Photochemical Modeling Simulation of a United States Grand Prix Event at the Circuit of the Americas. Technical Report

Transcription

1 Photochemical Modeling Simulation of a United States Grand Prix Event at the Circuit of the Americas Technical Report Prepared for Capital Area Council of Governments (CAPCOG) 6800 Burleson Road, Building 310, Suite 165, Austin, TX Prepared by: Alamo Area Council of Governments August 29, 2014

2 Title: Photochemical Modeling Simulation Report Date: August 29, 2014 of a United States Grand Prix Event at the Circuit of the Americas Authors: AACOG Natural Resources/ Type of Report: Technical Report Transportation Department Performing Organization Name & Period Covered: 2012 Address: Alamo Area Council of Governments 8700 Tesoro Drive, Suite 700 San Antonio, Texas Sponsoring Agency: Capital Area Council of Governments (CAPCOG) 6800 Burleson Road, Building 310, Suite 165, Austin, TX Abstract: AACOG simulated the potential impact of emissions generated during a United States Grand Prix (USGP) event at the Circuit of the Americas (COTA), located in southeast Austin, on ozone concentrations at regulatory monitors in the Austin area and across Travis County. The simulation was conducted using the CAMx photochemical model and estimated emissions from the 2012 U.S. Grand Prix, which held at COTA in November of that year, modeled as if it had occurred during ozone season. Meteorological and atmospheric inputs for the model were based on a period of high ozone concentrations that dominated central Texas in June The photochemical simulation predicted that, on average, peak 8-hour ozone concentrations at the C3 monitoring station in north Austin would increase by an average of 0.52 ppb during of the added emissions from activity associated with the USGP. At C38 in northwest Austin, the average predicted difference in peak 8-hour ozone averages was 0.36 ppb over the days analyzed. When the emissions from the USGP event at the COTA were reduced by 67% in the model, the average change in peak 8-hour average ozone concentrations over all days was 0.17 ppb at C3 and 0.12 ppb at C38. The average predicted difference in peak 8-hour ozone concentrations for all grid cells modeled to have 8-hour ozone concentrations above 60 ppb ranged from 0.07 to 0.53 ppb for the USGP simulated event. For grid cells above 70 ppb, the average difference was ppb when the USGP was simulated. When the emissions were reduced by 67 percent, the average differences were ppb for cells with peak 8-hour ozone averages greater than 60 ppb and 0.21 ppb ppb for grid cells with peak 8-hour ozone averages greater than 70 ppb. Related Reports: AACOG, December 15 th, Future Year Photochemical Modeling, 2012 and 2018 For the Capital Area Council of Governments. For the Capital Area Council of Governments (CAPCOG). San Antonio, Texas AACOG, October Development of the Extended June 2006 Photochemical Modeling Episode. For the San Antonio-Bexar County MPO. San Antonio, Texas CAPCOG, December and 2018 Emissions Updates for the CAPCOG Region and Milam Counties. Austin, Texas. i

3 Executive Summary This project simulates the potential ozone impacts of emissions associated with major events held at the Circuit of the Americas (COTA) by using activity data associated with the U.S. Grand Prix (USGP), held in November 2012, and photochemically modeling the emissions that would have been associated with that event if it had been held during ozone season in Since the USGP is the event with the maximum expected attendance for Circuit of the Americas (about 120,000), and the events emissions were modeled using meteorological conditions that were particularly conducive to ozone formation that occurred in June 2006, this scenario represents the worst case scenario of the impacts of an event of that magnitude if held during an episode of high ozone in Central Texas. Since the USGP does not necessarily represent the attendance of a typical major event (defined as an event with attendance of more than 40,000, exclusive of employees ), this project also modeled the effects of an event with a third of the emissions associated with it in order to establish an estimate of the lower bound of the range of impacts that could be expected from major events held at COTA during periods of high ozone in the region. AACOG modeled the difference between peak 8-hour ozone averages at the two regulatory ozone monitoring stations in Travis County (C3 and C38), as well as the differences elsewhere in Travis County where high ozone was modeled. Peak 8-hour ozone concentrations were compared between a baseline scenario using 2012 emissions data and event scenarios using the USGP simulation emissions added to the 2012 baseline at 100% and 33% of the attendance of the 2012 USGP. Emissions from each of the 3 days of the event were added to the Friday, Saturday, and Sunday emissions from the 2012 baseline scenario in order to account for the differences in day-to-day emissions estimates. The June 2006 base case meteorology and biogenic emissions were used in order to simulate conditions conducive to high ozone formation. The first two weekends of that episode included days with high ozone levels, which enabled this analysis. Therefore, the analysis performed was on the impact of changes to Friday, Saturday, and Sunday emissions associated with a major event of this type on ozone levels on those types of days when meteorology is conducive to ozone formation. The maximum difference in peak 8-hour ozone concentrations at C3 as a result of adding the simulated USGP events at the COTA was 0.80 ppb, with an average predicted difference of 0.52 ppb over all days of the simulation (Table 1). At C38, the maximum difference in peak 8- hour ozone concentrations modeled was 0.74 ppb, with an average predicted difference 0.36 ppb across all days. When the emissions from the USGP event at the COTA were reduced 67%, the maximum change in predicted peak 8-hour ozone was 0.27 ppb at CAMS3 and 0.25 ppb at CAMS38. The average change on all days with the 67% reduction was 0.17 ppb at CAMS3 and 0.12 ppb at CAMS38. These estimates are based on the change in peak 8-hour ozone averages within a 7x7 set of 4km grid cells around each monitor, which is the method EPA requires for attainment analysis. ii

