WRAP Regional Modeling Center - Simulation Specific ations

Scenario Name: 2002 Planning Simulation version D

RMC Code: “Plan02d”

Date Specifications Prepared: 10/26/2007, Last revised 10/27/2008.

Time Window for Modeling/Analysis:

• Emissions modeling completed October 17, 2007

• Air quality modeling November 2007

• Analysis results January 2008

• All Plan02d emissions files delivered to TSS Octob er 22, 2007

Description : The Plan02d case was the fourth and final iterat ion in the 2002 Planning Case typical-year emissions scenario. The Plan02d case includes majo r updates and corrections to the Plan02c emissions, as described in detail in the emission summary below.

. Purpose/Objective : The objective of this model simulation is to co mpare modeled visibility with the PRP18a case and other future control strategies or sensiti vity scenarios to evaluate the Uniform Rate of Prog ress (URP) at WRAP Class I Areas.

Expected Analysis Methods: Specific analysis methods will generally be deter mined based on the nature of the simulation and the stated purpose and objective s. These typically involve a number of standard po stprocessing products used to elucidate relevant mode ling results and analyses and aid in summarizing an d interpreting the simulation results. For the prese nt simulation these include:

• Standard displays of spatial distribution of model predicted concentrations of relevant pollutants (Sulfate, Nitrate, PM, OC, EC, etc..) for various t emporal periods (daily, monthly, seasonal and annua l totals).

• Spatial plots of differences between 2002 and 2018 PRP18a predictions .

• Output files of SMOKE emissions and CMAQ air qualit y results to TSS.

• SMOKE reports processed and uploaded to TSS.

Input Data:

Edit this text -- The Plan02d emissions data includ ed data from the Plan 2002 version C (Plan02c) emis sions and earlier emissions data that are described in pa ges 7-14 of the RMC 2006 annual report available at : http://pah.cert.ucr.edu/aqm/308/reports/final/2006/ WRAP-RMC_2006_report_FINAL.pdf

The emissions data for Plan02c are available at: http://pah.cert.ucr.edu/aqm/308/qa_plan02c36.shtml

Emissions – emission data and QA found at: http://pah.cert.ucr.edu/aqm/308/qa_plan02d36.shtml2

The following emissions did not change from previou s Plan02 simulations.

• From Base02a

o BEIS3 biogenic emissions (includes soil NO)

o Windblown fugitive PM dust emissions – all componen ts from WRAP WB Dust model

o WRAP NH 3 from WRAP NH 3 model

o Ontario, Canada point fires

o Mexico road dust

o CENRAP on-road mobile

o Gulf of Mexico offshore point

• From Plan02a

o Eastern Pacific commercial shipping lanes

o WRAP baseline wildfires

o WRAP baseline wildland fire use

• From Plan02c

o WRAP baseline prescribed fires (natural and anthrop ogenic)

o WRAP baseline agricultural fires

o WRAP baseline non-federal rangeland fires

• From PRP18a

o Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic commercial shipping lan es.

The following emissions sources were updated in th e Plan02d simulation :

• Stationary Area

o WRAP: 2002 inventory version September 14, 2007

o CENRAP: included the area fire emissions in the sta tionary area sector (eliminated the area fire sector), using fire inventory data from the station ary area inventory, not the area fire inventory; updates to temporal and gridding data for fire sour ces; 2002 inventory version August 17, 2005;

o VISTAS: included the area fire emissions in the sta tionary area sector (eliminated the area fire sector); 2002 version G inventory

o MWRPO: 2002 version K inventory

o MANE-VU: no inventory updates (see Base02b)

o Mexico: Phase III inventory and updates to gridding data

o Canada: no inventory updates (see Base02b)

• Non-road Mobile

o WRAP: New CA 2002 inventory only, see Plan02a for other WRAP states (annual and monthly)

o CENRAP: new 2002 inventories (annual and monthly)

o VISTAS: 2002 version G inventory (annual)

o MWRPO: 2002 version K marine inventory update (annu al and monthly)

o MANE-VU: no inventory updates (see Plan02a)

o Mexico: Phase III inventory and updates to gridding data (annual)

o Canada: no inventory updates (see Plan02a)

• On-road Mobile

o WRAP: New CA 2002 inventory only; changes to the ot her WRAP states include the correction to the PEC and POA double counting error

o CENRAP: no inventory updates (see Base02b)

o VISTAS: new 2002 activities and M6 scenario inputs3

o MWRPO: new 2002 activities and M6 scenario inputs

o MANE-VU: new 2002 activities and M6 scenario inputs

o Mexico: Phase III inventory and updates to gridding data

o Canada: no inventory updates (see Plan02a)

