Title:
Subtheme this proposal is
responding to
Principal Investigator and
Receiving Institution
Co-Principal Investigators
Ozone Modeling System and Emission Control Strategies
for the Lake Tahoe Basin
Air Quality; 3b: Managing air pollutants
Darko Koracin
Desert Research Institute
2215 Raggio Pkwy, Reno NV 89512
Phone: (775) 674-7091
Fax: (775) 674-7016
Email: Darko.Koracin@dri.edu
Julide Kahyaoglu-Koracin
Desert Research Institute
2215 Raggio Pkwy, Reno NV 89512
Phone: (775) 673-7300
Fax: (775) 674-7016
Email: Julide.Koracin@dri.edu
Alan Gertler
Desert Research Institute
2215 Raggio Pkwy, Reno NV 89512
Phone: (775) 674-7061
Fax: (775) 674-7060
Email: Alan.Gertler@dri.edu
Agency Collaborator
None
Grants Contact Person
Ms. Lycia Ronchetti
Desert Research Institute
2215 Raggio Parkway, Reno, NV 89512
Phone: (775) 673-7411
Fax: (775) 674-7016
Email: Lycia.Ronchetti@dri.edu
$ 129,891
Not applicable unless agency awards a cooperative agreement.
Funding requested:
Total cost share (value of
financial and in-kind
contributions):
1
II. Proposal Narrative
A. ABSTRACT
In the past years there have been an increasing number of exceedances of the California 8-hour ozone
standard in the Lake Tahoe Air Basin, and the area is currently designated as a nonattainment-transitional
zone for ozone (O3) by the California Air Resources Board. A robust emission control strategy is needed
and can only be achieved if we have a detailed understanding of the processes affecting the local and
regional O3 formation, transport and dispersion patterns by using measurements and modeling. In
response to Subtheme 3b: Managing air pollutants, we propose to
 Develop, validate, and apply an advanced state-of-the-art emission, atmospheric, and
photochemical modeling system (SMOKE/WRF/CMAQ) to simulate ozone in the Lake Tahoe
Basin using local emission inventory and CARB and EPA emission inventories.
 Validate the ozone modeling system using exceedance episodes in the period 2006-2009 as well
as against recent measurements in summer 2010.
 Integrate the ozone modeling system as a component of the Lake Tahoe Air Quality Modeling
System (LTAQMS).
 Perform simulations for various emission scenarios and determine the most cost effective control
strategies for the Basin emission sources to control ozone levels.
The study will also provide quantification of the impact of local vs. regional sources of ozone and its precursors.
B. JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT
This proposed 1-year study is in response to Subtheme 3b: Managing air pollutants. In particular,
the focus is on 1) developing, validating, and implementing into the LTAQMS a modeling system
consisting of emission, meteorology, and regulatory air quality modules that can be further used by the
Lake Tahoe Basin Agency; and 2) defining the most appropriate cost benefit control strategies for
controlling ozone levels in the Lake Tahoe Basin.
Ozone (O3) levels in the Tahoe air basin have been increasing and have led to exceedances of
current California air quality standards (ozone levels exceeded the 8-hr California standard 5 times in
both 2007 and 2008, 2 times in 2006, and once in 2009). This trend can have serious implications with
respect to human and ecosystem health. Due to the extremely complex terrain present in the Lake Tahoe
Basin and its proximity to highly polluted urban areas, a comprehensive numerical atmospheric modeling
system is necessary in order to understand and assess the major pollutant transport and dispersion
pathways from out-of-basin and in-basin sources that lead to O3 formation and degradation of air and
watershed quality. In previous studies such as Gertler et al. (2006), preliminary applications of an
atmospheric transport and dispersion modeling system applied to the Lake Tahoe Basin were able to
accurately predict and quantify the dominant influence of in-basin emission sources. To address this, and
other related concerns, the RFP lists the Subtheme 3b relevant to the problem of elevated O3: Managing
air pollutants. In this subtheme, the RFP asks for a Lake Tahoe Air Quality Modeling System
(LTAQMS) that is integrated with the Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions (SMOKE) in order to
update the basin emissions and predict local and out-of-basin sources of greenhouse gases, particulates,
organic aerosols, and other airborne pollutants which impact air quality, lake clarity and formation of O3.
The RFP also states that the LTAQMS must incorporate a mesoscale meteorological model to resolve the
complex air flow dynamics, thermodynamics and other necessary parameters to drive the air quality
model. The complexity of the Basin emission sources and their spatial and temporal distribution (Gertler
et al. 2008) clearly indicate that efficient cost benefit emission control strategies are definitely needed – as
stated by the RFP.
The proposed study will address all of the issues stated above. In addition to a state-of-the-art
modeling system for regional regulation of air quality (emission /SMOKE/, meteorology /WRF/, and
photochemical /CMAQ/ modules), this project will also include extensive data acquisition and analysis
2
tasks to facilitate the construction of and validate the modeling system. This integrated system will enable
us to determine viable emission reduction strategies and their effectiveness through a combination of
different pollutant reduction scenarios.
C. BACKGROUND AND PROBLEM STATEMENT
A number of previous monitoring studies have observed elevated levels of O3 (e.g., Dolislager et
al, 2009), highlighted the importance of atmospheric N deposition (Tarnay et al., 2002, 2005; Dolislager
et al., 2009), and attempted to attribute the observed pollutants to in-basin vs. out-of-basin sources
(Kahyaoglu-Koracin et al., 2004). The article by Dolislager et al. (2009) presents a comprehensive
analysis of data obtained during the LTADS (Lake Tahoe Atmospheric Deposition Study). The authors
reported that most of the observed O3 levels could be attributable to in-basin precursor sources, with outof-basin O3 transport providing a marginal elevated background. A confounding aspect of this work was
the elevated late afternoon/early evening levels of O3 observed at the Cave Rock monitoring location,
possibly due to out-of-basin transport. Alternatively, this finding could have been caused by recirculation
of previously formed O3 within the basin. To address this complex issue, one needs to understand both
the meteorology and chemistry of the system of interest. In the following text, we present background on
basin meteorology and the chemistry of O3 formation.
The Lake Tahoe Basin is characterized by highly developed topography in the Sierras, with the
Sierra slopes and the California Central Valley to the west and the Sierra slopes and the Washoe and Reno
Basins to the east. The climatology of the winds in the Lake Tahoe area is poorly known. One of the rare
documented wind climatologies for California is contained in Hayes et al. (1992). Although they
analyzed 176 stations, the Lake Tahoe area is represented only by the South Lake Tahoe station which
shows dominant southwest and southerly flows with secondary occurrence of northerly winds. This
information shows the limitations of using surface wind statistics in complex terrain, i.e., surface winds
are dominantly channeled by the surrounding topography and do not represent the broader flow field.
Additional information is presented by Zaremba and Carroll (1999). They performed aircraft
measurements over the Sierra slopes east of Sacramento and analyzed flow fields. They concluded that
westerly upslope flows occur in some cases during the daytime with a weak synoptic pressure gradient.
A comprehensive study of three-dimensional flows in the basin and their interaction with regional
flows is presented by Kahyaoglu-Koracin et al. (2004). They concluded that the situations with dominant
local flows in the basin induce significant increases in the pollutant concentrations in the basin. Based on
the modeling and chemical measurements, Kahyaoglu-Koracin et al. (2004) also found that the local
emission sources may have a dominant role during the episodes of high pollutant concentrations in the
basin.
Ozone (O3) is a secondary pollutant which is formed in the air through complex chemical
reactions. Prior to the development of our current understanding of O3 formation, the mechanism
producing O3 in the troposphere was believed to consist of only three reactions:
NO2 + h  NO + O
O + O2  O3
O3 + NO  NO2 + O2
(1)
(2)
(3)
In the first reaction, NO2 photodissociates ( < 420 nm) to yield NO and atomic oxygen, which
then reacts (equation 2) with molecular oxygen to yield O3. In the final reaction O3 is destroyed.
Equation 2 is the only reaction that forms O3 in the troposphere. Based on this mechanism, the amount of
O3 should be proportional to the NO2/NO ratio; however, the amount observed was often greater than
predicted by this simple mechanism. Additional studies highlighted the importance of other reactions.
Key to this better understanding is the reaction of hydrocarbons (VOCs, volatile organic compounds) with
OH to eventually form additional NO2 . This results in an enhanced NO2/NO ratio and increased levels of
O3. Thus, in order to control O3, one needs to control the sources of VOCs or NOx (the sum of NO2 and
3
NO). It is important to note that the cycle that forms O3 is dependent on the VOCs/NOx ratio. Reducing
both VOCs and NOx proportionately will not yield any change in the amount of O3 formed. In addition,
depending on whether an area is NOx or VOC limited, reducing one of these species may not reduce O3
and, under some circumstances, can actually increase the amount of O3. For this reason it is critical to
employ an appropriate atmospheric chemistry model prior to implementing any emission control
strategies.