4 Table 1: Change in Peak 8-Hour Ozone at each Monitor, COTA at 100% and 33%, ppb. Scenario Monitor 6/2 6/3 6/4 6/9 6/10 6/11 Maximum Change (all Days) Average Change in Peak Ozone (All Days) Average Change (Days > 60 pbb) COTA at 100 Percent COTA at 33 Percent Average Change (Days > 70 pbb) C C C C Two additional metrics were used to determine the potential impact on 8-hour ozone of a simulated USGP racing event at the COTA: 1. Average difference in predicted ozone for all grid cells with baseline peak 8-hour ozone averages > 60 ppb within Travis County for each day and across all days. 2. Average difference in predicted ozone for all grid cells with baseline peak 8-hour ozone averages > 70 ppb These thresholds were chosen based on the levels EPA staff have identified as the likely range for a new primary ozone standard as part of their policy assessments (60-70 ppb). A summary of the results for both the simulated USGP event scenario and the 67 percent reduction in emissions scenario is provided in Table 2. The average predicted differences for all grid cells above 60 ppb were 0.53 on June 2 nd, 0.25 ppb on June 9 th, and 0.07 ppb on June 10 th for the USGP simulated event. For grid cells above 70 ppb, the average predicted differences were 0.63 ppb on June 2 nd and 0.68 ppb on June 9 th. When the emissions were reduced by 67 percent, the average differences were 0.18 ppb on June 2 nd, 0.08 ppb on June 9 th, and 0.03 ppb on June 10 th in cells where predicted ozone was greater than 60 ppb. For grid cells with predicted ozone greater than 70 ppb, the average difference was 0.21 ppb on June 2 nd and 0.23 ppb on June 9 th. Table 2: Average 8-Hour Ozone Peak Difference for All Grid Cells in Travis County, COTA, ppb All Grid Cells > 60 ppb All Grid Cells > 70 ppb Scenario Date Average Difference Maximum Difference Average Difference Maximum Difference COTA at 100 Percent COTA at 33 percent 2-Jun Jun Jun All Days Jun Jun Jun All Days iii

5 Table of Contents Executive Summary... ii Table of Contents... iv List of Tables... v List of Figures... vi 1 Introduction Air Quality and Monitors in Austin-Round Rock MSA Project Background Photochemical Model Runs Quality Assurance Emission Inventory Processing Baseline Future-Year Inventories, COTA Emission Inventory EPS3 Processing Photochemical Modeling Projections Projections Baselines Ozone Plots Difference in Peak Ozone Appendix A: Example of EPS3 Processing Stream for CAPCOG Local Emission Inventory... 1 Appendix B: Example of EPS3 Output Message File for CAPCOG Local Emission Inventory... 1 Appendix C: EPS3 COTA modeling Input and Output files... 1 iv

6 List of Tables Table 1-1: 4 th Highest Ozone Values and Design Values at Austin-Round Rock MSA Regulatory Monitors, Table 1-2: Austin-Round Rock MSA Actual Peak 8-hour Ozone Readings by Monitor during the June 2006 Modeling Episode, June 2 nd -June 11 th, Table 2-1: Emission Inventory Sources by Type for 2012 Future Baseline Table 2-2: COTA Emission Inventory with June Meteorological Data, 2012 tons/ozone season day Table 3-1: Change in Peak 8-Hour Ozone at each Monitor, Eagle COTA at 100% and 33%, ppb Table 3-2: Average 8-Hour Ozone Peak Difference for All Grid Cells in Travis County, COTA, ppb (Days > 70 ppb) Table 3-3: Change in Peak 8-Hour Ozone at Each 4-km Grid Cell, COTA USGP event at 100%, ppb (Grid Cells > 70 ppb in the Baseline) Table 3-4: Change in Peak 8-Hour Ozone at Each 4-km Grid Cell, COTA at 100%, ppb (Grid Cells > 60 ppb in the baseline) Table 3-5: Change in Peak 8-Hour Ozone at Each 4-km Grid Cell, COTA USGP event at 33%, ppb (Grid Cells > 70 ppb in the Baseline) Table 3-6: Change in Peak 8-Hour Ozone at Each 4-km Grid Cell, COTA at 33%, ppb (Grid Cells > 60 ppb in the baseline) v

7 List of Figures Figure 1-1: Layout of the COTA Figure 1-2: Location of the COTA Figure 1-3: Monitoring Sites in the Austin-Round Rock MSA... Error! Bookmark not defined. Figure 2-1: COTA Taxi Exhaust NO X Emissions on Saturday at 4pm, Figure 2-2: COTA Bus Exhaust NO X Emissions on Saturday at 4pm, Figure 2-3: COTA Roadway Exhaust NO X Emissions on Saturday at 4pm, Figure 2-4: COTA Total NO X Emissions on Friday at 3pm, Figure 2-5: COTA Total NO X Emissions on Saturday at 3pm, Figure 2-6: COTA Total NO X Emissions on Sunday at 3pm, Figure 3-1: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 100 percent, Friday, June 2 nd 3-2 Figure 3-2: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 100 percent, Saturday, June 3 rd Figure 3-3: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 100 percent, Sunday, June 4 th Figure 3-4: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 100 percent, Friday, June 9 th 3-3 Figure 3-5: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 100 percent, Saturday, June 10 th Figure 3-6: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 100 percent, Sunday, June 11 th Figure 3-7: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 33 percent, Friday, June 2 nd 3-5 Figure 3-8: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 33 percent, Saturday, June 3 rd Figure 3-9: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 33 percent, Sunday, June 4 th 3-6 Figure 3-10: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 33 percent, Friday, June 9 th 3-6 Figure 3-11: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 33 percent, Saturday, June 10 th Figure 3-12: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 33 percent, Sunday, June 11 th Figure 3-13: Travis County 4km Photochemical Modeling Grid Squares used in the Analysis3-10 vi

