<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0"><?xmltex \makeatother\@nolinetrue\makeatletter?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">ACP</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">ACP</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Atmos. Chem. Phys.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1680-7324</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/acp-18-15581-2018</article-id><title-group><article-title>Long-range transport impacts on surface aerosol concentrations and the
contributions to haze events in China: an HTAP2 multi-model study</article-title><alt-title>Long-range transport impacts on China haze</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Long-range transport impacts on China haze}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{X.~Dong et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Dong</surname><given-names>Xinyi</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Fu</surname><given-names>Joshua S.</given-names></name>
          <email>jsfu@utk.edu</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5464-9225</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Zhu</surname><given-names>Qingzhao</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2866-5322</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Sun</surname><given-names>Jian</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Tan</surname><given-names>Jiani</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3296-6339</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Keating</surname><given-names>Terry</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3470-0104</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Sekiya</surname><given-names>Takashi</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Sudo</surname><given-names>Kengo</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5013-4168</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Emmons</surname><given-names>Louisa</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2325-6212</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Tilmes</surname><given-names>Simone</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5">
          <name><surname>Jonson</surname><given-names>Jan Eiof</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5">
          <name><surname>Schulz</surname><given-names>Michael</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4493-4158</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff6">
          <name><surname>Bian</surname><given-names>Huisheng</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff7">
          <name><surname>Chin</surname><given-names>Mian</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff8">
          <name><surname>Davila</surname><given-names>Yanko</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5872-8211</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff8">
          <name><surname>Henze</surname><given-names>Daven</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff9">
          <name><surname>Takemura</surname><given-names>Toshihiko</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2859-6067</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5">
          <name><surname>Benedictow</surname><given-names>Anna Maria Katarina</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff10">
          <name><surname>Huang</surname><given-names>Kan</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of
Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Environmental Protection Agency, Applied Science and Education
Division, National Center for Environmental Research, Office of Research and
Development, Headquarters, Federal Triangle, Washington, DC 20460, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Japan</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Atmospheric Chemistry Observations and Modeling Laboratory, National
Center for Atmospheric Research, <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>Boulder, Colorado, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>5</label><institution>Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff6"><label>6</label><institution>Goddard Earth Sciences and Technology Center, University of Maryland,
Baltimore, MD, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff7"><label>7</label><institution>Earth Sciences Division, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt,
MD, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff8"><label>8</label><institution>Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Colorado, Boulder,
CO, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff9"><label>9</label><institution>Research Institute for Applied Mechanics, Kyushu University, Fukuoka,
Japan</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff10"><label>10</label><institution>Center for Atmospheric Chemistry Study, Department of Environmental
Science and Engineering, <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, China
</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Joshua S. Fu (jsfu@utk.edu)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>30</day><month>October</month><year>2018</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>18</volume>
      <issue>21</issue>
      <fpage>15581</fpage><lpage>15600</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>27</day><month>January</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>11</day><month>April</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>17</day><month>August</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>7</day><month>September</month><year>2018</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        
        
