WESTAR-WRAP Perspectives on Regional Haze

Transcription

1 WESTAR-WRAP Perspectives on Regional Haze 118 Class 1 areas >85 monitors Causes of Haziest Days Dark edge indicates urban reference monitor 2016 Midwest and Central States Air Quality Workshop June 21, 2016 St. Louis, MO Tom Moore WESTAR-WRAP 1

2 Regional Haze Planning Considerations Progress to Date Near-Term Activities Upcoming SIP Revision Improving Visibility 2

3 Status in the WESTAR-WRAP region Regional Haze State Implementation Plans Submitted over four years from Several partially approved, with BART resolved separately US EPA prepared all or part of SIP for two western states Progress Reports (due 5 years after SIP submission) Five have been submitted since 2014 EPA review and approval takes about one year All but two are due to EPA by end of 2016 Progress Reports due in 2017 for two states with FIPS WRAP-TSS has posted rolling averages through 2014 BART Implementation Over 50 facilities in region; one state had no BART facilities Already complete in four states; others almost completed Remaining scheduled for implementation Three facilities resolved with shutdown prior to 2025 Decision pending at five facilities 3

4 Near-Term Actions Proposed Regional Haze Rule Change Additional 3 years for SIP preparation Modified Progress Report requirements Increased FLM consultation RAVI to be part of Regional Haze Discusses cleanups/clarifications within RHR Implementation Guidance Pending Metric for tracking visibility progress to change to Most Impaired Days Four-factor analysis for setting 2028 Reasonable Progress Goals Western responses likely; with further discussions about equivalent alternative approaches and resource needs 4

5 Basic SIP Revision Tasks Schedule 2014 Inventory Show the Basic Timeline Gantt chart here, just say imagine a three year time slip Western states must finish regional work by Spring 2020 if SIPS due Summer of

6 TASK Western SIP Revision Tasks Costs Initial SIP 2018 Milestone* 2 nd Planning Period 2028 Milestone ** Role of Regional Organization Common Regional Emissions Inventory Normalizing and gridding 2002 inventory (first-ever regional EI) Normalizing and gridding 2014 regional EI suitable for planning (agreement on data) Compile regional inventory Regional Modeling Baseline & 2018 forecast for 112 Class I Areas (first-ever regional modeling) Baseline and 2028 forecast for same Class 1 Areas Model performance; background and transport impacts; regionally consistent analysis Special Studies for Inventory Refinement Offshore Shipping; Dust; Oil & Gas; EGUs/Major Industries; Smoke Management; On-road/Non-Road Engines Oil & Gas Controls; Wildfire & Smoke; Non-U.S. background inventories; Climate Change Impacts on Visibility Regional Haze Planning Work Group targets and oversees consultant support Evaluate Progress Initial Progress Report; utilized Regional Summary States evaluate data; Anticipate revised metric Basic data through 2014 in TSS; Revamp needed for new metric Controls (BART and/or 4- factor analysis) BART ID and control analysis with consultant support Four-factor process pending guidance; analysis of achievable progress Reductions and location provided by states for final regional modeling Final Modeling to set 2028 RPGs Six Scenarios for setting Reasonable Progress Goals Limited number of scenarios for expected controls & uncontrollable impacts Regional Model determines RPGs Consultation Interstate, Federal Land Managers, Tribes Interstate, Federal Land Managers, Tribes Facilitation when needed State Approval Process Number of person-years used different in each state Number of person-years used different in each state Ongoing maintenance of Databases and Modeling Tools BOTTOM LINE 118 Class 1 Areas >85 monitors *more than $20 million provided over 11-year period for 15-state region to support initial SIP development (not including in-kind state staff time) **one FTE per year, estimated at $100,000 per state, times 4-5 years, is $6-7.5 million (not including supporting cost of regional analyses) two FTE for 3-4 years to coordinate Work Groups & manage consultants consultant services for regional data analyses, TSS/planning support, control strategy evaluation, regional modeling 6 total estimated at $3-4 million

