bluesky team meeting k. anderson (natural resources canada), j cochrane (parks canada) d. lyder...

BlueSky Team Meeting

K. Anderson (Natural Resources Canada), J Cochrane (Parks Canada)D. Lyder (Alberta Environment), A. Pankratz (Environment Canada),

R. Stull, R. Schigas (University of BC), S Sakiyama (BC MoE)

Predictive PerformanceForecast comparisons: timing, location (spatial coverage), magnitude Time and space comparisons the most challenging– Timing perfect, but location off– Location perfect, concentrations good, but timing off

Multiple Models - Uncertainty

Comparisons to Observations: AQ monitors, satellite

Ground level AQ Stations PM2.5: issues (local influences, vertical and horizontal spatial representation, hourly vs 24 hour, saturation)

Satellite (HMS analysis): issues (column integrated, cloud interference, daytime only)

Performance EvaluationsSTI: Pilot System August 2009 wildfires

All components functioning properly

Good job at predicting regional smoke coverage

Smoke from fires outside the domain (BC Alberta) can be important.

Yao, J. et al, (2013): 35 days during 2010 wildfire season, BlueSky forecasts compared to:

B.C. PM2.5 monitoring data (IOA, r, NRMSE, FB)

HMS smoke analysis (Figure of Merit in Space)

Population Health Indicators (Asthma Medication dispensations, Asthma-related physician visits)

Results

Global Analysis (all forecasted and measured values at any time and location were included) r = .4

Modest agreement (HMS and measured values)

BlueSky: Generally smaller smoke plumes than HMS

Better agreement during intense fire periods

Over prediction bias (predicted high peaks not seen in measurements)

Similar performance to other smoke forecasting systems (European, NOAA)

Significant associations between BlueSky forecasts and respiratory health outcomes

Evaluations Cont’d

Klikach, V et al. (2012) comparisons: 2010, 2011 with PM2.5 measures and satellite imagery– good qualitative agreement – challenges in comparing with PM2.5 measurements (other

sources vs smoke)– Carry over smoke important

Ho and Lyder (2013)

Several US BlueSky evaluations: Latest Strand et al (2012)– 2007 S. California fires (did not predict high measured PM2.5),

– 2009 N. California fires (predictions performed well)

Needs for Further Work

Challenges in comparing to observations

Sometimes operational issues create problems

Performance in timing and location of plume patterns is reasonable

Comparisons to PM2.5 measurements: further work needed to improve magnitudes of concentrations

Evaluation Studies Point to Needs and Further Work:

HLSPLIT blasts (improved – better source treatment, new Hysplit versions),

carry over smoke (improved - puffs retained for 72 hours),

inclusion of smoke outside domain (improved but not North America wide)

Further Needs and Work Cont’d

Latest implementation of the Canadian BlueSky needs to be evaluated (various improvements since 2010)

Produce only relative PM2.5 (high, med, low) or probabilities of high, med, low?

Focus on fuel loading, plume rise, fire timing (U.S. Joint Fire Science Council)

US NWS (NOAA) Smoke Forecasts have automated plots of Figure of Merit in Space and Measure of Effectiveness for every forecast based on the HMS analysis – Comprehensive (not just one area)– Continuous – look for trends, spot issues and

respond, assess overall performance

Qualitative Evaluation of the Eastern Canada Forecasts

Forecast smoke pattern at the surface, compared to satellite image analysis of smoke

June 22 2013

0622, 18 00 UTC

Smoke from US wildfires (not accounted for)

HMS Smoke Analysis (NOAA)Eastern BlueSky Forecast

Forecast Produced June 14 Forecast Date and Time in Image: Jun 15 0900 EDT

BlueSky East

Only qualitative evaluation

Ontario MNR was satisfied that system was producing forecasts that made sense based on reports of smoke (location and timing)

Ontario Environment reported some consistency with air quality measurements

References

Yao, J. et al Brauer, M. Henderson, S.B., 2013 Evaluation of a Wildfire Smoke Forecasting System as a Tool for Public Health Protection. Environ Health Perspect. 121(10): 1142–1147.

Klikach, V., Lyder, D, Cheng, L., Sakiyama, S. Hicks, G., and Anderson K. (2012) Development and Evaluation of a BlueSky Wildfire Smoke Forecasting System for Western Canada. AWMA Annual Conference . Paper 2012-A-507-AWMA. June 2012

Ho, V and Lyder, D. (2013) An Evaluation of the Western Canadian BlueSky Smoke Forecasting System for 2012. Poster International Smoke Symposium, University of Maryland University College

Strand et al. (2012) Analysis of BlueSky Gateway PM2.5 predictions during the 2007 sorthern California and 2009 northern California Fires. JGR Vol 117, Issue D17, 16, Sept 2012

Update

Playground Update

Early 2013, Beta Testers group (16): 3 provided feedback on their experience

Summarized feedback: created a laundry list of improvements

BC MoE 20 K.

Prioritized list into the following improvements by STI

Playground Update: Improvements

STI Contract:

Transfer all parts of Canadian Playground to UBC (installed on dedicated server at UBC)

Upgrade to the latest version of the BlueSky framework (v 3.5.1) that includes HYSPLIT v4.9 (MPI) and improved dispersion results with KML output

Previously MM5 as met forecast model - incorporate WRF meteorological domains and clarify domain areas for users

National coverage

Address system load, response times, and ease of use, coverage

Playground Update: ImprovementsIncorporate a pathway for wildfire emissions and dispersion scenarios : ability to forecast smoke from individual wildfires

Testing current prototype: – Retrospective Analysis: AESRD (D. Schroeder) (previous burns),

Parks Canada (J. Cochrane) – Planning Tool: AESRD (D. Schroeder)– Planned Burns: Parks Canada (J. Large), Saskatchewan

Improved system up and running completely at UBC – May?

Future Plans/Needs

Include Pile Burning

Feedback from current testers, update laundry list of improvements and prioritize: user interface, outputs (24 hr ave, health risk for 1 hour, source characterization (burn start and end times, diurnal profile output, etc.), new plume rise model

Provincial contributions to fund (Sask, BC)

Mobile App (Playground and other Burn information: regulations, ventilation index, local weather)– BC FERIC $$ for development

Need a Playground Lead

Outreach: CSSP Charter

4. Objective(s)

d. Webinars and Presentations: an outreach program intended on making agencies aware of the BlueSky—Canada products and provide an opportunity for their feedback.

Primary Audience

Environmental Agencies (Air Quality, Weather)

Wildfire Response Agencies

Transportation

Media

Emergency Response

Health Agencies (Provincial, Federal)

First Nations

Tourism

Public

?

How?

Establish/build relationships with primary audience: Associations: Forest (?), Health(?), Environmental (AWMA?),

suggestions?

Webinars (self organized or through associations): several – most recent had 500+ participants.

Canadian Smoke Newsletter

National Smoke Forum: Halifax 2014

Develop and carry out survey of target audience re: awareness and needs and feedback on system

Produce tailored messaging for primary target audience to use in their activities – FAQs (how does this tool help you?), health link BC file on wildfire smoke, etc

Develop a Brand (Logo): Example

developed through crowdsourcing

How?

Produce a BlueSky web widget that can be integrated on partner websites and key message delivers’ sites– Website links currently: BCMoE, BC Forests

(Wildfire), Alberta ESRD, NRC, US AirNow, US AirFire, Others?

– Include links to Kerry’s recorded webinar

Wildfire Smoke Website: Tools, Data, Information (one stop shopping)

Smoke forecasts promoted on the BC wildfire Facebook page

Develop a BlueSky and Playground app for accessibility on all devices