EMEP Case study:
Assessment of HM pollution levels with fine spatial
resolution in Belarus, Poland and UK
Ilia Ilyin, Olga Rozovskaya, Oleg Travnikov
Meteorological Synthesizing Centre - East
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Country-scale pollution assessment
Case studies of HM pollution in selected EMEP countries
Netherlands
Approach:
Evaluation of pollution levels in a country with
fine spatial resolution involving variety of
national data
Requirements:
• Detailed emissions data (fine resolution,
source categories, LPS)
• Additional measurements from national
monitoring networks
• Participation of national experts in joint
analysis of the results
Czech Republic
Croatia
Belarus
Countries involved:
Country
Status
Czech Rep
Croatia
Netherlands
Belarus
Poland
U.K.
complete
complete
complete
complete
in progress
in progress
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Case study for Belarus (Pb, 2012)
Purpose:
 Investigate changes in the model performance due to transfer from coarse to fine
resolution
 Provide the country with data on lead pollution levels with fine spatial resolution
Calculation of boundary concentrations for country-scale modelling domain
Official EMEP emission data used
50
EMEP domain
3
ng/m3
Factor of 2
Factor of 3
Pb air conc.
Model, ng/m
Pb in air, 2012
~ 40 stations
10
1
Berezinskiy
Reserve (Belarus)
0.1
0.1
- obs. sites
50x50 km2
1
10
3
Observed, ng/m
50
The model reasonably well reproduces Pb pollution in the EMEP region,
keeping in mind existing uncertainties (EMEP/MSC-E status report 2014)
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Emission data involved in the study
EMEP emission (CEIP)
50x50 km2
National data
10x10 km2
National emissions:
kg/km2/y
 High-resolution totals
 Gridded sector data
 Large Point Sources
kg/km2/y
Total in Belarus: 68 t (2012)
Total in Belarus: 8.3 t
This value used in
calculations
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Monitoring data in modelling domain (Pb, 2012)
Berezinskiy Reserve (Belarus)
Monitoring data (conc. in air)
 1 EMEP station in Poland
(Diabla Gora, PL5)
 1 background site
(Berezinsky Reserve, Belarus)
 5 background urban sites in Poland
(EU AirBase data)
 19 urban stations (Belarus)
BY urban stations (national experts)
Berezinskiy reserve (national experts)
EMEP station (CCC)
PL stations (AirBase)
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Model output for Belarus with fine spatial resolution
Pollution levels with fine (10x10 km2) resolution
Source-receptor relationships for the country and its regions
Pollution from particular emission sectors
Contamination from particular LPS
Pollution of cities
Belarus
6%
Remaining
22%
Italy
3%
Slovakia
3%
2.5
City (anthrop.)
External (anthrop)
Secondary
non-EMEP
2.0
2
1.5
1.0
0.5
t
dn
o
G
ro
Br
es
el
om
v
H
ile
M
og
bs
k
Vi
te
sk
0.0
M
in
Ukraine
11%
Poland
52%
Deposition, kg/km /y
Germany
3%
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Analysis of simulated pollution levels in the modelling
domain (10x10 km2)
Urban sites,
Poland
Model, ng/m
3
10
Diabla Gora
(EMEP site,PL5)
1
Berezinskiy Reserve (Belarus)
Concentrations in air (Pb, 2012)
1
10
Observed, ng/m
3
Factor of 2
Factor of 3
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Jul
0
Aug
Nov
Dec
10
Dec
Nov
15
Oct
PL0538A
Sep
25
Apr
Dec
Nov
Oct
Sep
Aug
Jul
Jun
3
Observed
Modelled
Aug
0
4
Observed
Modelled
Jul
5
Jun
15
May
0
20
May
2
Mar
4
Apr
6
Concentrations in air, ng/m
EMEP station
Feb
Jan
Dec
10
Mar
3
10
Concentrations in air, ng/m
Oct
Nov
PL5
Feb
Jan
Observed
Modelled
Oct
Sep
Aug
Jul
Jun
May
Apr
Mar
3
Observed
Modelled
Sep
5
Jul
10
20
Jun
15
12
May
25
Feb
5
Concentrations in air, ng/m
10
8
Apr
0
Jan
Dec
15
Mar
Oct
Nov
PL0531A
Feb
3
PL0507A
Concentrations in air, ng/m
Dec
Sep
Aug
Jul
Jun
May
Apr
Mar
3
25
Jan
Dec
Nov
Oct
Observed
Modelled
Sep
Oct
Nov
Jan
Feb
Concentrations in air, ng/m
Observed
Modelled
Aug
20
Sep
Aug
Jul
Jun
Observed
Modelled
Jun
May
Apr
Mar
May
Apr
Mar
Feb
3
20
Feb
3
20
Jan
Berezinskiy Reserve – reference station for further analysis
Concentrations in air, ng/m
Jan
Concentrations in air, ng/m
Seasonal variations of modelled and observed air concentrations
14
25
PL0148A
15
10
5
0
25
PL0214A
5
Berez. Reserve
(Belarus)
3
2
1
0
5
0
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Analysis of uncertainties
Three sources of uncertainties:
1) Measurements
2) Model
3) Emission data
Uncertainties of monitoring data
Data Quality Objectives for HM analytical methods:
±15-25% from expected (theoretical) value
7
3
2
Belgium
Netherlands
Latvia
Cyprus
Poland
France
Czech Rep.
