Estimating ozone and secondary PM 2.5 impacts from hypothetical single source emissions in the central and eastern United States

Source–Receptor Relationships Between Precursor Emissions and O3 and PM2.5 Air Pollution Impacts

“…34,35 The source apportionment feature was used to track generic sources added to the standard model inputs which varied by stack height and emission rate. 36 The combination of emission rate (500, 1000, or 3000 tpy), stack height (surface or 90 m release height), and location varied (Figure S1) because the original database was not intended to provide a systematic representation of these parameters over the contiguous U.S.…”

“…CAMx was applied with source apportionment which tracks the contribution of predefined emission sources to model predicted primary and secondarily formed pollutants including O 3 , PM 2.5 , and coarse fraction particulate matter . Photochemical grid model source apportionment tracks the contribution of precursor emissions through all chemical and physical processes in the model from predefined specific sources, sectors, and geographic regions. ,,,− The source apportionment of specific facilities has been shown to compare well with source specific in-plume measurements of primary and secondary pollutants. , The source apportionment feature was used to track generic sources added to the standard model inputs which varied by stack height and emission rate . The combination of emission rate (500, 1000, or 3000 tpy), stack height (surface or 90 m release height), and location varied (Figure S1) because the original database was not intended to provide a systematic representation of these parameters over the contiguous U.S.…”

Air Pollution and Solar Energy: Evidence from Wildfires

“…We take the very conservative assumption that the impact of PM2.5 emission is limited to the original ZIP code. We do not estimate the value of SO 2 emission (which can also increase PM2.5 concentration), as the impact of SO 2 emission reaches far beyond the ZIP code level (Baker et al, 2016); accurate estimation of SO 2 emission impact will require the use of integrated assessment models with chemical transport models, à la Muller and Mendelsohn (2009).…”

Assessing Model Characterization of Single Source Secondary Pollutant Impacts Using 2013 SENEX Field Study Measurements

“…(1) Photochemical grid modeling systems have been used extensively to estimate source specific impacts on O 3 and secondary PM 2.5 with various techniques to differentiate those impacts from other sources. (2)(3)(4)(5)(6) Previous studies have shown that Eulerian photochemical grid models are able to replicate near-source secondary pollutant scavenging (e.g., titration) and downwind production of O 3 . (2,6) Some photochemical grid models have been instrumented with a Lagrangian subgrid plume model to provide source impacts at subgrid scales with the intent of more finely resolved spatial representation of plumes by not immediately diluting emissions into the grid volume.…”

“…Photochemical grid modeling systems have been used extensively to estimate source specific impacts on O 3 and secondary PM 2.5 with various techniques to differentiate those impacts from other sources. − Previous studies have shown that Eulerian photochemical grid models are able to replicate near-source secondary pollutant scavenging (e.g., titration) and downwind production of O 3 . , Some photochemical grid models have been instrumented with a Lagrangian subgrid plume model to provide source impacts at subgrid scales with the intent of more finely resolved spatial representation of plumes by not immediately diluting emissions into the grid volume. ,− Emissions mass is typically tracked in the Lagrangian submodel until plume sizes are comparable to the size of the host model grid cell at which time the subgrid pollutant mass is transferred to the host grid cell. , Past evaluations of subgrid plume model predictions of secondary pollutants in 3-dimensional photochemical models include comparisons against routine surface monitors which suggest differences in overall model performance with and without subgrid treatment for specific sources are usually insignificant. , It is not clear whether the small differences in model performance are related to the different chemistry realized at the subgrid level or differences in the transport of primary and secondary pollutants by the subgrid plume treatment implementation.…”