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/15581/2018/acp-18-15581-2018.html">This article is available from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/15581/2018/acp-18-15581-2018.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/15581/2018/acp-18-15581-2018.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/15581/2018/acp-18-15581-2018.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract>
    <p id="d1e312">Haze has been severely affecting the densely populated areas in China
recently. While many of the efforts have been devoted to investigating the
impact of local anthropogenic emission, limited attention has been paid to
the contribution from long-range transport. In this study, we apply
simulations from six participating models supplied through the Task Force on
Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution phase 2 (HTAP2) exercise to
investigate the long-range transport impact of Europe (EUR) and
Russia–Belarus–Ukraine (RBU) on the surface air quality in eastern Asia
(EAS), with special focus on their contributions during the haze episodes in
China. The impact of 20 % anthropogenic emission perturbation from the
source region is extrapolated by a factor of 5 to estimate the full impact.
We find that the full impacts from EUR and RBU are 0.99 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
(3.1 %) and 1.32 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (4.1 %) during haze episodes,
while the annual averaged full impacts are only 0.35 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
(1.7 %) and 0.53 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (2.6 %). By estimating the aerosol
response within and above the planetary boundary layer (PBL), we find that
long-range transport from EUR within the PBL contributes to 22–38 % of the
total column density of aerosol response in EAS. Comparison with the HTAP
phase 1 (HTAP1) assessment reveals that from 2000 to 2010, the long-range
transport from Europe to eastern Asia has decreased significantly by a factor
of 2–10 for surface aerosol mass concentration due to the simultaneous
emission reduction in source regions and emission increase in the receptor
region. We also find the long-range transport from the Europe and RBU regions
increases the number of haze events in China by 0.15 % and 0.11 %, and
the North China Plain and southeastern China has 1–3 extra haze days (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %). This study is the first investigation into the contribution of
long-range transport to haze in China with multi-model experiments.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<?pagebreak page15582?><sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e408">Frequent low visibility due to heavy haze has been one of the most important
environmental concerns in China recently. Long-term monitoring data suggest
that visibility degradation has been identified during the past 30 years over
the North China Plain, Pearl River Delta, and Yangtze River Delta (Fu et al.,
2014; J. D. Wang et al., 2014), where more than 40 % of the national population
is hosted. As the most apparent symptom of air pollution, visibility
degradations induced by haze not only interrupt highway and airline
operations, but also indicate critical deterioration of public health. The
China Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP) reported that air quality in
265 of the 338 major cities failed to attain the national air quality
standard in 2015 (Jia and Wang, 2017), and studies also suggest that
350 000–400 000 of annual premature deaths are attributable to air
pollution exposure (WorldBank, 2007; Cao et al., 2017; Li et al., 2018) in
China during the past decade.</p>
      <p id="d1e411">China haze is usually associated with high concentrations and rapid
hygroscopic growth of fine-particulate matter (Im et al., 2018). Some
pilot studies have focused on the research topics including ambient air
quality conditions under haze (Huang et al., 2012; Wang et al.,
2015), spatial distribution and long-term trends of haze in China (Fu et al.,
2014), meteorology conditions that favor the formation of haze (J. D. Wang et al.,
2014), chemical components and size distributions of aerosols (Guo et al.,
2014; Ho et al., 2016; Shen et al., 2017; Yin et al., 2012; Zhang et al.,
2012), source apportionment of fine particles during haze episodes (Hua et
al., 2015; L. T. Wang et al., 2014; Y. J. Wang et al., 2014), and also the public health
impact of haze (Gao et al., 2017; Tie et al., 2009; Xu et al., 2013).</p>
      <p id="d1e414">Although these studies helped to improve the fundamental understanding of haze
in China, very limited attention has been paid to reveal the role of
long-range transport. The research community has realized the hemispheric
transport could also exacerbate local air quality problems since the early
20th century (Akimoto, 2003), and several international collaborated programs
have been initiated to investigate the long-range transport of air pollutants
since then (Carmichael et al., 2008; Rao et al., 2011). One of these is the
Task Force on Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution (TF HTAP), designated to
advance the understanding of intercontinental transport of air pollutants in
the Northern Hemisphere (Streets et al., 2010).</p>
      <p id="d1e417">The abovementioned prior efforts, however, have a limited assessment of the
long-range transport impact on haze. In order to achieve a better air quality
condition and reduce the frequency of haze events, China is investing
billions to reduce the local anthropogenic emissions (Li and Zhu, 2014; Liu
et al., 2015). However, the background concentrations of PM and the
contributions from long-range transport are poorly documented. A few studies
have demonstrated the existence of long-range transport into China with
campaign measurements (Kong et al., 2010) and attempted to quantify the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
response in eastern Asia due to intercontinental transport (Fu et al., 2012),
but the contribution of external emissions to China's PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> pollution
remains unknown. Understanding of the long-range transport impact is
essential for estimating the background concentrations of air pollutants and
estimating the efficiency and effectiveness of local emission control. It is
also an important scientific support for policy makers that allows them to
better organize the international collaborations.</p>
      <p id="d1e441">In this study, we evaluate the long-range transport impact on haze in China
by estimating the PM concentration response and visibility change based on
multi-model data provided through the second phase of HTAP (HTAP2). We
focused on transport from two source regions designed by the HTAP2 framework:
Europe (EUR) and Russia–Belarus–Ukraine (RBU), since they are the most
important upwind areas with respect to eastern Asia (EAS) as the receptor
region. The modeling framework and baseline evaluation are described in Sect. 2.
Results and discussions are summarized in Sect. 3, including the
demonstration of long-range transport seasonality, comparison of PM transport
above and within the planetary boundary layer (PBL), the assessment of the full
impact and relative importance of long-range transport, and also the
contributions during haze episodes in China. Conclusions are summarized in
Sect. 4.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Method</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <title>Configuration of models, emissions, and simulations</title>
      <p id="d1e455">The HTAP2 participating models all utilize the same anthropogenic emission
inventories for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, CO, nonmethane VOC
(NMVOC), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, black carbon (BC) and organic
carbon (OC). The emissions are compiled from several regional inventories for
the year 2010 with monthly temporal resolution and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> grid resolution, with more details reported in
Janssens-Maenhout et al. (2015). Emissions of year 2008 and 2009 are also
prepared in the same format as that of 2010 through the HTAP2 effort, yet
model simulations for these 2 years are of lower priority. So in this
study we mainly focus on the 2010 model experiments and briefly probe
the interannual variability by utilizing the 2008 and 2009 data. Emissions
from biomass burning and natural sources are not prescribed by the HTAP2
framework, but most of the participating models used the recommended Global
Fire Emissions Database version 3 (GFED3) and Model of Emissions of Gases and
Aerosols from Nature (MEGAN) for biomass burning and biogenic emissions,
respectively. Emission perturbation is conducted with all anthropogenic
emissions cut off by 20 % over the source region. To examine the relative
importance of long-range transport compared to local emission<?pagebreak page15583?> change,
emission perturbation is also performed for the receptor region only. This
study utilizes the simulations from four scenarios: (1) BASE scenario with
all baseline emissions; (2) EURALL scenario with all anthropogenic emissions
from EUR reduced by 20 %, (3) RBUALL scenario with all anthropogenic
emissions from RBU reduced by 20 %, and (4) EASALL scenario with all
anthropogenic emissions from EAS reduced by 20 %. Domain configurations of
these regions are shown in Fig. 1. Note that all model experiments are
conducted at global scale but the analysis of this study will focus on EUR,
RBU, and EAS only.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e532">The HTAP2 source and receptor regions for EUR (green), RBU (red),
and EAS (grey). Sites marked with the same symbols are from the same
observation network: red circles represent API, blue squares represent
AERONET, orange diamonds represent EANET, and yellow triangles represent
EBAS.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=384.112205pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/15581/2018/acp-18-15581-2018-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e541">This study takes input from six global models with their grid resolution,
meteorology, and references listed in Table 1. These models are selected
because of the model-level PM mass concentration data availability.
Long-range transport of air pollutants may occur near the PBL or occur in the upper free troposphere and then descend into the
PBL (Eckhardt et al., 2003; Stohl et al., 2002). Since near-surface aerosol
plays a more important role in haze event than that in the upper air, it is
necessary to understand the contributions from within and above the PBL.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e548">Models used for this study.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Model</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Resolution (lat <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>  long <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> layers)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Meteorology</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Model reference</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CAM-chem</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.9</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">56</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">GEOS5 v5.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Tilmes et al. (2016)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CHASER</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.8</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.8</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">32</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">ERA-Interim and HadISST</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Sudo et al. (2002)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">EMEP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">ECMWF-IFS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Simpson et al. (2012)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">GEOS5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.0</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.75</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">72</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">MERRA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Rienecker et al. (2008)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">GEOSCHEMADJOINT</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.0</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">72</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">MERRA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Henze et al. (2007)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SPRINTARS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.1</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.1</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">56</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">ECMWF Interim</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Takemura et al. (2005)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Model ensemble mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.8</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.8</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">32</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">–</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <title>Model evaluation</title>
