We can move on to the next and the final talk in this in this block now which is by Terry there are you there sorry I’m here um Terry are you planning to share your screen yes okay can you see that now no not yet it’s there it is yeah sorry okay um
So uh thank you very much um and this has been a really wonderful meeting uh so far and there’s been so much information um and I I we we hadn’t planned this and and so we sort of quickly filling back in um some covering some aspects um that are are I think
Might be helpful for our discussions later in the in the breakout sessions and so once again I wanted to go back to um you were introduced um on the first Daye to the task force on hemispheric transport and then yesterday you you were introduced to the the leadership
Team um and Tim myself um yasak Kaminsky and Rosa wo um who will be participating in the in the breakout sessions today um and you heard that um the hemispheric task force is organizing a a a set of model into comparison studies um with three streams of activity um and
And this was one really focused on future anthr IC um emission scenarios um that are intended to be very policy relevant for the lp convention the other is a um a set of mercury um simulations that are really trying to contribute to the Minima convention’s Effectiveness evaluation trying to look at how the
Minamata convention has led to whether or not you can detect changes in um environmental levels of of mercury due two actions of the convention and then finally a multi-pollutant um study of fires and so um we thought it would be helpful um to um to explain a little bit about a
Little bit more about what we what we hope to get out of this multimodel multipollutant study of fires and so one is that we are interested in improving understanding of fires um as a source of air pollution and um from the task force perspective our stock and trade is um is
Looking at air pollution from what I have taken to call extra Regional Air Pollution so we’re interested in how sources of air pollution that occur outside of a given region impact a particular region of the world and and looking at those Source receptor relationships on large InterContinental
Scales and so we want to design a set of model experiments that will help us estimate the impacts of fires at the regional and global scale across multiple pollutants we want to estimate how those impacts are expected to change over time and what potential there is for mitigation and we want to identify
Uncertainties and variability in our understanding so that we can inform efforts to decrease those uncertainties providing feedback back into the burned activities um to reduce the uncertainties but in addition to understanding fires itself we’re also trying to use fire as a as a place uh a topic that we can bring together
Communities that are used to working quite independently from one another to assess the impacts of multiple pollutants and so we’re interested in what can we learn from bringing together um the the the aerosol Community the ozone Community um the metals Mercury community and the persistant organic pollutants communities and which
Sometimes use uh different tools and and different model constructs um and we want us to to see what we can learn from applying um uh these different tools and different approaches to the same problem and um and see what um what we can transfer to the to being able to do more
Integrated analysis um of multiple pollutant problems o o over time so um you’ve heard a couple of times reference to um the H fires white paper and and the we’ve made the um the link available to this a couple of times in the chat um but the the way that
We’re trying to move the conversation forward is by putting this um this open um Community paper um that we’re trying to draft um and to have people go in and put down what they’re interested in and write a few sentences about that and what what pollutants they’re interested
In what impacts they’re interested in um what other efforts are going on um that that that we might take into account um to identify the models that they could bring to bear um and and the characteristics of that of those models um what observational data they might
Have to be able to evaluate those what emissions data um Etc and then use this um Community effort to design a a set of experiments to meet um those um objectives that we have and the other thing that I want to point out about this is this paper isn’t solely intended
For the purpose of htap um but also to serve as sort of a common reference point that if if there are groups that are doing similar work that are interested in in specific aspects of this um this could be documented in this paper and this paper can live um Beyond
Um our own work under the task force um But continuing on so that this provides an a place to to communicate and articulate the differences and and um synergies between different efforts that that might be going that that are are going on and may be planned so we’re
Hoping that this is use f for the community as a whole not just for this particular effort okay so if we’re going to do a multi-pollutant study of fire impacts then we have to take the emission inventories and emission estimates that you’ve been talking about um the last
