United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Sciences Research
Laboratory
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
Research and Development
EPA-600/S3-83-086 Dec. 1983
Project  Summary
Evaluation of Chemical Reaction
Mechanisms for  Photochemical
Smog:  Part  1.  Mechanism
Descriptions and  Documentation

Gregory J. McRae, Joseph A. Leone, and John H. Seinfeld
  Over the past ten years or so a great
deal of effort  has been  devoted to
developing chemical reaction mechanisms
for photochemical air pollution. Because
the actual number of atmospheric
organic species is  too large for the
detailed chemistry of each to be
included in a mechanism, it has been
necessary to reduce the number of
organic species to a manageable set by
a process referred to as lumping. The
manner in which this lumping has been
carried out constitutes one of the major
differences among existing mechanisms.
It has recently been demonstrated that
different chemical mechanisms predict
different degrees of hydrocarbon and
NOX control to achieve the same level of
ozone reduction under identical condi-
tions. Because of the necessity of using
reaction mechanisms for photochemical
smog  in determining air pollution
control strategies, these results point to
a serious need  to analyze the funda-
mental  behavior of such mechanisms
and to understand the key elements of
their behavior. Such an analysis is the
subject  of this two part  report. The
current volume. Part I,  contains a
detailed description of six mechanisms
that have been developed to  describe
photochemical smog chemistry, includ-
ing analyses of the treatments of the
basic chemistry, of photolysis reactions
and organic lumping in initial conditions
and rate constants. It is found that the
mechanisms differ in virtually all
aspects. Part II is devoted to a detailed
analysis of the behavior of each of the
mechanisms.
  This Project Summary was developed
by EPA's Environmental Sciences Re-
search Laboratory, Research Triangle
Park, NC, to announce key findings of
the research project that is fully docu-
mented in a separate report of the same
title (see Project Report ordering in-
formation at back).

Introduction
  Over the past ten years or so, a great
deal of effort has been devoted to
developing chemical reaction mechanisms
for photochemical air pollution, and, as a
result, several mechanisms exist at the
present time. Since the atmosphere
contains literally -scores of hydrocarbon
species, it is virtually impossible to write a
reaction mechanism that includes the
detailed chemistry of each hydrocarbon
species present.  Although each mecha-
nism is based, more or less, on the same
body of experimental kinetic data, the
manner of treatment of the hydrocarbon
chemistry varies among them. Because
the actual number of hydrocarbon species
is, as we have noted, too large for the
detailed chemistry of each to be included
in a mechanism, it has been necessary to
reduce the number of  hydrocarbon
species to a manageable set by a process
referred to as lumping. The manner in
which this lumping has been carried out
constitutes one of the major differences
among existing mechanisms.
  The differences among the several
existing reaction mechanisms would not
be of concern if their predictions were in
essential agreement over the range of
conditions of interest  for atmospheric

-------
predictions. It has recently been demon-
strated, however, that different mecha-
nisms predict rather different degrees of
hydrocarbon and NO, control to achieve
the same level of ozone reduction under
identical conditions.  Because  of the
necessity of using reaction mechanisms
for photochemical smog in determining
air pollution control strategies, these
results point to a serious need to analyze
the fundamental nature of such mecha-
nisms and to understand the key elements
of their behavior. Such an analysis is the
subject of this work.