8 1 Introduction Circuit of the Americas (COTA) is a multi-purpose facility that will host the most prestigious racing events in the world, including the Formula 1 (F1) United States Grand Prix (USGP). It is the first purpose-built Grand Prix facility in the U.S. Built around a state-of-the-art 3.4-mile circuit track with capacity for 120,000 fans and an elevation change of 133 feet, the facility is designed for any and all classes of racing. Circuit of The Americas is situated on a 1,000-acre site in southeast Austin, approximately two miles from Austin Bergstrom International Airport. 1 Figure 1-1 shows the layout of COTA, while Figure 1-2 shows the location of COTA in Austin. Figure 1-1: Layout of the COTA 2 1 COTA, Jan. 13, The New Home for the World Championships. Available online: Accessed 6/26/14. 2 Ibid. 1-7

9 Figure 1-2: Location of the COTA Air Quality and Monitors in Austin-Round Rock MSA The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charged with the maintenance of regional air quality across the United States through the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). 4 Ground-level ozone is one of the most common air pollutants in the country as well as one of the six criteria pollutants for which the EPA established NAAQS. A region is in 3 Ibid. 4 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), The Plain English Guide to the Clean Air Act. Available online: Accessed 06/26/

10 violation of the ozone NAAQS if the annual fourth highest peak daily 8-hour average ozone concentration, averaged over three consecutive years, exceeds the ozone standard. 5 Under the 2008 ozone standards, a region is in violation of the ozone NAAQS when its design value exceeds 75 ppb. The design values are calculated for each regulatory monitoring station, and the maximum design value among all of the monitors in the region sets the design value for the entire region. The ozone design values at the two regulatory monitors in the Austin-Round Rock Metropolitan Statistical Area are 72 ppb at C3 and 73 ppb at C38, both of which are located in Travis County (Table 1-1). Table 1-1: 4 th Highest Peak Daily 8-Hour Ozone Averages and the Design Value at Regulatory Monitors in the Austin-Round Rock MSA Monitor 2011 (ppb) 2012 (ppb) 2013 (ppb) Design Value Austin Northwest C3/A Audubon C The red highlighted values are above the 75 ppb ozone standard 1.2 Project Background In June 2011, the Circuit of the Americas (COTA) made a number of environmental agreements with the City of Austin (COA). One of those conditions was the following: "Work with CAPCOG and other relevant governmental entities to establish, by May 1st 2012, an Air Quality analysis and inventory, modeling, and a mitigation strategy to resolve air quality issues related to major events held between April 1 - October 31. Commit to securing data that allows assessment of emissions specific to the COTA site, subject to an annual cost cap of $50,000." COTA entered into contracts with CAPCOG and the URS Corporation in order to fulfill this requirement. COTA worked with CAPCOG, URS, City of Austin, Travis County, and CAMPO to develop methods to estimate the emissions associated with the first U.S. Grand Prix event held at COTA in November These methods included extensive observations and other data collection in order to accurately reflect the emissions-generating activity from the event, which was estimated to have an attendance of about 120,000. By modeling the impact of a simulated USGP held during peak ozone season, it was possible to obtain a "worst case scenario" for the 5 EPA, March Fact Sheet: Final Revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards For Ozone. Available online: Accessed 06/26/13. 6 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). Four Highest Eight-Hour Ozone Concentrations. Austin, Texas. Available online: Accessed 06/27/

11 potential impact of a major event held during ozone season might be. Under COTA's agreement with COA, a "major event" is defined as an event with attendance of more than 40,000, exclusive of employees. In order to assess the impact from an event that was smaller in scale than the USGP but that would still meet the criteria for a "major event," it was also necessary to model a scenario with a third of the emissions in order to establish the range of potential impacts for major events held at COTA. Once the activity data from the event was collected, COTA worked with CAPCOG and URS to use the activity data to develop emissions data that could then be photochemically modeled in order to estimate what the ozone impact of an event similar to the November 2012 USGP would be if it had been held during ozone season of that year, and to estimate what the impacts of a smaller, yet still "major" event may be. CAPCOG entered into an interlocal agreement with AACOG in order to perform the photochemical modeling of these emissions, and URS, CAPCOG, and AACOG worked closely with one another in order to ensure that all parties were in agreement on methodologies that would be used in order to obtain the photochemical modeling inputs. URS provided the detailed emissions data, and AACOG processed that data into photochemical model-ready input files prior to running the modeling scenarios. The event emissions were added to the photochemical modeling grid system for Friday, Saturday, and Sunday day types for the first two weeks of the episode, updated to The first two weekends during the episode included high ozone levels on the weekend, and should therefore better reflect the potential impact of major events occurring at COTA if those events occurred when meteorological conditions were conducive for high ozone. The photochemical modeling analyses contained in this report include the following: The average impact of major events at COTA on peak 8-hour ozone averages at Travis County's two regulatory monitoring stations; The average impact of major events at COTA on peak 8-hour ozone concentrations where ozone levels in Travis County were already modeled to be exceeding 70 parts per billion; and The average impact of major events at COTA on peak 8-hour ozone concentrations where ozone levels in Travis County were already modeled to be exceeding 60 parts per billion. This project uses the June 2006 photochemical modeling episode developed by TCEQ, updated by AACOG and CAPCOG with new 2012 baseline scenario anthropogenic emissions estimates. For more information on the emissions estimates in the 2012 baseline scenario and the 1-10

