Result: A comprehensive performance evaluation of MM5-CMAQ for the Summer 1999 Southern Oxidants Study episode-Part II Gas and aerosol predictions
Atmospheric and Environmental Research, Inc., 2682 Bishop Dr., Suite 120, San Ramon, CA 94583, United States
Department of Environment Quality, 629 East Main Street, 8th Floor, Richmond, VA 23219, United States
CC BY 4.0
Sauf mention contraire ci-dessus, le contenu de cette notice bibliographique peut être utilisé dans le cadre d’une licence CC BY 4.0 Inist-CNRS / Unless otherwise stated above, the content of this bibliographic record may be used under a CC BY 4.0 licence by Inist-CNRS / A menos que se haya señalado antes, el contenido de este registro bibliográfico puede ser utilizado al amparo de una licencia CC BY 4.0 Inist-CNRS
Further Information
Gas and aerosol predictions from CMAQ simulations with horizontal grid spacings of 8- and 32-km are evaluated against available observations from CASTNet, IMPROVE, AIRS-AQS, SOS99/SOS99NASH, SEARCH, and ARIES for the southeastern US for the period of 1-10 July 1999. The predictions evaluated in this work include mixing ratios of O3 (hourly, maximum 1-h, and 8-h average), NOx, HNO3, NOy, and mass concentrations of PM10, PM2.5, and PM2.5 components. Our evaluation has shown that CMAQ tends to underpredict maximum 1-h O3 mixing ratios on high O3 days at some sites. It overpredicts the maximum and minimum hourly O3 mixing ratios for most low O3 days, the daytime and nighttime hourly, and the maximum 8-h average O3 mixing ratios on most days at all sites. The model performance for hourly O3 mixing ratios generally meets EPA's criteria but deteriorates for maximum 1- and 8-h average O3 mixing ratios. CMAQ underpredicts the mass concentrations of PM10, PM2.5, and PM2.5 composition and fails to reproduce their temporal variations (except for sulfate). Largest underpredictions occur for organic matter (OM2.5) and nitrate2.5 among all PM components. These underpredictions and overpredictions may be caused by inaccurate meteorological predictions (e.g., the PBL height, wind speed/direction, vertical mixing, temperature, and relative humidity) and boundary conditions for chemical species (e.g., O3), underestimation in emissions (e.g., NOx, NH3, and primary OM), as well as uncertainties in model assumptions and treatments in aerosol chemistry and microphysics.