Ralph Morris, Tanarit Sakulyanontvittaya and Jeremiah Johnson ENVIRON International Corporation

Use of PM Source Apportionment to Assess the Contributions of Sources in

the Eastern U.S. to PM2.5 Concentrations

Ralph Morris, Tanarit Sakulyanontvittaya and Jeremiah Johnson

ENVIRON International [email protected]

Dennis McNally, Cyndi Loomis and Gregory Stella

Alpine Geophysics, LLC

October 8, 2008

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the Association for Southeast Integrated Planning (ASIP) and Visibility States and Tribal Association of the Southeast (VISTAS)

Acknowledge the assistance and guidance provided by the VISTAS/ASIP Technical Workgroup:– Patricia Brewer, SESARM,

Technical Coordinator– Jim Boylan, Georgia Department

of Natural Resources– George Bridgers, North Carolina

Department of Environment and Natural Resources

VISTAS and ASIP Modeling

VISTAS and ASIP have been modeling the 2002 annual period using a 36/12 km CMAQ modeling database for several years to assess ozone, PM2.5 and visibility in the Southeastern U.S.– VISTAS is modeling the 2002 current and 2018

future years to make 2018 visibility projections for the Southeastern States Regional Haze State Implementation Plans (SIPs) that were due December 2007

– ASIP is modeling the 2002 current and 2009 and 2012 future years to make 2009 and 2012 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 projections for the Southeastern States 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 SIPs due June 2007 and April 2008, respectively.

VISTAS/ASIP 36/12 km Domains

2002 Annual Runs– 4 Quarters w/ ~15 day spin up– MPI w/ 6 CPUs

36 km: 148 x 112 (4 days)

12 km: 168 x 177 (10 days)

19 Vertical Layers

CMAQ V4.51 w/ SOAmods– M3Dry– CBM-IV/AE4/SORGAM– SOAmods: In 2005 VISTAS

enhanced CMAQ to include SOA from sesquiterpenes and isoprene (Morris et al., 2006)

ASIP PM2.5 Point Source Contributions Projected 2009 PM2.5 concentrations are near the standard at

several monitoring sites

Some ASIP/VISTAS states wanted to know individual contributions of several point sources to 2009 PM2.5 levels– 31 individual point sources in 6 states identified– Contributions due to SO2 and primary PM emissions requested

ASIP 36/12 km database inappropriate for individual point source modeling– 12 km grid cell size too coarse to treat chemistry and dispersion

of point source plumes– Use of high enough resolution to resolve point source plume

would be computationally prohibitive– Would need to perform base case and 31 zero-out runs to get

individual source contributions

Elected to develop a new CAMx 2002 database:– 12/4 km domain with two-way nested grids– Plume-in-Grid to address near-source chemistry and dispersion– PM Source Apportionment Technology (PSAT) to obtain individual

source contributions

Full Chemistry Plume-in-Grid

Incremental chemistry approach allows full gas-phase aqueous-phase and aerosol chemistry within Plume-in-Grid modules (SCICHEM)– CAMx Incremental Reactions for Organics and NOx

(IRON) Plume-in-Grid (PiG) treatment

Diffusive growth– Shares SCICHEM concepts for second-order

turbulence closure– Assumes horizontal growth is isotropic (Kx = Ky)

Accounts for turbulence and horizontal shearAll diffusive growth in Ky y

– Vertical growth (Kz)Turbulence only (thermal instability and mechanical

mixing)

Full Chemistry Plume-in-Grid

Important to simulate proper chemistry in early evolution of point source plumes

Very little if any ozone and secondary PM2.5 formed under Stage 1 and 2 plume chemistry conditions for large NOx sources

Stack

(Source: Karamchandani et al., 2002)

PM and Ozone Source Apportionment

PM and Ozone Source Apportionment Technology (OSAT/PSAT) available in CAMx– Uses reactive tracers that operate in parallel to host model

and tracks ozone and PM formation back to emission source regions and categories

– PSAT has five families of tracers: SO4; NO3/NH4; Primary PM; SOA; and Hg

SO4 and Primary PM families selected for ASIP point source PM2.5 contribution modeling

Similar approaches in CMAQ (TSSA and PPTM)

Allows for identification of the ozone and PM impacts from several individual sources or groups of sources in single run

CAMx 12/4 km domain nested within ASIP 12 km CMAQ domain (one-way nesting)

CAMx 12/4 modeling using two-way interactive grid nesting

2002 base case using standard model

2009 base case with PSAT PM2.5 source apportionment for 31 point sources, plus:– Bus– All other sources

120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560 1680 1800 1920 2040

-1560

-1440

-1320

-1200

-1080

-960

-840

-720

-600

-480

-360

-240

-120

0

120

240

360

480

VISTAS CMAQ 12 km : 168 x 177 (108, -1620) to (2124, 504)CAMx 12km : 54 x 71 (828, -612) to (1476, 240)

CAMx 04km (includes buffer cells):Steubenville/W ierton 26 x 35 (1316, 80) to (1420, 220)Charleston 50 x 38 (1172, -148) to (1372, 4)Louisville 17 x 26 ( 944, -184) to (1012, -80)Chattanooga/Knoxville 47 x 44 (1028, -496) to (1216, -320)

VISTAS C M AQ 12km

CAM x 12km

900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400

-600

-500

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

CAMx 12km : 54 x 71 (828, -612) to (1476, 240)

CAMx 04km (includes buffer cells):Steubenville/W ierton 26 x 35 (1316, 80) to (1420, 220)Charleston 50 x 38 (1172, -148) to (1372, 4)Louisville 17 x 26 ( 944, -184) to (1012, -80)Chattanooga/Knoxville 47 x 44 (1028, -496) to (1216, -320)

CAMx 12km

4km Chat

4 km Char

4 km Steu

4 km Loui

CAMx 12/4 Domains

Four 4 km domains:– Charleston-Huntington,

KY/OH/WV– Wheeling-Weirton,

OH/PA/WV– Louisville, IN/KY– Knoxville-Chattanooga,

GA/KY/NC

PSAT to obtain individual PM2.5 contributions from 31 point sources

Plume-in-Grid for 31 plus other large point sources

Huntington-Ashland and Charleston 4 km Domain Map with FRM sites & Source Locations

11 8 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 2 0 1 2 4 0 1 2 6 0 1 2 8 0 1 3 0 0 1 3 20 1 34 0 13 6 0

-1 4 0

-1 2 0

-1 0 0

-8 0

-6 0

-4 0

-2 0

0

Ma ra thon Ashland Pe t LLC

Ak Steel CorpE I Dup ont Inc

Kentucky Po wer Co Big Sand y P la nt

Ohio Valley Electric Co rp . Kyge r C re ekGa vin Power P la nt

Swva, Inc.

Dup ont - Belle

Bayer Crop science

App alach ia n Power - Mo unta ine er Plan t

Flexsys - Nitro Plan tAp palachia n Power - John E Amo s P la nt

KY-Bo yd-00 17

KY-Carte r-05 00

OH-Lawren ce -0 010

OH -Scioto -0 013

W V-Cab ell-000 6WV-Kan awha -0010WV-Kan awha -1005

App ala ch ian Po wer - Ka nawh a Rive r Plant

App alach ia n Po wer - Philip Sp orn P lan t

Huntington A lloysFmc Corpo ratio n - S team PlantUnion C arbid e (Dow) So. C harle ston P la ntClea ron Co rp .

CAM x 04 km (inc lude s bu ffer c ells):Ch arle ston 50 x 38 (11 72 , -1 48 ) to (1 37 2, 4)

Point Sou rc esFRM Sites

Huntington-Ashland-Charleston: 4 km Grid; All Sources and SO4+Prim-PM

ASIP 2009 Q1 Projected SO4+EC+POC

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

KY-Boyd

-001

7

KY-Car

ter-0

500

OH-Law

rence

-001

0

OH-Scio

to-0

013

WV-C

abell

-000

6

WV-K

anawha

-001

0

WV-K

anawha

-100

5

Sources

SO

4+

EC

+P

OC

ug

/m3

BC

IC

Others

Appalachian Pow er Co.-John E A

Flexsys - Nitro Plant

Appalachian Pow er Co.-Mountain

Appalachian Pow er Co.-Philip S

Ohio Pow er - Kammer Plant

Ohio Pow er - Mitchell Plant

Ppg Industries, Inc.