Couple of days which primarily focus on um on the aerosol components um and the or organic um components of those um and we have to extend those to these other pollutants that we care about and so um I only have this one more slide um and this is intended to to
Capture a lot of discussion that has gone on um within the uh previous task force meetings um to talk about how we might get estimates of of mercury of lead and and persistent organic pollutants including phes like benzo ayene and so basically um what we know
Of is that there are um really two methods that have been used to calculate some of these and one is simply to um take the burned biomass from one of these Wildfire emissions data sets and apply an emissions Factor um to that that biomass burned um and the other is
Um to actually take the estimate from these of the emissions of pm2.5 and then apply a fractional composition um which has been observed either in the plume or in Ash and so um the first method um is the method that we are currently using to move forward
With our Mercury work so under htap um the our Mercury study for the that’s contributing to the minimatic convention um has has already produced um two um Mercury fire missions inventories and this work was done by Ilia illen um Eric Roy who’s been on um and I don’t know
Whether Eric’s on right now um and David mlagan and and basically what they did was they took burned biomass from GED and from Finn and um they basically applied Mercury emission factors from Andre 2019 by biome um and to calculate the emissions and as you’ve heard um before there’s issues about the emission
Factors about whether those are um derived from um lab studies or field studies and whether those field studies are far down wind and looking at age plumes or whether they’re looking at um near source and so um mlagan and and um and um collaborators have um near Source
Aircraft based um observations and so what we did in this study was to replace the temperate and Boral um uh emission factors with um factors that were based on these um relatively recent aircraft studies um that we think provide a better estimate so that’s what we’re using
Right now to move forward with the the Mercury runs and so we have two complete Mercury Global inventories um a very similar approach has been applied by um Shau and jenma um at uh PKU and lzu to produce Global inventories for benzoa Pyne um which they’ve added to their Global um black
Carbon anthropogenic inventories and um so taking a very similar approach of the burned biomass from gfed and applying an applying emission factors um and then again the the second approach um we’ve seen examples of that have been uh used uh with lead um and to get uh Global inventories for for LED um
By using the fractional composition um from uh of PM 2.5 so just wanted to share that those are the that’s the work that we know of that’s been done to extend um these and we’re hoping that um in whatever we do for um the the fires work we can build
On that and extend um those inventories to other chemicals that that uh gluten that we might be interested in so that’s all I had thank you thanks a lot for that Terry that that helps us to prepare for some of the questions in the breakout sessions that
We have later this afternoon or later today depending on where you are um yeah there’s also time for questions on on this is anybody else who’s online today aware of other um groups which are working on um um metals and pops and and other toxics emissions from fires
Perhaps that’s it would be interesting to know Cena has a hand up well maybe I’ll get my stuff to work today um Terry That’s so exciting um I worked with Hans like but almost 20 years ago I think on work emissions from fire so I’m so excited to see the um the
Measurements being done again um I was curious about the lead and maybe I missed this but where does the leg come from is it just part of the ecosystems and gets resuspended similar to like Mercury or is that the case I I’m not the best person to to
Answer that but I think that that’s our main concern um with most of the metals um is the is the resuspension of previously deposited metals that have built up um in in the vegetation primarily and in the soil and in that case we might want to
Think about um you know and this is something I thought about a long time kind of go but like you know those Mercury lead you know particularly Mercury like near power plants you might expect the lead concentrations to be higher or the Mercury concentrations to be higher than you know and downwind of
The power ples power plant plumes and elsewhere um I I think there’s a lot of opportunity to do some cool work there and I would say you know within 2.5 if you have emission factors they could readily be put into the emissions models to produce whatever you want
Like you know if we have measurements we just want the measurement Community to to take more measurements of these really important um components so um thanks for this I’m really it’s really great to see it moving forward so thanks Eric you have a hand up yes hi um hopefully uh sound’s coming
In yes um no I just wanted to follow up on that that was an excellent point and something that I think we all strive to do better with and something my current work is looking at seeing how we can kind of combine existing atmospheric observations with models to try and get
