Advertisement

Addressing Air Quality Problems with Genetic Algorithms: A Detailed Analysis of Source Characterization

  • Sue Ellen Haupt
  • Christopher T. Allen
  • George S. Young

The purposes for modeling air contaminants have evolved, and the models themselves have co-evolved to meet the changing needs of society. The original need for air contaminant models was to track the path of pollutants emitted from known sources. Therefore, the initial purpose of the models was to track and estimate the downwind transport and dispersion (T&D). Since dispersion results from turbulent diffusion, which is best modeled as a stochastic process, most models for the dispersion portion are based on a Gaussian spread.

Because many environmental problems have their sources in a region that is far from the impact, there came a need to identify remote sources of pollution. For instance, the acid rain problem that was highly studied in the 1980s was widely thought to be caused by upwind polluters. Power plant emissions in the Ohio Valley were blamed for acid rain in New York and New England. To test this conjecture, receptor models were developed. This type of model begins with monitored pollution concentrations and back calculates the sources. Some models of this type were based on a backward trajectory analysis while others separated out the mix of chemical species present in the sample and computed likely sources given knowledge of the species composition of the potential sources. These models pointed to the Ohio Valley for the source of the acid rain precursors. Receptor models are still popular for attributing pollutants to their sources.

Keywords

Wind Direction Root Mean Square Couple Model Dispersion Model Skill Score 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen, C. T. (2006).Source characterization and meteorological data optimization with a genetic algorithm-coupled dispersion/backward model. M.S. thesis, Department of Meteorology, The Pennsylvania State University, p. 69Google Scholar
  2. Allen, C. T., Haupt, S. E., & Young, G. S. (2007). Source characterization with a receptor/dispersion model coupled with a genetic algorithm.Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology,46, 273–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen, C. T., Young, G. S., & Haupt, S. E. (2006). Improving pollutant source characterization by optimizing meteorological data with a genetic algorithm.Atmospheric Environment,41, 2283–2289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beychok, M. R. (1994).Fundamentals of stack gas dispersion(3rd ed., p. 193). Irvine, CA: Milton BeychokGoogle Scholar
  5. Biltoft, C. A. (1998). Dipole Pride 26: Phase II of Defense Special Weapons Agency transport and dispersion model validation. DPG Doc. DPG-FR-98-001, prepared for Defense Threat Reduction Agency by Meteorology and Obscurants Divisions, West Desert Test Center, U.S. Army Dugway Proving Ground, Dugway, UT, 76 ppGoogle Scholar
  6. Camelli, F., & Lohner, R. (2004). Assessing maximum possible damage for contaminant release event.Engineering Computations,21, 748–760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cartwright, H. M., & Harris, S. P. (1993). Analysis of the distribution of airborne pollution using GAs.Atmospheric Environment,27A, 1783–1791Google Scholar
  8. Chang, J. C., Franzese, P., Chayantrakom, K., & Hanna, S. R. (2003). Evaluations of CALPUFF, HPAC, and VLSTRACK with two mesoscale field datasets.Journal of Applied Meteorology,42, 453–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Daley, R. (1991).Atmosphericdata analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  10. Haupt, R. L., & Haupt, S. E. (2004).Practical genetic algorithms(2nd ed., p. 255). New York: Wiley, with CDGoogle Scholar
  11. Haupt, S. E. (2005). A demonstration of coupled receptor/dispersion modeling with a genetic algorithm.Atmospheric Environment,39, 7181–7189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Haupt, S. E., Young, G. S., & Allen, C. T. (2006). Validation of a receptor/dispersion model coupled with a genetic algorithm using synthetic data.Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology,45, 476–490Google Scholar
  13. Haupt, S. E., Haupt, R. L., & Young, G. S. (2008). A mixed integer genetic algorithm used in Chem-Bio defense applications, submitted toJournal of Soft Computing Google Scholar
  14. Kumar, A. V., Patil, R. S., & Nambi, K. S. V. (2004). A composite receptor and dispersion model approach for estimation of effective emission factors for vehicles.Atmospheric Environment,38, 7065–7072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Long, K. J. (2007).Improving contaminant source characterization and meteorological data forcing with a genetic algorithm. Master's thesis, The Pennsylvania State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  16. Long, K. J., Haupt, S. E., & Young, G. S. (2008). Improving meteorological forcing and contaminant source characterization using a genetic algorithm, to be submitted toOptimization and Engineering Google Scholar
  17. Loughlin, D. H., Ranjithan, S. R., Baugh, J. W., Jr., & Brill, E. D., Jr. (2000). Application of GAs for the design of ozone control strategies.Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association,50, 1050–1063Google Scholar
  18. National Research Council (2003).Tracking and predicting the atmospheric dispersion of hazardous material releases. implications for homeland security. Washington, DC: The National Academies PressGoogle Scholar
  19. Nelder, J. A., & Mead, R. (1965). A simplex method for function minimization.Computer Journal,7, 308–314Google Scholar
  20. Penrose, R. (1955). A generalized inverse for matrices.Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society,51, 406–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Qin, R., & Oduyemi, K. (2003). Atmospheric aerosol source identification and estimates of source contributions to air pollution in Dundee, UK.Atmospheric Environment,37, 1799–1809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sykes, R. I., & Gabruk, R. S. (1997). A second-order closure model for the effect of averaging time on turbulent plume dispersion.Journal of Applied Meteorology,36, 1038–1045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sykes, R. I., Lewellen, W. S., & Parker, S. F. (1986). A gaussian plume model of atmospheric dispersion based on second-order closure.Journal of Applied Meteorology,25, 322–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sykes, R. I., Parker, S. F., Henn, D. S., Cerasoli, C. P., & Santos, L. P. (1998). PC-SCIPUFF version 1.2PD technical documentation (ARAP Rep. 718). Princeton, NJ: Titan Research and Technology Division, Titan Corporation, 172 ppGoogle Scholar
  25. Watson, T. B., Keislar, R. E., Reese, B., George, D. H., & Biltoft, C. A. (1998). The Defense Special Weapons Agency Dipole Pride 26 field experiment (NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Tech. Memo. ERL ARL-225), 90 ppGoogle Scholar
  26. Wyngaard, J. C. (1992). Atmospheric turbulence.Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics,24, 205–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sue Ellen Haupt
    • 1
  • Christopher T. Allen
    • 2
  • George S. Young
    • 3
  1. 1.Applied Research Laboratory and Department of MeteorologyThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUSA
  2. 2.Computer Sciences Corporation79 T.W. Alexander DriveResearch Triangle ParkUSA
  3. 3.Department of MeteorologyUniversity ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations