics…
5
Meteorological Assessment
• Objective: Assess the readiness of meteorological data and models to drive the air quality simulation models
• Issues investigated: (1) the sufficiency of data precision, accuracy, bias,
consistency, and time-resolution;(2) The adequacy and validity of measurement
methods; (3) the ability of models to represent important
processes and phenomena; and(4) new model evaluation techniques.
6
Model Performance Evaluations
• Typical Operational Evaluations Focus on “important” Parameters
• Statistical
• Graphical – Temporal and Spatial Comparisons; Animations
• Diagnostic and Sensitivity Simulations
7
“Innovative” Methods (1 of 2)
• Data-Based Analysis: Understanding Processes and Phenomena
Community Modeling and Analysis System (CMAS): 1997 – 2007
• Analysis Replication• Derived and Integrated Parameters
– Transport Statistics– Flux Calculations– Trajectories and Tracers
8
“Innovative” Methods (2 of 2)
• Process-Based Analysis
• Assess Meteorology with an AQM
• Assess Processes and Performance between Sources and Receptors but…
• Synthesis – Relate Physical and Chemical Processes– Multi-Parameter Analysis– “Big Picture”
9
ExamplesBased on Important Data Analysis Findings
• Tracer Concentration Distribution• Wildfires and Ozone Aloft• Flux Calculations and Transports Statistics• Plume Rise• Carbon vs. Nitrate Aerosols• Recirculation• Nighttime Nitrate Formation Aloft • Fog and Stratus• Soil Temperature-Air Temperature-Fog-Mixing
Heights
10
Tracer Distribution• CRPAQS: MM5-CAMx with 1 ppm initial concentration• Analysis after 60 hours:
– Surface concentration– Peak tracer concentrations by region– Mass balance
11
High Ozone Day TemperaturesEpisode2, PLR, Surface Gases
North South East West Top Deposition Chemistry Residual Mass
July 30July 29 July 31 Aug 1 Aug 2
26
Concentration Fluxes
27
Plume Rise Experiments
28
Soil TemperatureSoil Temperatures at Davis
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
De
g. C
CIMIS 15-cm MM5 15-cm MM5 47-cm
Soil Temperatures at Parlier
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Date
De
g. C
CIMIS 15-cm MM5 15-cm MM5 47-cm
29
Extent of FogMM5 tends to overestimate the extent of fog and stratus.
30
Summary• Think beyond traditional approaches
• Analysis• Multi-method• Multi-parameter• Phenomena and Processes • Synthesis
• Challenge models to replicate the synthesis• Maybe then the atmosphere will behave as
models predict
31
Acknowledgements
The evaluation methods discussed in this paper were developed over the past decade with funding from many agencies. Analyses and evaluations specific to the CCAQS were funded by the San Joaquin Valleywide Air Pollution Study Agency. The statements and conclusions in this paper are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the California Air Resources Board, the San Joaquin Valleywide Air Pollution Study Agency, or its Policy Committee, their employees or their members. The mention of commercial products, their source, or their use in connection with the material reported herein is not to be construed as actual or implied endorsement of such products.
32
Parting Thought
Why aren’t meteorological models instrumented with process analysis tools like photochemical grid models?