Clearon Corp.

Bayer Cropscience

Appalachian Pow er - Kanaw ha Ri

Union Carbide (Dow ) So. Charle

Fmc Corporation - Steam Plant

Dupont - Belle

Isg Weirton

Sw va, Inc.

Huntington Alloys - A Special

Bow ater New sprint & Directory

E.U.Du Pont De Nemours And Com

Pa Pow er Co/Bruce Mansfield Pl

W.H. Sammis Plant

Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp

Cardinal Pow er Plant (Cardinal

Gavin Pow er Plant

Ohio Valley Electric Corp Kyge

R.E. Burger Plant

Kentucky Pow er Co Big Sandy P

E I Dupont Inc

Ak Steel Corp

Marathon Ashland Pet Llc

Psi Energy - Gallagher

ASIP 2009 Annual Projected SO4+EC+POC

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Sources

SO

4+E

C+

PO

C u

g/m

3

Appalachian Pow er Co.-John E A

Flexsys - Nitro Plant

Appalachian Pow er Co.-Mountain

Appalachian Pow er Co.-Philip S

Ohio Pow er - Kammer Plant

Ohio Pow er - Mitchell Plant

Ppg Industries, Inc.

Clearon Corp.

Bayer Cropscience

Appalachian Pow er - Kanaw ha Ri

Union Carbide (Dow ) So. Charle

Fmc Corporation - Steam Plant

Dupont - Belle

Isg Weirton

Sw va, Inc.

Huntington Alloys - A Special

Bow ater New sprint & Directory

E.U.Du Pont De Nemours And Com

Pa Pow er Co/Bruce Mansfield Pl

W.H. Sammis Plant

Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp

Cardinal Pow er Plant (Cardinal

Gavin Pow er Plant

Ohio Valley Electric Corp Kyge

R.E. Burger Plant

Kentucky Pow er Co Big Sandy P

E I Dupont Inc

Ak Steel Corp

Marathon Ashland Pet Llc

Psi Energy - Gallagher

Huntington-Ashland and Charleston:4 km Grid; 31 Facilities

Ak Steel Corp

Swva Inc.

(12.9)

(10.3)

(13.7)

(15.0)

(14.5)

(13.3) (15.0)

(CAMx 4 km 2009 PM2.5 DVs)

ASIP 2009 Annual Projected PSO4

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

KY-Boy

d-00

17

KY-Car

ter-0

500

OH-Law

renc

e-00

10

OH-Scio

to-0

013

WV-C

abell

-000

6

WV-K

anaw

ha-0

010

WV-K

anaw

ha-1

005

Sources

PS

O4

ug

/m3

Huntington- Ashland and Charleston: 31 Facilities; SO4 (left) and Primary PM (right)

ASIP 2009 Annual Projected PEC+POA

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

KY-Boy

d-00

17

KY-Car

ter-0

500

OH-Law

renc

e-00

10

OH-Scio

to-0

013

WV-C

abell

-000

6

WV-K

anaw

ha-0

010

WV-K

anaw

ha-1

005

Sources

PE

C+

PO

A u

g/m

3

SO4 Primary PM

Wheeling 4 km Domain Map with FRM sites and Source Locations

1 3 2 0 1 3 40 1 36 0 1 3 8 0 1 4 0 0 1 4 208 0

10 0

12 0

14 0

16 0

18 0

20 0

22 0

R .E . B urg e r P la n t

C a rd in al P o w e r P la n t (C a rd in a l O p era tin g

W h e e lin g -P ittsb urg h S te e l C o rp

W .H . S a m m is P la n t

P a P o w e r C o /B ru ce M a n s fie ld P l t

Isg W e ir to n

P p g In d u s tr ie s , In c .

O h io P ow er - M i tche ll P la n tO h io P o w e r - K a m m e r P la n t

W V -B roo ke -0 0 05

W V -H a n co ck -00 1 1W V -H a n co ck -10 0 4

W V -M a rsh a ll-10 0 2

W V -O h io -0 0 1 0

CA M x 04 km (in clude s bu ffer ce lls):Ste ube nville/W ie rton 2 6 x 35 (1 31 6, 8 0) to (14 20, 220 )

Point Sou rc esFRM Sites

ASIP 2009 Annual Projected SO4+EC+POC

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

WV-B

rook

e-000

5

WV-H

anco

ck-0

011

WV-H

anco

ck-1

004

WV-M

arsh

all-100

2

WV-O

hio-00

10

Sources

SO

4+E

C+

PO

C u

g/m

3

Appalachian Pow er Co.-John E A

Flexsys - Nitro Plant

Appalachian Pow er Co.-Mountain

Appalachian Pow er Co.-Philip S

Ohio Pow er - Kammer Plant

Ohio Pow er - Mitchell Plant

Ppg Industries, Inc.

Clearon Corp.

Bayer Cropscience

Appalachian Pow er - Kanaw ha Ri

Union Carbide (Dow ) So. Charle

Fmc Corporation - Steam Plant

Dupont - Belle

Isg Weirton

Sw va, Inc.

Huntington Alloys - A Special

Bow ater New sprint & Directory

E.U.Du Pont De Nemours And Com

Pa Pow er Co/Bruce Mansfield Pl

W.H. Sammis Plant

Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp

Cardinal Pow er Plant (Cardinal

Gavin Pow er Plant

Ohio Valley Electric Corp Kyge

R.E. Burger Plant

Kentucky Pow er Co Big Sandy P

E I Dupont Inc

Ak Steel Corp

Marathon Ashland Pet Llc

Psi Energy - Gallagher

Wheeling and Steubenville-Weirton: 4 km Grid; 31 Facilities and SO4+Prim-PM

(13.3)

(12.5)

(13.6)

(13.5)

(12.8)

Isg Weirton

W.H. Sammis

Wheeling Pittsburgh

Steel

Wheeling-Weirton: 31 Facilities; SO4 (left) and Primary PM (right)

ASIP 2009 Annual Projected PSO4

0

0.3

0.6

0.9

1.2

1.5

Sources

PS

O4

ug

/m3 ASIP 2009 Annual Projected PEC+POA

0.00

0.30

0.60

0.90

1.20

1.50

Sources

PEC

+PO

A u

g/m

3

SO4

Primary PM

Summary of ASIP Nearby Sources Analysis

High resolution (4 km) PSAT source apportionment modeling was performed for four areas to assess the contributions of 31 facilities to projected 2009 PM2.5 Design Values

Largest contributions from all the other sources in the CAMx 12 km domain and Boundary Conditions

The largest single facility contribution to any 2009 PM2.5 Design Value was 2.1 µg/m3 by Ak Steel Corp at the Lawrence County, Ohio FRM site (2009 PM 2.5 DV of 13.7 µg/m3) in the Huntington 4 km domain– Source extremely close to monitor so use of finer grid than

4 km or local-scale model may be needed to properly address impacts

Conclusions Photochemical Grid Models (PGMs) now have the

capability of simulating the contributions of individual sources to ozone and PM2.5 concentrations accounting for full-science chemistry:– Two-way grid nesting and flexi-nesting– Full chemistry Plume-in-Grid– Ozone and PM source apportionment

New PGM developments further extend such “single source” contribution applications– Addition of receptor sampling grid allows for calculation of near-

source (fence line) impacts due to Plume-in-Grid point sources

Use of these modeling tools are becoming routine – ASIP point source assessment, NEPA assessments, Texas BART

modeling, multi-pollutant offset modeling, PM2.5 SIP modeling, etc.