Lumped Photochemical
Mechanisms
  Figure 1  depicts the ways in  which
hydrocarbon lumping has been approached
in photochemical smog mechanisms. In
the surrogate species approach, typified
by the mechanism of Dodge (1977), the
entire atmospheric mixture is represented
by a small number of surrogate hydrocarbon
species. In the  mechanism  of  Dodge
(1977),  propene  and n-butane, together
with small quantities of formaldehyde
and acetaldehyde, represent the entire
atmospheric mix.
  The  other lumping approaches are
indicated in Figure 1. Lumped molecule
approaches refer to those in which the
atmospheric  hydrocarbons  are  lumped
into identifiable  molecular species. For
example, in the surrogate species lumped
molecule approach, certain hydrocarbons
serve as surrogate species for an entire
group of actual species. For example, n-
butane can  be  used to represent all
atmospheric alkanes, and the  alkane
portion of the  full mechanism then
consists of  the detailed explicit chemistry
of  n-butane. Thus, a  mixture of many
alkanes is  represented by a comparable
concentration of n-butane. A mechanism
based on this approach is that of Atkinson
et al. (1982). We should point out that the
mechanism of Dodge (1977), referred to
above,  is, in essence, also a surrogate
species mechanism.  However,  the n-
butane and propene are not necessarily
identified with alkane and alkene species,
respectively. Rather, propene  and n-
butane represent the entire atmospheric
mix, where only the total concentration of
non-methane hydrocarbons in parts per
million by carbon is matched to the initial
concentrations of propene and n-butane.
   The other type of  lumped molecule
approach is that of generalized species
lumping, in  which an entire group of
compounds is represented by a generalized
species, the chemistry of which reflects
the common features of that of the whole
                       Photochemical Reaction
                            Mechanisms
    Surrogate Species
     - Dodge (1977)
                          Lumped Molecule
                  Lumped Structure
                 - Killus and Whitten
                       (1982)
           Generalized Species
           Used to Represent
           Chemistry of Each
             Lumped Class
           - Demerjian (1982)
           - McRae and Seinfield (1983)
           - Penner and Walton (1982)
       Surrogate Species
       Used to Represent
       Chemistrfof Each
         Lumped Class
       - Atkinson et al(1982)
Figure  1.    Classification of photochemical reaction mechanisms used in evaluation.
group.  For example, alkanes could be
represented by a species called ALKANE,
whose  rate  constants and reaction
mechanisms are,  in  some manner, an
average of those of all alkanes. Mechanisms
in this class include those of McRae and
Seinfeld  (1983), Demerjian (1982), and
Penner and Walton (1982).
  Finally in the lumped structure approach,
lumped species represent various classes
of structural  units, such  as,  single-
bonded carbon atoms, double-bonded
carbon  atoms, and carbonyl  carbon
atoms. An initial mixture of organics is
therefore apportioned by bond type rather
than by molecule type to obtain the
lumped  species. The one mechanism of
this type is that of Killus and Whitten
(1982). The Killus and Whitten mechanism,
referred to as the Carbon Bond mechanism,
treats the reactions of six different types
of carbon atoms: 1 -alkene carbon atoms
except ethene, ethene, single  bonded
carbon  atoms, reactive  aromatic  rings,
carbonyl carbon atoms including carbon
atoms from internal  olefins,  and  cc-
dicarbonyls.
  It is important  to  point out that any
reaction mechanism  for the atmospheric
chemistry of photochemical smog must
involve  some aspect of  hydrocarbon
lumping. It  is sometime mistakenly
assumed that lumping is not involved in a
surrogate mechanism, since a surrogate
mechanism  consists of the  explicit
chemistry of the surrogate species.
Although the  mechanism itself contains
only explicit chemical steps, not involving
any generalized species, the representation
of an atmospheric mixture requires that
many species  not explicitly included in
the mechanism  be apportioned  to  the
surrogate species. It is, in fact, the way
in which species are apportioned that
really constitutes the differences  among
mechanisms, although mechanisms do
differ in the values of rate constants used
and in the  importance  of  mechanistic
steps  where the available experimental
information  is open  to interpretation.

Procedure
   The particular mechanisms chosen for
initial testing in this study are shown in
Figure 1  and Table 1. Several different
criteria were used to select representative
mechanisms including: the availability of
support! ng docu mentation and the degree
of testing against smog chamber experi-
ments. One additional requirement was
that each mechanism had to  have been
implemented in an air quality model and
used  in  emissions  control  calculations.
With this background  the  following
material was  requested from each
investigator responsible for the develop-
ment of the reaction mechanism: (1) All
the available open  and  report literature
references  that describe the scientific
basis and testing of the reaction mechanism;
(2) A computer listing of the reactions,
species names and  a duplication of a test
case. This latter information was requested
to ensure that the mechanism has been

