Claim: Climate change may worsen summertime ozone pollution

From the National Science Foundation:

Americans face 70 percent increase in unhealthy ozone levels by 2050

bus with text ozone alert day on displayOzone pollution across the continental U.S. will become worse as global temperatures rise.

Credit and Larger Version

May 5, 2014

Ozone pollution across the continental United States will become far more difficult to keep in check as temperatures rise, according to new research results.

The study shows that Americans face the risk of a 70 percent increase in unhealthy summertime ozone levels by 2050. 

The results appear online this week in a paper in the Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, published by the American Geophysical Union.

The work was funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the U.S. Department of Energy.

Warmer temperatures and other changes in the atmosphere related to a changing climate, including higher atmospheric levels of methane, spur chemical reactions that increase overall levels of ozone.

Unlike ozone in the stratosphere, which benefits life on Earth by blocking ultraviolet radiation from the sun, ground-level ozone can trigger a number of health problems.

These range from coughing and throat irritation to more serious aggravation of asthma, bronchitis and emphysema.

Even short periods of unhealthy ozone levels can cause local death rates to rise. Ozone pollution also damages crops and other plants.

Unless emissions of specific pollutants associated with the formation of ozone are sharply cut, most of the continental United States will experience more summer days with unhealthy air by 2050, the research shows.

Heavily polluted locations in parts of the East, Midwest and West Coast, in which ozone already frequently exceeds recommended levels, could face unhealthy summer air in most years.

“It doesn’t matter where you are in the United States, climate change has the potential to make your air worse,” said National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) scientist Gabriele Pfister, lead scientist on the study.

In addition to NCAR, the paper co-authors are from the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory; University of Colorado, Boulder; and North-West University in South Africa.

“A warming planet doesn’t just mean rising temperatures, it also means risking more summertime pollution and the health effects that come with it,” said Pfister.

However, the research also showed that a sharp reduction in the emissions of certain pollutants would lead to dramatically decreased levels of ozone even as temperatures warm.

The research is one of the first of its type to be conducted with new, highly advanced geoscience supercomputing capabilities.

“Understanding future changes in surface ozone over the summer has tremendous implications for air quality and human health,” said Anjuli Bamzai, a program director in NSF’s Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences, which funded the research through NSF’s Decadal and Regional Climate Prediction using Earth System Models (EaSM) Program.

“Through a series of ‘what if’ simulations,” said Bamzai, “atmospheric chemists, climate modelers, regional modelers and developers of emissions scenarios demonstrate that a balance of emission controls can counteract the increases in future temperatures, emissions and solar radiation that in turn lead to decreases in surface ozone.”

Ozone and heat

Ozone pollution is not emitted directly. It forms as a result of chemical reactions that take place between nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds in the presence of sunlight.

These gases come from human activities such as combustion of coal and oil, as well as natural sources such as emissions from plants.

To examine the effects of climate change on ozone pollution, Pfister and colleagues looked at two scenarios.

In one, emissions of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds from human activities would continue at current levels through 2050.

In the other, emissions would be cut by 60-70 percent. Both scenarios assumed continued greenhouse gas emissions with significant warming.

The researchers found that, if emissions continue at present-day rates, the number of eight-hour periods in which ozone would exceed 75 parts per billion (ppb) would jump by 70 percent on average across the United States by 2050.

The 75 ppb level over eight hours is the threshold that is considered unhealthy by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (The agency is considering tightening the standard to a value between 65 and 70 ppb over eight hours.)

Overall, the study found that, 90 percent of the time, ozone levels would range from 30 to 87 ppb in 2050 compared with an estimated 31 to 79 ppb at present.

Although the range itself shifts only slightly, the result is a much larger number of days above the threshold considered unhealthy.

There are three primary reasons for the increase in ozone with climate change:

  • Chemical reactions in the atmosphere that produce ozone occur more rapidly at higher temperatures.
  • Plants emit more volatile organic compounds at higher temperatures, which can increase ozone formation if mixed with pollutants from human sources.
  • Methane, which is increasing in the atmosphere, contributes to increased ozone globally and will enhance baseline levels of surface ozone across the United States.

In the second scenario, Pfister and colleagues found that sharp reductions in nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds could reduce ozone pollution even as the climate warms.

In fact, 90 percent of the time, ozone levels would range from 27 to 55 ppb.

The number of instances when ozone pollution would exceed the 75 ppb level dropped to less than 1 percent of current cases.

“Our work confirms that reducing emissions of ozone precursors would have an enormous effect on the air we all breathe,” Pfister said.