12 photochemical modeling results from that project, please review the reports developed in 2013 by AACOG 7 and CAPCOG Photochemical Model Runs AACOG performed three sets of photochemical modeling run for this project: 1) Baseline 2012 scenario without COTA emissions (previously run) 2) Simulation of a major event at COTA with 120,000 in attendance based on USGP activity data, 3) Simulation of a major event at COTA with an attendance of 40,000 based on a 2/3 reduction in emissions modeled for the event with attendance of 120,000. Each photochemical model run used Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF v3.2) model, Carbon Bond 6 (CB6) chemical mechanism, and Comprehensive Air Quality Model With Extensions (CAMx 6.0). In its previous work that produced the baseline 2012 scenario, AACOG used existing emissions inventory files used for photochemical modeling for the Dallas- Fort Worth (DFW) area in order to simulate typical 2012 ozone season emissions. AACOG and CAPCOG both updated emissions estimates for that scenario based on original research and new emissions inventory data. All photochemical modeling runs for this project were conducted using updated 2012 baseline scenario emission inventory data for the adjacent San Antonio- New Braunfels MSA, all 10 counties in the CAPCOG region, Milam County, and counties in the Eagle Ford Shale geological formation. Updates to the San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA included refinements to emission estimates for construction equipment, landfill equipment, quarry equipment, agricultural tractors, combines, commercial airports, point sources, and heavy duty truck idling. Updates to the 10 CAPCOG counties and Milam County included point sources, on-road sources, construction equipment, non-road industrial equipment, lawn and garden equipment, agricultural equipment, aviation sources, area source fuel combustion, and oil and gas production. 9 Updates to counties in the Eagle Ford Shale region also included new, TCEQ- approved emissions estimates developed by AACOG for oil and gas activities in those counties for Alamo Area Council of Governments, October, Development of the Extended June 2006 Photochemical Modeling Episode. San Antonio-Bexar County Metropolitan Planning Organization. San Antonio, Texas. Available online: Accessed: 08/27/ Alamo Area Council of Governments, Dec. 15th, Future Year Photochemical Modeling, 2012 and 2018 for the Capital Area Council of Governments. Capital Area Council of Governments. Austin, Texas. Available online: Accessed: 08/27/ CAPCOG and 2018 Emissions Updates for the CAPCOG Region and Milam Counties. December 2, AACOG, April 4 th, Oil and Gas Emission Inventory, Eagle Ford Shale, San Antonio, Texas. Available online: Accessed 08/27/

13 As described earlier, COTA and URS collected data from the 2012 USGP that could be used to simulate the emissions and ambient air quality impacts of a similarly-sized event if held during ozone season. The actual 2012 USGP, including preliminary events, was held from Friday, November 16 Sunday, November 18, In consultation with CAPCOG, URS used the activity data collected during that event to produce a simulated event emissions inventory for Friday, Saturday, and Sunday during ozone season in This event inventory was developed to reflect what the emissions would have been if the USGP had been held during ozone season. The inventory was developed in order to specifically match assumptions used in the 2012 baseline scenario to those used in the event inventory. For example, on-road activity data was modeled using MOVES2010b using traffic volumes and speeds collected from the event, but meteorological inputs were matched to the meteorological inputs used for the underlying link-based on-road emissions inventory data, rather than modeling November meteorology. Detailed data was developed at a sub-county level of analysis, enabling highly spatially refined activity and emissions estimates that were used for the photochemical modeling efforts. The photochemical model was run with these added event emissions from May 31 st through June 11 th to estimate potential ozone impacts. As shown in Table 1-2, actual peak 8-hour ozone averages from the underlying June 2006 base case for the days analyzed (Friday-Sunday, June 2 nd to June 4 th and June 9 th - June 11 th, 2006) reached at least 60 ppb for at least one of the regulatory monitoring stations on each of those weekend days. Table 1-2: Austin-Round Rock MSA Actual Peak 8-hour Ozone Readings by Monitor during the June 2006 Modeling Episode, June 2 nd -June 11 th, Date Day of the Week Monitor C3 C38 Maximum 06/02/06 Friday /03/06 Saturday /04/06 Sunday /05/06 Monday /06/06 Tuesday /07/06 Wednesday /08/06 Thursday /09/06 Friday /10/06 Saturday /11/06 Sunday Note: Dates highlighted in Bold represent simulated race days at COTA in Quality Assurance Quality assurance (QA) procedures used to check emissions inventory preparation and the results from the photochemical model included: Examination of raw data files for inconsistencies in emissions and/or locations, 1-12