All of these previous studies highlight the importance of investigating the complexity of
meteorological processes focusing on modeling regional- and local-scale transport and dispersion and
using existing monitoring data to resolve the issues for effective ozone control strategies in the Lake
Tahoe Basin.
D. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND HYPOTHESES TO BE TESTED
The overall goal of this study is to improve understanding of the impacts of local and regional
emission sources on formation and transport of ozone in the Lake Tahoe Basin and provide planning
managers with a tool to determine the most cost benefit emission control strategies to control ozone levels
in the Basin. The proposed developed tool will be an integrated modeling system consisting of state-ofthe-art emission, meteorology, and air quality models. To achieve this goal we propose the following
main objectives:
 Acquire emission, meteorological, and air quality data relevant to the model application
 Review existing management and regulatory reduction strategies
 Identify cases representing various meteorological scenarios related to periods of low, high, and
exceedance O3 levels.
 Integrate emission (SMOKE), meteorological (WRF), and photochemical (CMAQ) models into
an ozone modeling system as a part of the LTAQMS
 Validate the ozone modeling system using episodes of ozone exceedances within the period
2006-2009. Additionally, use recent ozone measurements at 10 locations in summer 2010 to
further validate the ozone modeling system.
 Use the ozone modeling system to quantify viable alternative strategies for ozone and other
pollutants reduction in the Lake Tahoe Basin
 Provide comparisons of the cost effectiveness of each viable strategy and indicate needed actions
for the LTAQMS.
Major hypotheses to be addressed are:
 Local emission sources in the Basin are major causes of air quality degradation
 Control strategies of vehicle emissions and residential burning will significantly improve air
quality in the basin, including ozone levels and their exceedances
 There is a significant regional pool of ozone and its pre-cursors that can facilitate some of the
exceedance episodes
 For the highest O3 periods, less than 25% of the observed O3 can be attributed to out-of-basin
sources
 Late afternoon/early evening elevated levels of O3 are due to recirculation of in-basin formed O3
 The majority of O3-forming precursors are from in-basin sources.
 In-basin off-road mobile emissions play a critical role in summer O3 formation
 On- and off-road mobile sources will need to be controlled in order to reduce O3 and other
secondary pollutants in the basin.
E. APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY
We propose to develop a high resolution atmospheric and photochemical modeling system to
investigate the formation, transport, dispersion and deposition of ozone as well as its reduction strategies
in the Lake Tahoe Basin. A flow diagram of the modeling system that is proposed to be incorporated into
the LTAQMS is shown in Figure 1.
4
Each of these components is explained in the subsequent tasks below. The specific tasks are:
Task 1. Emission, Meteorological, and Chemical Monitoring Data Acquisition and Quality
Assurance
We will acquire meteorological and chemical measurements from available sources including
LTADS, special studies, IMPROVE, routine monitoring stations, and the Western Regional Climate
Center (located at DRI). Data will include hourly observations of surface parameters, upper air
observations, and air quality data including O3, NOx, and VOCs. The data will be compiled into a
database and analyzed using statistical methods in order to characterize the surface and upper air fields
pertaining to the ozone forming season. The chemical data analysis will serve as a reference for the model
evaluation as well as for determining the O3 episodes. The compiled database will be provided to the
agency at the end of the project. A preliminary analysis showed that 8-hr ozone exceedances of the
California state standards occurred:
 2006: 18 June and 13 September
 2007: 10 and 12 May, 19 June, 8 July
 2008: 13, 14 and 24 June, 10 and 26 July
 2009: 11 August
All of these episodes will be selected for meteorological (Task 4) and air quality (Task 5) modeling
for case study evaluation and control strategy (Task 6).
There are three accessible data resources for emission data, which will be used as input to SMOKE:
1) EPA’s emission data (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/) including 2005 emissions data, future years
(2012, 2014) emissions data, and ancillary SMOKE data. Those data are in SMOKE input format. With
gridded emission data output from SMOKE, cases of emission control or sensitivity experiments could be
conducted. 2) Air pollutant emissions inventory data for Lake Tahoe (Gertler, Weinroth, Luria and
Koracin 2008). The initial inventory was developed using the California Air Resource Board’s (CARB,
2006) emission inventory for the California portion of the basin and scaling this up to include the Nevada
side. The final inventory includes mobile sources, off-road mobile sources, area wide sources, stationary
sources, and biogenic sources. 3) ARB’s inventory data for the Lake Tahoe Air basin
(http://www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/emseic1_query.php?F_DIV=4&F_YR=2008&F_SEASON=A&SP=2009&F_AREA=AB&F_AB=LT&F_DD=Y ) and its gridded
emission data, which recently received 4 km resolution gridded emission data for Southern California.
Those data (2 and 3) could be used for air pollution forecasting of the outer domain, with consideration of
the transportation of ozone’s precursors from regions outside of the Lake Tahoe Basin.
For the model input and validation, we will use the following data:
 Meteorological data from stations (Coast Guard Station, Tahoe Vista, Cave Rock, Timber Cove,
Rubicon, Sunnyside, Blue Canyon Airport, Tahoe Truckee Airport, South Lake Tahoe Airport,
four buoys on Lake Tahoe).
 Ozone data were collected from June 15 to September 24, 2010 (Bytnerowicz, Zielinska, and
Gertler, 2010). There were eight observational locations, at Watson Creek, Genoa, Angora,
Blackwood, Valhalla, Thunderbird, Incline, and Sugar Pine Point (Fig. 3).
 Data from two standard stations with ozone measurements Echo Summit and South Lake Tahoe
will be used (Fig. 3). The observational data will provide a good basis for the validation of the air
pollution forecast system.
Task 2. Review of Existing Management and Regulatory Strategies
As specified in the RFP, existing management and regulatory strategies will be reviewed. The
review will include the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency’s (TRPA) Blue Boating Program, and federal
and state emission standards for watercraft, automobiles, buses and trucks.
Because of the mountainous climate and geographic complexity of the Lake Tahoe Basin, air
quality impact is a sensitive issue impacting the local economy, especially for tourism. Several ways were
5
pointed out in TRPA’s website to improve Lake Tahoe’s air quality; the ones we will test include: 1)
reducing the number of vehicles on the roadways by walking, biking, carpooling, or taking public transit.
2) Encouraging all public transit providers to move towards compressed natural gas fuels. 3) Installing
our Best Management Practices (BMPs) to help reduce wind-blown dust from bare areas and dust caused
by driving on dirt driveways. 4) Replacing old, non-compliant wood heaters with new, efficient EPAapproved wood or gas heaters. TRPA has been working on some programs—for example, the wood
heater retrofit program, and the blue boating program—to move in a cleaner and greener direction. Many
plans had been implemented and/or have had been carried on e.g., the 2010 Lake Tahoe Region Bicycle
and Pedestrian plan, Mobility 2030—Lake Tahoe Regional Transportation Plan, and Public Participation
Plan 2008. Sensitivity studies on emission amounts, emission area/location and the type of emission for
different species will provide a significant contribution to management and decision of strategies for air
pollution control.
Task 3. Emission Processing Using the SMOKE Modeling System
As specified in the RFP, we will use the SMOKE modeling system to process emissions and to
evaluate control strategies. The Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions (SMOKE) Modeling System
(The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2010) was developed by The MCNC Environmental
Modeling Center (EMC) to allow emissions data processing methods to integrate high-performance
computing (HPC) sparse-matrix algorithms. The SMOKE system is a significant addition to the available
resources for decision-making about emissions controls for both urban and regional applications. It
provides a mechanism for preparing specialized inputs for air quality modeling research, and it makes air
quality forecasting possible. The SMOKE system continues to develop and improve at the University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill’s Carolina Environmental Program (CEP). The purpose of SMOKE (or
any emissions processor) is to convert the resolution of the emission inventory data to the resolution
needed by an air quality model. Emission inventories are typically available with an annual-total
emissions value for each emissions source, or perhaps with an average-day emissions value.
SMOKE can process criteria gaseous pollutants such as O3, CO, NOx, volatile organic
compounds (VOCs); NH3; SO2; particulate matter (PM) pollutants such as PM2.5 and PM10; as well as a
large array of toxic pollutants, such as mercury, cadmium, benzene, and formaldehyde. Currently,
SMOKE supports area-, mobile-, and point-source emissions processing and also includes biogenic
emissions modeling through both a rewrite of the Biogenic Emission Inventory System, version 2
(BEIS2) and the BEIS3 system. SMOKE can process both criteria and toxic emissions data inventories.
The major components of the SMOKE system are shown in Figure 2. Note that the meteorological
modeling results (Task 4) are needed as input for the SMOKE processing. The outputs of the SMOKE
system will be used as inputs to the CMAQ model, and also for subsequent sensitivity studies and
examination of the efficiency of various emission control strategies for particular emission components.
Task 4. Meteorological Modeling
Due to the topographic complexity of the Lake Tahoe Basin, only advanced meteorological
models such as the Weather and Research Forecasting (WRF) model (Skamarock et al. 2008) can provide
sufficiently accurate information to be input to the photochemical models. The WRF model is a nextgeneration mesoscale numerical weather prediction system designed to serve both operational forecasting
and atmospheric research needs. It features multiple dynamical cores, a 3-dimensional variational
(3DVAR) data assimilation system, and a software architecture allowing for computational parallelism
and system extensibility (Fig. 3). WRF is suitable for a broad spectrum of applications across scales
ranging from meters to thousands of kilometers (Skamarock et al. 2008). WRF is the successor of the
widely used community Mesoscale Model 5 (MM5) and, in terms of both computational and physics
parameters, the most suitable mesoscale meteorological model for this study that can provide input to the
photochemical model CMAQ (Task 5). The selected case studies stated in Task 1 will be simulated using
WRF with a coarse domain (3 km resolution) to capture synoptic processes and a nested domain centered
on Lake Tahoe covering a local emission inventory grid with a 500 m resolution (Fig. 3). Prior to any
6
analysis, the model results will be evaluated using available meteorological data in the basin and vicinity.
The model outputs will be stored in hourly intervals and processed as inputs to the CMAQ photochemical
model (Task 3). The entire modeling process will be done on DRI’s computers. In the last phase of the
study, the modeling system will be ported to a TRPA or other management agency computer.
Task 5. Photochemical Modeling
The Models-3 Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system was developed by
the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the late 90’s in order to address the needs mandated
by the Clean Air Act Amendments in 1990 (Byun and Schere, 2006). It is an Eulerian-grid photochemical
model that treats multiple pollutants at multiple atmospheric levels using a “one-atmosphere” multiscale
approach. It provides a fully modular framework linked with emissions estimation and prognostic
meteorological models. Its multiscale capability is supported with a generalized coordinate system that is
consistent with many meteorological models and enables users to apply nesting to investigate local and
regional air pollution phenomena. The multipollutant approach makes it suitable for applications of
trapospheric ozone formation, particulate matter, acid deposition, and toxics through the use of gaseous
and aqueous chemistry and modal aerosol dynamics. CMAQ allows users to choose from different
chemical mechanisms including CB-IV (Gery et al., 1989), CB05 (Yarwood et al., 2005), and SAPRC99
(Carter, 2000). Each of these mechanisms is supported with additional aerosol and toxic chemistry.
As specified in the RFP, the EPA regulatory air quality model CMAQ has been selected for the
proposed study (see a schematic of the CMAQ modeling system in Figure 5).
We will use CMAQ with the chemical mechanism SAPRC99. This mechanism contains 72 model
species and 214 reactions. The SAPRC99 mechanism used in CMAQ includes isoprene extensions and
the reactions of formic, acetic, and higher organic acids with the hydroxyl radical. These properties are
essential in the prediction of ozone formation and more suitable for a region such as the Lake Tahoe
Basin, being an urban area surrounded by alpine forest with high biogenic emissions. For in-basin
sources, we will use the recently completed inventory developed by Gertler et al. (2008). An advantage
of this inventory is that it has the spatial resolution required for the gridded air quality model. The out-ofbasin inventory will be obtained from CARB and EPA. The simulations will be performed for selected
cases most relevant to the region and will be repeated with different emission input scenarios to identify
the best reduction strategies. Every emission scenario will be analyzed for its cost effectiveness and the
resulting suggestions will be presented in the final deliverables.
Task 6. Model Evaluation and Development of Emission Control Scenarios
Following completion of the meteorological and photochemical model runs, we will evaluate the
outputs against ambient monitoring results to assess model performance. Among the parameters we will
assess will be the timing and spatial location of the O3 peaks, maximum and minimum concentrations,
and the levels of secondary species such as nitric acid (HNO3), and ammonium nitrate (NH4NO3).
