7 m/s 4 urban2, ch4, co 4 2 4 138.75 138.8 138.85 138.9 380 390 … · 2019. 12. 6. · brandon...
Post on 02-Oct-2020
0 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Obs. 2015 Obs. 2016 CH4/CO (2015)* CO
EDGAR2010
CH4/CO2(2016) * CO2
NEI2014
US GHGI 2012Maasakkers et
al. [2016]
EDGAR v4.3.22012
StateInventory 2014
in Balt-Wash
CH4
Emiss
ions
(mol
s-1)
MD
DC
VA
-79 -78 -77 -76 -75
38
38.5
39
39.5
40
40.5
Longitude ()
La
titu
de
()
[O3] (ppbv)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Air Quality Flight in Maryland on 8 Sept. 2016Traditional westerly/easterly flight pattern
-74.5 -74 -73.5 -73
40.4
40.6
40.8
41
41.2
41.4
41.6
Longitude ()
La
titu
de
()
[O3] (ppbv)
40
60
80
100
120
140
Aircraft Measurements of Air Pollutants and Greenhouse Gases in the Mid-Atlantic StatesXinrong Ren1,2,*, Doyeon Ahn1, Phil Stratton1, Sarah Benish1, Hao He1, Ross Salawitch1, and Russ Dickerson1
1University of Maryland College Park; 2NOAA Air Resources Lab; *Contact: Xinrong.ren@noaa.gov
Motivation• Mid-Atlantic states occasionally experience severe air smog in summer.
• Urban greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions contribute to the majority (~70%) of the anthropogenic GHG emissions.
• Quantification of urban greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is important for establishing scientifically sound and cost-effective policies for mitigating GHGs.
Summary and Future Work
▪ Aircraft mass balance approach is a valuable tool for estimating urban GHG emission.
▪ CO & CO2 emissions: obs. agree with emission models in general. The discrepancies may be explained by uncertainties in mass balance approach and emission models.
▪ The EDGAR Inventory may underestimate CH4 emissions by a factor of 2-3.
Future work
▪ More flights will be conducted over Mid-Atlantic and NYC in the future to reduce uncertainties
▪ Biosphere CO2 uptake/emissions and inversion modeling
▪ NO2 (& NOy) emissions and compare to GEO-TASO and satellites
CH4 and CO2 during the flight on May 18, 2017
• High correlated between observed CO2 and CH4.
• Unlikly the same sources for CO2 & CH4, but likelythe sources are collocated.
We could use observed ratios to evaluate emission models.
Gridded CO & NOx emissions in EDGAR v4.3.2 for 2012
EDGAR v4.3.2CO emissions
NYC urban center: 302 mol/s (481 mol/s)
Metropolitan NYC: 511 mol/s (630 mol/s)
NYC urban center: 116 mol/s
Metropolitan NYC: 168 mol/s
EDGAR v4.3.2NOx emissions
Obs
-75 -74.5 -74 -73.5 -73 -72.5
39.8
40
40.2
40.4
40.6
40.8
41
41.2
41.4
41.6
41.8
Longitude ()
Latitu
de ()
CO Emissions in 2012 (kg/s)
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
-75 -74.5 -74 -73.5 -73 -72.5
39.8
40
40.2
40.4
40.6
40.8
41
41.2
41.4
41.6
41.8
Longitude ()
Latitu
de ()
NOx Emissions in 2012 (kg/s)
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
-75 -74.5 -74 -73.5 -73 -72.5
39.8
40
40.2
40.4
40.6
40.8
41
41.2
41.4
41.6
41.8
Longitude ()
Latitu
de ()
CH4 Emissions in 2012 (kg/s)
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
-75 -74.5 -74 -73.5 -73 -72.5 -72
39.8
40
40.2
40.4
40.6
40.8
41
41.2
41.4
41.6
41.8
Longitude ()
Latitu
de ()
CH4 Emissions in 2012 (kg/s)
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Gridded CH4 Emissions in EDGAR and Maasakkers InventoryEDGAR v4.3.2 for 2012 Maasakkers for 2012
EDGAR v4.3.2CH4 emissions
NYC urban center: 200 mol/s (418 mol/s)
Metropolitan NYC: 285 mol/s (630 mol/s)
NYC urban center: 130 mol/s (418 mol/s)
Metropolitan NYC: 251 mol/s (630 mol/s)
Maasakkers CH4 emissions
Obs Obs
Comparison with CO2 emission models(Close up NYC Metropolitan Area — corresponding to the flight on May 18, 2017)
Obs
CTBio
Obs.
Fossil-Fuel CO2 emission models:
➢ ACES (1 km, v1)July 2014
➢ ODIAC (1 km, v2017)July 2016
➢ FFDAS (0.1°, v2.0)July 2015
➢ EDGAR (0.1°, v4.3.2)July 2012
➢ CarbonTracker (1°, CT2017) July 2016
CTBio
Comparison with CO2 Emission Models(NYC urban center — corresponding to the flight on July 2, 2018)
Emission Rates (E. R.) based on Mass Balance
Transect # CO2 E. R.(mol/s)
CH4 E. R.(mol/s)
CO E. R.(mol/s)
NO2 E. R.(mol/s)
1 75,300 222 488 --
2 62,300 260 397 24.3
3 65,700 523 567 28.4
4 85,110 668 489 21.9
Mean 74,700 418 481 24.9
July 2, 2018 (NYC urban center)
May 18, 2017 (the Greater NYC Metro.)