14 Review of message files from Emissions Preprocessor System (EPS3) scripts for errors and warnings, Verification of consistency between input and output data, and Creation of output emissions and ozone tile plots for visual review. Special emphasis was placed on critical components, such as emission totals by SCC code, spatial allocation, and ozone plots, for quality checks. URS Corporation developed the emissions inventory inputs into the photochemical modeling for the USGP event at the COTA. Available URS data and emission factors were check to make sure the data was consistent and the latest approved emission factors were used. All available formulas were recalculated by AACOG to make sure the results can be replicated and are accurate. All raw data files were checked to ensure emissions were consistent by county, hour, and source type. Any inconsistencies were noted, checked, and corrected. All updates to the emission inventory were reviewed by AACOG and URS to make sure the results are correct. When running the EPS3 job scripts, several message files are generated from each script that record data inputs, results, and errors. As part of the QA procedure, modeling staff reviewed all error messages and corrected the input data accordingly. Errors can occur in EPS3 and go unnoticed by the built-in quality assurance mechanisms; therefore further QA methods were applied. Input and output emissions by source were compared. If there were inconsistencies between values, input data was reviewed and any necessary corrections were made. Emission and ozone tile plots by source category were also developed and reviewed for inconsistencies in emissions and spatial allocation. When errors and omissions were identified, they were corrected and all documentation was updated with the corrections. 1-13

15 2 Emission Inventory Processing 2.1 Baseline Future-Year Inventories, 2012 Since photochemical models simulate the atmospheric and meteorological conditions that helped produce high ozone during a particular episode, an important advantage the models provide is the ability to test various scenarios, such as changes in emission rates, under the same set of meteorological conditions that favor high ozone concentrations. The June 2006 model was projected to 2012 using forecasted changes in anthropogenic emissions. The year 2012 was selected because of the availability of several forecasted emissions inventories from previous work completed by TCEQ. Baseline data for the 2012 future year emission inventory is based on the DFW Attainment Demonstration SIP Revision for the 1997 Eight-Hour Ozone Standard. 11 The 2012 modeling emission inventories include the benefits of the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP), Texas Low-Emission Diesel (TxLED), non-road emission standards, Mass Emissions Cap and Trade (MECT) Program, the Highly Reactive VOC Emission Cap and Trade (HECT) Program in the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) area, and Phase One of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). 12 The updates to the 2012 emission inventories were presented in AACOG s report Development of the Extended June 2006 Photochemical Modeling Episode prepared for the San Antonio Bexar County Metropolitan Planning Organization. Biogenic emissions, meteorological inputs, and chemical speciation for the 2012 simulation remained the same as the original 2006 model except for the inclusion of an updated CAPCOG on-road emission inventory. CAPCOG provided updates to the speciation with the 2012 on-road MOVES2010b emissions for the Austin-Round Rock MSA. Table 2-1 shows the data sources for the 2012 emissions inventory. Following EPA guidance, the 2012 projection year emission inventories were based on generic ozone season days (OSD) instead of day-specific emissions. The projection year emission inventories are based on weekday (Monday-Thursday), Friday, Saturday, and Sunday emission estimates. 11 TCEQ. Appendix B: Emissions Modeling for the Dfw Attainment Demonstration Sip Revision for the 1997 Eight-Hour Ozone Standard. Austin, Texas. p. B-10. Available online: Accessed 07/03/ TCEQ. Appendix B: Emissions Modeling for the Dfw Attainment Demonstration Sip Revision for the 1997 Eight-Hour Ozone Standard. Austin, Texas. p. B-10. Available online: Accessed 07/03/

16 Table 2-1: Emission Inventory Sources by Type for 2012 Future Baseline On-Road Non-Road Point Area Biogenic Statewide: MOVES 2010a estimates from non-link-based inventories prepared in 2011 by TT 13 I; 2006 spatial allocation San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA updates: Extended Idling CAPCOG + Milam Counties: Updated Extended Idling Austin-Round Rock MSA: MOVES 2010b link-based inventories 14 Statewide: Default TexN 1.6 run 15 ; 2006 spatial allocation; ERG drill rig inventory 16 ; switcher and line-haul locomotives projected to 2012 using Pechan s inventory 17 ; ERG statewide aviation inventory projection for ; 2006 spatial allocation. San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA updates: Construction and Mining Equipment, Agricultural Tractors and Combines, Commercial Airports, updated spatial allocation. Non-road equipment associated with oil and gas drilling and production in Eagle Ford Shale Statewide: DFW 2012 Attainment Demonstration SIP county totals, allocated to points based on 2006 spatial allocation. EGU updates: all plants built between 2007 and 2012 accounted for; updated emissions for San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA NEGU updates: San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA and Austin-Round Rock MSA updates based on surveys Statewide: TexAER v4 19 area09c projected to 2012 using EGAS 20, 2006 spatial allocations. For oil and gas, DFW SIP special oil and gas production emissions inventory, 2012 Louisiana Haynesville Shale emissions. Area sources associated with oil and gas drilling and production in Eagle Ford Shale Same as 2006 Episode Texas Transportation Institute, July Development and Production of Statewide, Non-Link-Based, On-Road Mobile Source MOVES Emissions Inventories. The Texas A&M University System, College Station, Texas. Available online: ftp://amdaftp.tceq.texas.gov/pub/mobile_ei/statewide/mvs/reports/mvs10a_july_2011/mvs10a_att_tex_06_08_12_18_technical_report_final.pdf. Accessed 12/11/ Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI), June Austin Five-County Region Moves-Based On-Road Mobile Source Modeling Emissions Inventories for 2012 and College Station, p Eastern Research Group, Inc. April 26, Texas NONROAD (TexN) Model. Austin, Texas. Available online: ftp://amdaftp.tceq.texas.gov/pub/nonroad_ei/texn/. Accessed 07/03/ Eastern Research Group, Inc. August 15, Development of Texas Statewide Drilling Rigs Emission Inventories for the Years 1990, 1993, 1996, and 1999 through Austin, Texas. Work Order No FY p Available online: Accessed 07/01/ Ms. Kirstin B. Thesing. E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., July Development of Locomotive and Commercial Marine Emissions Inventory TO Durham, NC. TCEQ Grant Agreement No p. 1. Available online: ftp://amdaftp.tceq.texas.gov/pub/offroad_ei/locomotives/. Accessed 08/04/