• Road Dust (extracted from stationary area inventori es)

o PM2.5/PM10 ratio adjustments and county-level (US)/ state-level (Mexico)/provincelevel(Canada) vegetative cover transport factors ap plied to all dust sources

o WRAP: no inventory updates (see Base02b)

o CENRAP: no inventory updates (see Base02b)

o VISTAS: 2002 version G inventory

o MWRPO: 2002 version K inventory

o MANE-VU: no inventory updates (see Base02b)

o Mexico: no change (See Base02a)

o Canada: no inventory updates (see Base02b)

• Fugitive Dust

o PM2.5/PM10 ratio adjustments and county-level (US)/ state-level (Mexico)/provincelevel(Canada) vegetative cover transport factors ap plied to all dust sources

o WRAP: new inventory version September 14, 2007

o CENRAP: no inventory updates (see Base02b)

o VISTAS: 2002 version G inventory

o MWRPO: 2002 version K inventory

o MANE-VU: no inventory updates (see Base02b)

o Mexico: Phase III inventory and updates to gridding data

o Canada: no inventory updates (see Base02b)

• Offshore Area, Gulf of Mexico

o Removed shipping lane portion of the inventory to k eep from double counting with the gridding shipping inventory

o new non-shipping inventory from MMS

• Gridded Offshore Shipping

o Eastern Pacific: no change (see Plan02a)

o Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic: Corbet/ENVIRON invento ry

• Point Fires

o CENRAP: inventories same as Base02a, corrections to speciation profiles

o VISTAS: 2002 version Base G2 inventory

• WRAP Oil & Gas

o Update 2002 inventory

• Stationary Point

o WRAP: updated inventory version September 14, 2007

o CENRAP: updated inventory version March 30, 2007

o VISTAS: 2002 version G inventory

o MWRPO: 2002 version K inventory

o MANE-VU: no inventory updates (see Plan02b)

o Mexico: Phase III inventory

o Canada: no inventory updates (see Plan02b)

• Documentation on input data, model settings, and mo deling/QA procedures provided through standard reporting products: Plan02d_Inventory_summary_v{mmddyy}.xls

o Simulation schedule and input files

o Summary of inventory inputs to the simulation with descriptions of the changes to each input4

• Error tracking and resolutions stored in the UNC Bu gzilla database: http://bugz.unc.edu/show_bug.cgi?id=2433

Other Inputs and Model Settings

• Initial and Boundary Conditions based on natural GE OS-CHEM simulation

• Model version, settings and configuration same as f or 2002 Planning B

• Time period simulated – annual, typical year, meteo rology for 2002 used

Results:

Summary tables and maps

Table 1. Plan02d annual emissions summary by region s (tons/yr) Region CO NOX VOC NH3 SO2 PM10 PM2_5 PMC
US 118445985 23059537 69635932 17091938 14791429 15616820 5102817 10553999 Total WRAP 29547611 4928961 22596168 1724327 1298993 4709074 1663673 3084295 CENRAP 24661511 5670875 15446765 4521535 2679746 7248711 1 737440 3665279 VISTAS 30982474 5525732 20243047 4915103 4818926 2158333 968458 1123020 MWRPO 15957483 3573701 5438921 3726750 3426658 551425 252 148 180237 MANE-VU 17127599 2583689 5789762 2204116 2314962 881871 414730 448859 Canada 13981086 2917715 21298330 638601 2553365 2793906 74 8695 2045254 Mexico 9838427 1737630 14441852 1438928 3143259 1175074 654952 520332 Pacific Shipping 40868 524797 367468 149 280561 36352 35220 1132 Atlantic/Gulf Shipping 30158 571769 12587 108 229651 63726 62756 971
Total 260613201 51094407 175270831 36261554 35537551 35235292 11640887 21623377

Table 2. Plan02d WRAP total annual emissions by sec tor (tons/yr)
Sector CO NOX VOC NH3 SO2 PM10 PM2_5 PMC

Fires 8928013 202217 436714 45263 53856 726518 627618 119 796 Area 1268874 259990 1331075 24519 85117 213825 190665 23197 Point 533870 897910 260247 780738 780738 147818 60424 105 346 Non Road 3917820 1005930 535025 734 67286 74322 69424 4898 Onroad 12186508 1632549 1028968 55668 30253 50453 38902 11 551 Biogenic 2624814 286996 18197340 0 0 0 0 0 WOG 46846 118573 439330 0 1182 0 0 0 Road Dust 0 0 0 0 0 581980 63358 518630 Fugitive Dust 0 0 0 0 0 915642 146387 769256 Wind-Blown Dust 0 0 0 0 0 1962165 431676 1530489 Offshore Platforms 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Offshore Shipping 40868 524797 367468 149 280561 36352 35220 1132 Ag Ammonia 0 0 0 817256 0 0 0 0
Total 29547611 4928961 22596168 1724327 1298993 4709074 1663673 30842955 Emissions Summary

The objective of emissions simulation Plan02d was t o incorporate new emissions data and corrections to errors discovered during the QA/QC of previous WRAP-RMC em issions simulations to create a new planning year, annual 36-km grid resolution emissions dataset for air quality modeling. As summarized in the Input Da ta Emissions section of this specification sheet, we r eceived 2002 Planning/Typical year inventories for the WRAP states and collected updated 2002 inventories for the rest of the U.S. We also obtained new 1999 national inventories for Mexico. We combined these updated inventory data with both corrected and exis ting emissions data to develop the Plan02d emissions. Si mulation Plan02d builds off of the previous simulat ion in the Planning 2002 series, simulation Plan02c. We wi ll summarize simulation Plan02d by RPO, Canada, and Mexico in terms of new inventories, emissions data and modeling corrections, and emissions that we reu sed from previous simulations. This section will conclu de with a discussion of the overall impacts of thes e changes on the emissions modeling results.

The RMC received new data for the WRAP states and t ribes that included 2002 planning inventories for t he stationary area, stationary point, mobile, and oil and gas sectors. The stationary area and stationary point inventories included updates and corrections to sev eral inventory records throughout the WRAP region. As with the rest of the WRAP emissions simulations, we did not include any Tribal area source inventories in s imulation Plan02d, only Tribal point source inventories. The tribal area source emissions are not in the State i nventories, they were developed with explicit FIPS codes for di fferent reservations. The reason we have not inclu ded these data was because they are fairly small magnitude an d would require a complete overhaul of the spatial surrogates that we have been using to allocate the emissions to the model grids. In addition to creati ng surrogates for the reservations included in the inv entories, we would also need to exclude the tribal areas from the counties that they overlap. The mobile source inventory updates included new inventories for Cal ifornia on-road and non-road mobile sources only; the only changes to the non-California WRAP mobile sources included a correction to the on-road mobile process ing (described below). We extracted fugitive dust P M emissions sources from the stationary area inventor y using the list of sources consistent with simulat ion PRP18a. We expanded the list of sources in the stat ionary area inventory that we categorize as fugitiv e dust between the Plan02b/c series and Base18b simulation s. The reason for categorizing these emissions as f ugitive dust rather than leaving them as stationary area so urces is to apply revised PM 10 /PM 2.5 ratios and vegetative scavenging reduction factors to the PM emissions fr om dust sources. The result of using the expanded l ist of fugitive dust emissions sources was an increase in the PM emissions in the fugitive dust sector and a decrease in the PM emissions in the stationary area sector in s imulation Plan02d relative to simulation Plan02c. T he net result of the expanded dust list is an overall redu ction of PM 2.5 emissions through the application of scavenging factors to a larger number of sources. As with prev ious simulations the updated oil and gas inventorie s consisted of both area and point sources. The explicit WRAP o il and gas emissions sector contains only the area source oil and gas inventories. The point oil and gas sour ces are contained in the stationary point inventory

. The rest of the changes to the WRAP emissions in si mulation Plan02d resulted from corrections to model ing and data errors discovered since the completion of simulation Plan02c. We corrected errors in the WRAP onroad mobile and domain-wide road dust sectors that we discovered during the QA of simulation Base18b. We found that we were double counting primary elementa l and organic carbon emissions from brake wear, tir e wear, and resting-exhaust on-road mobile emissions processes. The net result of this correction was to decrease the PM 2.5 emissions, specifically in the form of elemental a nd organic carbon, from the WRAP on-road mobile sources in simulation Plan02d relative to Plan02c. During the QA process for simulation Plan02d we dis covered and corrected an incorrect setting in the SMOKE con figuration for road dust sources. In previous simul ations we assumed that the road dust inventories were deve loped as average weekday rather than as average day inventories (i.e. assuming a 5-day versus a 7-day w eek). SMOKE uses this information to normalize the6 inventories to be in terms of an average day before calculating hourly emissions. By correcting this s etting in simulation Plan02d we decreased the road dust emiss ions relative to simulation Base02b. The rest of t he inventory sectors in the WRAP region remained uncha nged in simulation Plan02d relative to Plan02c. We also made several updates and corrections to the emissio ns data for the other RPOs, Canada, and Mexico in simulation Plan02d.