Pfister and a nationwide scientific team expect to learn more about the sources, chemistry and movement of air pollutants this summer when they launch a major field experiment known as FRAPPÉ along Colorado’s Front Range.

The role of supercomputing

The study was among the first conducted on the new 1.5 petaflops Yellowstone supercomputer. The IBM system, operated by NCAR and supported by funding from NSF and the University of Wyoming, is one of the world’s most powerful computers dedicated to research in the atmospheric and related sciences.

“High resolution models can consume significant time and resources on massive computers, but as shown in this research, they’re often required for accurate regional ozone projections,” said Irene Qualters, division director for Advanced Computing Infrastructure at NSF.

“Running these models wouldn’t have been possible without the parallel processing power of the Yellowstone supercomputer, a critical part of NSF’s cyberinfrastructure.

“The work will also help other researchers in related climate topics determine scenarios where coarse resolution is sufficient and, conversely, where high resolution is needed.”

Thanks to its computing power, the scientists were able to simulate pollution levels hour-by-hour for 39 hypothetical summers.

This allowed the team to account for year-to-year variations in meteorological conditions, such as hot and dry vs. cool and wet, thereby getting a more detailed and statistically significant picture of future pollution levels.

To simulate the interplay of global climate with regional pollution conditions, the scientists turned to two of the world’s leading atmospheric models, both based at NCAR and developed through collaborations in the atmospheric sciences community.

They used the Community Earth System Model, funded primarily by the U.S. Department of Energy and NSF, to simulate global climate as well as atmospheric chemistry conditions.

They also used an air chemistry version of the multiagency Weather Research and Forecasting Model to obtain a more detailed picture of regional ozone levels.

Even with Yellowstone’s advanced computing speed, it took months to complete the complex simulations.

“This research would not have been possible even just a couple of years ago,” said Pfister.

“Without the new computing power made possible by Yellowstone, you cannot depict the necessary detail of future changes in air chemistry over small areas, including the urban centers where most Americans live.”

-NSF-

=============================================================

UPDATE: Chip Knappenberger writes in comments:

Lest anyone forget, levels of low level ozone have been trending downward across the U.S.–despite rising thermometer readings:

http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/ozone.html

ozone_USA_1990-2012

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

65 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Svend Ferdinandsen
May 12, 2014 3:21 pm

I wonder if the ozone and methane would not very fast anihilate. Ozone is very reactive towards cumbustable substances.

Tom J
May 12, 2014 3:36 pm

‘Overall, the study found that, 90 percent of the time, ozone levels would range from 30 to 87 ppb in 2050 compared with an estimated 31 to 79 ppb at present.’
Um, where to begin with this. Ok, let’s start off gently. Our society is clearly doomed since we need the most powerful computer in the whole galaxy to say that levels of something, thirty five years from now, will be higher, thirty five years from now, then those very same levels are, in the right here and now, when we don’t know what the hell those very same levels are. Right. Now. And, therefore, have to estimate.
Phew, I got that out. One would not believe how hard it is to describe something so extraordinarily stupid that the description defies describing. I trust, but am not convinced, that I succeeded.

Rbravery
May 12, 2014 3:51 pm

Can we not just spray CFCs into the atmosphere to kill the ozone…?

DesertYote
May 12, 2014 4:48 pm

Dang near fell out of my chair when I read “The research is one of the first of its type to be conducted with new, highly advanced geoscience supercomputing capabilities.” Sounds like a line from a 1950’s B SF thriller.

jimmi_the_dalek
May 12, 2014 5:01 pm

Didn’t you already do this story about a week ago?
Why the repeat?
REPLY: It was a simple mistake of getting double press releases, one later than the other in emails, and being distracted at home by family matters. One was from UCAR seen here, the other was from NSF, seen above. From experience, if I take something down that has already been published, people ascribe nefarious motives to that. For example, my wackadoodle Internet stalker known as hotwhopper aka “soubundanga”, aka Miriam O’Brien is already saying I’m losing my memory for this simple mistake, she’d holler just as loud if I took it down too. From the perspective of those sorts of people, I’m damned if I do, damned if I don’t so I’m leaving it up.
Of course, if I could just get some of that “big oil” money people claim I’m flush with, I could hire an assistant editor.
– Anthony

jmorpuss
May 12, 2014 5:32 pm
May 12, 2014 6:06 pm

“How much worse is ozone in the South in the summer? (I presume the paper looked at that.)”
More to the point why is Atlanta in trouble? Well, put a bunch of cars (NOx emissions, though much less than if the cars did not have cat converters), in the middle of a pine forest (lots of terpene emissions from the trees even though we have cut down human emissions) and heat. That is the recipe for tropospheric ozone