17 On-Road Non-Road Point Area Biogenic On-road truck traffic associated with oil and gas drilling and production in Eagle Ford Shale CAPCOG + Milam Counties: Updated Agricultural Equipment emissions and spatial allocation, updated mine and quarry equipment emissions and spatial allocation, updated landfill equipment spatial allocation, updated industrial equipment emissions, updated residential lawn and garden equipment emissions Austin Round Rock MSA: Updated heavy highway construction equipment emissions and spatial allocation, updated ABIA emissions CAPCOG + Milam Counties: Updated EGUs using 2012 Acid Rain Database and NEGUs using 2011 TCEQ point source inventory. CAPCOG + Milam Counties: Updated industrial fuel combustion emissions and spatial allocation, commercial fuel combustion emissions, and oil and gas emissions and spatial allocation 18 Eastern Research Group, Inc. July 15, Development of Statewide Annual Emissions Inventory and Activity Data for Airports Morrisville, North Carolina. p. ES TCEQ. TexAER (Texas Air Emissions Repository). Austin, Texas. Available online: Accessed 07/03/ TCEQ. Austin, Texas. Available online: ftp://amdaftp.tceq.texas.gov/pub/rider8/ei/basecase/. Accessed 07/02/ TCEQ. Austin, Texas. Available online: ftp://amdaftp.tceq.texas.gov/pub/rider8/ei/basecase/. Accessed 07/02/

18 2.2 COTA Emission Inventory URS Corporation supplied local emission inventory updates for a COTA event based on actual activity data and equipment counts collected at the 2012 United States Grand Prix race. Emission inventory categories calculated by URS using actual data during the race are: 1. Area Sources Fuel Usage (Gasoline, Diesel, Kerosene) Commercial propane combustion 2. Helicopters 3. Nonroad Sources Golf Carts Specialty Vehicles/Carts Forklifts Air Compressors Generators 4. Racing Vehicles Exhaust Running Exhaust Crank Case Running Exhaust 5. Racing Vehicles Off-network Start Exhaust Crank Case Start Exhaust Evaporative Permeation Evaporative Fuel Vent Evaporative Fuel Leak 6. COTA On-Road Vehicles Exhaust (regular vehicles operating on the COTA premises) Running Exhaust Crank Case Running Exhaust 7. COTA On-Road Vehicles Off-network (offnetwork processes from on-road vehicles operating on the COTA premises) Start Exhaust Crank Case Start Exhaust Evaporative Permeation Evaporative Fuel Vent Evaporative Fuel Leak 8. Taxi cabs Exhaust Running Exhaust Crank Case Running Exhaust 9. Taxi cabs Off-network Start Exhaust Crank Case Start Exhaust Evaporative Permeation Evaporative Fuel Vent Evaporative Fuel Leak 10. Buses Exhaust Running Exhaust Crank Case Running Exhaust 11. Buses Off-network Start Exhaust Crank Case Start Exhaust Evaporative Permeation Evaporative Fuel Vent Evaporative Fuel Leak 12. On-Road Vehicles Exhaust (vehicles operated on public roads, aside from taxi cabs and buses) Running Exhaust Crank Case Running Exhaust 13. On-Road Vehicles Off-network (vehicles operated in off-roadway settings other than on the COTA premises, aside from taxi cabs and buses) Start Exhaust Crank Case Start Exhaust Evaporative Permeation Evaporative Fuel Vent Evaporative Fuel Leak 2-4

19 As mentioned earlier, event emission inventory estimations are based on observed data collected by URS during the USGP events in November TCEQ and EPA approved models were used by URS and CAPCOG to calculate emissions from the USGP event. TexN model 22, MOVES2010b 23, and AP42 24 were used to calculate emissions based on meteorological conditions that occurred during June On-road traffic count data was collected during the USGP event and matched to the June 2012 modeling inputs from link based emission inventory developed for the Austin five county region 25. Emission plots were used to verify the accuracy of spatial allocations for each emission inventory category that was updated for the COTA simulation project. For each 4km modeling grid, NO X emissions at 4 pm on Saturday were plotted for taxi cabs, Figure 2-1, buses, Figure 2-2, and roadways, Figure 2-3. Total NO X emissions for each day type at 3 pm, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, are plotted in Figure 2-4 to Figure 2-6. Table 2-2 lists NO X, VOC, and CO emissions by week day for all COTA emission inventory categories in The largest source of NO X emissions was on-road vehicle exhaust (1.20 tons on Sunday) and bus exhaust (0.72 tons on Sunday). Helicopters (0.53 tons on Sunday), on-road vehicles off-network emissions (0.40 tons on Sunday), race vehicle exhaust (0.37 tons on Sunday), and generators (0.30 tons per day) are also significant sources of NO X emissions. 22 Eastern Research Group, Inc. April 26, TexN Model. Available online: ftp://amdaftp.tceq.texas.gov/pub/nonroad_ei/texn/. Accessed: 08/27/ EPA. MOVES2010b. Available online: Accessed: 08/27/ EPA. Emissions Factors & AP 42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors. Available online: Accessed: 08/27/ Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI), June Austin Five-County Region Moves-Based On- Road Mobile Source Modeling Emissions Inventories for 2012 and College Station, Texas. 2-5

