naturalhazelevelsIIr eport

Natural Haze Levels II:Application of the New IMPROVE Algorithm to Natural Species Concentrations Estimates: 

Natural Haze Levels II: Application of the New IMPROVE Algorithm to Natural Species Concentrations Estimates Final Report by the Natural Haze Levels II Committee to the RPO Monitoring/Data Analysis Workgroup

Slide2: 

Note: This presentation contains substantial additional information in the notes section of PowerPoint that can be seen in the bottom panel of the “Normal” view mode, and can be printed by selecting “Notes Pages” from the “Print what” selection of the “Print” menu (go to “Files” on the top tool bar and select “Print”). You can also use “Preview” for the “Notes Pages” to more easily read the notes on your computer monitor. These notes were prepared to aid those hearing the presentation by relieving them of the burden of taking as many notes; to allow those who haven’t heard the presentation to understand it by providing the additional information that is spoken during presentations; and to provide a more complete documentation of the natural haze levels II approach for anyone who may want to understand it For additional information contact Marc Pitchford at Marc.Pitchford@NOAA.gov

Overall Goal: 

Overall Goal Estimate 20% best and 20% worst natural haze levels for visibility-protected class I areas using the new IMPROVE algorithm for estimating light extinction from aerosol species concentrations. Needed for Regional Haze Rule (RHR) rate of progress glide slopes where the new IMPROVE algorithm is used to characterize current haze levels Should minimize the technical problems identified in the RHR default natural haze levels that were developed using the original IMPROVE algorithm

Default Natural Haze Levels Approach: 

Default Natural Haze Levels Approach Typical haze level estimates for East and West Typical light extinction by applying the original IMPROVE algorithm to Trijonis natural species concentration estimates for East and West Convert to haze index (deciview units) 20% best and 20% worst haze estimate for East and West Best = typical – 1.28(standard deviation) Worst = typical + 1.28(standard deviation) Standard deviation is 3dv for the East and 2dv for the West (corresponds to the 10th and 90th percentile)

Criticism of the Default Approach: 

Criticism of the Default Approach Limitations of the original IMPROVE algorithm Biased light extinction estimates at the extremes Uses an outdated organic compound mass to carbon mass ratio No sea salt (important at a few sites) Rayleigh scattering of 10Mm-1 used for all site Flawed assumptions used to estimate 20% best and worst conditions Haze index for natural conditions are not likely to be normally distributed due to inclusion of Rayleigh scattering 10th and 90th percentiles don’t correspond to the best and worst conditions if the distribution were normal

Natural Haze Levels II Approach: 

Natural Haze Levels II Approach Adjust each of the measured major species concentrations to the Trijonis natural concentration estimates Multiply each species concentration at a site by the site-specific ratio of the (Trijonis natural estimate) divided by the (annual mean concentration) for the species for the 5 year baseline period If the annual mean concentration for a species is smaller than the Trijonis natural estimate, make no adjustment Current sea salt levels are taken to be natural levels Apply the new IMPROVE algorithm to the Trijonis-adjusted species concentrations at each site to produce a distribution of natural light extinction values Convert to deciview and calculate the mean of the 20% best and 20% worst haze levels

Trijonis-Adjusted Specie Frequency Distributions : 

Trijonis-Adjusted Specie Frequency Distributions Sipsey Alabama Each aerosol species mass concentration frequency distribution scaled to estimated natural mass concentrations If current species mean is less than natural estimate, the that species is not scaled Geometric shape of species distributions is unchanged Current 2000-2004 Natural Estimate Hanging bars Solid - current mean Dashed - natural estimate mean

Current and Natural Haze Frequency Distributions: 

Current and Natural Haze Frequency Distributions Sipsey Alabama Natural scenario joint distribution shape is derived from scaling current aerosol species mass concentrations to natural condition estimates Allows estimation of best and worst 20% dv or aerosol species extinction

Natural Haze Levels II: 

Natural Haze Levels II

Default Natural Haze Levels: 

Default Natural Haze Levels

Natural Haze Levels II, 10-Year Rate of Progress Glide Path: 

Natural Haze Levels II, 10-Year Rate of Progress Glide Path

Default Natural Haze Levels, 10-Year Rate of Progress Glide Path: 

Default Natural Haze Levels, 10-Year Rate of Progress Glide Path

Status and Next Steps: 

Status and Next Steps This presentation is the final report of the Natural Haze Levels II Committee of the RPO Monitoring/Data Analysis Workgroup Review comments received by August 25, 2006 will be considered in preparation of the RPO Monitoring/Data Analysis Workgroup approved approach Workgroup approved approach is forwarded to the RPOs for their consideration by August 31, 2006 This presentation, including the natural haze estimates and any modifications will be made available on VIEWS

Appendix: 

Appendix Tables of Natural Haze Level II Estimates for all IMPROVE Sites by RPO and State

Slide15: 

CENRAP MANE-VU & Midwest RPO

Slide16: 

VISTAS + VI

Slide17: 

WRAP

Slide18: 

WRAP

Slide19: 

WRAP

Slide20: 

WRAP

Slide21: 

WRAP