Once the model performance has been evaluated, in conjunction with the basin managers, we will
develop a number of strategies designed to reduce O3 levels. The modeling system will then be applied to
evaluate the effectiveness of the various strategies. We will use the specific characteristics of SMOKE
having two types of processing (combined in “Cntlmat” program) which are useful for emission control
and can produce future year emissions based on emission trends and control strategies. The two
processing types are “Control Processing”, and “Growth processing”. The “Control processing” type
applies a control factor to emissions. A control scenario involves changing the values of emissions based
on regulations affecting industrial activities, personal behaviors or control strategies. The “Growth
processing” type creates emission data sets for years other than a year for which an emissions inventory is
available. Both control and growth processing can be applied to area, mobile and point sources, and
complex controls for on-road mobile sources can also be implemented when using MOBILE6 through
SMOKE to calculate emission factors and apply them to VMT (Vehicle Miles Traveled).
As mentioned above, a set of sensitivity experiments can be set up to investigate the contributions
from different types of emissions and different emission areas/locations.
7
Task 7. Reporting and Technology Transfer
We will submit quarterly reports, including brief updates on project accomplishments. Upon
completion of the study, a draft final report and a final report will be prepared. Included in the report will
be a summary of all modeling methods, the database used to drive the model, and proposed control
options. In addition, we will also turn the model over to interested parties (e.g., TRPA) for use in
analyzing additional and/or future emission control scenarios in the basin and present the results at
relevant scientific meetings such as the annual Lake Tahoe Science Conference.
F. RELATIONSHIP OF THE RESEARCH TO PREVIOUS STUDIES
The proposed study builds upon a number of previous programs conducted in the basin (Gertler et
al., 2006; Kahyaoglu-Koracin et al., 2004, 2005, 2008; Bytnerowicz et al., 2004, Dolislager et al., 2009).
As discussed earlier in this narrative, these studies concluded that most of the pollutants in the basin are
locally emitted and O3 transport into the Lake Tahoe Basin is limited. However, the study by Dolislager
et al. (2009) also indicated that under certain circumstances transported O3 may occur and lead to elevated
O3 levels.
For the highest-resolution grid centered at Lake Tahoe, we will use the emission inventory
developed by Gertler, Weinroth, Luria, and Kahyaoglu-Koracin (2008). This will provide the most up-todate emissions inventory for the basin, including biogenic organic species, which is critical in terms of
ozone prediction in a photochemical modeling study. In addition, chemical and meteorological data
collected under previous and current studies will provide much of the information required to run the
modeling system.
G. STRATEGY FOR ENGAGING WITH MANAGERS
The results of this work will be presented in report form to basin managers, regulatory agencies,
members of the Tahoe Science Consortium (TSC), and other interested parties. The study findings will
also be communicated via oral and poster presentations at scientific meetings (e.g., science symposia
conducted in the basin, regional meetings, and the annual Lake Tahoe Forum). Potential control
strategies will be discussed in detail with basin managers and regulatory agencies in order to develop
strategies to address the issue of increasing O3 levels in the basin. At the end of the project, we will turn
over the model and all data to the interested basin management agencies. If awarded, we will
communicate with the relevant Lake Tahoe Basin agency representatives to coordinate and optimize
modeling efforts and obtain their advice for the work plan and tasks. In particular, we will contact
Maureen McCarty of the Tahoe Science Consortium, Shane Romsos of the Tahoe Regional Planning
Agency, and Jack Landy of the U.S. EPA.
H. DELIVERABLES
The main deliverables will be: 1) the ozone modeling system framework (SMOKE/WRF/CMAQ)
that will be implemented as a component of the LTAQMS; 2) a final report with guidance on the most
cost effective emission control strategies for ozone reduction in the Lake Tahoe Basin. The final report
will describe the data used for model input and validation and will explain the modeling system and its
validation procedures and results. In addition, we will deliver the model to management agencies working
in the basin so they can apply the model to evaluate additional emission control options.
8
III. Schedule
The project will start 1 June, 2012. Quarterly reports will be submitted 1 September 2012, 1 December
2012, 1 March 2013, and 31 May 2013. A draft final report will be submitted on 1 June 2013 and the
final report will be submitted on 30 June 2013.
Milestone/Deliverables Start Date
1 June
Task 1. Emission,
2012
Meteorological, and
Chemical Monitoring
Data Acquisition and
Quality Assurance
End Date
1 August
2012
Task 2. Review of
Existing Management
and Regulatory
Strategies
1 June
2012
1 August
2012
Task 3. Emission
Processing Using the
SMOKE Modeling
System
1 July 2012
1 September
2012
Task 4.