-------
Table 1.    Photochemical Reaction Mechanisms Considered for Evaluation — Their Characteristics and Their Validation Base
Reaction Mechanism
Atkinson et al.
(1982)c
Number of
Reactions/
Type" Species
LM 81/52
Number of
Organic
Classes"
14
Validation Basis
Experiment
Numbers"
EC -178
EC- 143
EC-146
EC-216
EC-340
EC-344
EC-161
EC-237.EC-242.EC-246
Type of
Experiment
n-butane/NOi
ethene/NOi
tr-2-butene/NO*
propene/NO,
toluene/NO*
m-xylene/NOn
4 alkenes/NO*
7 hydrocarbons/ NO*
                                                                  AGC-119AGC-133AGC-134.
                                                                  AGC- 135.AGC- 138AGC- ISO,
                                                                  AGC-156

                                                                  AP-28AP-30.AP-35AP-37
Demerjian (1982)
LM
45/30
Dodge (1977)
Kit/us and Whitten
(1982)
LS
            76/39
79/41
McRae and Seinfeld (1983)
Penner and Walton
(1982)
LM
LM
52/32
59/22
                                      EC-231,EC-232.EC-233.
                                      EC-237,EC-238.EC-242.
                                      EC-243,EC-245,EC-246.
                                      EC-247
                                      EC-237

                                      SUR-119J,SUR-121J,
                                      SUR- 126J.SUR- 132J.
                                      SUR-133J.SUR-134J
                                                                  EC-231 .EC-232.EC-233,
                                                                  EC-237.EC-238.EC-241.
                                                                  EC-242.EC-243.EC-245
                                                                     surrogate (murti-
                                                                     hydrocarbonJNO*
hydrocarbon/NOi/SOz

40 Bureau of Mines smog
chamber experiments with
dilute auto exhaust and
added /VO«. Several UCR
aromatic hydrocarbon/7VOX
experiments

17 Bureau of Mines smog
chamber experiments with
dilute auto exhaust and
added NO*
7 hydrocarbons/NO *
experiments at SAPRC
2 day urban hydrocarbon
mix at UNC

7 hydrocarbons/NO*

surrogate atmospheric
mix
several individual
hydrocarbon/NO,
experiments

7 hydrocarbons/NO*
BThe mechanism type refers to: LM - Lumped molecule, S - Surrogate and LS - Lumped structure.
"Number of reactive organic groupings for which either emissions or initial conditions must be specified in practical applications.
cThe mechanism presented here corresponds to that in the most recent reference cited.
"This mechanism was developed by Falls and Seinfeld (1978), with updated rate constants presented by McRae and Seinfeld (1983).
"The experiment numbers refer to the following laboratories:

EC.SUR  Statewide Air Pollution Research Center (SAPRC) of
         the University of California, Riverside
   UNC  University of North Carolina
implemented in the manner intended by
the developer. A summary of the mechanism
characteristics, documentation  sources
and bases for validation is shown in Table
1. The validation bases of the Atkinson et
              al. (1982), Killus and Whitten (1982) and
              Penner and Walton (1982) mechanisms
              are experiments conducted at the University
              of California, Riverside, whereas the
              Demerjian  (1982) and  Dodge (1977)
                                            mechanisms were evaluated on Bureau
                                            of Mines smog chamber data. The Killus
                                            and Whitten (1982) mechanism has also
                                            been tested against outdoor smog chamber
                                            data from the University of North Carolina.

-------
   Chapter 2 contains summaries of the
   mechanisms.

   Results
    We discuss the basis of the lumping
   approaches of the five lumped mechanisms:
   Atkinson et al. (1982), Demerjian (1982),
   Killus and Whitten (1982), McRae and
   Seinfeld (1983), and Penner and Walton
   (1982). Our discussion of the chemistry of
   photochemical smog is based almost
   exclusively on  the extensive  review of
   Atkinson and  Lloyd  (1983). We then
   examine the specification of  photolysis
   rates and initial conditions in each of the
   mechanisms.