7 SIP Revision - Options Bottom Line: working smarter with less, using what we ve learned... Limit/focus modeling runs using existing regional platform(s) WestJumpAQMS, Intermountain West Data Warehouse, federal NEPA analyses, Northwest AirQuest State-specific work: Uinta Basin Study, California modeling, Denver Front Range Study Identify NOx and SOx reductions from controllable sources Use emission reductions benefits from other programs FLM partner actions inside Class 1 Areas Think outside the box to find resources, demonstrate visibility improvements, and target species primarily from anthropogenic sources. 7

8 Western Class 1 area Environment PRELIMINARY DESIGN VALUE by COUNTY* (using AQS data ) Alaska and Hawaii at reduced scale CLASS 1 AREA > PM Standard > Ozone 2015 Standard > Both PM 2.5 and Ozone Standards * Based on monitor with highest value in county Western region characterized by complex terrain, several climactic zones, oceanic and international source transport, dispersed population centers, large land mass, mix of non-attainment areas, unique geologic sources. 8

9 Average Visual Range Improves Five-year Average of Annual Averages for ALL IMPROVE SAMPLING DAYS shows relative improvement in Visual Range per individual site conditions. Averages based on ~120 days of data collected annually. Averaging ALL sampled days minimizes skewing by natural extreme episodic events (wildfires & dust storms) in the top quintile (20% Worst Days.) 9

10 Benefits of NOx and SOx reductions Mt. Rainier, near Seattle Agua Tibia, near the Los Angeles Basin -44% Nitrate -37% Sulfate -55% Nitrate -49% Sulfate 73 miles 96 miles 44 miles 67 miles After a decade of annual anthropogenic NOx and SOx reductions in nearby urban areas, particle Light Extinction and Visual Range improve more than 20% on average days at Class 1 areas. Theodore Roosevelt NP, western North Dakota -18% Nitrate -17% Sulfate Mesa Verde, near Four Corners -30% Nitrate -20% Sulfate 71 miles 79 miles 108 miles 127 miles On average days at Class 1 Areas not near urban areas, there is still measurable benefit from ongoing BART reductions of NOx and SOx at large facilities relatively nearby. Farther from urban areas and large anthropogenic sources, the smaller controllable anthropogenic emissions are overwhelmed by uncontrollable natural sources and international transport. 10

11 Summary Next Steps in 2016 Respond to Rule and Guidance Changes Organize Western Regional Haze Planning Work Group and revisit the Work Plan Where do we find the Resources for SIP Development? Thoughts for the Future Ways to Measure Visibility Improvements and Identify Anthropogenic Haze Reductions Very different Causes of Haze suggest Alternatives for Determining Progress Incorporate changing Climate Conditions into Long-term Goals Visitors and Public Interests should benefit from Investment of Resources Average Visual Range 185 km (115 miles) Average Visual Range 230 km (143 miles) 11

12 Acknowledgements Tina Suarez-Murias, CARB Chair, WESTAR Regional Haze Workgroup Regional haze planners 14 western states Questions? 12

13 Extra Slides for Information Only 13

14 BEST DAYS Includes data from urban monitors at Seattle, Portland, Fresno, Phoenix, and Washington D.C. for comparison.

15 AVERAGE OF ALL DAYS Includes data from urban monitors at Seattle, Portland, Fresno, Phoenix, and Washington D.C. for comparison.

16 WORST DAYS (not same days as MOST IMPAIRED days in western states) Includes data from urban monitors at Seattle, Portland, Fresno, Phoenix, and Washington D.C. for comparison.

17 Average Visual Range Improves Alaska and Hawaii at reduced scale CLASS 1 AREA Location of monitors analyzed on following slide Five-year Average of Annual Averages for ALL IMPROVE SAMPLING DAYS shows relative improvement in Visual Range per individual site conditions. Averages based on ~120 days of data collected annually. Averaging ALL sampled days minimizes skewing by natural extreme episodic events (wildfires & dust storms) in the top quintile (20% Worst Days.) 17