Performance evaluation of ISCST3, adms-urban and aermod for urban air quality management in a mega city of India

Urban air quality has deteriorated in last few decades in the mega cities of both developed and developing countries. Many mathematical models have been widely used as prediction tool for urban air quality management in developed countries. However, applications of these models are limited in developing countries including India due to lack of suffi cient validation studies. In this paper, three state-of-the-art air quality models namely AERMOD, ADMS-Urban and ISCST3 have been used to predict the air quality at an intersection in Delhi city, India, followed by their performance evaluation and sensitive analysis under different meteorological conditions. The models have been run for different climatic conditions, i.e. summer and winter season to predict the concentration of carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) and PM 2.5 (diameter size less than 2.5 µm). The ISCST3 has performed satisfactorily (d = 0.69) for predicting CO concentrations when compared with AERMOD (d = 0.50) and ADMS-Urban (d = 0.45) for winter period. The ADMS-Urban (d = 0.49) has performed satisfactorily for predicting NO 2 concentration when compared with ISCST3 (d = 0.36) and AERMOD (d = 0.32). The AERMOD, ISCST3 and ADMS-Urban have performed satisfactorily for predicting PM 2.5 concentrations having d values as 0.46, 0.45 and 0.43 respectively. All three models have performed satisfactorily for predicting CO concentrations when wind speed was in the range of 0.5–3 m/s and wind direction in the range 90–180 degrees, i.e. downwind direction. The difference in model’s performance may be due to differences in model formulation and the treatment of terrain features. The causal nature of these Gaussian based models may be one of the reasons for difference in performance of the models, because these are sensitive to

[1]  L VILLANUA,et al.  [Air pollution in cities]. , 1960, Anales de la Real Academia de Farmacia.

[2]  Mukesh Khare,et al.  Performance evaluation of air quality dispersion models at urban intersection of an Indian city: a case study of Delhi city , 2012 .

[3]  D. E. Conlan,et al.  The introduction of local air quality management in the United Kingdom: A review and theoretical framework , 1996 .

[4]  A. Cimorelli,et al.  AERMOD: A Dispersion Model for Industrial Source Applications. Part I: General Model Formulation and Boundary Layer Characterization. , 2005 .

[5]  Madhav G. Badami Urban Transport Policy as if People and the Environment Mattered: Pedestrian Accessibility the First Step , 2009 .

[6]  Margaret Bell,et al.  Application Of ADMS And AERMOD Models ToStudy The Dispersion Of Vehicular Pollutants InUrban Areas Of India And The United Kingdom , 2012 .

[7]  Glen E. Long An analysis of AERMOD sensitivity to input parameters in the San Francisco Bay Area , 2004 .

[8]  Anurag Kandya,et al.  An Analysis of the Annual and Seasonal Trends of Air Quality Index of Delhi , 2007, Environmental monitoring and assessment.

[9]  Neeru Jaiswal,et al.  Air quality impact assessment of NOx and PM due to diesel vehicles in Delhi , 2010 .

[10]  Mark Lawrence,et al.  Evaluation of emissions and air quality in megacities , 2008 .

[11]  B. W. Shaw,et al.  Sensitivity of Two Dispersion Models (AERMOD and ISCST3) to Input Parameters for a Rural Ground-Level Area Source , 2008, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association.

[12]  Abhilash Vijayan,et al.  Evaluation of the AERMOD dispersion model as a function of atmospheric stability for an urban area , 2006 .

[13]  J M Baldasano,et al.  Air quality data from large cities. , 2003, The Science of the total environment.

[14]  R. Sivacoumar,et al.  Assessment of contribution of SO2 and NO2 from different sources in Jamshedpur region, India , 2005 .