A framework for evaluating regional-scale numerical photochemical modeling systems

被引:148
作者
Dennis, Robin [1 ]
Fox, Tyler [2 ]
Fuentes, Montse [3 ]
Gilliland, Alice [1 ]
Hanna, Steven [4 ]
Hogrefe, Christian [5 ]
Irwin, John [6 ]
Rao, S. Trivikrama [1 ]
Scheffe, Richard [2 ]
Schere, Kenneth [1 ]
Steyn, Douw [7 ]
Venkatram, Akula [8 ]
机构
[1] US EPA, Atmospher Modeling & Anal Div, Natl Exposure Res Lab, Res Triangle Pk, NC 27711 USA
[2] US EPA, Air Qual Assessment Div, Off Air Qual Planning & Stand, Res Triangle Pk, NC 27711 USA
[3] N Carolina State Univ, Dept Stat, Raleigh, NC 27695 USA
[4] Hanna Consultants, Kennebunkport, ME 04046 USA
[5] Bur Air Qual Anal & Res, NYS Dept Environm Conservat, Albany, NY 12233 USA
[6] John S Irwin & Associates, Raleigh, NC 27615 USA
[7] Univ British Columbia, Dept Earth & Ocean Sci, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
[8] Univ Calif Riverside, Dept Mech Engn, Riverside, CA 92521 USA
关键词
Air quality model; Photochemical model; Model evaluation; Performance evaluation; COMMUNITY-MULTISCALE-AIR; EASTERN UNITED-STATES; QUALITY MODEL; PART II; SENSITIVITY-ANALYSIS; PARTICULATE MATTER; OZONE LEVELS; VERSION; 4.5; ENSEMBLE; SIMULATIONS;
D O I
10.1007/s10652-009-9163-2
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
This paper discusses the need for critically evaluating regional-scale (similar to 200-2,000 km) three-dimensional numerical photochemical air quality modeling systems to establish a model's credibility in simulating the spatio-temporal features embedded in the observations. Because of limitations of currently used approaches for evaluating regional air quality models, a framework for model evaluation is introduced here for determining the suitability of a modeling system for a given application, distinguishing the performance between different models through confidence-testing of model results, guiding model development and analyzing the impacts of regulatory policy options. The framework identifies operational, diagnostic, dynamic, and probabilistic types of model evaluation. Operational evaluation techniques include statistical and graphical analyses aimed at determining whether model estimates are in agreement with the observations in an overall sense. Diagnostic evaluation focuses on process-oriented analyses to determine whether the individual processes and components of the model system are working correctly, both independently and in combination. Dynamic evaluation assesses the ability of the air quality model to simulate changes in air quality stemming from changes in source emissions and/or meteorology, the principal forces that drive the air quality model. Probabilistic evaluation attempts to assess the confidence that can be placed in model predictions using techniques such as ensemble modeling and Bayesian model averaging. The advantages of these types of model evaluation approaches are discussed in this paper.
引用
收藏
页码:471 / 489
页数:19
相关论文
共 68 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 1999, Probabilistic Techniques in Exposure Assessment. A Handbook for Dealing with Variability and Uncertainty in Models and Inputs
  • [2] Evaluation of the community multiscale air quality (CMAQ) model version 4.5: Sensitivities impacting model performance; Part II - particulate matter
    Appel, K. Wyat
    Bhave, Prakash V.
    Gilliland, Alice B.
    Sarwar, Golam
    Roselle, Shawn J.
    [J]. ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT, 2008, 42 (24) : 6057 - 6066
  • [3] Evaluation of the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model version 4.5: Sensitivities impacting model performance Part I - Ozone
    Appel, K. Wyat
    Gilliland, Alice B.
    Sarwar, Golam
    Gilliam, Robert C.
    [J]. ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT, 2007, 41 (40) : 9603 - 9615
  • [4] Will the circle be unbroken: A history of the US national ambient air quality standards
    Bachmann, John
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, 2007, 57 (06) : 652 - 697
  • [5] Diagnostic model evaluation for carbonaceous PM2.5 using organic markers measured in the southeastern US
    Bhave, Prakash V.
    Pouliot, George A.
    Zheng, Mei
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2007, 41 (05) : 1577 - 1583
  • [6] Biswas J, 2001, J APPL METEOROL, V40, P117, DOI 10.1175/1520-0450(2001)040<0117:UIEOMS>2.0.CO
  • [7] 2
  • [8] The effects of meteorology on ozone in urban areas and their use in assessing ozone trends
    Camalier, Louise
    Cox, William
    Dolwick, Pat
    [J]. ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT, 2007, 41 (33) : 7127 - 7137
  • [9] Air quality model performance evaluation
    Chang, JC
    Hanna, SR
    [J]. METEOROLOGY AND ATMOSPHERIC PHYSICS, 2004, 87 (1-3) : 167 - 196
  • [10] Introduction to special topic: Weekend and weekday differences in ozone levels
    Chow, JC
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, 2003, 53 (07): : 771 - 771