Germany
U.K.
Belarus
Slovenia
Spain
Estonia
0
Hungary
1
Finland
3
4
Sweden
 Air conc. in ‘Berezinskiy Reserve‘ are
comparable with those in other parts
of the EMEP region
5
ng/m
 Participation of national laboratory in
intercomparison of analytical methods
coordinated by CCC is appreciated
Pb air conc. in 2012
(EMEP data)
6
Denmark
 Monitoring uncertainty of
‘Berezinskiy Reserve’ is unknown
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Uncertainty of the model
Intrinsic model uncertainty
(without effect of emission)
Sensitivity coefficient
Model uncertainty, %
70
Anthrop. Emission
60
Dry deposition veloc.
50
Particle diameter
40
Wet Scavenging Coeff.
30
Vertical diffus. Coeff.
20
Boundary conc.
10
Pb in air
Liquid water contents
0
Air conc. Conc.in
precip.
Total
depos.
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Sensitivity coefficient
Intrinsic model uncertainty is ±30-40% for concentrations and deposition
Reference: Travnikov O. and I.Ilyin [2005], EMEP/MSC-E Report 6/2005
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Uncertainties of the emission data
Average Pb emission flux
Pb
2
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Po
la
C
nd
ze
ch
R
ep
G
.
er
m
an
y
Sp
ai
n
Be
la
ru
s
Emission in Belarus: national (8.3 t/y )
Mean emission flux, kg/km /y
2.0
kg/km2/y
40
30
20
10
Sp
ai
n
Be
la
ru
s
an
y
m
ep
.
G
er
R
d
0
C
ze
ch
 Emission fluxes differ markedly
Pb
50
la
n
 Observed air conc. in BY and
other countries are comparable
60
Po
Pb emissions
in 2012 and
Pb emissions
in urban
2012 obs. sites
Pb air concentrations, ng/m
3
Observed urban Pb concentrations
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Emission sectors in Belarus and neighbouring countries
(Pb, 2012)
Belarus
(national data)
Latvia
6%
Poland
25%
75%
21%
4%
43%
2%
3%
6%
66%
19%
30%
Non-Industrial Combustion
Industry
Road transport
Other
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Pb emissions from ‘Road Transport’ and
‘Non-industrial combustion’ sectors
Pb emission fluxes in 2012 in the EMEP region
Road Transport
Non-Industrial Combustion
Belarus:
Data from national
experts
Other countries:
CEIP
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Sensitivity study of modelled air concentrations at
‘Berezinskiy Reserve’ to emission
Model run
Emission in BY, t
Spatial distribution in BY
Base-case
8.3
10x10 km2 (as in national data)
Total value provided
by national experts
Bias,%
-66
Modelled
Observed
Air concentrations, ng/m 3
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Scenario 1
 Emission data for Belarus (68 t/y) is used
 Spatial distribution of emissions: as in the national data
in Belarus
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Sensitivity study of modelled air concentrations at
‘Berezinskiy Reserve’ to emission
Model run
Emission in BY, t
Spatial distribution in BY
Base-case
8.3
10x10 km2 (as in national data)
Scenario #1
68
10x10 km2 (as in national data)
The same as officially
reported value for 2012
Bias,%
-66
-56
Modelled
Observed
Air concentrations, ng/m 3
2.5
2.0
1.5
significant bias still remains
1.0
0.5
0.0
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Scenario 2
Purpose:
Fitting of modelled and observed air concentrations at station ‘Berezinskiy Reserve’
The aim is NOT to revise national emission data!
Approach:
 Total emission in Belarus
changed from 8.3 to 137 t/y
4
Pb emission, t per
million of people
 Emissions in sectors ‘Non-Industrial
Combustion’ and ‘Road Transport’ are
increased proportional to population
density. Spatial distribution of emissions
changed.