20 Figure 2-1: COTA Taxi Exhaust NO X Emissions on Saturday at 4pm, Figure 2-2: COTA Bus Exhaust NO X Emissions on Saturday at 4pm, tons of NO X tons of NO X Emissions are simulated to June meteorological conditions Emissions are simulated to June meteorological conditions 2-6

21 Figure 2-3: COTA Roadway Exhaust NO X Emissions on Saturday at 4pm, Figure 2-4: COTA Total NO X Emissions on Friday at 3pm, tons of NO X tons of NO X Emissions are simulated to June meteorological conditions Emissions are simulated to June meteorological conditions 2-7

22 Figure 2-5: COTA Total NO X Emissions on Saturday at 3pm, Figure 2-6: COTA Total NO X Emissions on Sunday at 3pm, Emissions are simulated to June meteorological conditions tons of NO X Emissions are simulated to June meteorological conditions tons of NO X 2-8

23 Table 2-2: COTA Emission Inventory with June Meteorological Data, 2012 (tons per day) Type Emission Source (EPS3 input files) Friday Saturday Sunday NO X VOC CO NO X VOC CO NO X VOC CO Area Sources Area sources Generators Non-Road Equipment Vehicles Helicopters Other nonroad sources Race vehicles exhaust Race vehicles offnetwork COTA On-Road Vehicles Exhaust COTA On-Road vehicles off-network Taxi cabs exhaust Taxi cabs offnetwork Buses exhaust Buses off-network On-Road vehicles exhaust On-Road vehicles off-network Total (tons/ozone season day) Emissions are based on actual collected data from COTA during the 2012 Formula 1 United States Grand Prix Emissions are simulated to June meteorological conditions 2-9

24 2.3 EPS3 Processing EPS3 was used to prepare the COTA emission inventory for input to the photochemical model. EPS3 chemically speciates emissions and converts the data into binary format. The core EPS3 modules used to process the COTA emission inventory were: PREPNT The entry point for point sources; prepares the annual or seasonal point source inventory for further processing, identifies which sources are to be treated as elevated by the photochemical model. CHMSPL Assigns input hydrocarbon emissions to chemical compounds expected by the air quality model and disaggregates criteria pollutants into photochemical modeling compounds. TMPRL Temporally adjusts emissions from annual, seasonal, or typical season day to episodic levels; allocates emissions to the hours of the modeling episode. PSTPNT Screens the point source inventory and generates a stack list of elevated sources and emission inventory files to be processed by the PIGEMS module. PIGEMS Flags sources for Plume-in-Grid (PIG) treatment by the CAMx model, merges multiple elevated point source files, and generates a CAMx ready elevated emissions file. GRDEM Spatially allocates emissions based on source location, or gridded spatial surrogate indicators; generates a CAMx-ready surface emissions file. MRGUAM Merges multiple CAMx-ready surface emissions files into one file (e.g., merges anthropogenic and biogenic low-level emissions into the final CAMx-ready inventory of surface sources). 26 Chemical speciation in EPS3 was based on existing TCEQ and EPA approved modeling files used in the photochemical model to produce the June 2006 base case. All emissions were spatially allocated to the 4km grid cells using data provided by URS. An example of the EPS3 script used to process COTA non-road emissions is provided in Appendix A.. Appendix B contains an example of an EPS3 PREPNT output message file for COTA non-road emissions. Appendix C lists all EPS3 input and output files. 26 ENVIRON International Corporation, September User s Guide Emissions Processor Version 3. Novato, CA. pp

25 3 Photochemical Modeling Projections 3.1 Projections Baselines Three 2012 scenarios listed below were developed using the June 2006 modeling episode. Each run was completed with WRF v3.2 and CAMx Baseline Emission Scenario Updated 2012 CAPCOG and Milam counties emission inventory including construction and mining equipment, industrial equipment, oil and gas equipment, agricultural equipment, commercial fuel consumption, industrial fuel consumption, Austin-Bergstrom International Airport, residential lawn and garden equipment, heavy duty truck idling, EGU, and NEGU Updated Austin-Round Rock MSA on-road, link-based MOVES 2010b emission inventory MOVES2010a on-road emission inventories for all other counties Updated 2012 San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA emission inventory including refined estimates for construction equipment, landfill equipment, quarry equipment, agricultural tractors, combines, commercial airports, point sources, and heavy duty truck idling Eagle Ford 2012 Emission Inventory This run was completed under a separate contract with CAPCOG and does not include any emissions from COTA 2012 Ozone Season USGP Simulation Includes all emission sources in the 2012 base case emission inventory Simulation of COTA USGP event with 120,000 in attendance, using actual activity data collected during the 2012 United States Grand Prix, modeled as if the event had occurred in June 2012 Ozone Season 40,000 Person Event Simulation Includes all emission sources in the 2012 base case emission inventory Reduction of the COTA simulation by 67 percent. This scenario represents a simulated event with attendance of 40,000 occurring at COTA 3.2 Ozone Plots Plots in Figure 3-1 through Figure 3-6 show the difference in the maximum predicted 8-hour ozone concentrations between the 2012 base case and the run incorporating the COTA USGP event emissions. Likewise, plots in Figure 3-7 to Figure 3-12 show the difference in the maximum predicted 8-hour ozone concentrations for a simulated USGP event at 33 percent. During the first two days of the episode, June 2 nd and June 3 rd, wind direction and speed push the ozone plume from emission sources at the simulated USGP event towards the southwest. During the other 4 days of the simulated USGP event at COTA, June 4 th, 9 th, 10 th, and 11 th, the ozone plume from the COTA event flows towards the north and northwest. As expected, when the COTA USGP event is at 33% there is a significant reduction in predicted ozone concentrations and ozone plume sizes. 3-1