      <p id="d1e866">Before analyzing the source–receptor (S–R) relationship, we applied
measurements from multiple observation networks to evaluate the models
performances at the EUR, RBU, and EAS regions. Surface observations are
collected from four programs: EBAS from the Norwegian Institute for Air
Research (<uri>http://ebas.nilu.no</uri>, last access:
10 October 2017), Air Pollution Index (API) from the
China Ministry of Environmental Protection
(<uri>http://datacenter.mep.gov.cn/</uri>, last access:
19 September 2017), Acid Deposition Monitoring Network
in eastern Asia (EANET, 2007), and the AERONET
(<uri>http://aeronet.gsfc.nasa.gov</uri>, last access:
18 October 2017) from NASA. EBAS (Tørseth et al.,
2012) sites are all located in Europe so the data are used for model
evaluation in EUR. API includes PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations from 86 cities over
China (Dong et al., 2016), and EANET has observations of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, CO, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at more than 30
sites over eastern Asia countries (Dong and Fu, 2015a, b), so these two data
sets are used for model evaluation in EAS. AERONET (level 2.0, version 2) has
AOD (aerosol optical depth)
measurements at more than 1400 sites with global coverage (Dubovik et al.,
2000). As some of the sites may not have valid measurements during the
simulation period, only those with valid data are used and their locations
are shown in Fig. 1. Satellite-retrieved AOD is collected from the daily
MODIS product (MOD08, MYD08, <uri>https://modis.gsfc.nasa.gov/</uri>, last access:
19 October 2017) with a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.25</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.25</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> grid resolution to investigate the spatial distributions and
column densities of aerosol simulated by the participating models.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1018">Monthly mean surface concentrations of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(a, d)</bold>,
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(b, c)</bold>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(c, f)</bold> for the year 2010
in the EUR <bold>(a, b, c)</bold> and EAS <bold>(d, e, f)</bold> regions from
observations and model simulations. Observations (bold black lines with
vertical error bars) represent the averages of all sites falling within the
same ensemble grid (bold red lines), and the vertical error bars depict the
standard deviation across the sites in the same ensemble grid. Models are
sampled at the nearest grid to each station; multiple stations within the
same model grid are averaged to represent the paring observation.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/15581/2018/acp-18-15581-2018-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1072">Monthly mean surface concentrations from participating models are sampled at
their own model grid cells containing the observational sites, and the
corresponding measurements are also averaged on monthly scale to facilitate
the evaluation. No valid data are found for surface measurements of air
pollutants in the RBU region. The monthly variations of surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> are shown only for EUR and EAS in Fig. 2.
Evaluation statistics including mean bias (MB) and coefficient of
determination (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) are indicated in Fig. 2 for the model ensemble mean,
calculated as the average of all participating models at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.8</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.8</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> grid resolution. Measurements of aerosol subspecies including
sulfate (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), nitrate (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), ammonium
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), organic aerosols (OA), and gas-phase species such as CO,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are also available at some of
the EBAS and EANET stations. However, the data coverage is very sparse in terms of
both number of sites and sampling periods, so the evaluations of these
species are not discussed here but presented in the Supplement (Table S1). In
general, all participating models successfully reproduce the seasonal cycle
of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in EUR and EAS. The model ensemble mean shows an MB of only
4.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> compared to the EBAS observation in EUR.
Relatively large biases (8–15 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) are indicated in warmer
months (June–September). However, meanwhile the standard deviation of measurement
(indicated by vertical error bars in Fig. 2) is even larger
(10–15 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), indicating that the measured <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations vary significantly among the EBAS sites in the same model
ensemble grid. Seasonal variation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is also simulated well in
EAS with moderate overestimation throughout the year.</p>
      <p id="d1e1302">Simulations of surface PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations are consistent among the
participating models, except that GEOSCHEMADJOINT suggests larger seasonal
variation than the other models. In EUR, the model ensemble mean shows the MB
as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> against EBAS measurements and generally
captures the monthly changes with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.7. Underestimation of surface
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration in EUR might be due to the fact that some of the
measurements are affected by the local environment. PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> are available
from five EBAS stations, and one of the stations is close to a highway
(49.90<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 4.63<inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E). These local impacts can hardly be
captured by global models due to their coarse-grid resolutions. In the EAS
region, the model ensemble mean shows an MB as small as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> but poor correlation with the measurement <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is 0.2. The
monthly dynamics of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is more prominent in EAS than in EUR and the
models tend to miss the high peaks in spring (April–May). As the
anthropogenic emission in Asia is developed with top-down method, the
predefined seasonal profile has been demonstrated to affect the model's
capability of reproducing the seasonal changes in PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Dong and Fu,
2015a). The simulation of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration shows good agreement
between the model ensemble mean and the measurements in EUR, with an MB of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The models systematically underestimate surface
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in EAS but successfully reproduce
the seasonal cycle. This is likely due to the fact that the majority of the
API and EANET stations are<?pagebreak page15584?> located in the urban area and are thus frequently
affected by the local sources. Previous studies (Dong and Fu,
2015a) also suggested that the
anthropogenic emission of primary PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> might be underestimated in China
and subsequently lead to negative MB.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1539">Monthly average AOD comparison between the models and
AERONET <bold>(a, b, c)</bold> and between the models and the MODIS <bold>(d, e, f)</bold> in EUR <bold>(a, d)</bold>, RBU <bold>(b, e)</bold>, and EAS <bold>(c, f)</bold>.
Models are represented by markers with different colors and styles.
Evaluation statistics (MB and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) are indicated for the model ensemble mean
in the upper-left corner of the scatter plot. The solid black line is the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> line, whereas the black dashed contours represent the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
lines.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/15581/2018/acp-18-15581-2018-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1611">As no surface measurement of air pollutants is available the RBU region, we
evaluate the model-simulated AOD against the AERONET measurement and MODIS
satellite product on a monthly scale in all three regions as shown in
Fig. 3. Most of the models fall into the 2-fold range at both AERONET
stations and MODIS grid cells. Models tend to overestimate AOD in the EUR
region compared to the AERONET observation with 0.1 MB and 0.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
for the model ensemble mean. In the RBU region, the model ensemble mean shows an MB
of only 0.05, yet the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is only 0.2, indicating that there is a large
discrepancy between model simulation and AERONET in terms of the seasonal
changes in AOD. The model ensemble mean has best performance in EAS among
all the three regions with an MB of 0.1 and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.6, suggesting that
models have good agreement with the AERONET observation for both the level and
the seasonal cycles of AOD. The simulated AODs are generally consistent between
models, except that CHASER is always 1–2 times higher than the others. The
validations against the MODIS product suggest a slightly better model performance,
as the model ensemble mean shows <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values as 0.5, 0.4, and 0.6 in EUR,
RBU, and EAS. In contrast to the overall overestimation
indicated by AERONET, MODIS suggests models tend to slightly underestimate
the AODs in all three regions with MBs of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.02</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the
EUR, RBU, and EAS regions. This shall be due to the fact that
AERONET has limited number of stations – there are 73, 11, and 15 stations
in the EUR, RBU, and EAS regions that have valid observations
covering the simulation period – while MODIS has more comparable grid cells
over the study domain.</p>
      <p id="d1e1689">The discrepancy between AERONET observations and MODIS product indicates that
limited number of surface observations may not be sufficient to judge the
overall performance of model since there is a high chance that the
observation may be affected by the local sources, subsequently biasing the
assessment. Spatial distributions of the simulated AOD from all participating
models and the MODIS product are compared as shown in Fig. 4. The Aerosol
Comparisons between Observations and Models (AEROCOM) project has conducted a
thorough evaluation of 14 global models and suggested the simulated AOD is in
a 2-fold range of the observations with mean normalized bias (MNB) varied
between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">44</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % and 27 % (Huneeus et al., 2011). As presented in Fig. 4,
the model ensemble mean in this study shows good agreement with the MODIS
production in terms of spatial distribution, and the MNB values are 9.3 %,
18.1 %, and 44.9 % in the EUR, RBU, and EAS regions. These<?pagebreak page15585?> evaluation
statistics are consistent with AEROCOM. However, we also find some exceptions
as CHASER significantly overestimate the AOD in China, especially over the
central and eastern coastal areas, indicating that the simulation bias may be
generated by the model's treatment of the intensive anthropogenic emission
over these areas. SPRINTARS is also found to significantly overestimate AOD
over the Taklamakan Desert area, indicating that the bias shall be attributed
to the treatment of wind-blown dust.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1704">Spatial distributions of AOD from MODIS and model simulations.
Evaluation statistics of each model are indicated in the lower-left corners of
the plots.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/15581/2018/acp-18-15581-2018-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Result and discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <title>Seasonality of long-range transport impacts at the surface layer</title>
      <p id="d1e1725">We start evaluating the long-range transport of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> from the EUR and
RBU source regions to the EAS receptor region by estimating the surface
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration response on domain average scale under the emission
perturbation scenarios. PM response (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM) is defined as the
concentration difference between the baseline scenario and the perturbation
scenarios as follows:

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M89" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E1"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EURALL</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BASE</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EURALL</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E2"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RBUALL</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BASE</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RBUALL</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            To also understand the responses of aerosol subspecies, simulations of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, OA, and black
carbon (BC) are collected from each of the participating models if it is
available. Dust and sea salt are not analyzed in this study because emission
perturbations are performed for anthropogenic sectors only. So in this study
we assume that <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>OA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>BC <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. For
those models reporting organic carbon (OC) instead of OA, an OC-to-OA
conversion factor such as 1.8 is applied to estimate OA following the method
discussed in Stjern et al. (2016). For those models reporting only some of
the subspecies and total PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, an extra species, “other”, is defined
as subtracting the available subspecies from PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. For example, GEOS5
and SPRINTARS report mass concentrations of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> , OA, BC, and
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, then for these two models we use other <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OA</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BC</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). Note that the CAM-chem model
reports subspecies for all scenarios but <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for BASE scenario
only, so no <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>other is estimated for this model.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2061">Monthly averages of surface aerosol response in the EAS receptor
region under the EURALL scenario. Solid bars with different colors represent
the responses of different aerosols. </p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/15581/2018/acp-18-15581-2018-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page15587?><p id="d1e2070">Long-range transport impacts from the EUR region are presented in Fig. 5.
Large variations of the simulated PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> responses are found among the
models. The largest estimation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is 0.16 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> estimated by GEOS5 in March, and the smallest <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
is 0.01 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> estimated by EMEP in July. Regarding the
seasonal cycle, the majority of the models suggest that long-range transport has
a higher impact in winter and spring and lower impact in summer, consistent with the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> long-range transport seasonality reported by
the HTAP1 assessment (Streets et al., 2010). In contrast to other models that
show the most significant responses in winter or spring, CAM-chem suggests higher
values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>OA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>BC <inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in July. The prominent difference in seasonality may
attributed to the model diversity in terms of meteorology, aerosol
mechanisms, and convection scheme. CAM-chem-simulated surface air temperature
is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> K higher than other models in EUR region. Im et al. (2018)
suggested wind speed and PBL height may play a more important role in
resulting model diversities of aerosol burden, but unfortunately only one of
the participating models (SPRINTARS) provides the PBL data. Stjern et
al. (2016) suggested that the differences of aerosol schemes and treatments of
OC, OA, and SOA lead to additional intermodel variability. An additional
specifically designed model experiment is necessary to explicitly identify
the causes of intermodel variability. For most of the participating models,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and/or <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>OA make larger contributions to
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and show more prominent monthly changes than other
subspecies. CAM-chem- and GEOSCHEMADJOINT-simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> show monthly variations with a factor of 5, and GEOS5
suggests the monthly dynamics of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>OA is with a factor of 8. The model
ensemble mean suggests that the largest long-range transport impact of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is 0.064 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in March and the smallest
impact is 0.035 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in September, and the contributions
from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>BC, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>OA, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are 3 %, 45 %, 19 %,
17 %, and 16 %.</p>
      <p id="d1e2439">Long-range transport from the RBU to the EAS region is presented in Fig. 6.
The highest <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is estimated by GEOS5 as 0.19 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in March, and the lowest <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM is indicated by
GEOSCHEMADJOINT as 0.018  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in July. Similarly to the
response under EURALL scenario, long-range transport from the RBU region is
also mainly contributed by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, but <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> share more significant
portions in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. Most of the models suggest relatively lower
values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>OA except for GEOS5, which suggests up to 0.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>OA in March. The model ensemble mean suggests maxima of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> as 0.101 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in March and the minima as
0.065 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in August, and the contributions from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>BC, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>OA, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are 2 %, 43 %, 14 %, 20 %, and 21 %.
Percentage contributions are generally less than 3 %, yet the
highest contributions could be up to 3–4 % for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as suggested by EMEP. The relatively lower contribution of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>OA and higher contributions of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is probably due to the low temperature in the RBU
source region, which may extend the lifetime of gas-phase precursors
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and enhance the
export of secondary inorganic aerosols produced during the journey of
long-range transport. Low temperature also favors SOA production from VOC due
to the partitioning to the condensed phase. CAM-chem suggests the
contribution of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>SOA in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>OA is 32 % under the RBUALL
scenario and 28 % under the EURALL scenario, and the model ensemble mean also
shows that more OA is transported from RBU (0.01 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) than
that from EUR (0.008 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), although the anthropogenic NMVOC
and OC emissions from EUR are 10 % and 70 % higher. However, the
low temperature seems affect the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> more by influencing the chemical kinetics and slowing down the
production of PM at the source region, which may allow more uplift motion of
the gas-phase precursors and finally result in more <inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> produced during the long-range transport pathway. More
research effort is necessary to explicitly understand the export<?pagebreak page15588?> of
precursors and secondary inorganic aerosols traveling from high-latitude
areas.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <title>Long-range transport above and within the PBL</title>
      <p id="d1e3037">The HTAP phase 1 (HTAP1) report (Streets et al., 2010) suggests that
long-range transport of air pollutants from Europe to Asia are identified at
two major different heights: within and above 3 km, and the
upper path is believed to be more important due to the existence of the
westerlies, especially when the emission source area is close to the jet
stream (Eckhardt et al., 2003; Stohl et al., 2002) The Europe to Asia
transport pathways are identified based on spatial distributions of simulated
CO column density, and the contributions from upper- and lower-level
transport remain unknown. The transport pathways above and within 3 km are
commonly used by previous studies in order to distinguish the long-range
transport above and within the free troposphere, but 3 km was apparently a
rough estimation of the PBL height. The intensity of long-range transport
exclusively within the PBL is believed to be negligible because it is
frequently affected by the land surface, turbulence, and exchange with the
free troposphere. The transport from Europe to Asia estimated with model
experiment in this study, however, may show some significance within the PBL
since the emission perturbation is performed on a continental scale, and there
is a large portion of remote areas with flat topography in the central Asia
region between Europe and eastern Asia. Annual average PBL height is
about 1.5 km (880–850 hPa) above the surface over our study domain on an annual average scale, and instead of assuming a constant PBL height, we use
the monthly PBL data from the SPRINTARS model because it is the only one that
uploads. To enable the comparison of PM transported within and above the PBL,
we use the column density instead of mass concentration, defined below:

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M198" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E3"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">within</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mtext>layer=surface 
layer</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PBL</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PMC</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">layer</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HT</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">layer</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E4"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">above</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">layer</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PBL</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>model  top</mml:mtext></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PMC</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">layer</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HT</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">layer</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">above</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">within</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) is the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM transported above (within) the PBL, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PMC is the mass
concentration response under the perturbation scenarios at each layer, and
HT is the model layer thickness. Figure 7 presents the spatial distributions
of model-simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">within</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">above</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> under the EURALL scenario, as well as the
longitude-pressure cross sections of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PMC estimated by the
participating models. It is important to note that PM mentioned in this
section refers to the lump sum of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, OA, and BC (because
these are the subspecies available from all participating models) to enable
the intermodel comparison.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e3240">Same as Fig. 5 but under the RBUALL scenario.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/15581/2018/acp-18-15581-2018-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e3251">Annual averages of PM column density responses (calculated as
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM <inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>BC <inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>OA) under
the EURALL scenario within <bold>(a)</bold> and above the <bold>(b)</bold> PBL, and the
corresponding longitude-pressure cross sections of PM concentrations
(averaged over 10–70<inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N) estimated by participating models.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/15581/2018/acp-18-15581-2018-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3319">Transport from the EUR to the EAS region shows generally consistent spatial
distributions between participating<?pagebreak page15589?> models. Long-range transport of PM above
the PBL is mainly distributed along 40<inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and higher latitudes, where
the impact can reach even further towards the western Pacific. The lower-latitude (30–40<inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N) transport of PM is blocked by the Pamirs,
Tianshan, and Altay Mountains due to the elevated topography along the
western boundary of China. Long-range transport within PBL is mostly blocked
shortly after exported from Europe at the eastern side of the Black Sea along
Iran, Georgia, and Armenia, while the rest of it travels along 45<inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N
and above latitudes towards eastern Asia. All participating models suggest that
PM is firstly carried from EUR in a northeastern direction over Siberia,
Mongolia and northeastern part of China, and then down to lower-latitude areas
over North China Plain (NCP). This transport pathway is consistent with
the HTAP1 assessment (Streets et al., 2010). <inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">above</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is
found substantially higher than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">within</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> over the EAS
receptor region. Large values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">above</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> suggest that
the long-range transport may also play an important role in affecting the
shortwave radiative forcing budget, since the aerosol may be suspended above the
cloud. Deposition of PM from upper air down to the surface layer may also
subsequently affect the near-surface layer air quality. Most models show
gradually decreased <inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">above</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">within</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> from EUR to EAS, but SPRINTARS shows nonnegligible PM
changes along the southeastern coast of China, which could be due to the
production of secondary <inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> converted from long-range
transport <inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, discussed earlier in Sect. 3.1. The largest
long-range transport impact is estimated by CHASER and the smallest impact is
estimated by EMEP, but no significant model diversities are found. The
longitude-pressure cross sections of the PM responses present a clear
depiction of the long-range transport from EUR to EAS at different heights. The PM
responses at the the longitude can reach up to more than 500 hPa over the
EUR region (10–40<inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E), indicating a significant uplift motion of
the air pollutants over Europe. Majority of the eastward transport PM is
blocked at 45–50<inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E due to the elevated topography. In the upper
layer above 800 hPa, however, PM is slightly less affected by the topography
and can transport further towards the EAS region, where it subsequently deposits on near-surface layer. Both the spatial distributions of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">within</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and the cross sections of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PMC suggested that
the intercontinental transport of aerosol does occur within PBL, although
the intensity is less significant compared to that above PBL. Under the
ERUALL scenario, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">within</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> contribution to the total
column density of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM is 34 % estimated by the model ensemble mean,
with the lowest contribution estimated by EMEP as 22 % and highest
contribution estimated by GEOSCHEMADJOINT as 38 %.</p>
      <p id="d1e3523">Long-range transport from RBU follows a similar pathway to that from EUR to
EAS, as shown in Fig. 8, which is likely because most of the RBU
anthropogenic emissions are located in the European part of Russia and
Ukraine. PM responses are also relatively more significant in the upper air
above the PBL, which spread along 45<inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and higher latitude and affect
the northern part of China, North Korea, South<?pagebreak page15590?> Korea, and Japan. Long-range
transport from RBU is slightly larger than that from EUR for both above and
within the PBL. Spatial distributions of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">above</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">within</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> suggest that RBU exported air pollutants can
travel further towards the western Pacific. Cross sections of PM concentrations
suggest that RBU-emitted PM shows a much lower plume rise height in the
source region compared to that over EUR. PM response under the RBUALL
scenario is also found to exist up to 500 hPa in the source region, but
the majority of plume is within 800 hPa.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e3569">Same as Fig. 7 but under the RUBALL scenario.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/15581/2018/acp-18-15581-2018-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<?pagebreak page15591?><sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <title>Change and interannual variability of the long-range transport</title>
      <?pagebreak page15592?><p id="d1e3584">The global anthropogenic emissions have changed significantly, especially over
eastern Asia during the past decade (Li et al., 2017); thus the long-range
transport impact and its relative importance may have also changed as well.
In this section, we compare the impact estimated for the year 2010 with the
assessment reported by HTAP1 for the year 2000. We also analyze the HTAP2
simulations for the year 2008 and 2009 to probe the interannual
variability. To properly interpret the HTAP1 report and the HTAP2 modeling
results, it is important to realize that the regions definitions are
moderately different between the two experiments. HTAP1 used straight
latitude and longitude boundaries to define the domain coverage of each
region (Fiore et al., 2009), while HTAP2 applies national boundaries (one
exception in the Northern Hemisphere is the Arctic region, defined as being
north of 66<inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N latitude); thus the spatial coverage of “EU”
(25–65<inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N; 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> W–50<inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E) defined by HTAP1 is
slightly different from “EUR” defined by HTAP2, although both of them
represent the European region. A similar discrepancy exists for the definition
of eastern Asia between the two experiments, as the HTAP1-defined “EA”
(15–50<inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N; 95–160<inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E) is smaller than the EAS region with
less coverage on the western and northern sides of China. Consequently, when
referring to “long-range transport from Europe to eastern Asia”, neither the
source (Europe) nor the receptor (eastern Asia) region share exactly the same
meaning for HTAP1 and HTAP2. In addition, emission perturbations in
source regions performed in both HTAP1 and HTAP2 experiments are 20 %
instead of 100 %; thus the full contributions from the EUR or RBU to the
EAS region remain unknown. Although the PM response is not exactly
proportional to emission perturbation, previous studies (Leibensperger et
al., 2011; Liu et al., 2008) suggested that it is reasonable to linearly
extrapolate it when evaluating the intercontinental source–receptor
relationship because the nonlinear relationship between precursor emission
changes and PM responses is only locally effective. The HTAP1 assessment
reported that surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations are reduced by
12 %–14 % from 20 % local emission reduction in eastern Asia, Europe, and
North America, corresponding to 60 %–70 % reduction under 100 % local
emission reduction if the responses are extrapolated linearly. Yet model
experiments show that the real 100 % emission perturbation simulations
suggest 80 %–82 % surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration reduction due to
“oxidant limitation” over these polluted areas. However, this relationship
becomes linear during transoceanic transport due to the relatively short
lifetime of precursors compared to the travel duration. So in this study,
we use the Full_Impact to represent the PM responses from 100 % emission
perturbation at EUR and RBU by scaling the PM responses under the 20 %
emission perturbation conditions by a factor of 5, which provide a rough but
direct estimation of the full contributions of long-range transport. This
method has been applied by the HTAP1-related studies to estimate the
long-range transport of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fiore et al., 2009; West et al., 2009;
Zhang et al., 2009).

