11.07.2014 Views

CRC Report No. A-34 - Coordinating Research Council

CRC Report No. A-34 - Coordinating Research Council

CRC Report No. A-34 - Coordinating Research Council

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

April 2005<br />

Selection of Fitting Species<br />

A prerequisite for using receptor models is that the relative proportions of chemical species<br />

change little between source and receptor. Most ambient NMHCs are oxidized in the lowest 2<br />

km of the troposphere with tropospheric lifetimes ranging from hours to several months.<br />

<strong>No</strong>minal afternoon summertime residence times for a reactive environment (e.g., Los Angeles)<br />

are estimated in Table 3-1. These estimates provide indications of which components are likely<br />

to remain relatively stable between source and receptor, thereby qualifying as fitting species for<br />

CMB source apportionment. An exception is isoprene, which is included as a fitting species<br />

despite its high reactivity because it serves as a marker for biogenic emissions. The source<br />

contribution estimates under-estimated the actual source contributions of biogenic emissions, i.e.,<br />

they provide a lower limit to biogenic contributions.<br />

Table 3-1 lists three sets of default fitting species, by site location and time of day, which we<br />

have used in past CMB analysis of PAMS hydrocarbon data. Compounds with potential<br />

analytical problems such as coelution of peaks during gas chromatographic analysis are also<br />

excluded as fitting species. Type 2 PAMS sites are located immediately downwind of the area of<br />

maximum precursor emissions and are typically placed near the downwind boundary of the<br />

central business district. An expanded list of hydrocarbons (36 species) are used as fitting<br />

species at Type 2 sites for samples collected in the morning hours prior to 9:00 am since the<br />

emissions are largely unreacted. A shorter list of more stable species (20 species) is used for<br />

samples collected between 9:00 am and 6:00 pm. Type 1 sites characterize upwind background<br />

and Type 3 sites monitor maximum ozone concentrations downwind from the fringe of the urban<br />

area. Type 4 sites characterize the extreme downwind transported ozone and its precursor<br />

concentrations exiting the area and are located near the downwind edge of the photochemical<br />

grid model domain. A shorter list of 11 fitting species is used for Type 1, 3 and 4 PAMS sites.<br />

Reactive species are retained in the CMB modeling as “floating species”, and provide useful<br />

diagnostic information. Because the CMB model calculations are based upon non-reactive<br />

fitting species, the predicted concentrations exceed the measured values by margins that increase<br />

with increasing reactivity of the species.<br />

3.2 APPLICATION OF CMB BY ROUND<br />

The validity of source contribution estimates obtained from CMB depends greatly upon the<br />

selection and application of appropriate sets of source composition profiles and “fitting” species.<br />

In an actual CMB analysis, the location and time of sample collection are known. Available<br />

emission inventory data are used to determine the major emission sources that are likely to<br />

impact the receptor site. Visual surveys of the sampling location identify local sources near the<br />

sampling site that might disproportionately influence the receptor measurements. This<br />

information is then used to select an appropriate set of source composition profiles among<br />

available alternatives and identify sources for which new or updated composition profiles are<br />

needed. The location of the sampling site in relation to source and receptor areas and time of<br />

sample collection provide a basis for selecting “fitting” species that are sufficiently nonreactive<br />

so that relative proportions of chemical species change little between source and receptor. The<br />

expectation in this present experiment is that the accuracy of the source attributions from the<br />

CMB model analysis will improve as more appropriate source profiles and fitting species are<br />

applied to the simulated ambient samples. The receptor model performance was evaluated in<br />

four rounds as described in Section 1.4. This section describes DRI’s approach for performing<br />

H:\crca<strong>34</strong>-receptor\report\Final\sec3.doc 3-3

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!