We incorporated updated 2002 inventories and some c orrections for the non-WRAP, US sources in simulati on Plan02d. We updated the stationary area, stationary point, on-road mobile, and non-road mobile invento ries for several non-WRAP RPO’s. As the fugitive dust and ro ad dust inventories are derived from the stationary area inventory, the updates to the stationary area inven tories also impacted these emissions sectors. As wi th the WRAP inventories, we treated the fugitive and road dust inventories explicitly in order to apply revis ed PM 10 /PM 2.5 ratios and vegetative scavenging reduction factors . We selected the fugitive dust sources from the stationary area inventory using the expanded list o f sources that we applied for the WRAP states. The SMOKE configuration correction for treating the road dust inventories as average day rather than average wee kday emissions applies also to the non-WRAP sources, inc luding Mexico and Canada. We also eliminated the no nWRAP area-source fire sector, which included CENRAP and VISTAS fires that are inventoried at the count ylevel and get modeled as area sources. We folded th is category into the stationary area sector for sim ulation Plan02d; this change is consistent with the approac h that we used for simulation PRP18a. For the point fire category we updated the VISTAS data to a new 2002 i nventory and corrected errors in the application of speciation profiles to the fires in the CENRAP regi on. We also incorporated new anthropogenic and natu ral ammonia inventories for CENRAP in simulation Plan02 d. In addition to these updates and corrections to sources in the continental U.S., we also updated th e offshore, Canadian, and Mexican emissions in simu lation Plan02d.

We added a new source in commercial shipping lane e missions in the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Oce an and updated the Mexico and Canadian inventories in simulation Plan02d. We received a new gridded commercial shipping inventory that contained emissi ons for the Pacific, Gulf of Mexico, and Atlantic. We discarded the Pacific shipping lane emissions in th is new inventory and combined the Pacific shipping lane emissions that we used in simulation PRP18a with th e Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic emissions from the ne w inventory. With the addition of the shipping lane i nventory for the Gulf of Mexico, we modified the of fshore area source inventory for this region by removing t he shipping sources to keep from double counting th ese emissions. The area source Gulf of Mexico offshore shopping inventory is an updated version of these d ata from the Minerals Management Service; the Gulf of M exico point source inventories remained unchanged. We also removed some shipping sources from the Canadia n inventory to keep from double counting the offsho re shipping emissions in the Pacific and Atlantic. Fin ally we used updated Phase III 1999 Mexican invento ries that covered the entire country for all emissions sector s. Along with the updated inventories we used revis ed spatial surrogates developed from Shapefiles provided by Me xico’s Instituto Nacional de Ecología. We prepared the fugitive dust inventories for Canada and Mexico thr ough the application of revised PM 10 /PM 2.5 ratios and vegetative scavenging reduction factors in a manner consistent with the U.S. inventories. As the Phase III Mexican inventory did not contain road dust estimat es, we used the same Mexican road dust inventory th at we used in all previous modeling runs. The rest of the sources for Mexico and Canada, as well as the doma in-wide biogenic emissions did not change in simulation Pla n02a.

A complete record of the quality assurance process for simulation Plan02d and a description of the dif ferences in the results of Plan02d relative to Plan02c and P RP18a are documented in http://bugz.unc.edu/show_bug.cgi?id=2433

.
Overall the WRAP emissions on an annual basis (annu al totals for all WRAP states) decreased for PM 10 , PM 2.5 , PMC, SO 2 , and VOC and increased for NO x , NH 3 , and CO for simulation Plan02d relative to simulat ion Plan02c. The most significant change in the PM emis sions was a shift in the size distribution of point source emissions from the course to the fine mode, with a 17,752 ton/yr reduction in PMC being offset by a 14 ,4587 ton/yr increase in PM 2.5 . The decreases in area source PM emissions were of fset by the increase in fugitive dust PM emissions, the result of the expanded list of fu gitive dust sources. The NO x emissions increases in simulation Plan02d relative to Plan02c were driven by sizeable emissions increases in the California o n-road and non-road mobile inventories. The stationary are a, point, and oil and gas sectors exhibited offsett ing NO x decreases in comparing the Plan02d and Plan02c simu lations, but the combined decreases were smaller th an the increases in California mobile NO x emissions. The SO 2 reductions in simulation Plan02d relative to Plan0 2c were driven by combined reductions in the stationar y area, point, non-road mobile, and oil and gas sec tors. An 8.3% increase in NH 3 emissions from on-road mobile sources in Californi a was offset by smaller decreases in the stationary area, point, and non-road mobile sec tors. The stationary area sector contributed the la rgest VOC reductions, while the oil and gas sector experience d the largest VOC increases. The combined changes in VOC emissions amounted to less than a 0.1% in the overa ll WRAP VOC emissions. A large relative CO increas e in the oil and gas sector (275%) relative to simulatio n Plan02c was still quite small compared to the an increase in CO emissions from on-road mobile sources in Califor nia. Overall the CO emissions for simulation Plan0 2d increased only 0.1% relative to simulation Plan02c.

