Particulate air quality model predictions using prognostic vs. diagnostic meteorology in central California

Atmospheric Environment

Volumn 44, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 215-226

  Hu, Jianlin ^a   Ying, Qi ^b   Chen, Jianjun ^c   Mahmud, Abdullah ^c   Zhao, Zhan ^a   Chen, Shu Hua ^a   Kleeman, Michael J ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b Texas A and M University   (United States)

^c Davis   (United States)

Author keywords

California Regional Particulate Air Quality Study (CRPAQS); Data assimilation; Diagnostic meteorological fields; Prognostic meteorological fields; UCD CIT air quality model

Indexed keywords

AIR QUALITY MODELS; CALIFORNIA; DATA ASSIMILATION; METEOROLOGICAL FIELDS; PROGNOSTIC METEOROLOGICAL FIELDS;

DATA PROCESSING; FORECASTING; OZONE; WIND EFFECTS;

AIR QUALITY;

OZONE; SULFATE;

AIR QUALITY; DATA ASSIMILATION; MODELING; PARTICULATE MATTER; PREDICTION;

ACCURACY; AIR POLLUTION; AIR QUALITY; AIR TEMPERATURE; AIRBORNE PARTICLE; ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC METEOROLOGICAL FIELD; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; GAS; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; METEOROLOGY; NONBIOLOGICAL MODEL; PARTICULATE AIR QUALITY MODEL; PARTICULATE MATTER; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSTIC METEOROLOGICAL FIELD; SEASONAL VARIATION; UNITED STATES; VELOCITY; WIND;

