Hybrid modelling approach for effective simulation of reactive pollutants like Ozone

Abstract Prediction of air quality is an important component of any air quality management programme. Broadly, two approaches are used to predict the ambient air quality – the deterministic and the statistical approach, with each approach having its own merits and demerits. While the models based on the deterministic approach accurately predict the concentrations of air pollutants in the middle percentile range, the statistical models provide a better estimate of concentrations in the extreme percentile ranges. However, the statistical models are site specific and are not able generate ‘what-if’ scenarios; the deterministic models on the other hand are general in character and useful in creating alternative scenarios. An alternative approach – hybrid modelling is a technique which aggregates the benefits of the two techniques and predicts the ‘entire range’ of the distribution. While in the past there were attempts to predict the concentrations of inert pollutants using hybrid modelling approach, this paper shows the hybrid model applications for reactive secondary pollutants like ground level Ozone (GLO). This study presents the development of a hybrid model that concatenates the results of CMAQ (community multi-scale air quality model) as its deterministic component with statistical distribution model (based on the specific area category and timeframe) to predict the entire range of GLO concentrations. Predictions have been made using both purely deterministic and hybrid approaches at a receptor location near a major traffic intersection. The performance of the model has been found to improve from an index of agreement from 0.77 (deterministic model) to 0.91 (hybrid model). In order to assess the predictive capability of the hybrid approach, the model has been tested at an entirely different location for different set of temporal data. The results show an improvement in the predictions using the hybrid model over the deterministic model.

[1]  Anthony J. Jakeman,et al.  Modeling distributions of air pollutant concentrations—III. The hybrid deterministic-statistical distribution approach , 1988 .

[2]  C. Willmott.  ON THE VALIDATION OF MODELS , 1981 .

[3]  Kenneth L. Demerjian,et al.  Performance evaluation of an air quality forecast modeling system for a summer and winter season – Photochemical oxidants and their precursors , 2008 .

[4]  C. Willmott.  Some Comments on the Evaluation of Model Performance , 1982 .

[5]  Rohit Mathur,et al.  A detailed evaluation of the Eta-CMAQ forecast model performance for O3, its related precursors, and meteorological parameters during the 2004 ICARTT study , 2007 .

[6]  Shaocai Yu,et al.  New unbiased symmetric metrics for evaluation of air quality models , 2006 .

[7]  Shaocai Yu,et al.  A performance evaluation of the 2004 release of Models-3 CMAQ , 2006 .

[8]  Robert E. Davis,et al.  Statistics for the evaluation and comparison of models , 1985 .

[9]  P. Bhave,et al.  Primary and secondary organic aerosols over the United States: estimates on the basis of observed organic carbon (OC) and elemental carbon (EC), and air quality modeled primary OC/EC ratios , 2004 .

[10]  Sharon Phillips,et al.  Comparison of spatial patterns of pollutant distribution with CMAQ predictions , 2006 .

[11]  Prateek Sharma,et al.  Predicting violations of national ambient air quality standards using extreme value theory for Delhi city , 2012 .

[12]  Roberto San José García,et al.  Prediction of ozone levels in London using the MM5-CMAQ modelling system , 2006, Environ. Model. Softw..

[13]  Mukesh Khare,et al.  A hybrid model for predicting carbon monoxide from vehicular exhausts in urban environments , 2005 .

[14]  Prashant Kumar,et al.  An integrated statistical approach for evaluating the exceedence of criteria pollutants in the ambient air of megacity Delhi , 2013 .

[15]  R. Mathur,et al.  Evaluation of real‐time PM2.5 forecasts and process analysis for PM2.5 formation over the eastern United States using the Eta‐CMAQ forecast model during the 2004 ICARTT study , 2008 .

[16]  Wayne R. Ott,et al.  An evaluation of the methods of fractiles, moments and maximum likelihood for estimating parameters when sampling air quality data from a stationary lognormal distribution , 1984 .

[17]  Anthony J. Jakeman,et al.  Modeling distributions of air pollutant concentrations—I. Identification of statistical models , 1986 .

[18]  Shaocai Yu,et al.  Moment-based simulation of microphysical properties of sulfate aerosols in the eastern United States: Model description, evaluation, and regional analysis , 2003 .

[19]  A. Jakeman,et al.  A hybrid model for predicting the distribution of pollutants dispersed from line sources. , 1985, The Science of the total environment.

[20]  R. Mathur,et al.  Comparative evaluation of the impact of WRF-NMM and WRF-ARW meteorology on CMAQ simulations for O3 and related species during the 2006 TexAQS/GoMACCS campaign , 2012 .

[21]  R. Mathur,et al.  Performance and Diagnostic Evaluation of Ozone Predictions by the Eta-Community Multiscale Air Quality Forecast System during the 2002 New England Air Quality Study , 2006, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association.

[22]  William S. Olson,et al.  A physical model to estimate snowfall over land using AMSU‐B observations , 2008 .

[23]  P. Hyde,et al.  CMAQ predictions of tropospheric ozone in the U.S. southwest: influence of lateral boundary and synoptic conditions. , 2012, The Science of the total environment.

[24]  Daiwen Kang,et al.  Application of WRF/Chem-MADRID for real-time air quality forecasting over the Southeastern United States , 2011 .

[25]  D. Byun,et al.  Review of the Governing Equations, Computational Algorithms, and Other Components of the Models-3 Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Modeling System , 2006 .

[26]  C. Willmott,et al.  An Empirical Method for the Spatial Interpolation of Monthly Precipitation within California , 1980 .