Advertisement

Boundary-Layer Meteorology

, Volume 170, Issue 1, pp 95–125 | Cite as

The Effect of the Urban Parametrization on Simulated Contaminant Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion

  • Timothy J. BauerEmail author
Research Article
  • 182 Downloads

Abstract

Urban atmospheric transport and dispersion are investigated through the simulation of hypothetical contaminant releases. The Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model is used to simulate a New York City heat event from 18–20 July 2013 using three different urban parametrizations and the Noah land-surface model, with simulation results reflecting the variations in the parametrization of urban drag and building-wake effects, leading to simulated ranges of 2 °C for the surface air temperature, 3 m s−1 for the surface wind speed, and 20° for the surface wind direction. The Quick Urban and Industrial Complex (QUIC) model for atmospheric transport and dispersion is used to simulate three hypothetical contaminant releases in Central Park in New York City: the release of a biological agent from a backpack sprayer, the release of pressurized liquid chlorine from a rupture in a tanker truck, and the release of a radioisotope from a radiological dispersion device. The WRF model results from the four simulations at the times of maximum and minimum surface air temperature are used to initialize the QUIC model, with the different urban parametrizations leading to differences in plume directions and contaminant contour areas of up to 33° and up to a factor of 2.1, respectively. The variation in the size of predicted contours at the toxicity threshold may influence emergency-response decisions, while the differences in the predicted plume direction may influence where emergency-response personnel are directed. The results support the development and deployment of the best urban parametrization scheme in a forecast model for predicting hazard areas.

Keywords

Atmospheric transport and dispersion Emergency response Numerical weather prediction model Toxic hazard area Urban heat island Urban parametrization 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study and the preceding UHI analysis cited are part of the author’s research towards a PhD in Atmospheric and Oceanic Science, and this article is submitted to meet a requirement to obtain that degree. The author thanks his advisor, Dr. Da-Lin Zhang, for overall guidance, Dr. Yixuan Shou for valuable assistance in setting up and executing the WRF model, Dr. Michael Brown for providing the high resolution QUIC model-domain representation of NYC buildings and the QUIC model, and Mr. Matthew Wolski for assistance in executing the QUIC model. The NARR and GFS meteorology data were obtained from the following sources. National Centers for Environmental Prediction/National Weather Service/NOAA/U.S. Department of Commerce. 2005, updated monthly. NCEP North American Regional Reanalysis (NARR). Research Data Archive at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, Computational and Information Systems Laboratory. http://rda.ucar.edu/datasets/ds608.0/. Accessed 11/19/2014. National Centers for Environmental Information/National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/National Centers for Environmental Prediction/U.S. Department of Commerce. Global Forecasting System version 4, NOAA National Operational Model Archive and Distribution System (NOMADS). https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/data-access/model-data/model-datasets/global-forcast-system-gfs. Accessed 11/14/2014.

References

  1. Allwine KJ, Flaherty JE, Brown M, Coirier W, Hansen O, Huber A, Leach M, Patnaik G (2008) Urban dispersion program: evaluation of six building-resolved urban dispersion models. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Tech Rep PNNL-17321Google Scholar
  2. Baik J-J, Park S-B, Kim J-J (2009) Urban flow and dispersion simulation using a CFD model coupled to a mesoscale model. J Appl Meteorol Climatol 48:1667–1681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bauer T (1998) Software design description for the chemical/biological agent vapor, liquid, and solid tracking (VLSTRACK) computer model, version 3.0. Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division, Tech Rep NSWCDD/TR-98/6Google Scholar
  4. Bauer TJ, Fox SB (2008) Characterization of the initial cloud of chlorine resulting from a 90-ton railcar incident. US Department of Homeland Security, Chemical Security Analysis CenterGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown MJ, Gowardhan AA, Nelson MA, Williams MD, Pardyjak ER (2013) QUIC transport and dispersion modeling of two releases from the Joint Urban 2003 field experiment. Int J Environ Pollut 52(3–4):263–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burian S, Augustus N, Jeyachandran I, Brown M (2008) National Building Statistics Database, version 2. Los Alamos National Laboratory, Tech Rep LA-UR-08-1921Google Scholar
  7. Chen F, Kusaka H, Bornstein R, Ching J, Grimmond CSB, Grossman-Clarke S, Loridan T, Manning KW, Martilli A, Miao S, Sailor D, Salamanca FP, Taha H, Tewari M, Wang X, Wyszogrodzki AA, Zhang C (2011) The integrated WRF/urban modelling system: development, evaluation, and applications to urban environmental problems. Int J Climatol 31:273–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chou M-D, Suarez MJ (1994) An efficient thermal infrared radiation parameterization for use in general circulation models. NASA, Tech Rep 104606, 85 ppGoogle Scholar
  9. Department of Homeland Security (2008) Potential terrorist attack methods, joint special assessment. Homeland Security Office of Intelligence and Analysis and Federal Bureau of Investigation, Tech Rep. https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb388/docs/EBB015.pdf
  10. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (DOT PHMSA) (2016) Emergency Response Guidebook (ERG). US Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/hazmat/erg/emergency-response-guidebook-erg
  11. Ehardt L, Lebel L, Korpach E, Berg R, Inrig E, Watson I, Liu C, Gilhuly C, Quayle D (2016) Deposition measurements from the Full-Scale Radiological Dispersion Device field trials. Health Phys 110(5):442–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2009) National Planning Scenarios Fact Sheet. https://www.fema.gov/txt/media/factsheets/2009/npd_natl_plan_scenario.txt
  13. Flaherty JE, Stock D, Lamb B (2007) Computational fluid dynamic simulations of plume dispersion in urban Oklahoma City. J Appl Meteorol Climatol 46:2110–2126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fry J, Xian G, Jin S, Dewitz J, Homer C, Yang L, Barnes C, Herold N, Wickham J (2011) Completion of the 2006 National Land Cover Database for the conterminous United States. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 77(9):858–864Google Scholar
  15. García-Sanchez C, Van Tendeloo G, Gorle C (2017) Quantifying inflow uncertainties in RANS simulations of urban pollutant dispersion. Atmos Environ 161:263–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Glotfelty T, Tewari M, Sampson K, Duda M, Chen F, Ching J (2013) NUDAPT 44 Documentation. http://ral.ucar.edu/sites/default/files/public/product-tool/NUDAPT_44_Documentation.pdf
  17. Gutierrez E, Gonzalez JE, Martilli A, Bornstein R, Arend M (2015) Simulations of a heat-wave event in New York City using a multilayer urban parameterization. J Appl Meteorol Climatol 54:283–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hanna SR, Hansen OR, Ichard M, Strimaitis D (2009) CFD model simulation of dispersion from chlorine railcar releases in industrial and urban areas. Atmos Environ 43:262–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hanna S, White J, Trolier J, Vernot R, Brown M, Gowardhan A, Kaplan H, Alexander Y, Moussafir J, Wang Y, Williamson C, Hannan J, Hendrick E (2011) Comparisons of JU2003 observations with four diagnostic urban wind flow and Lagrangian particle dispersion models. Atmos Environ 45:4073–4081CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hendricks EA, Diehl SR, Burrows DA, Keith R (2007) Evaluation of a fast-running urban dispersion modeling system using Joint Urban 2003 field data. J Appl Meteorol Climatol 46:2165–2179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Holt T, Pullen J (2007) Urban canopy modeling of the New York City metropolitan area: a comparison and validation of single- and multilayer parameterizations. Mon Weather Rev 135:1906–1930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Homer CG, Dewitz JA, Yang L, Jin S, Danielson P, Xian G, Coulston J, Herold ND, Wickham JD, Megown K (2015) Completion of the 2011 National Land Cover Database for the conterminous United States-Representing a decade of land cover change information. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 81(5):345–354. http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/basic/
  23. Hong S, Dudhia J, Chen S (2004) A revised approach to ice microphysical processes for the bulk parameterization of clouds and precipitation. Mon Weather Rev 132:103–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hu X-M, Xue M (2016) Influence of synoptic sea-breeze fronts on the urban heat island intensity in Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas. Mon Weather Rev 144:1487–1507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Invatech Italia (2018) Manufacturer website http://www.misterduster.com/Default.asp