CALIFORNIA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 73249123199     PISSN: 13522310     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.10.011     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Boylan J.W., and Russell A.G. PM and light extinction model performance metrics, goals, and criteria for three-dimensional air quality models. Atmospheric Environment 40 (2006) 4946-4959
2. Byun D.W. Dynamically consistent formulations in meteorological and air quality models for multiscale atmospheric studies. Part II: mass conservation issues. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 56 (1999) 3808-3820
3. Chen F., and Dudhia J. Coupling an advanced land-surface/hydrology model with the Penn State/NCAR MM5 modeling system. Part I: model description and implementation. Monthly Weather Review 129 (2001) 569-585
4. Chen, J., Ying, Q., Kleeman, M.J. Source apportionment of wintertime secondary organic aerosol during the California Regional PM10/PM2.5 Air Quality Study. Atmospheric Environment, in press. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.07.010.
5. Choi H.J., Lee H.W., Sung K.H., Kim M.J., Kim Y.K., and Jung W.S. The impact of nudging coefficient for the initialization on the atmospheric flow field and the photochemical ozone concentration of Seoul, Korea. Atmospheric Environment 43 (2009) 4124-4136
6. 2O aerosols. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 7 (2007) 4639-4659
7. Garratt J.R. The Atmospheric Boundary Layer (1994), Cambridge University Press p. 155
8. Goodin W.R., McRae G.J., and Seinfeld J.H. Comparison of interpolation methods for sparse data - application to wind and concentration fields. Journal of Applied Meteorology 18 (1979) 761-771
9. Goodin W.R., Mcrae G.J., and Seinfeld J.H. Objective analysis technique for constructing 3-dimensional urban-scale wind fields. Journal of Applied Meteorology 19 (1980) 98-108
10. Grell A.G., Dudhia J., and Stauffer D.R. A Description of the Fifth-Generation Penn State/NCAR Mesoscale Model (MM5). NCAR Technical Note NCAR/TN-398+STR (June 1994), National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO
11. Hanna S.R., Moore G.E., and Fernau M.E. Evaluation of photochemical grid models (UAM-IV, UAM-V, and the ROM/UAM-IV couple) using data from the Lake Michigan Ozone Study (LMOS). Atmospheric Environment 30 (1996) 3265-3279
12. Harley R.A., Russell A.G., Mcrae G.J., Cass G.R., and Seinfeld J.H. Photochemical modeling of the Southern California Air-Quality Study. Environmental Science & Technology 27 (1993) 378-388
13. Hass H., Builtjes P.J.H., Simpson D., and Stern R. Comparison of model results obtained with several European regional air quality models. Atmospheric Environment 31 (1997) 3259-3279
14. Held T., Ying Q., Kaduwela A., and Kleeman M. Modeling particulate matter in the San Joaquin Valley with a source-oriented externally mixed three-dimensional photochemical grid model. Atmospheric Environment 38 (2004) 3689-3711
15. Hogrefe C., Rao S.T., Kasibhatla P., Hao W., Sistla G., Mathur R., and McHenry J. Evaluating the performance of regional-scale photochemical modeling systems: part II - ozone predictions. Atmospheric Environment 35 (2001) 4175-4188
16. Hogrefe C., Rao S.T., Kasibhatla P., Kallos G., Tremback C.J., Hao W., Olerud D., Xiu A., McHenry J., and Alapaty K. Evaluating the performance of regional-scale photochemical modeling systems: part I - meteorological predictions. Atmospheric Environment 35 (2001) 4159-4174
17. Hong S.Y., Noh Y., and Dudhia J. A new vertical diffusion package with an explicit treatment of entrainment processes. Monthly Weather Review 134 (2006) 2318-2341
18. Hu Y.T., Odman M.T., and Russell A.G. Mass conservation in the Community Multiscale Air Quality model. Atmospheric Environment 40 (2006) 1199-1204
19. Jackson B., Chau D., Gurer K., and Kaduwela A. Comparison of ozone simulations using MM5 and CALMET/MM5 hybrid meteorological fields for the July/August 2000 CCOS episode. Atmospheric Environment 40 (2006) 11
20. Jacobson M.Z. A solution to the problem of nonequilibrium acid/base gas-particle transfer at long time step. Aerosol Science and Technology 39 (2005) 92-103
21. x emission sources on ozone formation in Houston during the TexAQS 2000 field campaign. Atmospheric Environment 38 (2004) 5071-5085
22. Jimenez P., Jorba O., Parra R., and Baldasano J.M. Evaluation of MM5-EMICAT2000-CMAQ performance and sensitivity in complex terrain: high-resolution application to the northeastern Iberian Peninsula. Atmospheric Environment 40 (2006) 5056-5072
23. Kleeman M.J., and Cass G.R. A 3D Eulerian source-oriented model for an externally mixed aerosol. Environmental Science & Technology 35 (2001) 4834-4848
24. Kleeman M.J., Cass G.R., and Eldering A. Modeling the airborne particle complex as a source-oriented external mixture. Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres 102 (1997) 21355-21372
25. Kleeman M.J., Ying Q., Lu J., Mysliwiec M.J., Griffin R.J., Chen J.J., and Clegg S. Source apportionment of secondary organic aerosol during a severe photochemical smog episode. Atmospheric Environment 41 (2007) 576-591
26. Kumar N., and Russell A.G. Comparing prognostic and diagnostic meteorological fields and their impacts on photochemical air quality modeling. Atmospheric Environment 30 (1996) 1989-2010