A more spatially representative uh understanding of these emissions but um yeah no it’s that’s a very good point Christine and I think something that more uh measurements would be helpful for we also just to follow up on that one I mean that basically requires a totally different application of emission
Factors right then I mean normally we look at what kind of biome or what stuff is burning and then we apply the emission Factor but here’s probably more the location where it’s coming from the Govern emission Factor right um yes and no um I I think because um there
The accumulation in different certainly the accumulation I is going to be different in different places but it also matters a lot on what surfaces that um the deposition occurred so because deposition varies by biome um and so so and and we’re talking about we’re talking about very long-term um accumulation um occurring
That’s that’s something we haven’t really dealt with but um you know if you have fires moving through and it mobilizing um for a a really long time you know deposition that’s that’s occurred over a very long time and then um how how often fire is Revisited in that
Area you know there you have a different cycle but I I think the big concern is the deposition over really long periods of time leading to accumulation as opposed to more nearer term okay thanks Cool yeah I was wondering about the um the the type of emission inventory could be used for these um so to add um the the metals and and Pops to so the the ones that you’ve listed here are based on the burnt area um approach would it be
Possible also to use the the top down emission inventories based on the fire radiative power here as well to to add on Mercury and Pops to them the to me that’s a really good question um I I think there would need to be a lot more work to develop the the
Emission coefficients that are being applied there and my my understanding is that a lot of those are sort of calibrated back to the burned um biomass um emission estimates and so they’re derived to match some of that and so that that’s a an important question that I have back
To the people who work with the fire radiative power um methodologies is what would we have to do um to be able to understand to be able to use that activity um to calculate emissions of some of these other things I see a couple of comments in the
In the chat on the spatial variability of different emissions as well so Christina mentions that chlorinated compound might be emitted more along coastlines um and there’s a comment from James uh on the EPA National mission inventry on lead um they vary are by State and phase I’m
Not sure what phase means in this context combustion phase thank you um and then there’s a comment from Eric as well okay so unlike lead mercury has a longer atmospheric lifetime so the thought would be that spatial dependence is less the speciation of mercury gasas or particle could impact the immediate
Area of a source in their inventory they assume that 10% of the emissions are particular based on limited existing Electric however more measurements I needed to explore the factors controlling this Nancy has a comment on different Approaches different approaches that use energy for emissions will need to be tagged with fuel type and combustion type so maybe I could add something about you know what we’re what we’re looking for in terms of uh fires in in the htap study so so um as you mentioned
Terry this this this htap fires has has quite a a large scope it’s it’s um it’s yeah there’s and the scope is still being defined by this white paper but it’s also linking in very much with the um the opens work the more policy related work which includes um the
Analysis of the anthropogenic emissions as well not just the the fire emissions um and so we’re looking more immediately for a fire emission inventory to use in that um policy relevant study um but ideally we want to keep the two the two different um studies the the open study
And the fire study as closely linked with each other as possible and so I think what we’re looking for immediately is is a recommendation for a particular product or some kind of mosaic products that um that we can use um sort of immediately and by immediately I mean
Starting to do model runs um in the late spring early summer of next year um to be delivered within a year or so for us to be able to um yeah thanks for going back there Terry to um to advise the convention uh for the upcoming revision of the Gotham
Protocol so that’s that’s the immediate um need that that htap has there is is a recommendation on which uh product we should be using for fire emissions but then that will also serve as the Baseline um fire emissions for the for the rest of the fires work going
Forwards where we might have more time to think about um different kinds of sensitivity studies or different kinds of um ways of combining different emissions products does that sound fair Terry yeah well stated so does anybody have any more questions on on um more broadly perhaps on on the edab fire
Study this is going what the scope is comments on what emission symmetry we should be using I know this is one of the questions in the breakout rooms but we have a chance here in plenary since there’s more time so Cindy asks guo um when gf5 will be out
Um that’s um I’m always saying in two months but we hope end of this year ear next year uh I mean the burn area is out um the paper was accepted so that’s now in press the fuel conception papers out the measure factors something we want to touch base with Kelly
Shortly um we have some issues with some of the burnt area in forested regions which which seems to be so too large so there’s still some allocation so all the ingredients are there it’s a matter of um yeah finding a bit more time but hopefully by by December or maybe
January and there will be data from initially 20 2 through 2020 and then we’ll work on updating it towards new real time so there are also some comments in the chat there on the importance of including open waste burning especially in Africa but just getting back to that um
That that uh point on on gfed it seemed to me looking at some of the comparisons that we’ve seen that that maybe gfed seem to be kind of in the middle of a lot of the other infantries maybe not in all regions or for all species but um
But that seemed to be a more of a middleof the road kind of infantry compared to some of the others is that is that a fair overall assessment for my perspective that may be the case but that’s also I think because a lot of comparisons we’ve seen
So far us the old fin versions I think if you use 2.5 g is probably one of the lower ones and then G fet 5 will be yeah hopefully in the middle again there so perhaps that’s also a um a a small argument for considering gfed 5 as
As a potential inventory for this work since it’s it’s not exactly the average in the middle of of the other inventes something to think about I think um probably we’re we’re running out of um time but I’m I’m very interested in the conversation going on in the chat about um open waste burning
Which I realized isn’t necessarily the the focus of this which is focused on biomass burning but um the idea of being able to see open waist burning in some of the satellite products and being able to include that um and five minutes in this session so if
This was something to move on through then sure up down and back it’s back up again now okay great yeah um no I’m I’m still intrigued by this Quest the discussion above um how important uh the different combustion phase is and that of course relates to the Peet burning which which
Has all of the smoldering and I’m I’m wondering if this is important uh whether it uh then may be some information in F FRP when you look at uh the maximum value that the satellites see and when you look at the dional cycle the amplitude of the dial
Cycle that you see in the satellites that could give you some information about how much flaming and how much smoldering there is so over the Pete fires we see a very flat down cycle so that’s very clear um so if if for for these uh metals and uh
Pabs that that’s important uh we could think about uh having additional data in there they we archive them they’re not in the official gas products but they are being archived there there’s more information there which we might use if that’s that’s really an important uh Process can you repeat that johanes what is being archived uh we are archiving The the magnitude of the dional cycle ah okay I mean from the hourly product you can see it right away but we also archiving it separately and we are also keeping track of the number of uh modus
Detections we had having each grid cell and the uh magnitude of the largest FP in each grid cell so that also gives an indication whether you’ve got one very hot strong fire flaming or many small fires uh maybe cooler PES so I see some more comments sorry
Yeah go ahead if you if you’d like to continue on that point no no no it’s it’s really my question is how important is this combustion phase for for the metals and the pups thanks for that um so there are a couple of comments here um in the chat um that
Maybe gfed is underestimating compared to the measurements so that’s also a consideration of um maybe choosing an inventory that uh having the comparison to measurements in mind when we choose an inventory and um uh that perhaps it might also be useful to consider at least one top down emission inventory in
The comparison because G35 is bottom up and this maybe leads to the the idea that maybe in the htap fires work if there was enough interest from the modeling community that potentially we could think about using multiple inventories and then we could turn this part of this into a multimodel multi- inventory multi
Multi-pollutant um study as well um if people have the appetite to do more model runs on that so there’s more more comments on that which you can all see in the chat but I think we are now at the end of this uh this this session we have a minute to go
But that doesn’t leave us any time to start any new questions um so thanks again to all of the speakers um uh and to all of all of the comments and all of the questions that was great um see Nancy you’re there would you like to take
Over no uh fine I think it’s time for our break so um we’re going to be breaking now and reconvening at the top of the hour um and at that point we will give you instructions for breakout please come back and and and be um a vital part of our Workshop is having
People do the breakouts so please uh come back for that at the top of the hour thanks