May 12, 2014 9:34 pm

The answer is simple.
Just point all those bird-chopping windthingies toward the Ozone Holes. It’s a win-win!

ferdberple
May 12, 2014 11:11 pm

sunshine causes ozone. sunshine causes warming. thus warming causes ozone and ozone causes warming.

george e. smith
May 13, 2014 12:09 am

“””””…..Justthinkin says:
May 12, 2014 at 2:58 pm
Ozone,second-hand smoke,or simple dust are NOT allergens. Allergens cause an immediate and can be fatal reaction in your immune system.None of the above do such a thing. And I am married to an asthmatic. I spent 6 weeks,24/7,living with people who smoked.When I was drug tested,not ONE of the so called carcogines showed up. You are being sorely duped by power-junkies and hucksters,but then that is what LIP’s do……””””””
Not sure who or what post this comment of yours is addressed to.
For example, if you read my posts above; meaning ANY post I have EVER made on WUWT, you would discover that NEVER have I claimed to be allergic to anything. So far as I know I am not allergic to anything; well anything I have so far encountered.
So what is “simple dust”.
Ozone specifically does nothing to me, nothing negative that is; clears my breathing wonderfully.
No Idea what “second hand smoke” is. But I immediately start coughing, and eventually wheezing, if I get near smoke from tobacco cigarettes, or cigars. To me that is first hand smoke; comes directly to me from the fag.
Don’t understand why you would be drug tested for being around someone who smokes; it is after all legal to smoke.
I’m sorry your spouse is also asthmatic; I hope she has reliable treatment remedies, when she needs it.
For me and my younger sister, it meant an entire childhood of isolation, and ostracism for being “wallflowers”. When there were school break times, each of us sat alone (separately) in the shade; just praying for the bell to ring, so we could go back into class. Yes the “normal” kids thought we were “weird”.
If you have never had to consciously force your lung system to take each and every breath for an hour or so, waiting for some rocket fuel medication, to kick in, and hoping like hell, that it didn’t blow your heart up (Ephedrine Hydrochloride), then you don’t know much about asthma.
If you have ever wondered why so many Olympic class swimmers, are purportedly asthmatic, try an ephedrine pill for yourself, and immediately a light will go on in your head. You really can leap small buildings, in a single bound. (if you survive the medication.
“””…You are being sorely duped by power-junkies and hucksters,but then that is what LIP’s do…..”””
Sorry, you completely lost me ; no idea, what that is all about.

May 13, 2014 2:10 am

Justthinkin on May 12, 2014 at 2:58 pm
There are different types of asthma. You are refering to the allergic type. There are also non-allergic and exercise induced types (I have all three of them).
Airborne chemicals (like ozone, smoke from tobacco/burning wood, solvents incl. alcohols, many perfumes/flowers and a lot of other stuff) affect those who have non-allergic asthma.

Snaggletooth
May 13, 2014 3:17 am

One of your ” followers” offered the link to this site and I have been reading the posts since the weekend. It is obvious that many comments are not engaging in a intellectual, or even a scientific, debate on the various links posted here.
This one is a ideal example. The article includes much of the known information on the causes of ozone pollution. Is that something to deny?
As the world population grows and industrializes ground level ozone will continue to be a major public health problem.
You can dispute the modeling but honestly it is the 21st century so you have to except the fact of its beneficial uses.
Is one to assume that the majority of posters here are scientists, engineers, and the such who are either work in the private or government sectors and who are the “silenced”, at the risk of losing their careers, by the overlords of the behemoth of the global climate conspiracy?
Maybe that is the case for some of you but I am surely not for the majority of you.
If you want to expand the debate you need to do more than just criticize and deny the data.
[snip]

Gamecock
May 13, 2014 11:07 am

Snaggletooth says:
May 13, 2014 at 3:17 am
If you want to expand the debate you need to do more than just criticize and deny the data.
=========================
“Overall, the study found that, 90 percent of the time, ozone levels would range from 30 to 87 ppb in 2050 compared with an estimated 31 to 79 ppb at present.”
Snaggletooth, your failure to find a problem with this data speaks volumes about YOU. It is rich for criticism. What is this “If you want to expand the debate?” What does that even mean?

Gamecock
May 13, 2014 3:04 pm

One other thing about ground level ozone. It is transient. It lasts for a few hours. If ground level ozone becomes a problem by 2050, we can take action in 2050. Taking action now is silly.

RoHa
May 13, 2014 4:55 pm

Ozone is unhealthy? Not so long ago, people in illhealth were urged to go to the seaside and “breath in the ozone”.

Verified by MonsterInsights