Meteorological
Modeling
Task 5.
Photochemical
Modeling
1 July 2012
1 September
2012
Task 6. Model
Validation and
Development of
Control Scenarios
Task 7. Reporting
and Technology
Transfer
1 February
2013
1 May 2013
1 May
2013
30 May
2013
1September 1 February
2012
2013
9
Description
Acquire relevant data for the
meteorological and photochemical
modeling data and perform
descriptive data analyses. Determine
relevant episodes for model
validation and control strategies.
Review will include Tahoe Regional
Planning Agency’s (TRPA) Blue
Boating Program, and federal and
state emission standards for
watercraft, automobiles, buses and
trucks.
Prepare emission input data (local
emission inventory /Gertler eta al.
2008/, and CARB and EPA
inventories) and run the emission
model SMOKE.
Prepare input data and run the
meteorological model WRF and
validate model outputs
Prepare input data and run the
photochemical model CMAQ and
validate model outputs.
Validate integrated modeling results.
Develop various control strategies
and rank their importance using the
modeling system.
Prepare and submit draft final and
final report. Transfer the modeling
technology to management agencies
in the basin.
IV. References
Atkinson, R., and Arey, J.: Gas-phase tropospheric chemistry of biogenic volatile organic compounds: a
review. Atmos. Environm. 37, 197-219 (2003).
Bytnerowicz, A., et al., 2004. Evaluation of ozone and HNO3 vapor distribution and ozone effects on
conifer forests in the Lake Tahoe basin. 2nd Biennial Conference on Tahoe Environmental
Concerns, May 17-19, 2004.
Bytnerowicz, A., B. Zielinska, A. Gertler, 2010: Distribution of ozone, ozone pre-cursors and gaseous
componenets of atmospheric nitrogen deposition in the Lake Tahoe Basin. Progress Report.
Byun, D. and Schere, K.L., 2006. Review of the Governing Equations, Computational algorithms, and
Other Components of the Models-3 Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Modeling
System. Mechanics Review 59, 51-77.
Calvert, J.G., Atkinson, R., Becker, K.H., Kamens, R.M., Seinfeld, J.H., Wallington, T.J., and Yarwood,
G.: The mechanisms of atmospheric oxidation of aromatic hydrocarbons, Oxford University
Press (2002).
Carroll, J.J., Dixon, A.J., 2002. Regional Scale Transport over Complex Terrain, A Case Study: tracing
the Sacramento plume in the Sierra Nevada of California. Atmos. Environ. 36(23) 3745-58.
Carter, W.P.L., 2000. Implementation of the SAPRC-99 Chemical Mechanism Into the Models-3
Framework. Final Report to US EPA.
Dillon, M.B., Lamanna, M.S., Schade, G.W., Goldstein, A.H., 2002. Chemical Evolution of the
Sacramento Urban Plume: transport and oxidation. J. Geophys. Res. 107(D5) 1-15.
Dolislager, L.J, VanCuren, R., Pederson, J.R., Lashgari, A., McCauley, E., 2009. An Assessment of
Ozone Concentrations within and neat the Lake Tahoe Air Basin. Atmospheric Environment (In
print).
Fenn, E.M., Poth, M.A., Aber, J.D., Baron, J.S., Bormann, B.T., Johnson, D.W., Lemly, A.D., McNulty,
S.G., Ryan, D.E., Stottlemeyer, R., 1998. Nitrogen excess in North American ecosystems:
predisposing factors, ecosystem responses, and management strategies. Ecol. Appl. 8, 706-733.
Geiger, H., Barnes, I., Bejan, J., Benter, T., Spittler, M.: The tropospheric degradation of isoprene: an
updated module for the regional atmospheric chemistry mechanism. Atmos. Environ. 37, 15031519 (2003).Gertler, A.W., A. Bytnerowicz, T.A. Cahill, M. Arbaugh, S. Cliff, J.K.ahyaogluKoracin, L. Tarnay, R. Alonso, and W. Fraczek, 2006. Local Pollutants Threaten Lake Tahoe 's
Clarity. California Agriculture, 60, 53-58.
Gertler, A.W., E. Weinroth, M. Luria, and J. Koracin, 2008. Development of an Air Pollutant Emissions
Inventory for the Lake Tahoe Basin that Incorporates Current and Future Land Use Scenarios.
