1
|
Hogrefe C, Bash JO, Pleim JE, Schwede DB, Gilliam RC, Foley KM, Appel KW, Mathur R. An Analysis of CMAQ Gas Phase Dry Deposition over North America Through Grid-Scale and Land-Use Specific Diagnostics in the Context of AQMEII4. Atmos Chem Phys 2023; 23:8119-8147. [PMID: 37942278 PMCID: PMC10631556 DOI: 10.5194/acp-23-8119-2023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2023]
Abstract
The fourth phase of the Air Quality Model Evaluation International Initiative (AQMEII4) is conducting a diagnostic intercomparison and evaluation of deposition simulated by regional-scale air quality models over North America and Europe. In this study, we analyze annual AQMEII4 simulations performed with the Community Multiscale Air Quality Model (CMAQ) version 5.3.1 over North America. These simulations were configured with both the M3Dry and Surface Tiled Aerosol and Gas Exchange (STAGE) dry deposition schemes available in CMAQ. A comparison of observed and modeled concentrations and wet deposition fluxes shows that the AQMEII4 CMAQ simulations perform similarly to other contemporary regional-scale modeling studies. During summer, M3Dry has higher ozone (O3) deposition velocities (Vd) and lower mixing ratios than STAGE for much of the eastern U.S. while the reverse is the case over eastern Canada and along the West Coast. In contrast, during winter STAGE has higher O3 Vd and lower mixing ratios than M3Dry over most of the southern half of the modeling domain while the reverse is the case for much of the northern U.S. and southern Canada. Analysis of the diagnostic variables defined for the AQMEII4 project, i.e. grid-scale and land-use (LU) specific effective conductances and deposition fluxes for the major dry deposition pathways, reveals generally higher summertime stomatal and wintertime cuticular grid-scale effective conductances for M3Dry and generally higher soil grid-scale effective conductances (for both vegetated and bare soil) for STAGE in both summer and winter. On a domain-wide basis, the stomatal grid-scale effective conductances account for about half of the total O3 Vd during daytime hours in summer for both schemes. Employing LU-specific diagnostics, results show that daytime Vd varies by a factor of 2 between LU categories. Furthermore, M3Dry vs. STAGE differences are most pronounced for the stomatal and vegetated soil pathway for the forest LU categories, with M3Dry estimating larger effective conductances for the stomatal pathway and STAGE estimating larger effective conductances for the vegetated soil pathway for these LU categories. Annual domain total O3 deposition fluxes differ only slightly between M3Dry (74.4 Tg/year) and STAGE (76.2 Tg/yr), but pathway-specific fluxes to individual LU types can vary more substantially on both annual and seasonal scales which would affect estimates of O3 damages to sensitive vegetation. A comparison of two simulations differing only in their LU classification scheme shows that the differences in LU cause seasonal mean O3 mixing ratio differences on the order of 1 ppb across large portions of the domain, with the differences generally largest during summer and in areas characterized by the largest differences in the fractional coverages of the forest, planted/cultivated, and grassland LU categories. These differences are generally smaller than the M3Dry vs. STAGE differences outside the summer season but have a similar magnitude during summer. Results indicate that the deposition impacts of LU differences are caused both by differences in the fractional coverages and spatial distributions of different LU categories as well as the characterization of these categories through variables like surface roughness and vegetation fraction in look-up tables used in the land-surface model and deposition schemes. Overall, the analyses and results presented in this study illustrate how the diagnostic grid-scale and LU-specific dry deposition variables adopted for AQMEII4 can provide insights into similarities and differences between the CMAQ M3Dry and STAGE dry deposition schemes that affect simulated pollutant budgets and ecosystem impacts from atmospheric pollution.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christian Hogrefe
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Dr., P.O. Box 12055, RTP, NC 27711, USA
| | - Jesse O Bash
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Dr., P.O. Box 12055, RTP, NC 27711, USA
| | - Jonathan E Pleim
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Dr., P.O. Box 12055, RTP, NC 27711, USA
| | - Donna B Schwede
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Dr., P.O. Box 12055, RTP, NC 27711, USA
| | - Robert C Gilliam
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Dr., P.O. Box 12055, RTP, NC 27711, USA
| | - Kristen M Foley
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Dr., P.O. Box 12055, RTP, NC 27711, USA
| | - K Wyat Appel
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Dr., P.O. Box 12055, RTP, NC 27711, USA
| | - Rohit Mathur
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Dr., P.O. Box 12055, RTP, NC 27711, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Foley KM, Pouliot GA, Eyth A, Aldridge MF, Allen C, Appel KW, Bash JO, Beardsley M, Beidler J, Choi D, Farkas C, Gilliam RC, Godfrey J, Henderson BH, Hogrefe C, Koplitz SN, Mason R, Mathur R, Misenis C, Possiel N, Pye HO, Reynolds L, Roark M, Roberts S, Schwede DB, Seltzer KM, Sonntag D, Talgo K, Toro C, Vukovich J, Xing J, Adams E. 2002-2017 anthropogenic emissions data for air quality modeling over the United States. Data Brief 2023; 47:109022. [PMID: 36942100 PMCID: PMC10023994 DOI: 10.1016/j.dib.2023.109022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2022] [Revised: 02/17/2023] [Accepted: 02/21/2023] [Indexed: 03/06/2023] Open
Abstract
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) has developed a set of annual North American emissions data for multiple air pollutants across 18 broad source categories for 2002 through 2017. The sixteen new annual emissions inventories were developed using consistent input data and methods across all years. When a consistent method or tool was not available for a source category, emissions were estimated by scaling data from the EPA's 2017 National Emissions Inventory with scaling factors based on activity data and/or emissions control information. The emissions datasets are designed to support regional air quality modeling for a wide variety of human health and ecological applications. The data were developed to support simulations of the EPA's Community Multiscale Air Quality model but can also be used by other regional scale air quality models. The emissions data are one component of EPA's Air Quality Time Series Project which also includes air quality modeling inputs (meteorology, initial conditions, boundary conditions) and outputs (e.g., ozone, PM2.5 and constituent species, wet and dry deposition) for the Conterminous US at a 12 km horizontal grid spacing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristen M. Foley
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
- Corresponding authors. @kfoley7991
| | - George A. Pouliot
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
- Corresponding authors. @kfoley7991
| | - Alison Eyth
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Michael F. Aldridge
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Christine Allen
- General Dynamics Information Technology, 79 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, United States
| | - K. Wyat Appel
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Jesse O. Bash
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Megan Beardsley
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - James Beidler
- General Dynamics Information Technology, 79 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, United States
| | - David Choi
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Caroline Farkas
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Robert C. Gilliam
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Janice Godfrey
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Barron H. Henderson
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Christian Hogrefe
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Shannon N. Koplitz
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Rich Mason
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Rohit Mathur
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Chris Misenis
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Norm Possiel
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Havala O.T. Pye
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Lara Reynolds
- General Dynamics Information Technology, 79 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, United States
| | - Matthew Roark
- General Dynamics Information Technology, 79 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, United States
| | - Sarah Roberts
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Donna B. Schwede
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Karl M. Seltzer
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Darrell Sonntag
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Kevin Talgo
- General Dynamics Information Technology, 79 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, United States
| | - Claudia Toro
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Jeff Vukovich
- US Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Jia Xing
- School of Environment, State Key Joint Laboratory of Environment Simulation and Pollution Control, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
| | - Elizabeth Adams
- University of North Carolina, Institute for the Environment, 100 Europa Drive, Suite 490, CB #1105, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, United States
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Pye HOT, Appel KW, Seltzer KM, Ward-Caviness CK, Murphy BN. Human-health impacts of controlling secondary air pollution precursors. Environ Sci Technol Lett 2022; 9:96-101. [PMID: 35342772 PMCID: PMC8942014 DOI: 10.1021/acs.estlett.1c00798] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
Exposure to ozone and fine particle (PM2.5) air pollution results in premature death. These pollutants are predominantly secondary in nature and can form from nitrogen oxides (NOX), sulfur oxides (SOX), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Predicted health benefits for emission reduction scenarios often incompletely account for VOCs as precursors as well as the secondary organic aerosol (SOA) component of PM2.5. Here, we show that anthropogenic VOC emission reductions are more than twice as effective as equivalent fractional reductions of SOX or NOX at reducing air pollution-associated cardiorespiratory mortality in the United States. A 25% reduction in anthropogenic VOC emissions from 2016 levels is predicted to avoid 13,000 premature deaths per year, and most (85%) of the VOC-reduction benefits result from reduced SOA with the remainder from ozone. While NOX (-5.7 ± 0.2 % yr-1) and SOX (-12 ± 1 % yr-1) emissions have declined precipitously across the U.S. since 2002, anthropogenic VOC emissions (-1.8 ± 0.3 % yr-1) and concentrations of non-methane organic carbon (-2.4 ± 1.0 % yr-1) have changed less. This work indicates preferentially controlling VOCs could yield significant benefits to human health.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Havala O. T. Pye
- Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 109 TW Alexander Dr, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711, USA
| | - K. Wyat Appel
- Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 109 TW Alexander Dr, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711, USA
| | - Karl M. Seltzer
- Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education Postdoctoral Fellow in the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 109 TW Alexander Dr, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711, USA
| | - Cavin K. Ward-Caviness
- Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 104 Mason Farm Rd, Chapel Hill, NC, 27514, USA
| | - Benjamin N. Murphy
- Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 109 TW Alexander Dr, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Pye HOT, Ward-Caviness CK, Murphy BN, Appel KW, Seltzer KM. Secondary organic aerosol association with cardiorespiratory disease mortality in the United States. Nat Commun 2021; 12:7215. [PMID: 34916495 PMCID: PMC8677800 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-27484-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2020] [Accepted: 11/19/2021] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Fine particle pollution, PM2.5, is associated with increased risk of death from cardiorespiratory diseases. A multidecadal shift in the United States (U.S.) PM2.5 composition towards organic aerosol as well as advances in predictive algorithms for secondary organic aerosol (SOA) allows for novel examinations of the role of PM2.5 components on mortality. Here we show SOA is strongly associated with county-level cardiorespiratory death rates in the U.S. independent of the total PM2.5 mass association with the largest associations located in the southeastern U.S. Compared to PM2.5, county-level variability in SOA across the U.S. is associated with 3.5× greater per capita county-level cardiorespiratory mortality. On a per mass basis, SOA is associated with a 6.5× higher rate of mortality than PM2.5, and biogenic and anthropogenic carbon sources both play a role in the overall SOA association with mortality. Our results suggest reducing the health impacts of PM2.5 requires consideration of SOA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Havala O T Pye
- Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 109 TW Alexander Dr, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711, USA.
| | - Cavin K Ward-Caviness
- Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 104 Mason Farm Rd, Chapel Hill, NC, 27514, USA
| | - Ben N Murphy
- Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 109 TW Alexander Dr, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711, USA
| | - K Wyat Appel
- Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 109 TW Alexander Dr, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711, USA
| | - Karl M Seltzer
- Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education Postdoctoral Fellow in the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 109 TW Alexander Dr, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Murphy BN, Nolte CG, Sidi F, Bash JO, Appel KW, Jang C, Kang D, Kelly J, Mathur R, Napelenok S, Pouliot G, Pye HOT. The Detailed Emissions Scaling, Isolation, and Diagnostic (DESID) module in the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system version 5.3.2. Geosci Model Dev 2021; 14:3407-3420. [PMID: 34336142 PMCID: PMC8318114 DOI: 10.5194/gmd-14-3407-2021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/28/2023]
Abstract
Air quality modeling for research and regulatory applications often involves executing many emissions sensitivity cases to quantify impacts of hypothetical scenarios, estimate source contributions, or quantify uncertainties. Despite the prevalence of this task, conventional approaches for perturbing emissions in chemical transport models like the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model require extensive offline creation and finalization of alternative emissions input files. This workflow is often time-consuming, error-prone, inconsistent among model users, difficult to document, and dependent on increased hard disk resources. The Detailed Emissions Scaling, Isolation, and Diagnostic (DESID) module, a component of CMAQv5.3 and beyond, addresses these limitations by performing these modifications online during the air quality simulation. Further, the model contains an Emission Control Interface which allows users to prescribe both simple and highly complex emissions scaling operations with control over individual or multiple chemical species, emissions sources, and spatial areas of interest. DESID further enhances the transparency of its operations with extensive error-checking and optional gridded output of processed emission fields. These new features are of high value to many air quality applications including routine perturbation studies, atmospheric chemistry research, and coupling with external models (e.g., energy system models, reduced-form models).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin N. Murphy
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - Christopher G. Nolte
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - Fahim Sidi
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - Jesse O. Bash
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - K. Wyat Appel
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - Carey Jang
- Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - Daiwen Kang
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - James Kelly
- Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - Rohit Mathur
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - Sergey Napelenok
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - George Pouliot
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - Havala O. T. Pye
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Murphy BN, Nolte CG, Sidi F, Bash JO, Appel KW, Jang C, Kang D, Kelly J, Mathur R, Napelenok S, Pouliot G, Pye HOT. The Detailed Emissions Scaling, Isolation, and Diagnostic (DESID) module in the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system version 5.3.2. Geosci Model Dev 2021. [PMID: 34336142 DOI: 10.5194/gmd-2020-361] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/05/2023]
Abstract
Air quality modeling for research and regulatory applications often involves executing many emissions sensitivity cases to quantify impacts of hypothetical scenarios, estimate source contributions, or quantify uncertainties. Despite the prevalence of this task, conventional approaches for perturbing emissions in chemical transport models like the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model require extensive offline creation and finalization of alternative emissions input files. This workflow is often time-consuming, error-prone, inconsistent among model users, difficult to document, and dependent on increased hard disk resources. The Detailed Emissions Scaling, Isolation, and Diagnostic (DESID) module, a component of CMAQv5.3 and beyond, addresses these limitations by performing these modifications online during the air quality simulation. Further, the model contains an Emission Control Interface which allows users to prescribe both simple and highly complex emissions scaling operations with control over individual or multiple chemical species, emissions sources, and spatial areas of interest. DESID further enhances the transparency of its operations with extensive error-checking and optional gridded output of processed emission fields. These new features are of high value to many air quality applications including routine perturbation studies, atmospheric chemistry research, and coupling with external models (e.g., energy system models, reduced-form models).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin N Murphy
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - Christopher G Nolte
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - Fahim Sidi
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - Jesse O Bash
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - K Wyat Appel
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - Carey Jang
- Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - Daiwen Kang
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - James Kelly
- Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - Rohit Mathur
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - Sergey Napelenok
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - George Pouliot
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| | - Havala O T Pye
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Appel KW, Bash JO, Fahey KM, Foley KM, Gilliam RC, Hogrefe C, Hutzell WT, Kang D, Mathur R, Murphy BN, Napelenok SL, Nolte CG, Pleim JE, Pouliot GA, Pye HOT, Ran L, Roselle SJ, Sarwar G, Schwede DB, Sidi FI, Spero TL, Wong DC. The Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model versions 5.3 and 5.3.1: system updates and evaluation. Geosci Model Dev 2021; 14:2867-2897. [PMID: 34676058 PMCID: PMC8525427 DOI: 10.5194/gmd-14-2867-2021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/21/2023]
Abstract
The Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model version 5.3 (CMAQ53), released to the public in August 2019 and followed by version 5.3.1 (CMAQ531) in December 2019, contains numerous science updates, enhanced functionality, and improved computation efficiency relative to the previous version of the model, 5.2.1 (CMAQ521). Major science advances in the new model include a new aerosol module (AERO7) with significant updates to secondary organic aerosol (SOA) chemistry, updated chlorine chemistry, updated detailed bromine and iodine chemistry, updated simple halogen chemistry, the addition of dimethyl sulfide (DMS) chemistry in the CB6r3 chemical mechanism, updated M3Dry bidirectional deposition model, and the new Surface Tiled Aerosol and Gaseous Exchange (STAGE) bidirectional deposition model. In addition, support for the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model's hybrid vertical coordinate (HVC) was added to CMAQ53 and the Meteorology-Chemistry Interface Processor (MCIP) version 5.0 (MCIP50). Enhanced functionality in CMAQ53 includes the new Detailed Emissions Scaling, Isolation and Diagnostic (DESID) system for scaling incoming emissions to CMAQ and reading multiple gridded input emission files. Evaluation of CMAQ531 was performed by comparing monthly and seasonal mean daily 8 h average (MDA8) O3 and daily PM2.5 values from several CMAQ531 simulations to a similarly configured CMAQ521 simulation encompassing 2016. For MDA8 O3, CMAQ531 has higher O3 in the winter versus CMAQ521, due primarily to reduced dry deposition to snow, which strongly reduces wintertime O3 bias (2-4 ppbv monthly average). MDA8 O3 is lower with CMAQ531 throughout the rest of the year, particularly in spring, due in part to reduced O3 from the lateral boundary conditions (BCs), which generally increases MDA8 O3 bias in spring and fall ( 0.5 μg m-3). For daily 24 h average PM2.5, CMAQ531 has lower concentrations on average in spring and fall, higher concentrations in summer, and similar concentrations in winter to CMAQ521, which slightly increases bias in spring and fall and reduces bias in summer. Comparisons were also performed to isolate updates to several specific aspects of the modeling system, namely the lateral BCs, meteorology model version, and the deposition model used. Transitioning from a hemispheric CMAQ (HCMAQ) version 5.2.1 simulation to a HCMAQ version 5.3 simulation to provide lateral BCs contributes to higher O3 mixing ratios in the regional CMAQ simulation in higher latitudes during winter (due to the decreased O3 dry deposition to snow in CMAQ53) and lower O3 mixing ratios in middle and lower latitudes year-round (due to reduced O3 over the ocean with CMAQ53). Transitioning from WRF version 3.8 to WRF version 4.1.1 with the HVC resulted in consistently higher (1.0-1.5 ppbv) MDA8 O3 mixing ratios and higher PM2.5 concentrations (0.1-0.25 μg m-3) throughout the year. Finally, comparisons of the M3Dry and STAGE deposition models showed that MDA8 O3 is generally higher with M3Dry outside of summer, while PM2.5 is consistently higher with STAGE due to differences in the assumptions of particle deposition velocities to non-vegetated surfaces and land use with short vegetation (e.g., grasslands) between the two models. For ambient NH3, STAGE has slightly higher concentrations and smaller bias in the winter, spring, and fall, while M3Dry has higher concentrations and smaller bias but larger error and lower correlation in the summer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K. Wyat Appel
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Jesse O. Bash
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Kathleen M. Fahey
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Kristen M. Foley
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Robert C. Gilliam
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Christian Hogrefe
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - William T. Hutzell
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Daiwen Kang
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Rohit Mathur
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Benjamin N. Murphy
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Sergey L. Napelenok
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Christopher G. Nolte
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Jonathan E. Pleim
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - George A. Pouliot
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Havala O. T. Pye
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Limei Ran
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Shawn J. Roselle
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Golam Sarwar
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Donna B. Schwede
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Fahim I. Sidi
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Tanya L. Spero
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - David C. Wong
- Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Zhou L, Schwede DB, Wyat Appel K, Mangiante MJ, Wong DC, Napelenok SL, Whung PY, Zhang B. The impact of air pollutant deposition on solar energy system efficiency: An approach to estimate PV soiling effects with the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model. Sci Total Environ 2019; 651:456-465. [PMID: 30243165 PMCID: PMC7156116 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.09.194] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2018] [Revised: 09/11/2018] [Accepted: 09/15/2018] [Indexed: 05/16/2023]
Abstract
Deposition and accumulation of aerosol particles on photovoltaics (PV) panels, which is commonly referred to as "soiling of PV panels," impacts the performance of the PV energy system. It is desirable to estimate the soiling effect at different locations and times for modeling the PV system performance and devising cost-effective mitigation. This study presents an approach to estimate the soiling effect by utilizing particulate matter (PM) dry deposition estimates from air quality model simulations. The Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system used in this study was developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) for air quality assessments, rule-making, and research. Three deposition estimates based on different surface roughness length parameters assumed in CMAQ were used to illustrate the soling effect in different land-use types. The results were analyzed for three locations in the U.S. for year 2011. One urban and one suburban location in Colorado were selected because there have been field measurements of particle deposition on solar panels and analysis on the consequent soiling effect performed at these locations. The third location is a coastal city in Texas, the City of Brownsville. These three locations have distinct ambient environments. CMAQ underestimates particle deposition by 40% to 80% when compared to the field measurements at the two sites in Colorado due to the underestimations in both the ambient PM10 concentration and deposition velocity. The estimated panel transmittance sensitivity due to the deposited particles is higher than the sensitivity obtained from the measurements in Colorado. The final soiling effect, which is transmittance loss, is estimated as 3.17 ± 4.20% for the Texas site, 0.45 ± 0.33%, and 0.31 ± 0.25% for the Colorado sites. Although the numbers are lower compared to the measurements in Colorado, the results are comparable with the soiling effects observed in U.S.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luxi Zhou
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States; National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine, Washington, DC 20001, United States.
| | - Donna B Schwede
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - K Wyat Appel
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Michael J Mangiante
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - David C Wong
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Sergey L Napelenok
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Pai-Yei Whung
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States
| | - Banglin Zhang
- Institute of Tropical and Marine Meteorology/Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Regional Numerical Weather Prediction, CMA, Guangzhou 510641, China
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Friberg MD, Kahn RA, Limbacher JA, Appel KW, Mulholland JA. Constraining chemical transport PM 2.5 modeling outputs using surface monitor measurements and satellite retrievals: application over the San Joaquin Valley. Atmos Chem Phys 2018; 18:12891-12913. [PMID: 30288162 PMCID: PMC6166888 DOI: 10.5194/acp-18-12891-2018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/30/2023]
Abstract
Advances in satellite retrieval of aerosol type can improve the accuracy of near-surface air quality characterization by providing broad regional context and decreasing metric uncertainties and errors. The frequent, spatially extensive and radiometrically consistent instantaneous constraints can be especially useful in areas away from ground monitors and progressively downwind of emission sources. We present a physical approach to constraining regional-scale estimates of PM2.5, its major chemical component species estimates, and related uncertainty estimates of chemical transport model (CTM; e.g., the Community Multi-scale Air Quality Model) outputs. This approach uses ground-based monitors where available, combined with aerosol optical depth and qualitative constraints on aerosol size, shape, and light-absorption properties from the Multi-angle Imaging SpectroRadiometer (MISR) on the NASA Earth Observing System's Terra satellite. The CTM complements these data by providing complete spatial and temporal coverage. Unlike widely used approaches that train statistical regression models, the technique developed here leverages CTM physical constraints such as the conservation of aerosol mass and meteorological consistency, independent of observations. The CTM also aids in identifying relationships between observed species concentrations and emission sources. Aerosol air mass types over populated regions of central California are characterized using satellite data acquired during the 2013 San Joaquin field deployment of the NASA Deriving Information on Surface Conditions from Column and Vertically Resolved Observations Relevant to Air Quality (DISCOVER-AQ) project. We investigate the optimal application of incorporating 275 m horizontal-resolution aerosol air-mass-type maps and total-column aerosol optical depth from the MISR Research Aerosol retrieval algorithm (RA) into regional-scale CTM output. The impact on surface PM2.5 fields progressively downwind of large single sources is evaluated using contemporaneous surface observations. Spatiotemporal R 2 and RMSE values for the model, constrained by both satellite and surface monitor measurements based on 10-fold cross-validation, are 0.79 and 0.33 for PM2.5, 0.88 and 0.65 for NO3 -, 0.78 and 0.23 for SO4 2-, and 1.01 for NH+, 0.73 and 0.23 for OC, and 0.31 and 0.65 for EC, respectively. Regional cross-validation temporal and spatiotemporal R2 results for the satellite-based PM2.5 improve by 30 % and 13 %, respectively, in comparison to unconstrained CTM simulations and provide finer spatial resolution. SO4 2- cross-validation values showed the largest spatial and spatiotemporal R2 improvement, with a 43 % increase. Assessing this physical technique in a well- instrumented region opens the possibility of applying it globally, especially over areas where surface air quality measurements are scarce or entirely absent.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mariel D. Friberg
- NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
- School of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA
| | - Ralph A. Kahn
- NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
| | - James A. Limbacher
- NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA
- Science Systems and Applications Inc., Lanham, MD 20706, USA
| | | | - James A. Mulholland
- School of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Pye HOT, Zuend A, Fry JL, Isaacman-VanWertz G, Capps SL, Appel KW, Foroutan H, Xu L, Ng NL, Goldstein AH. Coupling of organic and inorganic aerosol systems and the effect on gas-particle partitioning in the southeastern US. Atmos Chem Phys 2018; 18:357-370. [PMID: 29963078 PMCID: PMC6020690 DOI: 10.5194/acp-18-357-2018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/03/2023]
Abstract
Several models were used to describe the partitioning of ammonia, water, and organic compounds between the gas and particle phases for conditions in the southeastern US during summer 2013. Existing equilibrium models and frameworks were found to be sufficient, although additional improvements in terms of estimating pure-species vapor pressures are needed. Thermodynamic model predictions were consistent, to first order, with a molar ratio of ammonium to sulfate of approximately 1.6 to 1.8 (ratio of ammonium to 2× sulfate, RN/2S ≈ 0.8 to 0.9) with approximately 70% of total ammonia and ammonium (NH x ) in the particle. Southeastern Aerosol Research and Characterization Network (SEARCH) gas and aerosol and Southern Oxidant and Aerosol Study (SOAS) Monitor for AeRosols and Gases in Ambient air (MARGA) aerosol measurements were consistent with these conditions. CMAQv5.2 regional chemical transport model predictions did not reflect these conditions due to a factor of 3 overestimate of the nonvolatile cations. In addition, gas-phase ammonia was overestimated in the CMAQ model leading to an even lower fraction of total ammonia in the particle. Chemical Speciation Network (CSN) and aerosol mass spectrometer (AMS) measurements indicated less ammonium per sulfate than SEARCH and MARGA measurements and were inconsistent with thermodynamic model predictions. Organic compounds were predicted to be present to some extent in the same phase as inorganic constituents, modifying their activity and resulting in a decrease in [H+]air (H+ in μgm-3 air), increase in ammonia partitioning to the gas phase, and increase in pH compared to complete organic vs. inorganic liquid-liquid phase separation. In addition, accounting for nonideal mixing modified the pH such that a fully interactive inorganic-organic system had a pH roughly 0.7 units higher than predicted using traditional methods (pH = 1.5 vs. 0.7). Particle-phase interactions of organic and inorganic compounds were found to increase partitioning towards the particle phase (vs. gas phase) for highly oxygenated (O : C≥0.6) compounds including several isoprene-derived tracers as well as levoglu-cosan but decrease particle-phase partitioning for low O: C, monoterpene-derived species.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Havala O. T. Pye
- National Exposure Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA
| | - Andreas Zuend
- Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada
| | - Juliane L. Fry
- Department of Chemistry, Reed College, Portland, Oregon, USA
| | - Gabriel Isaacman-VanWertz
- Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA
- Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA
| | - Shannon L. Capps
- Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - K. Wyat Appel
- National Exposure Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA
| | - Hosein Foroutan
- National Exposure Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA
- Department of Biomedical Engineering and Mechanics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA
| | - Lu Xu
- Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California, USA
| | - Nga L. Ng
- School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
- School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Allen H. Goldstein
- Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA
- Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Appel KW, Napelenok SL, Foley KM, Pye HOT, Hogrefe C, Luecken DJ, Bash JO, Roselle SJ, Pleim JE, Foroutan H, Hutzell WT, Pouliot GA, Sarwar G, Fahey KM, Gantt B, Gilliam RC, Heath NK, Kang D, Mathur R, Schwede DB, Spero TL, Wong DC, Young JO. Description and evaluation of the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system version 5.1. Geosci Model Dev 2017. [PMID: 30147852 DOI: 10.5194/gmd-1703-2017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/11/2023]
Abstract
The Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model is a comprehensive multipollutant air quality modeling system developed and maintained by the US Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Research and Development (ORD). Recently, version 5.1 of the CMAQ model (v5.1) was released to the public, incorporating a large number of science updates and extended capabilities over the previous release version of the model (v5.0.2). These updates include the following: improvements in the meteorological calculations in both CMAQ and the Weather Research and Forecast (WRF) model used to provide meteorological fields to CMAQ, updates to the gas and aerosol chemistry, revisions to the calculations of clouds and photolysis, and improvements to the dry and wet deposition in the model. Sensitivity simulations isolating several of the major updates to the modeling system show that changes to the meteorological calculations result in enhanced afternoon and early evening mixing in the model, periods when the model historically underestimates mixing. This enhanced mixing results in higher ozone (O3) mixing ratios on average due to reduced NO titration, and lower fine particulate matter (PM2.5) concentrations due to greater dilution of primary pollutants (e.g., elemental and organic carbon). Updates to the clouds and photolysis calculations greatly improve consistency between the WRF and CMAQ models and result in generally higher O3 mixing ratios, primarily due to reduced cloudiness and attenuation of photolysis in the model. Updates to the aerosol chemistry result in higher secondary organic aerosol (SOA) concentrations in the summer, thereby reducing summertime PM2.5 bias (PM2.5 is typically underestimated by CMAQ in the summer), while updates to the gas chemistry result in slightly higher O3 and PM2.5 on average in January and July. Overall, the seasonal variation in simulated PM2.5 generally improves in CMAQv5.1 (when considering all model updates), as simulated PM2.5 concentrations decrease in the winter (when PM2.5 is generally overestimated by CMAQ) and increase in the summer (when PM2.5 is generally underestimated by CMAQ). Ozone mixing ratios are higher on average with v5.1 vs. v5.0.2, resulting in higher O3 mean bias, as O3 tends to be overestimated by CMAQ throughout most of the year (especially at locations where the observed O3 is low); however, O3 correlation is largely improved with v5.1. Sensitivity simulations for several hypothetical emission reduction scenarios show that v5.1 tends to be slightly more responsive to reductions in NO x (NO + NO2), VOC and SO x (SO2 + SO4) emissions than v5.0.2, representing an improvement as previous studies have shown CMAQ to underestimate the observed reduction in O3 due to large, widespread reductions in observed emissions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K Wyat Appel
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Sergey L Napelenok
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Kristen M Foley
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Havala O T Pye
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Christian Hogrefe
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Deborah J Luecken
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Jesse O Bash
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Shawn J Roselle
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Jonathan E Pleim
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Hosein Foroutan
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - William T Hutzell
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - George A Pouliot
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Golam Sarwar
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Kathleen M Fahey
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Brett Gantt
- Air Quality Analysis Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Office of Air and Radiation, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Robert C Gilliam
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Nicholas K Heath
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Daiwen Kang
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Rohit Mathur
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Donna B Schwede
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Tanya L Spero
- Systems Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - David C Wong
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Jeffrey O Young
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Appel KW, Napelenok SL, Foley KM, Pye HOT, Hogrefe C, Luecken DJ, Bash JO, Roselle SJ, Pleim JE, Foroutan H, Hutzell WT, Pouliot GA, Sarwar G, Fahey KM, Gantt B, Gilliam RC, Heath NK, Kang D, Mathur R, Schwede DB, Spero TL, Wong DC, Young JO. Description and evaluation of the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system version 5.1. Geosci Model Dev 2017; 10:1703-1732. [PMID: 30147852 DOI: 10.5194/gmd-2016-226] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/22/2023]
Abstract
The Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model is a comprehensive multipollutant air quality modeling system developed and maintained by the US Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Research and Development (ORD). Recently, version 5.1 of the CMAQ model (v5.1) was released to the public, incorporating a large number of science updates and extended capabilities over the previous release version of the model (v5.0.2). These updates include the following: improvements in the meteorological calculations in both CMAQ and the Weather Research and Forecast (WRF) model used to provide meteorological fields to CMAQ, updates to the gas and aerosol chemistry, revisions to the calculations of clouds and photolysis, and improvements to the dry and wet deposition in the model. Sensitivity simulations isolating several of the major updates to the modeling system show that changes to the meteorological calculations result in enhanced afternoon and early evening mixing in the model, periods when the model historically underestimates mixing. This enhanced mixing results in higher ozone (O3) mixing ratios on average due to reduced NO titration, and lower fine particulate matter (PM2.5) concentrations due to greater dilution of primary pollutants (e.g., elemental and organic carbon). Updates to the clouds and photolysis calculations greatly improve consistency between the WRF and CMAQ models and result in generally higher O3 mixing ratios, primarily due to reduced cloudiness and attenuation of photolysis in the model. Updates to the aerosol chemistry result in higher secondary organic aerosol (SOA) concentrations in the summer, thereby reducing summertime PM2.5 bias (PM2.5 is typically underestimated by CMAQ in the summer), while updates to the gas chemistry result in slightly higher O3 and PM2.5 on average in January and July. Overall, the seasonal variation in simulated PM2.5 generally improves in CMAQv5.1 (when considering all model updates), as simulated PM2.5 concentrations decrease in the winter (when PM2.5 is generally overestimated by CMAQ) and increase in the summer (when PM2.5 is generally underestimated by CMAQ). Ozone mixing ratios are higher on average with v5.1 vs. v5.0.2, resulting in higher O3 mean bias, as O3 tends to be overestimated by CMAQ throughout most of the year (especially at locations where the observed O3 is low); however, O3 correlation is largely improved with v5.1. Sensitivity simulations for several hypothetical emission reduction scenarios show that v5.1 tends to be slightly more responsive to reductions in NO x (NO + NO2), VOC and SO x (SO2 + SO4) emissions than v5.0.2, representing an improvement as previous studies have shown CMAQ to underestimate the observed reduction in O3 due to large, widespread reductions in observed emissions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K Wyat Appel
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Sergey L Napelenok
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Kristen M Foley
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Havala O T Pye
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Christian Hogrefe
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Deborah J Luecken
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Jesse O Bash
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Shawn J Roselle
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Jonathan E Pleim
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Hosein Foroutan
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - William T Hutzell
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - George A Pouliot
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Golam Sarwar
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Kathleen M Fahey
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Brett Gantt
- Air Quality Analysis Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Office of Air and Radiation, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Robert C Gilliam
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Nicholas K Heath
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Daiwen Kang
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Rohit Mathur
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Donna B Schwede
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Tanya L Spero
- Systems Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - David C Wong
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Jeffrey O Young
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Pye HOT, Murphy BN, Xu L, Ng NL, Carlton AG, Guo H, Weber R, Vasilakos P, Appel KW, Budisulistiorini SH, Surratt JD, Nenes A, Hu W, Jimenez JL, Isaacman-VanWertz G, Misztal PK, Goldstein AH. On the implications of aerosol liquid water and phase separation for organic aerosol mass. Atmos Chem Phys 2017; 17:343-369. [PMID: 30147709 PMCID: PMC6104851 DOI: 10.5194/acp-17-343-2017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 85] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/19/2023]
Abstract
Organic compounds and liquid water are major aerosol constituents in the southeast United States (SE US). Water associated with inorganic constituents (inorganic water) can contribute to the partitioning medium for organic aerosol when relative humidities or organic matter to organic carbon (OM/OC) ratios are high such that separation relative humidities (SRH) are below the ambient relative humidity (RH). As OM/OC ratios in the SE US are often between 1.8 and 2.2, organic aerosol experiences both mixing with inorganic water and separation from it. Regional chemical transport model simulations including inorganic water (but excluding water uptake by organic compounds) in the partitioning medium for secondary organic aerosol (SOA) when RH > SRH led to increased SOA concentrations,· particularly at night. Water uptake to the organic phase resulted in even greater SOA concentrations as a result of a positive feedback in which water uptake increased SOA, which further increased aerosol water and organic aerosol. Aerosol properties· such as the OM/OC and hygroscopicity parameter (κorg), were captured well by the model compared with measurements during the Southern Oxidant and Aerosol Study (SOAS) 2013. Organic nitrates from monoterpene oxidation were predicted to be the least water-soluble semivolatile species in the model, but most biogenically derived semivolatile species in the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model were highly water soluble and expected to contribute to water-soluble organic carbon (WSOC). Organic aerosol and SOA precursors were abundant at night, but additional improvements in daytime organic aerosol are needed to close the model-measurement gap. When taking into account deviations from ideality, including both inorganic (when RH > SRH) and organic water in the organic partitioning medium reduced the mean bias in SOA for routine monitoring networks and improved model performance compared to observations from SOAS. Property updates from this work will be released in CMAQ v5.2.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Havala O. T. Pye
- National Exposure Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Benjamin N. Murphy
- National Exposure Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Lu Xu
- School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Nga L. Ng
- School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA
- School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Annmarie G. Carlton
- Department of Environmental Sciences, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
- now at: Department of Chemistry, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA
| | - Hongyu Guo
- School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Rodney Weber
- School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Petros Vasilakos
- School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - K. Wyat Appel
- National Exposure Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | | | - Jason D. Surratt
- Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Athanasios Nenes
- School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA
- School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA
- Institute of Environmental Research and Sustainable Development, National Observatory of Athens,·Palea Penteli, 15236, Greece
- Institute for Chemical Engineering Sciences, Foundation for Research and Technology Hellas, Patras, Greece
| | - Weiwei Hu
- Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA
- Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Colorado, Boulder,·CO,·USA
| | - Jose L. Jimenez
- Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA
- Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Colorado, Boulder,·CO,·USA
| | - Gabriel Isaacman-VanWertz
- Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, CA USA
| | - Pawel K. Misztal
- Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, CA USA
| | - Allen H. Goldstein
- Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, CA USA
- Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Fahey KM, Carlton AG, Pye HOT, Baek J, Hutzell WT, Stanier CO, Baker KR, Appel KW, Jaoui M, Offenberg JH. A framework for expanding aqueous chemistry in the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model version 5.1. Geosci Model Dev 2017; 10:1587-1605. [PMID: 30147851 PMCID: PMC6104655 DOI: 10.5194/gmd-10-1587-2017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/21/2023]
Abstract
This paper describes the development and implementation of an extendable aqueous-phase chemistry option (AQCHEM -KMT(I)) for the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system, version 5.1. Here, the Kinetic PreProcessor (KPP), version 2.2.3, is used to generate a Rosenbrock solver (Rodas3) to integrate the stiff system of ordinary differential equations (ODEs) that describe the mass transfer, chemical kinetics, and scavenging processes of CMAQ clouds. CMAQ's standard cloud chemistry module (AQCHEM) is structurally limited to the treatment of a simple chemical mechanism. This work advances our ability to test and implement more sophisticated aqueous chemical mechanisms in CMAQ and further investigate the impacts of microphysical parameters on cloud chemistry. Box model cloud chemistry simulations were performed to choose efficient solver and tolerance settings, evaluate the implementation of the KPP solver, and assess the direct impacts of alternative solver and kinetic mass transfer on predicted concentrations for a range of scenarios. Month-long CMAQ simulations for winter and summer periods over the US reveal the changes in model predictions due to these cloud module updates within the full chemical transport model. While monthly average CMAQ predictions are not drastically altered between AQCHEM and AQCHEM-KMT, hourly concentration differences can be significant. With added in-cloud secondary organic aerosol (SOA) formation from biogenic epoxides (AQCHEM-KMTI), normalized mean error and bias statistics are slightly improved for 2-methyltetrols and 2-methylglyceric acid at the Research Triangle Park measurement site in North Carolina during the Southern Oxidant and Aerosol Study (SOAS) period. The added in-cloud chemistry leads to a monthly average increase of 11-18 % in "cloud" SOA at the surface in the eastern United States for June 2013.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kathleen M. Fahey
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | | | - Havala O. T. Pye
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Jaemeen Baek
- formerly at: Department of Chemical and Biochemical Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
| | - William T. Hutzell
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Charles O. Stanier
- Department of Chemical and Biochemical Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
| | - Kirk R. Baker
- Air Quality Assessment Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Office of Air and Radiation, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - K. Wyat Appel
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Mohammed Jaoui
- Exposure Methods and Measurements Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - John H. Offenberg
- Exposure Methods and Measurements Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Appel KW, Napelenok SL, Foley KM, Pye HOT, Hogrefe C, Luecken DJ, Bash JO, Roselle SJ, Pleim JE, Foroutan H, Hutzell WT, Pouliot GA, Sarwar G, Fahey KM, Gantt B, Gilliam RC, Heath NK, Kang D, Mathur R, Schwede DB, Spero TL, Wong DC, Young JO. Description and evaluation of the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system version 5.1. Geosci Model Dev 2017; 10:1703-1732. [PMID: 30147852 DOI: 10.5194/gmd-3-205-2010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 136] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/25/2023]
Abstract
The Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model is a comprehensive multipollutant air quality modeling system developed and maintained by the US Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Research and Development (ORD). Recently, version 5.1 of the CMAQ model (v5.1) was released to the public, incorporating a large number of science updates and extended capabilities over the previous release version of the model (v5.0.2). These updates include the following: improvements in the meteorological calculations in both CMAQ and the Weather Research and Forecast (WRF) model used to provide meteorological fields to CMAQ, updates to the gas and aerosol chemistry, revisions to the calculations of clouds and photolysis, and improvements to the dry and wet deposition in the model. Sensitivity simulations isolating several of the major updates to the modeling system show that changes to the meteorological calculations result in enhanced afternoon and early evening mixing in the model, periods when the model historically underestimates mixing. This enhanced mixing results in higher ozone (O3) mixing ratios on average due to reduced NO titration, and lower fine particulate matter (PM2.5) concentrations due to greater dilution of primary pollutants (e.g., elemental and organic carbon). Updates to the clouds and photolysis calculations greatly improve consistency between the WRF and CMAQ models and result in generally higher O3 mixing ratios, primarily due to reduced cloudiness and attenuation of photolysis in the model. Updates to the aerosol chemistry result in higher secondary organic aerosol (SOA) concentrations in the summer, thereby reducing summertime PM2.5 bias (PM2.5 is typically underestimated by CMAQ in the summer), while updates to the gas chemistry result in slightly higher O3 and PM2.5 on average in January and July. Overall, the seasonal variation in simulated PM2.5 generally improves in CMAQv5.1 (when considering all model updates), as simulated PM2.5 concentrations decrease in the winter (when PM2.5 is generally overestimated by CMAQ) and increase in the summer (when PM2.5 is generally underestimated by CMAQ). Ozone mixing ratios are higher on average with v5.1 vs. v5.0.2, resulting in higher O3 mean bias, as O3 tends to be overestimated by CMAQ throughout most of the year (especially at locations where the observed O3 is low); however, O3 correlation is largely improved with v5.1. Sensitivity simulations for several hypothetical emission reduction scenarios show that v5.1 tends to be slightly more responsive to reductions in NO x (NO + NO2), VOC and SO x (SO2 + SO4) emissions than v5.0.2, representing an improvement as previous studies have shown CMAQ to underestimate the observed reduction in O3 due to large, widespread reductions in observed emissions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K Wyat Appel
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Sergey L Napelenok
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Kristen M Foley
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Havala O T Pye
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Christian Hogrefe
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Deborah J Luecken
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Jesse O Bash
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Shawn J Roselle
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Jonathan E Pleim
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Hosein Foroutan
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - William T Hutzell
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - George A Pouliot
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Golam Sarwar
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Kathleen M Fahey
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Brett Gantt
- Air Quality Analysis Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Office of Air and Radiation, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Robert C Gilliam
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Nicholas K Heath
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Daiwen Kang
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Rohit Mathur
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Donna B Schwede
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Tanya L Spero
- Systems Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - David C Wong
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Jeffrey O Young
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Appel KW, Napelenok SL, Foley KM, Pye HOT, Hogrefe C, Luecken DJ, Bash JO, Roselle SJ, Pleim JE, Foroutan H, Hutzell WT, Pouliot GA, Sarwar G, Fahey KM, Gantt B, Gilliam RC, Heath NK, Kang D, Mathur R, Schwede DB, Spero TL, Wong DC, Young JO. Description and evaluation of the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system version 5.1. Geosci Model Dev 2017; 10:1703-1732. [PMID: 30147852 PMCID: PMC6104654 DOI: 10.5194/gmd-10-1703-2017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 97] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/04/2023]
Abstract
The Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model is a comprehensive multipollutant air quality modeling system developed and maintained by the US Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Research and Development (ORD). Recently, version 5.1 of the CMAQ model (v5.1) was released to the public, incorporating a large number of science updates and extended capabilities over the previous release version of the model (v5.0.2). These updates include the following: improvements in the meteorological calculations in both CMAQ and the Weather Research and Forecast (WRF) model used to provide meteorological fields to CMAQ, updates to the gas and aerosol chemistry, revisions to the calculations of clouds and photolysis, and improvements to the dry and wet deposition in the model. Sensitivity simulations isolating several of the major updates to the modeling system show that changes to the meteorological calculations result in enhanced afternoon and early evening mixing in the model, periods when the model historically underestimates mixing. This enhanced mixing results in higher ozone (O3) mixing ratios on average due to reduced NO titration, and lower fine particulate matter (PM2.5) concentrations due to greater dilution of primary pollutants (e.g., elemental and organic carbon). Updates to the clouds and photolysis calculations greatly improve consistency between the WRF and CMAQ models and result in generally higher O3 mixing ratios, primarily due to reduced cloudiness and attenuation of photolysis in the model. Updates to the aerosol chemistry result in higher secondary organic aerosol (SOA) concentrations in the summer, thereby reducing summertime PM2.5 bias (PM2.5 is typically underestimated by CMAQ in the summer), while updates to the gas chemistry result in slightly higher O3 and PM2.5 on average in January and July. Overall, the seasonal variation in simulated PM2.5 generally improves in CMAQv5.1 (when considering all model updates), as simulated PM2.5 concentrations decrease in the winter (when PM2.5 is generally overestimated by CMAQ) and increase in the summer (when PM2.5 is generally underestimated by CMAQ). Ozone mixing ratios are higher on average with v5.1 vs. v5.0.2, resulting in higher O3 mean bias, as O3 tends to be overestimated by CMAQ throughout most of the year (especially at locations where the observed O3 is low); however, O3 correlation is largely improved with v5.1. Sensitivity simulations for several hypothetical emission reduction scenarios show that v5.1 tends to be slightly more responsive to reductions in NO x (NO + NO2), VOC and SO x (SO2 + SO4) emissions than v5.0.2, representing an improvement as previous studies have shown CMAQ to underestimate the observed reduction in O3 due to large, widespread reductions in observed emissions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K. Wyat Appel
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Sergey L. Napelenok
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Kristen M. Foley
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Havala O. T. Pye
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Christian Hogrefe
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Deborah J. Luecken
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Jesse O. Bash
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Shawn J. Roselle
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Jonathan E. Pleim
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Hosein Foroutan
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - William T. Hutzell
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - George A. Pouliot
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Golam Sarwar
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Kathleen M. Fahey
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Brett Gantt
- Air Quality Analysis Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Office of Air and Radiation, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Robert C. Gilliam
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Nicholas K. Heath
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Daiwen Kang
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Rohit Mathur
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Donna B. Schwede
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Tanya L. Spero
- Systems Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - David C. Wong
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Jeffrey O. Young
- Computational Exposure Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Pinder RW, Appel KW, Dennis RL. Trends in atmospheric reactive nitrogen for the Eastern United States. Environ Pollut 2011; 159:3138-3141. [PMID: 21596465 DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2011.04.042] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2010] [Revised: 04/25/2011] [Accepted: 04/29/2011] [Indexed: 05/30/2023]
Abstract
Reactive nitrogen can travel far from emission sources and impact sensitive ecosystems. From 2002 to 2006, policy actions have led to decreases in NO(x) emissions from power plants and motor vehicles. In this study, atmospheric chemical transport modeling demonstrates that these emissions reductions have led to a downward trend in ambient measurements of transported reactive nitrogen, especially atmospheric concentrations and wet deposition of nitrate. The trend in reduced nitrogen, namely ammonium, is ambiguous. As reduced nitrogen becomes a larger fraction of the reactive nitrogen budget, wide-spread NH(3) measurements and improved NH(3) emissions assessments are a critical need.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert W Pinder
- US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Mail Drop E243-01, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, United States.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Pinder RW, Gilliam RC, Appel KW, Napelenok SL, Foley KM, Gilliland AB. Efficient probabilistic estimates of surface ozone concentration using an ensemble of model configurations and direct sensitivity calculations. Environ Sci Technol 2009; 43:2388-2393. [PMID: 19452891 DOI: 10.1021/es8025402] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/27/2023]
Abstract
Because all models are a simplification of the phenomenon they aim to represent, it is often more useful to estimate the probability of an event rather than a single "best" model result. Previous air quality ensemble approaches have used computationally expensive simulations of separately developed modeling systems. We present an efficient method to generate ensembles with hundreds of members based on several structural configurations of a single air quality modeling system. We use the Decoupled Direct Method in three dimensions to directly calculate how ozone concentrations change as a result of changes in input parameters. The modeled probability estimate is compared to observations and is shown to have a high level of skill and improved resolution and sharpness. This approach can help resolve the practical limits of incorporating uncertainty estimation into deterministic air quality management modeling applications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert W Pinder
- National Exposure Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, USEPA Mail Drop E243-01, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|