PM status for 2012 and the main issues regarding the EMEP measurement program

Transcription

1 PM status for 2012 and the main issues regarding the EMEP measurement program

2 Outline Status of PM levels in rural Europe in 2012 Including high episode in jan/febr in central Europe EMEP intensive measurement periods Mineral dust campaign 2012 and 2013 Future campaigns Compliance with the monitoring strategy Development in data quality and reporting

3 PM 10 concentration, sites measured PM-mass concentrations. (66 for PM 10 and 47 for PM 2.5 ) The PM levels in 2012 are higher than in 2011 (1-3 μg/m 3 over large parts and up to 5-10 μg/m 3 in the alps; mainly due to meteorological conditions. However the annual mean concentrations over most of Europe being about 1-4 μg/m 3 below the average due to emission reductions. An average decrease of 26% of PM 10 between 2000 and 2012 (24 EMEP sites μg/m 3. y)

4 Observed pollution episode in Jan-Feb 2012

5 Modelled vs measured PM 2.5 The EMEP model doesn t capture the intensity of the epiode very well Most likely, this is caused by the combination of emission underestimation and difficulties in the model to describe the cold stagnant-air weather. ECMWF MARS shows that the boundary layer heights low, down to over a large area of Europe during that period. In the EMEP/MSC-W the lowest layer in the model is appr. 90 m thick

6 Modelled vs measured PM 2.5 (II) Payerne (CH02) 489 m height Caumont (CH04) 1137 m height Using finer vertical resolution model and improved calculations of PBL height in the model are expected to improve its ability to reproduce high pollution events under stable meteorological conditions in shallow PBL

7 EMEP intensive measurement periods (IMP) To assist the implementation of the EMEP monitoring strategy, the Task Force of Measurement and Modelling (TFMM) has recommended conducting coordinated intensive measurements of more advanced character. These are done in close cooperation wit EU funded research projects 1 st Period 1-30 of June Jan -4 Feb nd Period 17 Sep 16 Oct Feb 26 Mar rd Period 8 June - July jan - 8 Febr 2013.

8 Speciation of PM 10, EMEP intensive 2012/2013 Mineral dust: centralized lab using PIXE laboratory in Florence. - Scientific lead: Xavier Querol and Andrés Alestuey, CSIC Inorganic ions (regular EMEP) Carbonaceous EC/OC (EMEP) Carbonate (Lead by JP Putaud and Fabrizia Cavalli, JRC)

9 Mineral dust (µg/m 3 ) Summer 2012 Winter Mineral load: obtained by the addition of the SiO 2, Al 2 O 3, Fe 2 O 3 concentrations, and the dust contribution of Na 2 O, K 2 O dust, CaO and MgO after the subtraction of their marine contribution from the bulk concentrations

10 Contribution of mineral dust to PM10, % Summer Winter

11 Trace metals: coal combustion Summer 2012 As (ng/m 3) Winter

12 Modelled dust in PM 10 vs measured Modelling of Saharan dust has been greatly improved by using 12-hourly 3D boundary for the actual year instead of monthly average climatological data. The major African dust events are well reproduced in Southern Europe and partly in Central Europe, though: some overestimation by the model of peak dust concentrations. Outside dust episodes, the model tends to under-predict observed dust levels.

13 Next EMEP intensive to be planned for 2016 Coordination with future European Union (EU) projects are recommended, although such projects had not yet been defined. Some recommendations were expressed by the TFMM: There was still a need for investigations of particulate matter (PM) compounds and biogenic VOCs. There was interest in coupling the periods with campaigns planned in urban environments, (urban increments). Investigate air pollution episodes and near real time capacity Extension of the monitored domain towards the Eastern part of Europe Longer measurement periods?

14 Implementation of monitoring strategy, level 1 -site distribution

15 Implementation of monitoring strategy, level 1 index based

16 Level 2

17 Data reporting large volumes of data are reported late data submission has become more complex and challenging for the Parties New database launched in June 2014 Major updates and improvements of the EBAS database and web Now include more complex data and meta-data information CCC will develop more automatic data submission tools. training workshop at CCC, 8-9 October 2014

18 That lack of progress in quality in traditional compounds Possible reasons Less attentions cost savings and out-sourcing. TFMM concluded that the lack of progress in lab performance needs to be re-visit and re-vitalize, and even set more ambitious targets for data quality

19 First intercalibration of Levoglucosan

20 Present status of the EMEP VOC programme Somewhat «inhomogeneous» network: Many methods Analytical problems at some sites Problems with local influence (i.e in GB) Few sites with carbonyles Promising developments with cooperation with ACTRIS and EU infrastructure projects Lab intercomaprison Reference methods Reporting Color indicates instrumentation

21 Summary for VOCs Challenges with an inhomogeneous network a need for station audits lack of long-term consistent time series New EBAS Challenging reporting criteria Workshop arranged at NILU in October Several new sites with light hydrocarbons Improved geographical coverage requires intercalibrations/standards/harmonisation ACTRIS Monitoring of carbonyls strongly reduced Have shown valuable for model validation

22 Summary PM levels higher in 2012 than 2011 due to meteorological conditions, but a down word trend from Challenging in keeping focus and improve data quality and network development on traditional EMEP compounds (EMEP level 1) Monitoring network in positive development for EMEP level 2 More sites, higher focus on harmonization of method and more advanced reporting