Compared to simulation PRP18a, the Plan02d WRAP emi ssions decreased for PM 2.5 , PMC, PM 10 , NH 3 , and VOC and increased for and NO x , SO 2 , and CO. The PM reductions were driven by the fugi tive and road dust sectors. The NO x emissions increased as a result of the on-road mob ile, non-road mobile, and stationary point sectors. These increases were offset slightly by NO x decreases in the stationary area and oil and gas s ectors. The SO 2 increases were driven by stationary point, on-road mobile, and non-road mobile sectors. A large CO increase in the on-road mobile sector was offset by decreases in the stationary area, stationary point , non-road mobile, and oil and gas sectors. Decreases in NH 3 emissions were driven by the on-road mobile and st ationary point sectors. Large decreases in VOC emissions fro m the oil and gas and stationary area sectors were offset by smaller increases in the on-road and non-road mobil e sectors.

Visibility Modeling Results

The Plan02d case was the fourth and final iteration in the 2002 Planning Case typical-year emissions s cenario. The objective of this model simulation is to compar e modeled visibility with the PRP18a case and other future control strategies or sensitivity scenarios to eval uate the Uniform Rate of Progress (URP) at WRAP Cla ss I Areas.

Relevant Output Products :

• Relevant model output products include daily, seaso nal and annual spatial distributions of Regional Haze contributing pollutants.

• In this report, the annual average model simulated concentrations are presented below, along with the changes compared to the Plan02c simulation.

• Results of this simulation will be compared with th e PRP18a simulation in the report on the PRP18a results.

• Comparisons with other simulations as appropriate.

Spatial plots showing the effect of changes in emis sions for Plan02d compared to Plan02c are available at the RMC webpage: www.cert.ucr.edu/aqm/308/cmaq.shtml#plan02dvsplan02 c . Both yearly average and monthly average are available. Spatial plots showi ng the effect of changes in emissions for Plan02d c ompared to PRP18a are available at: www.cert.ucr.edu/aqm/308/cmaq.shtml#prp18avsplan02d

.8 Summary of Key Findings

The largest changes in SOx emissions in Plan02d com pared to Plan02c were outside the WRAP region, and Figure 1 (top) shows that these emissions changes h ad small effects on modeled sulfate within the WRAP states, although there were local areas in Wyoming with increase in sulfate. Annual average model concentrations of nitrate and ammonium increased in California by as much as 0.29 ug/m3 and 0.9 ug/m3, respectively. The Plan02 modeled concentrations of elemental and organic carbon and coarse mass mostl y decreases compared to Plan02c, especially in the Pa cific Northwest, although there were some areas wer e concentration increased in Plan02.

The key findings for this simulation are the compar ison to the Preliminary Reasonable Progress Version A (PRP18a) model simulation, and these are discussed in detail in the Run Specification Sheet for the PR P18a case available on the RMC webpage.9 Figure 1. Left panel shows annual average sulfate (top) and nitrate (bottom) CMAQ simulated concentra tions for PRP18a. Right panel shows the change in concen tration for PRP18a minus Plan02d.10 Figure 2. Left panel shows annual average ammonium (top) and ozone (bottom) CMAQ simulated concentrations for PRP18a. Right panel shows the c hange in concentration for PRP18a minus Plan02d.11 Figure 3. Left panel shows annual average elementa l carbon (top) and organic carbon (bottom) CMAQ simulated concentrations for PRP18a. Right panel s hows the change in concentration for PRP18a minus Plan02d.12 Figure 4. Left panel shows annual average coarse m atter (top) and total PM2.5 (bottom) CMAQ simulated concentrations for PRP18a. Right panel shows the c hange in concentration for PRP18a minus Plan02d.