26 Figure 3-1: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 100 Figure 3-2: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 100 percent, Friday, June 2 nd percent, Saturday, June 3 rd 3-2

27 Figure 3-3: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 100 Figure 3-4: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 100 percent, Sunday, June 4 th percent, Friday, June 9 th 3-3

28 Figure 3-5: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 100 Figure 3-6: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 100 percent, Saturday, June 10 th percent, Sunday, June 11 th 3-4

29 Figure 3-7: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 33 Figure 3-8: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 33 percent, Friday, June 2 nd percent, Saturday, June 3 rd 3-5

30 Figure 3-9: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 33 Figure 3-10: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 33 percent, Sunday, June 4 th percent, Friday, June 9 th 3-6

31 Figure 3-11: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 33 Figure 3-12: Difference in Daily Max 8-hour Ozone from COTA at 33 percent, Saturday, June 10 th percent, Sunday, June 11 th 3-7

32 3.3 Difference in Peak Ozone The maximum difference in peak 8-hour ozone levels modeled at the C3 ozone monitor as a result of adding the simulated USGP events at the COTA was 0.80 ppb with an average difference of 0.52 ppb over all weekend days analyzed (Table 3-1). At the C38 ozone monitor, the maximum difference modeled was 0.74 ppb with an average difference of 0.36 ppb over all days analyzed. When the emissions from the USGP event at the COTA were reduced in the model by 67% to reflect an event with 40,000 attendees, as opposed to the 120,000 who attended the 2012 USGP, the maximum change in modeled peak 8-hour ozone was 0.27 ppb at C3 and 0.25 ppb at C38. The average changes over all episode days analyzed with the 67% reduction were 0.17 ppb at C3 and 0.12 ppb at C38. The impact of emissions from the USGP event on the C3 and C38 ozone monitors was higher than some other sources (i.e. elevated point sources) in the Austin-Round Rock MSA because the COTA is located southeast of these ozone monitors, and the wind direction during the ozone season often flows northwest. On three of the modeling days, June 4 th, June 9 th, and June 11 th, the ozone plume went directly over the grids used to determine ozone impact at the monitors. Also, most of the emissions, except helicopters, are from ground level sources which have a greater impact on local ozone monitors compared to elevated sources like power plants. Two additional metrics were used to determine the potential impact of USGP racing events at COTA on 8-hour ozone concentrations: 1. Average difference for all grid cells with baseline peak 8-hour ozone averages > 60 ppb with centers within Travis County for each day and across all days. 2. Average difference for all grid cells with baseline peak 8-hour ozone averages > 70 ppb A map of the 4km grid cells used in the analysis is located in Figure 3-13 and a summary of the results for both the simulated USGP event scenario and the 67 percent reduction in emissions scenario is provided in Table 3-2. The average difference modeled for all grid cells above 60 ppb was 0.53 on June 2 nd, 0.25 ppb on June 9 th, and 0.07 ppb on June 10 th for the USGP simulated event. For grid cells with peak baseline 8-hour ozone averages above 70 ppb, the average difference modeled was 0.63 ppb on June 2 nd and 0.68 ppb on June 9 th. When the emissions were reduced by 67 percent, the average differences were 0.18 ppb on June 2 nd, 0.08 ppb on June 9 th, and 0.03 ppb on June 10 th in cells with predicted ozone greater than 60 ppb. For grid cells with baseline peak 8-hour ozone averages greater than 70 ppb, the average differences were 0.21 ppb on June 2 nd and 0.23 ppb on June 9 th. In Table 3-3, the predicted ozone and difference in each 4km photochemical model grid cells over 70 ppb are provided for the simulated USGP event, while Table 3-4 has the same data for grid cells over 60 ppb. Table 3-5 and Table 3-6 list the predicted ozone concentration in each 4km grid cell for the 67 percent reduction scenario. 3-8

33 Table 3-1: Change in Peak 8-Hour Ozone at each Monitor, Eagle COTA at 100% and 33%, ppb. Scenario Monitor Case 6/2 6/3 6/4 6/9 6/10 6/11 COTA at 100 Percent COTA at 33 Percent C3 C38 C3 C38 Based on the 7x7 4km grids around each monitor Base case With COTA Maximum Change (all Days) Average Change in Peak Ozone (All Days) Average Change (Days > 60 pbb) Average Change (Days > 70 pbb) Difference Base case With COTA Difference Base case With COTA Difference Base case With COTA Difference

34 Figure 3-13: Travis County 4km Photochemical Modeling Grid Squares used in the Analysis 3-10