  26. Janjić ZI (1994) The step-mountain eta coordinate model: further development of the convection, viscous sublayer, and turbulent closure schemes. Mon Weather Rev 122:927–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kain J, Fritsch J (1990) A one-dimensional entraining/detraining plume model and its application in convective parameterization. J Atmos Sci 47:2784–2802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kusaka H, Kondo H, Kikegawa Y, Kimura F (2001) A simple single-layer urban canopy model for atmospheric models: comparison with multi-layer and slab models. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 101:329–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lateb M, Meroney RN, Yataghene M, Fellouah H, Saleh F, Boufadel MC (2016) On the use of numerical modelling for near-field pollutant dispersion in urban environments—a review. Environ Pollut 208:271–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Liu Y, Chen F, Warner T, Basara J (2006) Verification of a mesoscale data assimilation and forecasting system for the Oklahoma City area during the Joint Urban 2003 field project. J Appl Meteorol 45:912–929CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Luhar AK, Thatcher M, Hurley PJ (2014) Evaluating a building-averaged urban surface scheme in an operational mesoscale model for flow and dispersion. Atmos Environ 88:47–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Martilli A (2002) Numerical study of urban impact on boundary layer structure: sensitivity to wind speed, urban morphology, and rural soil moisture. J Appl Meteorol 41:1247–1266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Martilli A, Clarke SG, Tewari M, Manning KW (2009) Description of the modifications made in WRF.3.1 and short user’s manual of BEP. https://www.rap.ucar.edu/research/land/technology/urban/Multi_layer_UCM.pdf
  34. Meir T, Orton PM, Pullen J, Holt T, Thompson WT, Arend MF (2013) Forecasting the New York City urban heat island and sea breeze during extreme heat events. Weather Forecast 28:1460–1477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mesinger F, DiMego G, Kalnay E, Mitchell K, Shafran PC, Ebisuzaki W, Jović D, Woollen J, Rogers E, Berbery EH, Ek MB, Fan Y, Grumbine R, Higgins W, Li H, Lin Y, Manikin G, Parrish D, Shi W (2006) North American Regional Reanalysis. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 87(3):343–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Miao Y, Liu S, Chen B, Zhang B, Wang S, Li S (2013) Simulating urban flow and dispersion in Beijing by coupling a CFD model with the WRF model. Adv Atmos Sci 30(6):1663–1678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Miao Y, Liu S, Zheng H, Zheng Y, Chen B, Wang S (2014) A multi-scale urban atmospheric dispersion model for emergency management. Adv Atmos Sci 31:1353–1365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Michioka T, Sato A, Sada K (2013) Large-eddy simulation coupled to mesoscale meteorological model for gas dispersion in an urban district. Atmos Environ 75:153–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Micron Group (2018) Manufacturer website http://www.microngroup.com/all_products
  40. Mlawer EJ, Taubman SJ, Brown PD, Iacono MJ, Clough SA (1997) Radiative transfer for inhomogeneous atmosphere: RRTM, a validated correlated-k model for the longwave. J Geophys Res 102:16663–16682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Nakayama H, Leitl B, Harms F, Nagai H (2014) Development of local-scale high-resolution atmospheric dispersion model using large-eddy simulation. Part 4: turbulent flows and plume dispersion in an actual urban area. J Nucl Sci Technol 51(5):626–638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) (2014) Weather research and forecasting ARW version 3 modeling system user’s guide. http://www2.mmm.ucar.edu/wrf/users/download/get_sources.html#V361
  43. NCEP Weather Prediction Center (WPC) (2014) Daily weather maps are available at http://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/dailywxmap/
  44. Nelson M, Brown M (2014) The QUIC Start Guide (v 6.03), The Quick Urban & Industrial Complex (QUIC) Dispersion Modeling System. LA-UR-13-27291, Los Alamos National Laboratory, 269 ppGoogle Scholar
  45. Nelson MA, Brown MJ, Halverson SA, Bieringer PE, Annunzio A, Bieberbach G, Meech S (2016) A case study of the Weather Research and Forecasting model applied to the Joint Urban 2003 tracer field experiment. Part 2: gas tracer dispersion. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 161:461–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (2017) Maximum permissible dose equivalent for occupational exposure. https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/radiationionizing/introtoionizing/ionizingattachmentsix.html
  47. Office of the President of the United States (2017) National Security Strategy of the United States of AmericaGoogle Scholar
  48. Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) (2005) Convention on the prohibition of the development, production, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons and on their destruction. https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/download-the-cwc/
  49. Pontiggia M, Landucci G, Busini V, Derudi M, Alba M, Scaioni M, Bonvicini S, Cozzani V, Rota R (2011) CFD model simulation of LPG dispersion in urban areas. Atmos Environ 45:3913–3923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Röckle R (1990) Bestimmung der stomungsverhaltnisse im bereich komplexer bebauungsstrukturen. PhD thesis, Vom Fachbereich Machanik, der Technischen Hochshule, Darmstadt, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  51. Rodriguez LM, Bieringer PE, Warner T (2013) Urban transport and dispersion model sensitivity to wind direction uncertainty and source location. Atmos Environ 64:25–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Saha S, Nadiga S, Thiaw C, Wang J, Wang W, Zhang Q, Van den Dool HM, Pan H-L, Moorthi S, Behringer D, Stokes D, Peña M, Lord S, White G, Ebisuzaki W, Peng P, Xie P (2006) The NCEP Climate Forecast System. J Clim 19:3483–3517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Salamanca F, Martilli A (2010) A new building energy model coupled with an urban canopy parameterization for urban climate simulations—Part I. Formulation, verification and a sensitive analysis of the model. Theor Appl Climatol 99:331–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Schatzmann M, Leitl B (2011) Issues with validation of urban flow and dispersion CFD models. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 99:169–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tewari M, Kusaka H, Chen F, Coirier WJ, Kim S, Wyszogrodzki AA, Warner TT (2010) Impact of coupling a microscale computational fluid dynamics model with a mesoscale model on urban scale contaminant transport and dispersion. Atmos Res 96:656–664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. The National Academies Press (2002) Acute exposure guideline levels for selected airborne chemicals, volume 2Google Scholar
  57. Xie Z-T, Castro IP (2009) Large-eddy simulation for flow and dispersion in urban streets. Atmos Environ 43:2174–2185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zhang D, Shou Y, Dickerson R, Chen F (2012) Impact of upstream urbanization on the urban heat island effects along the Washington-Baltimore corridor. J Appl Meteorol Climatol 50:2012–2029CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic ScienceUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations