ADMS-Airport and its application to PSDH and the R3/Mixed Mode consultation for Heathrow

Similar documents
Modelling Airport Air Quality

Air quality assessment for Cycle Enfield A105 proposals

Study of microscale urban air dispersion by ADMS - Urban

Dispersion Modelling Tools for Urban Air Quality and Climate Amy Stidworthy, Jenny Stocker and David Carruthers

Comparison of ADMS-Roads, CALINE4 and UK DMRB Model Predictions for Roads

Application of a High Density Low Cost Sensor Network for Air Quality (SNAQ) at London Heathrow Airport

Croucher Advanced Study Institute Urban Climatology for Tropical & Sub-tropical Regions

OUR APPROACH TO AIR QUALITY

Air Quality Modelling for Cycle Enfield. 21 st January 2016

The Leeds Clean Air Zone. Emission and Nitrogen Dioxide Concentration. Modelling Methodology Report. Second Round Modelling

AIR POLLUTANT DISPERSION. EXAMPLE APPLICATION TO AN AIRPORT AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.

Urban Heat Island modelling with ADMS-Urban: London case study

DOCUMENT CONTROL SHEET

Appendix 14.2 Air Quality Modelling Study

APPENDIX H AIR DISPERSION MODELLING REPORT BY PROJECT MANAGEMENT LTD. (REF. CHAPTER 11 AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATIC FACTORS)

Air quality at Heathrow Airport

modeling using the Pollution Climate Mapping (PCM) model UK NO X and NO 2

Urban Form, Vehicle Technology and Air Quality

Ambient NO 2 -concentrations in Germany Spatio-temporal distribution, effects, mitigations measures and scenarios

THE DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF AN AUTOMATED SYSTEM FOR NESTING ADMS-URBAN IN REGIONAL PHOTOCHEMICAL MODELS

Operational LTO Emission Calculation

CAFS National Modelling Framework & Glasgow Low Emission Zone. Vincent McInally

Air Quality Updating and Screening Assessment

AIR QUALITY MODELLING OF STRATEGIC TRAFFIC DEMAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

Low Emission Zones in Europe

Air Quality. Executive Summary

Air Pollution at Street Level in European Cities with Emphasis on PM 10 and PM 2.5

White Rose Research Online URL for this paper:

Modelling the effects of traffic emissions on the air quality

AEF discussion paper on aviation and air pollution

Air Quality Modelling Methodology

An update from the UK: the CLEAN AIR STRATEGY

Bristol City Council Clean Air Local Plan: Transport and Air Quality Compliance Timescales, Assumptions and Calculations

SHERPA for e-reporting

Air quality modelling in London LAEI2013

COEGA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OUR APPROACH TO AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT IN THE COEGA SEZ 1 OCTOBER 2018

Challenges in Delivering Clean Air Zones lessons from the feasibility studies. Dr Guy Hitchcock Technical Director AQE, 21 st and 22 nd Nov 2018

Global NOx 2004 per Envisat G R EA TER TO R O N TO A IR P O R TS A U TH O R ITY

Omagh District Council

Air quality, urban heat islands and climate change

Millipore Thermal Oxidiser Emissions Dispersion Modelling Impact Assessment

Ricardo-AEA. Road Transport and Air Quality. Guy Hitchcock. Transport Planning Society 21 st Jan

Air Quality Management in Tehran Paimaneh Hastaie Advisor to the Mayor of Tehran Exit on Environmental Affairs Next page Page 1 Tehran - IRAN

Using low-cost sensor networks to refine emissions for use in air quality modelling

FORUM-AE Workshop 1 Heathrow Airport Particulate Measurements 10th January 2014

Air Quality Modelling & Assessment Unit (AQMAU)

The results of CAIMANs project FUTURE TIME AIR DISPERSION MODEL RESULTS FOR THE TREND SCENARIO. Anastasia Poupkou AUTH

Air Quality Assessment for the proposed school development at 1 MacFarlane Lane, Isleworth, Hounslow, TW7 5PN

Experimental research about gaseous emissions coming from multi-floor parks: a real case in Taormina (Italy)

Airport GHG and Other Environmental Management. ICAO Environment Seminar and State Action Plan Workshop 11 to 13 June 2014 Yaoundé, Cameroon

Air Quality in Bath. Bath and North East Somerset The place to live, work and visit

Potential Impact of Biomass Burning on Urban Air Quality: Case-study of Chiang Mai

A LOW EMISSION ZONE FOR LONDON.