Final report prepared for USEPA Region 9, San Francisco, CA, July 31, 2008.
Gery, M.W., Whitten, G.Z., Killus, J.P., and Dodge, M.C., 1989. A Photochemical Kinetics Mechanism
for Urban and Regional Scale Computer Modeling. J. Geophys. Res., 94, pp. 12,925-12,956.
Goldman, C.R., 1998. Primary Productivity, Nutrients, and Transparency during the early Onset
of Eutrafication in Ultra Oligotrophic Lake Tahoe, California-Nevada. Limnol. Oceanogr. 33,
1321-1333.
Grell, G.A., J. Dudhia, and D.R. Stauffer, 1994: A description of the fifth-generation Penn State/NCAR
mesoscale model (MM5). NCAR Tech. Note NCAR/TN-398+STR, 122pp.
Hayes, T.P., J.J. Kinney, and N.J. Wheeler, 1984. California surface wind climatology. California Air
Resources Board, Sacramento, CA, 180 pp.
Kahyaoglu-Koracin, J. K., (2005). The Development and Application of Atmospheric Modeling Systems
to Determine the Environmental Impact of Regional Scale and Local Emissions on Complex
Mountain Terrain and Coastal-Urban Areas. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Nevada, Reno.
Kahyaoglu-Koracin, J., L. Tarnay, and A. Gertler, 2004. Modeling the impact of regional versus local
emissions on nitrogen deposition in the Lake Tahoe basin. 2nd Biennial Conference on Tahoe
Environmental Concerns, May 17-19, 2004.
10
Kahyaoglu-Koracin, J., Bassett, S.D., Mouat, D.A., Gertler, A.W., 2008. A scenario-based modeling
system to predict the air quality impact from future growth.
Atmospheric Environment 43(5), 1021-1028.
Lake Tahoe Regional Transportation Plan. 2011. http://tahoempo.org/Default.aspx?SelectedIndex=-1
Skamarock, W. C., J. B. Klemp, J. Dudhia, et al. 2008: A description of the advanced research WRF
version 3. NCAR Tch. Note NCAR/TN-475+STR, 125pp.Tarnay, L., A.W. Gertler, R.R. Blank,
and G.E. Taylor Jr, 2001. Preliminary Measurements of Summer Nitric Acid and Ammonia
Concentration in the Lake Tahoe Basin Airshed: Implications for Dry Deposition of Atmospheric
Nitrogen. Env. Poll., 113, 145-153.
South coast air quality management district governing board. Final 2007 air quality management plan.
Jun 2007. 352pp.
Tarnay, L., A. Gertler, and G.E. Taylor, 2002. The use of inferential models for estimating nitric acid
vapor deposition to semi-arid coniferous forests. Atmospheric Environment, 36, 3277-3287.
Tarnay, L.W., D.W. Johnson, and A.W. Gertler, 2005. Modeled inputs of atmospheric nitrogen to the
Lake Tahoe Basin due to gaseous pollutant deposition, Journal of the Nevada Water Resources
Association, 2 (1), 41-57.
The institute for the Environment – The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2010: SMOKE V2.7
User’s Manual, 538pp.
TRPA, 2010: Lake Tahoe Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan.
http://www.tahoempo.org/documents/bpp/Chapters/2010bpp.pdf
Yarwood, G., Rao, S., Yocke, M., Whitten, G.Z., 2005. Updates to the Carbon Bond Mechanisms: CB05.
Report to the US EPA.
Zaremba, L.L., and J.J. Carroll, 1999. Summer wind flow regimes over the Sacramento Valley. J. Appl.
Meteor., 38, 1463-1473.
11
V. Figures
Fig. 1. Flow diagram of the proposed ozone modeling system to be incorporated into the
LTAQMS framework.
12
Fig. 2. Flow chart of the SMOKE emission processing system.
13
Fig. 3. Setup of the proposed meteorological (WRF) and air quality (CMAQ) modeling
domains. Ozone monitoring stations that were operating in summer 2010 are indicated
(Bytnerowicz, Zielinska, and Gertler, 2010). Continuous chemical monitoring stations South
Lake Tahoe - Airport, South Lake Tahoe – Sandy Way, and Echo Summit are also indicated.
14
Figure 4. The flow chart for the WRF model with objective analysis and data assimilation.
15
Fig. 5. Schematic of the SMOKE-CMAQ modeling system.
16