Transect # CO2 E. R.(mol/s)
CH4 E. R.(mol/s)
CO E. R.(mol/s)
NO2 E. R.(mol/s)
1 101,000 560 642 10.4
2 127,000 700 628 7.6
Mean 114,000 630 636 9.0
High [CO2] & [CH4] observed over the Sound and CT/RI coastal areas were associated with airflow passing NYC/NJ
Mass Balance Approach
E. R. : emission rate (flux)[C] : concentrations (downwind)[C]b : concentration in background U⊥ : perpendicular wind speed
38.2 38.4 38.6 38.8 39 39.2 39.4409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
[CO
2] (p
pb
v)
Latitude ()
2500ft
1000 ft
DCplume
Baltimoreplume
Morgantown
Chalk Point
Brandon Shores
Background
BackgroundCO2, CH4, CO
UrbanΔCO2, ΔCH4, ΔCO
∆x
∆z
Obs. winds
CO2 on track
12h HYSPLITback trajectories NYC urban center
Metro. NYC
>420 7 m/s7 m/s
21 21.5 22 22.50
500
1000
1500
2000
Alt AGL (m)
Track Angle ()*5
21 21.5 22 22.5400
410
420
430
440
[CO
2]
(ppm
)
21 21.5 22 22.51900
2000
2100
2200
[CH
4]
(ppb)
21 21.5 22 22.5
100
200
300
400
500
[CO
] (p
pb)
21 21.5 22 22.50
5
10
[NO
2]
(ppb)
Hour (UTC)
Time series of Alt, Ozone, CO2, CH4, and CO
Transect #1 #2#3 #4
Afternoon Flight on July 2, 2018
Wind
-74.5 -74 -73.5 -73
40.2
40.4
40.6
40.8
41
41.2
41.4
Longitude ()
La
titu
de
()
[CH4] (ppbv)
1900
1950
2000
2050
2100
2150>2150
A Typical Air Quality & Mass Balance FlightAfternoon Flight (~2:30-5:30 PM) on 7/2/2018
Wind
Transect #1
#2#3
#4
• Ozone and CH4 plume downwind of NYC.
GPS Position (Lat, Long, Altitude)
Met (T, RH, P, wind speed/direction)
Trace gases:
O3: UV Absorption, modified TECO
SO2: Pulsed Fluorescence, modified TECO
CH4/CO2/CO/H2O: Cavity Ringdown, Picarro
NO2: Cavity Ring Down, Los Gatos
NO: Chemiluminescence, modified TECO
VOCs: grab canisters/GC-FID
Aerosol Optical Properties:
Scattering: bscat (@450, 550, 700 nm), Nephelometer
Absorption: bap (565 nm), PSAP
Black Carbon: Aethalometer
Aerosol Inlet
Gas Inlet
Met Sensors
Measurements
Results
Acknowledgments
Correlation among CO, CO2 and CH4
380 390 400 410 420 430 440 450 460 470 4800
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
[CO2] (ppmv)
[CO
] (
ppbv)
y = 4.2742x - 1603.1459
r2 = 0.80827
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 4501850
1900
1950
2000
2050
2100
2150
2200
2250
[CO] (ppbv)
[CH
4]
(ppbv)
y = 1.0614x + 1777.264
r2 = 0.86
Afternoon Flight on May 18, 2017
380 390 400 410 420 430 440 450 460 470 4801700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
[CO2] (ppmv)
[CH
4]
(ppbv)
y = 5.181x - 192.916
r2 = 0.92
EDGAR v.4.3.2 for 2012𝐶𝑂 𝐸. 𝑅
𝐶𝑂2 𝐸. 𝑅= 𝟒. 𝟒𝟖 ppb CO/ppmCO2
Observed Δ[𝐶𝑂]
Δ[𝐶𝑂2]
= 4.27 ppb CO/ppmCO2
EDGAR v.4.3.2 for 2012𝐶𝐻4 𝐸. 𝑅
𝐶𝑂2 𝐸. 𝑅= 𝟏. 𝟕𝟎 ppbCH4/ppmCO2
Observed Δ[𝐶𝐻
4]
Δ[𝐶𝑂2]
= 5.18 ppb CH4/ppmCO2
EDGAR v.4.3.2 for 2012
𝐶𝐻4 𝐸. 𝑅
𝐶𝑂 𝐸. 𝑅= 𝟎. 𝟑𝟖 ppbCH4/ppbCO
Observed Δ[𝐶𝐻
4]
Δ[𝐶𝑂]= 1.06 ppb CH4/ppmCO
y = 4.27x – 1603r2 = 0.81
y = 5.18x – 192r2 = 0.92
y = 1.06x + 1777r2 = 0.86
• EDGAR CH4 emissions may be significantly underestimated for the NYC area.
• EDGAR CO and CO2 emissions may be good.
Emission Rates (E. R.) based on Mass Balance
CO2 Emissions from Washington, DC/Baltimore CH4 Emissions from Washington, DC/Baltimore
BaltimoreNew York City
138.75 138.8 138.85 138.9
1900
1950
2000
2050
2100
2150
2200
Day of year (days)
CH4 (ppbv)
CO4 ppm*5
380 390 400 410 420 430 440 450 460 470 4801700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
[CO2] (ppmv)
[CH
4]
(ppbv)
y = 5.3042x - 244.8424
r2 = 0.94584
top related