27. Lee S.M., Yoon S.C., and Byun D.W. The effect of mass inconsistency of the meteorological field generated by a common meteorological model on air quality modeling. Atmospheric Environment 38 (2004) 2917-2926
28. Liang J.Y., Martien P.T., Soong S., and Tanrikulu S. A photochemical model comparison study: CAMx and CMAQ performance in central California. Proceedings of the Thirteenth Conference on the Application of Air Pollution Meteorology with the Air and Waste Management Association, Vancouver, Canada (2004), American Meteorological Society, Boston
29. McRae G.J., Goodin W.R., and Seinfeld J.H. Development of a 2nd-generation mathematical-model for urban air-pollution. 1. Model formulation. Atmospheric Environment 16 (1982) 679-696
30. Menut L., Coll I., and Cautenet S. Impact of meteorological data resolution on the forecasted ozone concentrations during the ESCOMPTE IOP2a and IOP2b. Atmospheric Research 74 (2005) 139-159
31. Mysliwiec M.J., and Kleeman M.J. Source apportionment of secondary airborne particulate matter in a polluted atmosphere. Environmental Science & Technology 36 (2002) 5376-5384
32. Nenes A., Pandis S.N., and Pilinis C. ISORROPIA: a new thermodynamic equilibrium model for multiphase multicomponent inorganic aerosols. Aquatic Geochemistry 4 (1998) 123-152
33. Noilhan J., and Planton S. A simple parameterization of land surface processes for meteorological models. Monthly Weather Review 117 (1989) 536-549
34. Odman M.T., and Russell A.G. Mass conservative coupling of non-hydrostatic meteorological models with air quality models. In: Gryning S.E., and Batchvarova E. (Eds). Air Pollution Modeling and its Application XIII (2000), Kluwer/Plenum, New York 651-660
35. Pielke R.A., Cotton W.R., Walko R.L., Tremback C.J., Lyons W.A., Grasso L.D., Nicholls M.E., Moran M.D., Wesley D.A., Lee T.J., and Copeland J.H. A comprehensive meteorological modeling system - RAMS. Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics 49 (1992) 69-91
36. Pun B.K., Balmori R.T.F., and Seigneur C. Modeling wintertime particulate matter formation in central California. Atmospheric Environment 43 (2009) 402-409
37. Seaman N.L. Meteorological modeling for air-quality assessments. Atmospheric Environment 34 (2000) 2231-2259
38. Seaman N.L. Future directions of meteorology related to air-quality research. Environment International 29 (2003) 245-252
39. Skamarock W.C., and Klemp J.B. A time-split nonhydrostatic atmospheric model for weather research and forecasting applications. Journal of Computational Physics 227 (2008) 3465-3485
40. Skamarock, W.C., Klemp, J.B., Dudhia, J., Frill, D.O., Barker, M., Wang, W., Powers, J.G., 2005. A description of the advanced research WRF version 2. NCAR Technical Note NCAR/TN-4688+STR.
41. Sistla G., Hao W., Ku J.Y., Kallos G., Zhang K.S., Mao H.T., and Rao S.T. An operational evaluation of two regional-scale ozone air quality modeling systems over the eastern United States. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 82 (2001) 945-964
42. Soong S., Tanrikulu S., Wilczak J., Bao J., Martin P., and Michelson S. Simulation of an ozone episode during the Central California Ozone Study. Part II: CAMx air quality model simulations. Proceedings of the Thirteenth Conference on the Application of Air Pollution Meteorology with the Air and Waste Management Association, Vancouver, Canada (2004), American Meteorological Society, Boston
43. Sportisse B., Quelo D., and Mallet V. Impact of mass consistency errors for atmospheric dispersion. Atmospheric Environment 41 (2007) 6132-6142
44. Stauffer D.R., and Seaman N.L. Use of four-dimensional data assimilation in a limited area mesoscale model. Part I: experiments with synoptic-scale data. Monthly Weather Review 118 (1990) 1250-1277
45. Stauffer D.R., Seaman N.L., and Binkowski F.S. Use of four-dimensional data assimilation in a limited-area mesoscale model. Part II: effects of data assimilation within the planetary boundary layer. Monthly Weather Review 119 (1991) 734-754
46. Stauffer D.R., and Seaman N.L. Multiscale four-dimensional data assimilation. Journal of Applied Meteorology 33 (1994) 416-434
47. Thompson G., Rasmussen R.M., and Manning K. Explicit forecasts of winter precipitation using an improved bulk microphysics scheme. Part I: description and sensitivity analysis. Monthly Weather Review 132 (2004) 519-542
48. Ying Q., Fraser M.P., Griffin R.J., Chen J.J., and Kleeman M.J. Verification of a source-oriented externally mixed air quality model during a severe photochemical smog episode. Atmospheric Environment 41 (2007) 1521-1538
49. Ying Q., and Kleeman M.J. Effects of aerosol UV extinction on the formation of ozone and secondary particulate matter. Atmospheric Environment 37 (2003) 5047-5068
50. Ying Q., and Kleeman M.J. Source contributions to the regional distribution of secondary particulate matter in California. Atmospheric Environment 40 (2006) 736-752
51. 2.5 Air Quality Study (CRPAQS) using the UCD/CIT source-oriented air quality model - part I. Base case model results. Atmospheric Environment 42 (2008) 8954-8966
52. Zhan, Z., Chen, S., et al. Dynamically downscaling PCM with WRF for climate change impact in California: part 1. Present time simulation analysis. Journal of Climate, in preparation.