The Hybrid Single-Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory model (HYSPLIT), developed by NOAA’s Air Resources Laboratory, is one of the most widely used models for atmospheric trajectory and dispersion calculations. We present the model’s historical evolution over the last 30 years from simple hand-drawn back trajectories to very sophisticated computations of transport, mixing, chemical transformation, and deposition of pollutants and hazardous materials. We highlight recent applications of the HYSPLIT modeling system, including the simulation of atmospheric tracer release experiments, radionuclides, smoke originated from wild fires, volcanic ash, mercury, and wind-blown dust.

No abstract

An overview of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) current operational Smoke Forecasting System (SFS) is presented. This system is intended as guidance to air quality forecasters and the public for fine particulate matter (≤2.5 μm) emitted from large wildfires and agricultural burning, which can elevate particulate concentrations to unhealthful levels. The SFS uses National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS) Hazard Mapping System (HMS), which is based on satellite imagery, to establish the locations and extents of the fires. The particulate matter emission rate is computed using the emission processing portion of the U.S. Forest Service’s BlueSky Framework, which includes a fuel-type database, as well as consumption and emissions models. The Hybrid Single Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory (HYSPLIT) model is used to calculate the transport, dispersion, and deposition of the emitted particulate matter. The model evaluation is carried out by comparing predicted smoke levels with actual smoke detected from satellites by the HMS and the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) Aerosol/Smoke Product. This overlap is expressed as the figure of merit in space (FMS), the intersection over the union of the observed and calculated smoke plumes. Results are presented for the 2007 fire season (September 2006–November 2007). While the highest FMS scores for individual events approach 60%, average values for the 1 and 5 μg m−3 contours for the analysis period were 8.3% and 11.6%, respectively. FMS scores for the forecast period were lower by about 25% due, in part, to the inability to forecast new fires. The HMS plumes tend to be smaller than the corresponding predictions during the winter months, suggesting that excessive emissions predicted for the smaller fires resulted in an overprediction in the smoke area.

Five different atmospheric transport and dispersion model's (ATDM) deposition and air concentration results for atmospheric releases from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident were evaluated over Japan using regional (137)Cs deposition measurements and (137)Cs and (131)I air concentration time series at one location about 110 km from the plant. Some of the ATDMs used the same and others different meteorological data consistent with their normal operating practices. There were four global meteorological analyses data sets available and two regional high-resolution analyses. Not all of the ATDMs were able to use all of the meteorological data combinations. The ATDMs were configured identically as much as possible with respect to the release duration, release height, concentration grid size, and averaging time. However, each ATDM retained its unique treatment of the vertical velocity field and the wet and dry deposition, one of the largest uncertainties in these calculations. There were 18 ATDM-meteorology combinations available for evaluation. The deposition results showed that even when using the same meteorological analysis, each ATDM can produce quite different deposition patterns. The better calculations in terms of both deposition and air concentration were associated with the smoother ATDM deposition patterns. The best model with respect to the deposition was not always the best model with respect to air concentrations. The use of high-resolution mesoscale analyses improved ATDM performance; however, high-resolution precipitation analyses did not improve ATDM predictions. Although some ATDMs could be identified as better performers for either deposition or air concentration calculations, overall, the ensemble mean of a subset of better performing members provided more consistent results for both types of calculations.