Not logged in - Login
< back

2015-10-20 Tools Workgroup

Date: October 20, 2015
Time: 2-3:30pm MDT
Call in: 1-800-768-2983 and access code 4918837
Webinar: https://join.me/IWDW-Online

IWDW Visualization Tools Workgroup

Contents [hide]

Links

Tools wiki Meeting minutes and agendas
Tools workgroup forum IWDW Forum topic on tool development
Planning doc pdf doc

Current tools

IWDW Data Includes the tools:
  • Emissions Review
  • Source Apportionment
  • Model-to-Observation Comparison
  • Model Performance Evaluation Plots
  • Summary Reports

Development

Geospatial tools
  • IWDW GIS Server:link

Agenda

  1. Workgroup roles & tool review
  2. Status of current tools
    1. Supported modeling platforms & observational data
    2. Features
  3. Development priorities
  4. Other items
  5. Next call

Minutes

Attendees

Mark Jones (NMED), Chris Pennell (UTDEQ), Gail Tonnesen (EPA), Kevin Briggs (CODPHE), Rebecca Matichuk (EPA), Nancy Daher (UTDEQ), Ken Rairigh (WYDEQ), Zac Adleman (UNCIE), Tom Moore (WESTAR), Shawn McClure (CIRA), Dustin Schmidt (CIRA), Rodger Ames (CIRA)

Rodger Ames began the call with an overview of the agenda, and pointed out resources for the workgroup, including the workgroup wiki page, IWDW workgroup forum, and IWDW development team issue tracker for internal project management.

The group used the attached planning document to walk through the respective IWDW tools and look at their current functionality and discuss possible enhancements.

Beginning with the ERT, Rebecca suggested breaking out VOCs into speciated components in order to track reactive VOCs, such as CH2O. Zac indicated that this would be problematic in the current ERT because some source categories, such as biogeneics, do not include VOC speciation, however speciation could be provided for most anthropogenic source categories. Rebecca then suggested moving tracking of speciated VOCs to a latter point in the processing stream, for example to model ready gridded emissions where VOC speciation is prescribed. Zac pointed out that at that point county codes are not retained, which looses a key linkage in the current ERT.

Discussion turned to aligning tool development with the EPA's MPE guidance document, which prioritizes sets of graphic products that useful to various components of the MPE process. Tom noted that there is a need to develop a feedback process whereby issues identified during modeling evaluation (for example emissions review) can be incorporated into model application. For example, a tool to display spatial model-ready gridded emissions could reveal discrepancies in emissions inventories across State/county lines.

MPE tool: Tom suggested developing a matrix of available plots by plot type, parameter, and other indices of interest (such as dry & wet dep, etc.). Rebecca added that certain plots are necessary to identify model performance issues, as indicated in the MPE guidance doc., and such plots could be identified.

Model-to-obs: Rebecca suggested adding diurnal plots to the output options, for example, filtering hourly O3 by a specific time-of-day. Zac noted that such plots are part of the AMET output and provided in the MPE static plot browser, however they might be difficult to find (see ftp://imgreader@viking.cira.colostate.edu/3SDW/3SAQS/2011/Base11a/plots/AQ/CO/CAMx_3SAQS04_B11a_CO_AQS_Hourly_O3_mar_hourlyboxplot.png)ftp://imgreader@viking.cira.colostate.edu/3SDW/3SAQS/2011/Base11a/plots/AQ/CO/CAMx_3SAQS04_B11a_CO_AQS_Hourly_O3_mar_hourlyboxplot.png )

Action Items