A Study on Improvement of Air Quality Dispersion Model Application Method in Environmental Impact Assessment (II) - Focusing on AERMOD Model Application Method -
환경영향평가에서의 대기질 확산모델 적용방법 개선 연구(II) - AERMOD 모델 적용방법을 중심으로 -
Suhyang Kim
(Sunil Engineering&Consultant, Co., Ltd.)
;
Sunhwan Park
(Sunil Engineering&Consultant, Co., Ltd.)
;
The AERMOD model was the most used, accounting for 89.0%, based on the analysis of the environmental impact assessment reports published in the Environmental Impact Assessment Information Support System (EIASS) between 2021 and 2022. The mismatch of versions between AERMET and AERMOD was found to be 25.3%. There was the operational time discrepancy of 50.6% from industrial complexes, urban development projects between used in the model and applied in estimating pollutant emissions. The results of applying various versions of the AERMET and AERMOD models to both area sources and point sources in both simple and complex terrain in the Gunsan area showed similar values after AERMOD version 12 (15181). Emissions are assessed as 24-hour operation, and the predicted concentration in both simple and complex terrain when using the variable emission coefficient option that applies an 8-hour daytime operation in the model is lowered by 37.42% ~ 74.27% for area sources and by 32.06% ~ 54.45% for point sources. Therefore, to prevent the error in using the variable emission coefficient, it is required to clearly present the emission calculation process and provide a detailed explanation of the composition of modeling input data in the environmental impact assessment reports. Also, thorough reviews by special institutions are essential.
우리나라 환경영향평가서의 대기모델 적용 실태를 조사하기 위하여 2021년부터 2022년까지 협의가 완료되어 환경영향평가정보지원시스템(EIASS)에 공개된 환경영향평가서를 분석한 결과 AERMOD가 89.0%로 가장 많이 사용되었다. AERMET과 AERMOD의 버전 불일치는 25.3%로 나타났으며, 산업단지 및 도시개발사업의 발생하는 오염물질 배출량 산정시 적용한 가동시간과 모델에 적용한 가동시간의 불일치는 50.6%로 나타났다. 군산지역의 단순 및 복잡지형에서 다양한 버전의 AERMET과 AERMOD 모델을 면오염원과 점오염원에 적용한 결과, AERMOD 버전 12(15181) 이후부터는 동일한 값을 나타내었다. 배출량은 24시간 가동을 기준으로 산정하고, 모델에는 주간 8시간 가동을 적용하는 가변 배출계수 옵션을 사용할 때, 예측농도는 단순 및 복잡지형에서 면오염원은 32.06~74.27%, 점오염원은 14.85~43.13% 축소되는 것으로 나타났다. 따라서 AERMOD 모델의 가변 배출계수 적용 오류를 방지하기 위해서는 환경영향평가서에 배출량 산정과정을 명확히 제시하고, 모델링 입력자료 구성에 대한 구체적인 설명이 요구되며, 환경영향평가 전문 검토기관에서는 보다 철저한 검토가 필요하다.
본 결과물은 환경부의 재원으로 한국환경산업기술원의 한국보건디지털 조사기반 구축기술개발사업의 지원을 받아 연구되었습니다(2021003330003).
References
Kim SH, Park SH, Tak JS, Ha JS, Joo HS, Lee NH. 2022. A Study on Improvement of Air Quality Dispersion Model Application Method in Environmental Impact Assessment (I) - Focusiong on AERMOD Meteorological Preprocessor. J. Environ. Impact Assess. 31(5): 271-285. [Korean Literature]
EIASS (Environmental Impact Assessment Support System), [cited 2022 Dec. 3]. Available from https://www.eiass.go.kr/
Environmental Protection Agency. 2005. 40 CFR Appendix W to Part 51 - Revision to the Guideline on Air Quality Models.
Environmental Protection Agency. 2017. 40 CFR Appendix W to Part 51 - Revision to the Guideline on Air Quality Models.
Environmental Protection Agency. 2020. User's Guide for AERSURFACE Tool.
Environmental Protection Agency. 2022. User's Guide for the AMS/EPA Regulatory Model (AERMOD).
Ministry of Environment. 2009. Environmental Impact Prediction Model User Guide. [Korean Literature]
Mun NG, Lee YS, Gang YH, Kim YH. 2005. The Application of Air Quality Models on Environment Impact Assessment. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature]
Support Center for Regulatory Atmospheric Modeling [Internet]. Environmental Protection Agency; [cited 2022 Jan. 3]. Available from : https://www.epa.gov/scram/air-quality-dispersion-modeling-preferred-and-recommended-models#aermod