ISSUES RELATED TO NO2 NAAQS MODELING

David Carruthers, Jenny Stocker, Christina Hood CERC Jimmy Fung and Xie Bo HKUST BAQ 2012

The Challenge of Air Quality Management in the Ruhr Area, Germany

Deriving Background Concentrations of NOx and NO 2

COMMITTEE ON AVIATION ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (CAEP)

The practicalities of urban air quality management in large European cities

Proposed London Low Emission Zone. Impacts Monitoring Programme. Charles Buckingham Monitoring Manager Transport for London

Air Pollution at Stansted Airport: Annual Report for 2009

The role of light duty vehicles in future air pollution: a case study of Sacramento

Stansted Airport Generation 1 Inquiry. PROOF OF EVIDENCE BY Malcolm Pratt BSc, EurChem, CChem, CEnv, FRSC, FIEMA

Effective Air Quality Strategy in Oxford

What advice for modelling future nitrogen dioxide? Prof. Duncan Laxen

EMISSION REDUCTION SCENARIOS FOR THE AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN IN AOSTA VALLEY

LONDON ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS INVENTORY

Intermodal Logistics Centre at Enfield Environmental Assessment CHAPTER 12 AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT

The Highways Agency roadside air pollution monitoring network report

Bridging inventory and projections 21 October 2015 Brussels

The Challenges of Clean Air - Local, Regional & Global A Possible Solution

Clean air in Europe. Air quality challenges around airports. Vicente Franco, Zlatko Kregar DG Environment Clean Air Unit

ROMAIR - Implementation of an air quality modelling and forecast system in Romania LIFE08 ENV/F/000485

WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS FOR AIR- POLLUTION MONITORING IN CITIES

Proof of Evidence on behalf of Saffron Walden Friends of the Earth and Stop Stansted Expansion. Air Quality Issues

Air Quality Monitoring in the vicinity of Gatwick Airport: a proposal for future air quality reporting to the GP Sub Committee.

MODELLING OF VARIATION IN VEHICULAR POLLUTION CONCENTRATION WITH TIME PERIOD AND SEASON

Integrated Assessment Modelling in the UK: with a focus on the transport sector & NO2

Near-Road Air Quality Monitoring and Modeling: Towards a Mechanistic Understanding

EVALUATION OF THE OPEN ROAD SOURCE MODEL OML-HIGHWAY FOR SEVERAL FIELD DATASETS

Detailed Assessment of Nitrogen Dioxide Along the A14 Corridor South Cambridgeshire District Council

STAGE 3 REVIEW AND ASSESSMENT - DOMESTIC MODELLING UPDATE

Stansted Airport Sustainability Report Data Table ( )

ERCD REPORT Air noise and NO x emissions for B departures at London Heathrow. D Rhodes C Walker* A Clough

Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling for Odour Impact: Practices, Issues & Recommendations

Modelling of air pollutants released from highway traffic in Hungary

The Global Supply Chain and Greenhouse Gases: a North American Perspective

Mayor s Air Quality Strategy

A MAJOR ROAD NETWORK FOR ENGLAND: SUPPORTING DOCUMENT 5 AIR QUALITY

Implementing of RIAT+ in Emilia Romagna

Air Quality Assessment: Queen Margaret University Biomass Boiler. Report to East Lothian Council

ABP Southampton. Environmental Statement for Port of Southampton: Berth 201/202 Works. Appendix P. Air Quality Background Information

Combatting Air Pollution Learning from Success in Germany

Low Emission Topic Note 3 Review of Low Emission Zone / Low Emission Strategy Feasibility Studies

Air Quality, Odour & Pollutants Data Sheet

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT. Accompanying the document. A Strategy

2. This note has been written by Dr Claire Holman. Her air quality management experience is outlined in Appendix A.

ABERDEEN HARBOUR EXPANSION PROJECT November Volume 3: Technical Appendices STUDY

Air Quality Technical Report PM2.5 Quantitative Hot spot Analysis. A. Introduction. B. Interagency Consultation

EMISSION NEEDS AT LOCAL SCALE FOR AIR QUALITY MODELLING

Transcription:

ADMS-Airport and its application to PSDH and the R3/Mixed Mode consultation for Heathrow Study conducted for DfT David Carruthers Cambridge Environmental Research Consultants OMEGA International Conference on Airport Air Quality London, October 14 2008

Contents Key Factors affecting AQ at Airports Features of ADMS-Airport Model Set-Up and Emissions AQ Monitoring at Heathrow Model Performance and Results

1) Key factors affecting air quality at airports

Key factors affecting air quality at airports Emissions Background concentrations Meteorology Near field dispersion processes Chemical reactions

2) Features of ADMS-Airport

Features of ADMS-Airport An extension of ADMS-Urban Gaussian type model nested in regional trajectory model Includes chemical reaction scheme, meteorological preprocessor, Monin-Obukhov and mixed layer scaling for boundary layer structure Allowance for up to 6500 sources: road (1500, each with up to 50 vertices), point, line area and volume (1500), grid sources (3000) and up to 500 runway sources (exhaust modelled as moving jets) Other airport features Hour by hour time varying data Multi-segment line sources e.g. taxi ways GIS link displays line, volume and runway sources

Features: MODELLING EXHAUSTS AS MOVING JETS - TAKE-OFF Models engine exhausts as moving jet sources As the aircraft accelerates buoyancy and emissions increasingly spread along the runway the exhaust jet sees a faster ambient wind speed, this affects the plume rise The plume from the faster aircraft rises less than that from a slower aircraft

Local and Regional Scales Box model domain Main model domain First source Backgound monitoring site U Main model nested within large, area-wide trajectory model

3) Model Set-Up and Emissions

Heathrow: SCENARIOS 2010 Segregated Mode (2010SM) 2015 Segregated Mode (2015SM) 2015 Segregated Mode with Easterly Preference (2015EP) 2015 Segregated Mode with No Cranford Agreement (2015NoC) 2015 Mixed Mode (2015MM) 2015 Mixed Mode with traffic mitigation (2015MMRd) 2030 Mixed Mode (2030MM) 2020 Third Runway (2020R3) 2030 Third Runway (2030R3)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 100 200 300 400 500 600 Heathrow: METEOROLOGICAL DATA 2002 0 0 3 1.5 6 3.1 10 5.1 16 8.2 (knots) (m/s) Wind speed 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270

Heathrow: BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS, AVERAGE 60 50 Annual Average (µg/m³) 40 30 20 % Harwell 220 to 330 330 to 60 % 135 to 220 % Wicken Fen 60 to 135 Lullington Heath % % Rochester % Harwell % Wicken Fen 184 to 4 % 4 to 184 Lullington Heath % % Rochester NOx NO2 O3 PM10 10 0 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Year

Heathrow: EMISSION SOURCES Gridded sources for all of London (LAEI,NAEI) Roads local to Heathrow from LAEI (London Atmospheric Emissions Inventory) and the Heathrow Inventory (Heathrow area road traffic data from Hyder) LTO: taxi-in, taxi-out, landing, approach, initial climb, climb out (AEA) Other: APU, airside vehicles, car parks, taxi ranks modelled as area or volume sources (AEA)

Heathrow: ANNUAL NOx EMISSIONS, ROAD & AIRPORT 6000 5000 4000 t/yr) NOx emissions (t 3000 Road Airport 2000 1000 0 2002 Base 2010 SM 2015 SM 2015 MM 2020 R3 2030 MM 2030 R3

Heathrow: PRIMARY NO2 EMISSIONS 25% 20% Road Traffic Primary NO2 15% 10% 5% Heathrow area Rest of London 0% 2002 2010 2015 2020 2030 Year Industrial sources: 10% primary NO2 assumed Primary NO2 for aircraft depends on thrust 100% - 4.5%; 85% - 5.3%; 30% - 15.0%; 7% - 37.5%

Heathrow: TRAFFIC EMISSION FACTORS Light duty vehicles, arabic numerals: 4, 5, 6 Heavy duty vehicles, roman numerals: IV, V, VI Motorcycles, arabic numerals: 4, 5, 6 but may have different entry dates from the light duty vehicles Euro 5 and V Euro 6 and VI Petrol cars Jan 2010 - Petrol LGVs Jan 2011 - Diesel cars Jan 2010 Jan 2015 Diesel LGVs Jan 2011 Jan 2016 HDVs Oct 2008 Jan 2013

Heathrow: TRAFFIC EMISSION FACTORS RIGID HDV 12 EURO V & VI rigid (urban, 2010) 10 emission factor (g g/km) 8 6 4 2 EURO V EURO VI P07 - EURO V P07 - EURO VI 0 0 50 100 150 speed

Heathrow: TRAFFIC EMISSION FACTORS ARTIC HDV 12 EURO V & VI articulated (urban, 2010) 10 emission factor (g g/km) 8 6 4 2 EURO V EURO VI P07 - EURO V P07 - EURO VI 0 0 50 100 150 speed

Heathrow: CURRENT AIRCRAFT EMISSIONS TAKE-OFF 1 BA have developed a method to relate information on take-off thrust to be derived from information on actual take-off weight The methodology is based on analysis of an extensive set of FDR and weight data for the fleet at Heathrow The method has been extended for use with airlines The method has been extended for use with airlines other than BA and aircraft outside the data set by adding 5% to the estimate of thrust to account for uncertainties

Heathrow: CURRENT APU EMISSIONS NOX BA defined 6 APU class, each aircraft at Heathrow was assigned to one the classes Model emission indices were derived by BA from the detailed manufacturers data PM10 BA found a large variability in modal PM10 emission rates The variability was found to be reduced if the PM10 emission rates were expressed as a function of the corresponding NOX index Three classes of APU were defined with different NOX-PM10 relationships

Heathrow: FUTURE AIRCRAFT EMISSIONS TAKE-OFF Based on judgement by Qinetiq on evolution of aircraft engines for current fleet and future fleet. Takes into account manufacturers targets, technology expectations Emissions primarily characterised in terms relative to CAEP/4 limits Higher average take-off thrust settings on R3

4) AQ Monitoring at Heathrow

Heathrow: AMBIENT MONITORING SITES 1

Heathrow: MONITORED NOX CONCENTRATIONS NO x trends with 2002 and 2010 predictions (mg/m 3 ) NO x concentration 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 LHR2 LHR5 LHR6 LHR8 LHR10 LHR11 LHR14 LHR15 LHR16 LHR17 LHR18 LHR2 predicted LHR5 predicted LHR6 predicted LHR8 predicted LHR10 predicted LHR11 predicted LHR14 predicted LHR15 predicted LHR16 predicted LHR17 predicted LHR18 predicted 0 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Year

Heathrow: MONITORED NO2 CONCENTRATIONS NO 2 trends with 2002 and 2010 predictions /m 3 ) NO 2 concentration (mg/ 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 LHR2 LHR5 LHR6 LHR8 LHR10 LHR11 LHR14 LHR15 LHR16 LHR17 LHR18 LHR2 predicted LHR5 predicted LHR6 predicted LHR8 predicted LHR10 predicted LHR11 predicted LHR14 predicted LHR15 predicted LHR16 predicted LHR17 predicted LHR18 predicted 0 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 Year

Heathrow: MONITORED NO2/NOX RATIO 0.8 NO 2 / NO x ratio trend NO 2 / NO x ratio 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 LHR2 LHR5 LHR6 LHR10 LHR11 LHR14 LHR15 LHR16 LHR17 LHR8 0 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Year

5) Model performance and Results

250 70 200 LHR10 60 LHR10 lled NOx (ug/m3) Model 150 100 50 LHR6 LHR11 LHR5 LHR14 LHR8 LHR15 LHR16 LHR2 Model lled NO2 (ug/m3) 50 40 30 20 10 LHR16 LHR11 LHR5 LHR15 LHR14 LHR6 LHR8 LHR2 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 Measured NOx (ug/m3) 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Measured NO2 (ug/m3) Scatter plot comparison of monitored and modelled annual average NOX and NO2

Box and whisker plot of the ratio of modelled to monitored NO x concentration 10 Ratio of NO x concentration 1 LHR2 Box and whisker plots for the ratio of (calculated/monitored) concentrations, NO X (top) and NO 2 (bottom). 0.1 LHR2 LHR5 LHR6 LHR8 LHR10 LHR11 LHR14 LHR15 LHR16 10 Box and whisker plot of the ratio of modelled to monitored NO 2 concentration The lines indicate the 75 th, 50 th and 25 th percentiles and the lines extend from the 95 th to 5 th percentile. Ratio of NO 2 concentration 1 0.1 LHR2 LHR5 LHR6 LHR8 LHR10 LHR11 LHR14 LHR15 LHR16

LHR2 diurnal variation ADMS-Airport (solid line) compared with measured data (dotted line), different runway use 160 140 D LHR2-LHR8 Measured D LHR2-LHR8 Modelled A LHR2-LHR8 Measured A LHR2-LHR8 Modelled 120 (ug/m3) NOx concentration 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Hour of the day

181000 200 Base Case NOX 180000 175 150 179000 125 100 No orthing (metres) 178000 75 177000 50 40 176000 30 175000 20 10 174000 5 2 173000 1 503000 504000 505000 506000 507000 508000 509000 510000 511000 512000 Easting (metres) 0 2000 4000 6000 8000

181000 80 Base Case NO2 180000 70 179000 60 Norrthing (metres) 178000 50 177000 40 176000 35 175000 30 20 174000 10 173000 0 503000 504000 505000 506000 507000 508000 509000 510000 511000 512000 Easting (metres) 0 2000 4000 6000 8000

Base Case ozone 181000 180000 179000 178000 45 42 39 36 Northing (metres) 177000 176000 175000 33 30 27 24 174000 21 173000 18 15 503000 504000 505000 506000 507000 508000 509000 510000 511000 512000 Easting (metres) 0 2000 4000 6000 8000

181000 181000 50 50 180000 45 180000 45 179000 40 179000 40 Northing (metres) 178000 177000 176000 175000 174000 173000 503000 504000 505000 506000 507000 508000 509000 510000 511000 512000 Easting (metres) 181000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 PM10 due to -All sources (top left) -Airport and other airport sources (top right) -Road sources (bottom) Northing (metres) 180000 179000 178000 177000 176000 175000 174000 173000 35 30 25 20 10 5 4 3 2 1 Northing (metres) 178000 177000 176000 175000 174000 173000 503000 504000 505000 506000 507000 508000 509000 510000 511000 512000 Easting (metres) 503000 504000 505000 506000 507000 508000 509000 510000 511000 512000 Easting (metres) 50 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 45 40 35 30 25 20 10 5 4 3 2 1 35 30 25 20 10 5 4 3 2 1 0 2000 4000 6000 8000

Page 41, Adding Capacity at Heathrow Airport: Consultation Document, Department for Transport, November 2007

Predicted NO 2 concentrations 2002 Base Case 2010 SM 2015 SM 181000 180000 179000 178000 Northing (metres) 177000 176000 175000 174000 173000 503000 504000 505000 506000 507000 508000 509000 510000 511000 512000 Easting (metres) 2015 MM 2020 R3 2030 R3 181000 180000 179000 178000 Northings (metres) 177000 176000 175000 174000 173000 503000 504000 505000 506000 507000 508000 509000 510000 511000 512000 Eastings (metres)

Scenarios: ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATION OF NOx and NO2 ACROSS THE DOMAIN 90 80 70 Annual average e (µg/m³) 60 50 40 30 Average NOx Average NO2 20 10 0 2002 base 2010 SM 2015 SM 2015 MM 2020 R3 2030 R3 2030 MM

Scenarios: NUMBER OF PROPERTIES & POPULATION PREDICTED TO EXCEED NO2 LIMIT Case Properties Population 2002 Base 7336 17581 2010SM 1386 3126 2015SM 56 139 2015MM 91 199 2015MMrd 35 75 2030MM 0 0 2020R3 0 0 2030R3 0 0

Scenarios: NUMBER OF PROPERTIES PREDICTED TO EXCEED NO2 LIMIT 8000 7000 Properties Exceed ding 40µg/m³ 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 2002 base 2010 SM 2015 SM 2015 MM 2020 R3 2030 R3 2030 MM

Scenarios: PERCENTAGE AREA OF DOMAIN EXCEEDING NO2 LIMIT 25 Percentage area exc ceeding 40µg/m³ 20 15 10 5 0 2002 base 2010 SM 2015 SM 2015 MM 2020 R3 2030 R3 2030 MM

Scenarios: PDFs OF ANNUAL AVERGAE NO2 CONCENTRATIONS 0.12 0.1 0.08 ity Probabili 0.06 2002 Base 2015MM 2030MM 2030 R3 0.04 0.02 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Annual average NO2 (µg/m³)

Scenarios: AREA EXCEEDING NO2 LIMIT AS A FUNCTION OF AIRPORT AND ROAD NOX EMISSIONS 4500 Average NOx Emissions fr rom Road Traffic (t/yr) 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Size = Area Exceeding 40µg/m³ 2015 MM 2030 MM 2002 Base 2030 R3 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Average NOx Emissions from Airport (t/yr) 2010 SM 2015 SM 2020 R3

Conclusions Key factors affecting pollutant concentrations in the neighbourhood of airports include the following: Emissions including primary NO 2 Background concentrations e.g. O 3 Meteorology Near field dispersion processes Chemical reactions Heathrow Mixed Mode and R3 Consultation period over; DfT preparing response