Per capita Pb emission in 2012 in sectors
‘Non-Industrial Combustion’ and ‘Road
Transport’
3
Non-industrial Combustion
Road Transport
2
1
0
 The change of emissions took
place only in Belarus, Ukraine
and Russia
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Spatial distribution of national and scenario emissions
(Pb, 10x10 km2)
National emissions (8.3 t)
(Base-case run)
Scenario emissions (137 t)
LV
LT
LV
LT
PL
PL
BY
BY
kg/km2/y
RU
UA
RU
UA
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Sensitivity study of modelled air concentrations at
‘Berezinskiy Reserve’ to emission
Model run
Emission in BY, t
Spatial distribution in BY
Base-case
8.3
10x10 km2 (as in national data)
Scenario #1
68
10x10 km2 (as in national data)
Bias,%
-66
-56
Modelled
Observed
Air concentrations, ng/m 3
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Sensitivity study of modelled air concentrations at
‘Berezinskiy Reserve’ to emission
Model run
Emission in BY, t
Spatial distribution in BY
Base-case
8.3
10x10 km2 (as in national data)
Scenario #1
68
10x10 km2 (as in national data)
Scenario #2
137
10x10 km2 (Scenario)
Bias,%
Modelled
Observed
Air concentrations, ng/m 3
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
-66
-56
-1
 Joint efforts of the
EMEP Centres, and
national experts and
TFEIP are needed for
further analysis of
emission data in EECCA
countries
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Model output for Belarus with fine spatial resolution:
base-case vs. scenario #2
Air concentration of lead in 2012
Base-Case
Scenario #2
Emissions assumed in Scenario #2 led to significant increase of calculated pollution
levels in Belarus
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Conclusions and recommendations
 Assessment of pollution level assessment for Belarus with fine spatial resolution was
done. The country was provided with detailed country-specific information with fine
(10x10 km2) resolution.
 Analysis of the available national emission data shows that Pb emissions in Belarus
and in neighbouring EECCA countries from sectors ‘Non-Industrial Combustion’ and
‘Road Transport’ are likely underestimated. Therefore, calculated lead pollution levels
in Belarus may be underpredicted.
 Model sensitivity study demonstrates that the modelled Pb pollution levels are
sensitive not only to emission total values in countries but also to their spatial
distribution.
 The suggested emission scenario led to improvement of modelling results compared
to observed levels. However, joint efforts of the EMEP Centres, national experts and
TFEIP are needed for further analysis of emission data in the EECCA countries.
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Conclusions and recommendations (cont.)
 Evaluation of quality of measurement data in Belarus under supervision of CCC is
appreciated.
 Pollution levels in Belarus are strongly affected by emission sources in
neighbouring countries. To better understand origin of pollution in Belarus,
similar studies in other neighbouring countries (PL, UA, RU) would be helpful.
 Similar case studies of pollution level assessment in Belarus could be carried out for
other pollutants (e.g., for particulate matter). It could be useful to better understand
peculiarities of atmospheric pollution in Belarus.
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Pollution assessment for Poland (Cd) (in progress)
Purpose: Evaluate Cd pollution levels in Poland
with fine spatial resolution (10x10 km2)
Emissions of Cd from point
sources in 2012, kg/y
Available data:
Point-source emissions of Cd
(provided by Poland)
-
Power stations
Production of coke
Copper smelting
Production of cement
Area sources (to be derived from EMEP data)
Monitoring data
Cd total deposition
from point sources
- EMEP data
- AirBase
Modelling under preparation
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Simulation of HM levels over the U.K. (Centre of Ecology and
Hydrology) with fine spatial resolution (preliminary results)
Main purposes:
Simulate Pb pollution levels with fine spatial resolution (10x10 km)
Compare modelling results of MSC-E and national FRAME model
Evaluate a role of wind re-suspension in HM levels in the U.K.
National data:
Emissions (1x1 km)
- Source categories
- Point sources
Monitoring data
- Air concentrations (32 sites)
- Wet deposition (8 sites)
Concentrations in soil
Pb total deposition in 2012 (10x10 km2)
More details: in the next presentation by Massimo
Vienno
17th TFMM
Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Thank you for attention!
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016
Uncertainties of the emission data
Pb emission flux
Pb
2
Mean emission flux, kg/km /y
2.0
Pb total emissions in 2012
1.0
0.5
0.0
Po
la
C
nd
ze
ch
R
ep
G
.
er
m
an
y
Sp
ai
n
Be
la
ru
s
kg/km2/y
1.5
17th TFMM Meeting, 17-20 May, 2016