Application and evaluation of two Air Quality Models for particulate matter for a southeastern US episode

摘要

The Models-3 Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Modeling System and the Particulate Matter Comprehensive Air Quality Model with extensions (PMCAMx) were applied to simulate the period June 29-July 10, 1999, of the Southern Oxidants Study episode with two nested horizontal grid sizes: a coarse resolution of 32 km and a fine resolution of 8 km. The predicted spatial variations of ozone (O-3), particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.S muM (PM2.5), and particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 10 mum (PM10) by both models are similar in rural areas but differ from one another significantly over some urban/suburban areas in the eastern and southern United States, where PMCAMx tends to predict higher values of O-3 and PM than CMAQ. Both models tend to predict O-3 values that are higher than those observed. For observed O-3 values above 60 ppb, O-3 performance meets the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's criteria for CMAQ with both grids and for PMCAMx with the fine grid only. It becomes unsatisfactory for PMCAMx and marginally satisfactory for CMAQ for observed O-3 values above 40 ppb. Both models predict similar amounts of sulfate (SO42-) and organic matter, and both predict SO42- to be the largest contributor to PM2.5, PMCAMx generally predicts higher amounts of ammonium (NH4+), nitrate (NO3-), and black carbon (BC) than does CMAQ. PM performance for CMAQ is generally consistent with that of other PM models, whereas PMCAMx predicts higher concentrations of NO3-, NH4+, and BC than observed, which degrades its performance. For PM10 and PM2.5 predictions over the southeastern U.S. domain, the ranges of mean normalized gross errors (MNGEs) and mean normalized bias are 37-43% and -33-4% for CMAQ and 50-59% and 7-30% for PMCAMx. Both models predict the largest MNGEs for NO3- (98-104% for CMAQ, 138-338% for PMCAMx). The inaccurate NO3- predictions by both models may be caused by the inaccuracies in the ammonia emission inventory and the uncertainties in the gas/particle partitioning under some conditions. In addition to these uncertainties, the significant PM overpredictions by PMCAMx may be attributed to the lack of wet removal for PM and a likely underprediction in the vertical mixing during the daytime.