   Conclusions
    This report  has presented  a detailed
   description of six  lumped reaction
   mechanisms for photochemical smog:
    Atkinson et al. (1982)
    Demerjian (1982)
    Dodge (1977)
    Killus and Whitten (1982)
    McRae and Seinfeld (1983)
    Penner and Walton (1982)

   The description includes a discussion of
   the basic assumptions in each mechanism's
   treatment of the fundamental chemistry,
   photolysis reactions, and organic lumping
   via  initial  conditions and organic rate
   constants. In general, it is found that the
   mechanisms differ in virtually all aspects,
   and, without  detailed,  quantitative,
   numerical comparisons, it is  difficult to
   predict simply from inspection how each
   mechanism will perform in a particular
   application. Nevertheless, if one removes
   those mechanism aspects included only
   to account for smog chamber-dependent
   radical sources, such as a wall source of
   OH  radicals or initial HONO, it is possible
   to  rank  the mechanisms according to
   overall "reactivity." We find on the basis
   of our analysis that such a ranking is:
       Killus and Whitten (1982)
       Demerjian (1982)
       McRae and Seinfeld (1983)

       Atkinson et al. (1982)
       Penner and Walton (1982)
most
reactive


less
reactive
       The Dodge (1977) mechanism cannot be
       ranked  in  this  scale because the  split
       between propene and n-butane is fixed.
         Our object is to be able to tell specifically
       what aspects of each mechanism are key
       to its performance, as  measured by its
       "reactivity." To  do so  requires the de-
       tailed, quantitative, numerical comparisons
       referred to above. Such comparisons are
       the subject of Part II.

       References
       Atkinson, R. and Lloyd, A.C. (1983), "Eval-
           uation of Kinetic and  Mechanistic
           Data for Modeling of Photochemical
           Smog," J. Phys. Chem.  Ref. Data (in
           press).
       Atkinson, R., Lloyd, A.C. and Winges, L
           (1982), "An Updated Chemical Mechan-
           ism for  Hydrocarbons/NOx/SOa
           Photooxidations Suitable for Inclusion
           in Atmospheric Simulation Models,"
           Atmospheric Environment, 16, 1341-
           1355.
Demerjian,  K.L (1982), "Personal Com-
    munication."
Dodge, M.C. (1977), "Combined  Use of
    Modeling Techniques and  Smog
    Chamber Data to Derive  Ozone —
    Precursor Relationships,"  U.S. Envi-
    ronmental Protection Agency Report,
    EPA-600/3-77-001a, 881-889.

Falls, A.M. and Seinfeld, J.H. (1978),
    "Continued Development of a Kinetic
    Mechanism for Photochemical Smog,"
    Environmental Science and Technolo-
    gy, 12.  1398-1406.
Killus, J.P.  and Whitten, G.Z.  (1982), A
    New Carbon-Bond Mechanism  for
    Air Quality Modeling, U.S. Environ-
    mental Protection Agency Report No.
    EPA-600/3-82-041.
McRae,  G.J. and  Seinfeld, J.H.  (1983),
    "Development of a Second-Generation
    Mathematical  Model for Urban Pollu-
    tion II:  Model Performance Evalua-
    tion," Atmospheric Environment,  17,
    501-523.
Penner, J.E. and Walton, J.J. (1982) Air
    Quality Model Update,  Lawrence
    Livermore  Laboratory Report  UCID  -
    19300, Lawrence Livermore National
    Laboratory, University of California,
    Livermore, California, 55 pp.
          G. J. McRae, J. A. Leone, and J. H. Seinfeld are with the California Institute of
            Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125,
          Marc/a C. Dodge is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
          The complete report, entitled "Evaluation of Chemical Reaction Mechanisms for
            Photochemical Smog: Part I.  Mechanism Descriptions and Documentation."
            (Order No. PB 83-263 251; Cost: $16.00, subject to change) will be available
            only from:
                  National Technical Information Service
                  5285 Port Royal Road
                  Springfield. VA 22161
                  Telephone: 703-487-4650
          The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
                  Environmental Sciences Research Laboratory
                  U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
                  Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
                                                                                          irUS GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1983-659-017/7237
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

-------