Global S&T Development Trend Analysis Platform of Resources and Environment
DOI | 10.5194/acp-19-15157-2019 |
Evaluating wildfire emissions projection methods in comparisons of simulated and observed air quality | |
Shankar, Uma1; McKenzie, Donald2; Prestemon, Jeffrey P.3; Baek, Bok Haeng4; Omary, Mohammed4; Yang, Dongmei4; Xiu, Aijun4; Talgo, Kevin5; Vizuete, William1 | |
2019-12-13 | |
发表期刊 | ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS
![]() |
ISSN | 1680-7316 |
EISSN | 1680-7324 |
出版年 | 2019 |
卷号 | 19期号:23页码:15157-15181 |
文章类型 | Article |
语种 | 英语 |
国家 | USA |
英文摘要 | Climate warming has been implicated as a major driver of recent catastrophic wildfires worldwide but analyses of regional differences in US wildfires show that socioeconomic factors also play a large role. We previously leveraged statistical projections of annual areas burned (AAB) over the fast-growing southeastern US that include both climate and socioeconomic changes from 2011 to 2060 and developed wildfire emissions estimates over the region at 12 km x 12 km resolution to enable air quality (AQ) impact assessments for 2010 and selected future years. These estimates employed two AAB datasets, one using statistical downscaling ("statistical d-s") and another using dynamical downscaling ("dynamical d-s") of climate inputs from the same climate realization. This paper evaluates these wildfire emissions estimates against the U.S. National Emissions Inventory (NEI) as a benchmark in contemporary (2010) simulations with the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model and against network observations for ozone and particulate matter below 2.5 mu m in diameter (PM2.5). We hypothesize that our emissions estimates will yield model results that meet acceptable performance criteria and are comparable to those using the NEI. The three simulations, which differ only in wildfire emissions, compare closely, with differences in ozone and PM2.5 below 1 % and 8 %, respectively, but have much larger maximum mean fractional biases (MFBs) against observations (25 % and 51 %, respectively). The largest biases for ozone are in the fire-free winter, indi- cating that modeling uncertainties other than wildfire emissions are mainly responsible. Statistical d-s, with the largest AAB domain-wide, is 7 % more positively biased and 4 % less negatively biased in PM2.5 on average than the other two cases, while dynamical d-s and the NEI differ only by 2 %-3 % partly because of their equally large summertime PM2.5 underpredictions. Primary species (elemental carbon and ammonium from ammonia) have good-to-acceptable results, especially for the downscaling cases, providing confidence in our emissions estimation methodology. Compensating biases in sulfate (positive) and in organic carbon and dust (negative) lead to acceptable PM2.5 performance to varying degrees (MFB between -14 % and 51 %) in all simulations. As these species are driven by secondary chemistry or non-wildfire sources, their production pathways can be fruitful avenues for CMAQ improvements. Overall, the downscaling methods match and sometimes exceed the NEI in simulating current wildfire AQ impacts, while enabling such assessments much farther into the future. |
领域 | 地球科学 |
收录类别 | SCI-E |
WOS记录号 | WOS:000502996800006 |
WOS关键词 | IMPACTING MODEL PERFORMANCE ; EASTERN UNITED-STATES ; ORGANIC AEROSOL ; WILDLAND FIRES ; CLIMATE-CHANGE ; AFRICAN DUST ; VERSION 4.5 ; ENVIRONMENT ; PREDICTIONS ; INVENTORY |
WOS类目 | Environmental Sciences ; Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences |
WOS研究方向 | Environmental Sciences & Ecology ; Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences |
引用统计 | |
文献类型 | 期刊论文 |
条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.173/C666/handle/2XK7JSWQ/224129 |
专题 | 环境与发展全球科技态势 |
作者单位 | 1.Univ North Carolina Chapel Hill, Dept Environm Sci & Engn, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA; 2.Univ Washington, Sch Environm & Forest Sci, Seattle, WA 98195 USA; 3.US Forest Serv, USDA, Southern Res Stn, Res Triangle Pk, NC 27709 USA; 4.Univ North Carolina Chapel Hill, Inst Environm, Chapel Hill, NC 27517 USA; 5.CSRA Inc, Res Triangle Pk, NC 27709 USA |
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Shankar, Uma,McKenzie, Donald,Prestemon, Jeffrey P.,et al. Evaluating wildfire emissions projection methods in comparisons of simulated and observed air quality[J]. ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS,2019,19(23):15157-15181. |
APA | Shankar, Uma.,McKenzie, Donald.,Prestemon, Jeffrey P..,Baek, Bok Haeng.,Omary, Mohammed.,...&Vizuete, William.(2019).Evaluating wildfire emissions projection methods in comparisons of simulated and observed air quality.ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS,19(23),15157-15181. |
MLA | Shankar, Uma,et al."Evaluating wildfire emissions projection methods in comparisons of simulated and observed air quality".ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS 19.23(2019):15157-15181. |
条目包含的文件 | 条目无相关文件。 |
除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。
修改评论