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M252" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E5"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mtext>Full_Impact</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EUR</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EUR</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E6"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mtext>Full_Impact</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RBU</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RBU</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            and

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M253" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E7"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mtext>Full_Impact</mml:mtext><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EUR</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>Full_Impact</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EUR</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BASE</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E8"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mtext>Full_Impact</mml:mtext><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RBU</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>Full_Impact</mml:mtext><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RBU</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BASE</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn>.100</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            In addition, we also defined the Relative_Impact in this study to represent
the relative importance of long-range transport in contrast to the local
emission, as the ratio of PM responses under 20 % emission perturbation in
source regions (i.e., EUR, RBU) to the PM responses under 20 % emission
perturbation in the receptor region (i.e., EAS):

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M254" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E9"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mtext>Relative_Impact</mml:mtext><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EUR</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EUR</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EAS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E10"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mtext>Relative_Impact</mml:mtext><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RBU</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RBU</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EAS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            The full impact and relative impact are calculated with the model ensemble mean to
represent the averages, and with individual modeling results to estimate the
minima and maxima, as summarized in Table 2. The HTAP1 experiment only
reported the assessment of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, BC, and OA, so this section
will focus on the analysis and comparison of these species. As mentioned
earlier, the EAS region is different from the EA region defined in HTAP1, so
we also calculate the full impact and relative impact for the EA region but
with HTAP2 modeling data to enable the comparison. We first compare the 2000
EU impact on EA with the 2010 EUR impact on EA. The long-range transport
shows a prominent decreasing change for all investigated species. The full
impact of Europe long-range transport on surface <inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentration decreased from 0.15 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (5.0 %) in 2000 to
0.02 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (0.5 %) in 2010, which shall be due to the
significant reduction of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> anthropogenic emission in Europe from
9.95 Tg in 2000 to 6.18 Tg in 2010 (anthropogenic emissions are summarized
in Table S2). The full impacts of Europe long-range transport on surface BC
and OA also decreased by a factor of 2–5 for both absolute concentrations
and percentage contributions during the 10-year period. Anthropogenic
emissions of BC, OC, NMVOC, and primary PM in Europe decreased by 21 %,
4 %, 37 %, and 2 % and their emissions in eastern Asia
increased by 39 %, 21 %, 38 %, and 32 % from 2000 to
2010. The emission increase in eastern Asia shall be responsible for the enhanced
surface PM concentrations simulated under the baseline scenario. The emission
reductions in EUR are consistent with the decreasing change in the long-range
transport contributions estimated by the models.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e4004">Annual average long-range transport impacts of surface PM
concentrations and percentage contributions from the EUR and RBU source
regions to the EAS receptor region. Numbers collected from the HTAP1
assessment are presented in italic font; aerosol surface concentrations
(Surf. Conc.) under the baseline scenario are presented in bold font.
Numbers in the parentheses indicate the range of each variable among the
participating models.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="8">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col8" align="center">Full impact of long-range transport </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col4" nameend="col5" align="center" colsep="1">EA as receptor </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col6" nameend="col8" align="center">EAS as receptor </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">EU<inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:mo>→</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>EA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">EUR<inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:mo>→</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>EA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col6" nameend="col8" align="center"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2000<inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2010EA<inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2008<inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2009<inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2010</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3"><bold>Surf. Conc.</bold> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>
                    <bold>2.94 (1.96–4.42)</bold>
                  </italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>3.25 (2.07–5.46)</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><bold>5.9 (5.38–6.51)</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>5.29</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>3.80 (1.45–6.67)</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3">Full_Impact<inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EUR</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>5.0 (0.3–9.8)</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.5 (0.1–0.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3.5 (2.9–4.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.7 (0.4–5.6)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3">Full_Impact<inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RBU</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">5.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">4.1 (2.6–6.9)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">BC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3"><bold>Surf. Conc.</bold> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>
                    <bold>0.42 (0.28–0.71)</bold>
                  </italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>0.56 (0.34–0.74)</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><bold>1.00 (0.93–1.08)</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>0.92</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>0.82 (0.51–1.07)</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3">Full_Impact<inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EUR</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>1.0 (0.5–3.9)</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.2 (0.03–0.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.2 (0.6–1.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.1 (0.1–2.2)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3">Full_Impact<inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RBU</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.1 (0.1–2.5)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">OA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3"><bold>Surf. Conc.</bold> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>
                    <bold>1.46 (0.81–2.52)</bold>
                  </italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>3.56 (1.93–6.29)</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><bold>6.28 (3.51–9.06)</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>3.37</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><bold>5.06 (2.1–8.87)</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3">Full_Impact<inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EUR</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>0.4 (0.2–0.9)</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.2 (0.02–0.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.7 (0.3–1.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.9 (0.1–1.2)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3">Full_Impact<inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RBU</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.0 (0.1–3.2)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col4" nameend="col8">Relative impact of long-range transport </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> OA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3">Relative_Impact<inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EUR</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>2.9</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3">Relative_Impact<inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RBU</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3.3 (2.1–5.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">3.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col4" nameend="col8">Local 20 % anthropogenic emission perturbation impact </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> OA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EAS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PM</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BASE</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><italic>16.8</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">12.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">14.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">14.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">12</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e4007"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Numbers shown for 2000 are collected from the HTAP1 report that
represent the long-range transport impact from EU to EA.
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> 2010EA is calculated with the HTAP2 data by using the HTAP1 domain
configuration for EA.
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Only data from two models (CAM-chem and CHASER) are available for the EURALL
scenario in 2008, and only data from one model (CAM-chem) are available for RBUALL
scenario in 2008, so no range is calculated for RBU %.
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Only data from one model (CAM-chem) 2009 are available so no range is
calculated for EUR % and RBU %.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e4772">We then investigate the interannual variability of the long-range transport
by examining the EUR to EAS and the RBU to EAS impacts from 2008 to 2010. The
model-estimated full impact<inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EUR</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> shows annual changes of
15 %–30 % for all species. The full impact<inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RBU</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> shows
relatively larger interannual changes. As the anthropogenic emissions from
the RBU region steadily decreased by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % from 2008 to 2010, the
large dynamics of full impact<inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RBU</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is more likely due to the
fact that only one model (CAM-chem) is available to estimate the RBU impact
in 2008 and 2009 and thus the assessment may be biased. While the estimation
for 2010 is calculated with the multi-model ensemble mean, the estimations for
the other 2 years are determined by CAM-chem only and need to be
validated further.</p>
      <p id="d1e4824">We finally analyze the relative importance of long-range transport. The HTAP1
reported that the overall contribution to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and OA from EU
to EA is 2.9 % in 2000, and the relative impact in 2010 is 2.2 %, indicating that
long-range<?pagebreak page15593?> transport is playing a less important role compared to the
local anthropogenic emission. In contrast, 20 % anthropogenic emission
reductions in the EAS region led to a surface concentration of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> OA that decreased by 16.8 % in 2000 and 14.1 % in 2010,
suggesting that the nonlinear relationship between the precursor and PM becomes
more significant when the anthropogenic emissions increase. It also indicates
that, to achieve a better air quality with lower PM concentrations, more
efforts shall be devoted to reduce the emissions in 2010 because the top
20 % emission reduction would lead to a smaller PM response compared to
in 2000.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <title>Long-range transport impact during the haze episode</title>
      <p id="d1e4872">We first use the National Climate Data Center (NCDC) observations to identify
the locations and periods of haze in China, and then analyze the long-range
transport impacts during these identified haze episodes. Haze can be
quantitatively identified with visibility less than 10 km and relative
humidity less than 90 % (Fu et al., 2014). As most of the haze (locations
of NCDC sites and full map of haze shown in Fig. S1 in the Supplement) are
located over the central and eastern parts of China (CEC), in this section we
focus the analysis of long-range transport impacts on the CEC subdomain
(20–55<inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N; 100–135<inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E). The full impacts during the haze
episodes (HAZE) are estimated and compared with the annual averaged full
impacts, as shown in Table 3.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e4896">Long-range transport full impacts on an annual average scale and
during the haze episodes. Numbers in the parentheses indicate the percentage
contributions.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="9">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center">Base PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col5" nameend="col6" align="center">EUR full impact (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (%)) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col8" nameend="col9" align="center">RBU full impact (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (%)) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Models</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">AAVG</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">HAZE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">AAVG</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">HAZE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">AAVG</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">HAZE</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CHASER</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">47.73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.23 (1.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.00 (2.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.29 (1.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.99 (2.1)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">EMEP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">17.35</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">29.34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.05 (0.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.11 (0.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.23 (1.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.61 (2.1)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">GCA<inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">25.47</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">28.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.12 (0.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.29 (1.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.35 (1.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.86 (3.0)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SPRINTARS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">17.45</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">24.80</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.00 (5.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.58 (10.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.26 (7.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.82 (11.4)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Ensemble</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20.18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">32.48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.35 (1.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.99 (3.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.53 (2.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.32 (4.1)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e4899"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> GCA: GEOSCHEMADJOINT</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e5208">CAM-chem and GEOS5 have no daily surface data available, so data from the
remaining four participating models are analyzed in this section. The models suggest that
the PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> baseline concentrations during haze episodes are substantially
higher than the annual averages shown in Table 3. The full impacts of
long-range transport from the source regions are also higher during the haze
episodes by a factor of 2–3 than the annual averages. Higher values of
Full_Impact<inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EUR</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and Full_Impact<inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RBU</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> suggest that
more fine particles are transported from the EUR and RBU source regions when
China is suffering from haze.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e5241">Spatial distributions and histograms of the full impacts of long-range transport
during the haze episodes. Model grids with no NCDC observation
sites are assigned to fill values.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=375.576378pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/15581/2018/acp-18-15581-2018-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page15594?><p id="d1e5250">As shown in Fig. 9, the spatial distributions of the full impact of the long-range transport
during the haze episodes demonstrate a very similar pattern
among the participating models. The Full_Impact<inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EUR</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is most
significant over the northeastern corner of China, and gradually decreases
towards the southeastern direction. The intensity of Full_Impact<inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EUR</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> estimated by models, however, shows large differences, as the maximum estimated
by SPRINTARS is 10.5 % and the minimum estimated by EMEP is 0.4 %. The
numbers presented in Table 3 have demonstrated the general full impacts
during all haze episodes, but we are still unaware of how those individual
haze episodes are affected by long-range transport. So, we also summarize
the histograms of daily full impacts during the haze episodes. The frequency
of the histogram is calculated as follows:

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E11" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M307" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{8.8}{8.8}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Frequency</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Full</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Impact</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">#</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mtext>HazeEvent</mml:mtext><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MaxFI</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">#</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HazeEvent</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          and it satisfies

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E12" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M308" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MaxFI</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Frequency</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Full</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Impact</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          We define MaxFI <inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to represent the upper boundary
as Full_Impact <inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %. This value (i.e., 15 %) contribution is
selected in order to compare the full impact from long-range transport
against the PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> response under 20 % local emission control in the
EAS region. As shown in Table 2, the surface concentration of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> OA is reduced by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % under the EASALL scenario. So, if
Full_Impact<inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EUR</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, it indicates that the long-range
transport from EUR may have an equivalent or even more significant
contribution to the surface PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> than that produced from 20 % of the
local anthropogenic emission. We define <inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">#</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HazeEvent</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as
the number of haze events that satisfy <inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Full</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Impact</mml:mi><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and are calculated as follows:

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E13" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M319" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HazeEvent</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">365</mml:mn></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          <inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the haze event at day d, row r, and column c, defined
as follows:

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E14" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M321" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close="" open="{"><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{8.2}{8.2}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:mtable class="array" columnalign="left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mtext>if</mml:mtext><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RH</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">90</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mtext>and</mml:mtext><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">visibility</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>and</mml:mtext><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mtext>Full_Impact</mml:mtext><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mtext>otherwise</mml:mtext></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e5760">Reduction of visibility <bold>(a, c)</bold> and enhancement of number of
haze days <bold>(b, d)</bold> under the EURALL <bold>(a, b)</bold> and
RBUALL <bold>(c, d)</bold> scenarios.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=384.112205pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/15581/2018/acp-18-15581-2018-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e5781">So with Frequency<inline-formula><mml:math id="M322" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Full</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Impact</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, we can estimate the
percentage of the haze episodes for which the long-range transport
contributes to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M323" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the surface PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. The values of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Frequency</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Full</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Impact</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are indicated in the
histogram plots as shown in Fig. 9. The SPRINTARS-estimated
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Frequency</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Full</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Impact</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is 5.5 %, suggesting
that during almost 5.5 % of the haze episodes in China, long-range
transport from Europe contributed to at least the equivalent amount of
surface PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration as that generated from 20 % of local
anthropogenic emission, while the other model estimations range from
0.01 % to 1.9 %. The influence from the RBU region shows a slightly higher
value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Frequency</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Full</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Impact</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as 2.2 %.
Although significant variations are found among the model estimations, all
participating models suggest nonnegligible values of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Frequency</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Full</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Impact</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, indicating the important
contributions of long-range transport to haze episodes in China.</p>
      <?pagebreak page15596?><p id="d1e5927">The high surface PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is believed to be the most direct cause of
haze conditions. However, visibility cannot be represented by PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
mass concentration only, since it is also determined by the optical
properties, number concentrations, and size distributions of the aerosols.
Thus the analysis of the PM concentration response only partially depicts the
impact of long-range transport during haze episodes. Calculating model-predicted visibility requires the detailed aerosol information mentioned
above which is not available from any of the participating models. So we use
the Koschmieder equation (Han et al., 2013) to estimate the model-simulated
visibility from aerosol extinction coefficient (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M332" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) as follows:

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E15" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M333" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">visibility</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.912</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          Modeled visibility is calculated for SPRINTARS only since the other
participating models have no surface layer extinction coefficient available.
The long-range transport impact on visibility change and number of haze days
change are shown in Fig. 10. It shall be noted that SPRINTARS-estimated
long-range transport impact of surface PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is the highest among the
participating models; thus the analysis of visibility change shown in Fig. 10
may represent the upper boundary of model estimations. The spatial
distribution of visibility changes agree well with that of surface PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M335" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
responses. Visibility is reduced by up to 10 km along the northeastern boundary
of China, which is likely due to the fact that these areas receive the most
significant amount of the long-range transport aerosols from the EUR and RBU
regions. The number of haze days changes, however, are mostly prominent in the
NCP and along the eastern coast of China. The long-range transport results in
1–3 days (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M336" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) of extra haze over these areas throughout the year. The
total number of haze events (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MaxFI</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">#</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HazeEvent</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) estimated by the SPRINTARS model is 18 566,
18 538, and 18 546 under the BASE, EURALL, and RBUALL scenarios, suggesting
that transport from the EUR and RBU regions contributes to an additional
0.15 % and 0.11 % of haze events.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Summary and conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e6044">To estimate the long-range transport contributions to the surface aerosol
concentrations in eastern Asia, this study uses six global models participating in
the HTAP2 experiment. Simulations for the year 2010 from the baseline scenario
and 20 % anthropogenic emission perturbation scenarios are explored to
estimate the long-range transport from the Europe and
Russia–Belarus–Ukraine source regions. We find that on an annual
average scale, long-range transport from Europe contributes
0.04–0.06 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M338" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (0.2–0.8 %) to the surface PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentration in eastern Asia as indicated by the 20 % emission perturbation
experiment, with the majority of the transported aerosols as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and OA at 43 % and 19 %. Long-range transport from
Russia–Belarus–Ukraine shows slightly higher impact with contributions of
0.07–0.10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M341" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (0.3–0.9 %) to the surface PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in
eastern Asia, within which the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M344" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> responses
share bigger slices as 20 % and 21 %, larger than that of OA
as 14 %. As compared to the impact from Europe to eastern Asia, more secondary
inorganic aerosols are transported from the Russia–Belarus–Ukraine region
despite the fact that the 2010 anthropogenic emission from RBU is 40–50 %
lower than that from EUR for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M346" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Our analysis suggests that the lower temperature in RBU may
result in extended lifetime of the gas-phase precursors, which are<?pagebreak page15597?> gradually
converted to secondary inorganic aerosols during the transport pathway to
eastern Asia, yet further modeling experiment is necessary to explicitly explore
the temperature impact on long-range transport.</p>
      <p id="d1e6179">By investigating the PM responses in different atmosphere layers, we find
that long-range transport exist both within and above the PBL, although the
upper-level transport takes a larger portion as 66 % of the total PM column
density response in eastern Asia. Spatial distributions of the PM responses
suggest that the long-range transport from Europe and
Russia–Belarus–Ukraine are both predominantly blocked at western side of
China due to the elevated topography of Pamirs, Tianshan, and Altay
Mountains, where the rest of the exported pollutants are carried by the
Westerlies along 45<inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and higher latitude towards China, North
Korea, South Korea, Japan, and the western Pacific.</p>
      <p id="d1e6191">Comparison between the HTAP1 assessment and the estimation from this study
reveals the 10 years of decreasing change in long-range transport from Europe to
eastern Asia. When extrapolating the impact of 20 % anthropogenic emission
perturbation by a factor of 5 to estimate the full impact, contributions to
surface concentrations are decreased from 5.0 %, 1.0 %, and 0.4 % in
2000 to 0.5 %, 0.2 %, and 0.2 % in 2010 for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M349" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, BC, and
OA. This comparison may contain uncertainty because of the
different model ensemble compositions between HTAP1 and this study, but the
change in the long-range transport impacts from 2000 to 2010 found in this
study was consistent with the implications from the emissions changes. The
simultaneous emission reduction in Europe and emission enhancement in eastern Asia shall be responsible for the decreasing change. The surface
concentrations of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, BC, and OA in eastern Asia are also
increased by 14 %, 50 %, and 140 % from 2000 to 2010, consistent
with many of the local measurements reported in recent years (Chen et al.,
2016; Feng et al., 2014; Lu et al., 2010; Zhu et al., 2012). It is important
to emphasize that, based on the model ensemble mean estimations, despite the
fact that baseline of 2010 anthropogenic emission is substantially higher
(20 %–40 %) than that in 2000, the same percentage reduction in the local
anthropogenic emission will lead to a smaller benefit in terms of reducing the
ambient PM concentrations in the 2010 scenario, indicating the increasing
difficulty for air quality management in eastern Asia.</p>
      <p id="d1e6226">The long-range transport impact during haze episodes in China is estimated
by using the NCDC surface observations to identify the haze events, on top of
which the HTAP2 experiments are analyzed to quantify the changes in surface
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M351" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, visibility, and number of haze days. Despite the significant
discrepancy between the models, all participants demonstrate that the full
impact during haze episodes is more significant than that on an annual average
scale. Estimations with the model ensemble mean suggest that the full impacts
from EUR and RBU are 0.99 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (3.1 %) and 1.32 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (4.1 %) during haze episodes, significantly higher
than the annual averages. The model ensemble also suggests that during
5.5–5.7 % of the haze episodes, long-range transport can contribute to
surface PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> as much as that generated from 20 % of local
anthropogenic emission. Based on analysis with the SPRINTARS model output,
visibility is reduced by up to 10 km, with the largest impact found along
northeastern China, and the impact gradually decreases towards the southeast and
causes visibility reduction of less than 500 m. The enhancement of the number of
haze days, however, is found mainly located at the North China Plain and
southeastern coastal area of China, where most of the places receive an extra 1–3
haze days due to the influence of long-range transport. We find that,
throughout the year of 2010, the number of haze events in our study domain
is increased by 0.15 % and 0.11 % due to the long-range transport from
the Europe and Russia–Belarus–Ukraine regions.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability">

      <p id="d1e6290">The HTAP Phase II modeling data can be obtained through the
AeroCom servers and web interfaces, accessible at <uri>http://aerocom.met.no</uri>
(last access: 10 August 2017).</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e6296">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-15581-2018-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-15581-2018-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution">

      <p id="d1e6305">XD and JSF designed the study,
analyzed the data and wrote the manuscript. QZ, JS, JT and KH helped to
process modeling and observation data. TK organized the collaboration and
communication between groups from different institutions and commented on the
research idea. TS and KS provided CHASER data.
LE and ST provided CAM-chem data. JEJ and MS provided the EMEP data. HB and MC provided the GEOS5
data. YD and DH provided the GEOSCHEMADJOINT data. TT
provided the SPRINTARS data. AMKB provided all modeling data
management and access to observation data.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests">

      <p id="d1e6311">The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="sistatement">

      <p id="d1e6317">This article is part of the special issue “Global and regional
assessment of intercontinental transport of air pollution: results from HTAP,
AQMEII and MICS”. It is not associated with a conference.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e6323">This work was partly supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China
(41429501). We would like to thank the UN-ECE CLRTAP (EMEP), AMAP, and NILU
for supporting the EBAS database with air pollutant measurements. We thank
Keiichi Sato and Ayako Aoyagi from Asia Center for Air Pollution Research for
providing the EANET data. We would also like to acknowledge NOAA NCDC for
providing the public accessible meteorology observations. We thank the Oak
Ridge Leadership Computing Facility (OLCF) at Oak Ridge National Lab<?pagebreak page15598?> (ORNL)
for providing computational sources. Funding for open access to this research
was provided by University of Tennessee's Open Publishing Support
Fund.<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>Edited by: Stefano Galmarini
<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Reviewed by: three anonymous referees</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Akimoto, H.: Global air quality and pollution, Science, 302, 1716–1719,
2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>Cao, Q. L., Liang, Y., and Niu, X. T.: China's Air Quality and Respiratory
Disease Mortality Based on the Spatial Panel Model, Int. J. Environ. Res.
Pu., 14, 1081, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/Ijerph14091081" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/Ijerph14091081</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>Carmichael, G. R., Sakurai, T., Streets, D., Hozumi, Y., Ueda, H., Park, S.
U., Fung, C., Han, Z., Kajino, M., Engardt, M., Bennet, C., Hayami, H.,
Sartelet, K., Holloway, T., Wang, Z., Kannari, A., Fu, J., Matsuda, K.,
Thongbooncho, N., and Amann, M.: MICS-Asia II: The model intercomparison
study for Asia Phase II methodology and overview of findings, Atmos.
Environ., 42, 3468–3490, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>Chen, Y., Schleicher, N., Fricker, M., Cen, K., Liu, X. L., Kaminski, U.,
Yu, Y., Wu, X. F., and Norra, S.: Long-term variation of black carbon and
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M355" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in Beijing, China with respect to meteorological conditions and
governmental measures, Environ. Pollut., 212, 269–278,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.01.008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.envpol.2016.01.008</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>Dong, X., Fu, J. S., Huang, K., Tong, D., and Zhuang, G.: Model development
of dust emission and heterogeneous chemistry within the Community Multiscale
Air Quality modeling system and its application over East Asia, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 16, 8157–8180, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-8157-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-8157-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>Dong, X. Y. and Fu, J. S.: Understanding interannual variations of biomass
burning from Peninsular Southeast Asia, part I: Model evaluation and analysis
of systematic bias, Atmos. Environ., 116, 293–307, 2015a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>Dong, X. Y. and Fu, J. S.: Understanding interannual variations of biomass
burning from Peninsular Southeast Asia, part II: Variability and different
influences in lower and higher atmosphere levels, Atmos. Environ., 115,
9–18, 2015b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>Dubovik, O., Smirnov, A., Holben, B. N., King, M. D., Kaufman, Y. J., Eck,
T. F., and Slutsker, I.: Accuracy assessments of aerosol optical properties
retrieved from Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET) Sun and sky radiance
measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 9791–9806, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
EANET: EANET Data Report 2006, Acid Deposition Monitoring
Network in East Aisa (EANET), 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>Eckhardt, S., Stohl, A., Beirle, S., Spichtinger, N., James, P., Forster, C.,
Junker, C., Wagner, T., Platt, U., and Jennings, S. G.: The North Atlantic
Oscillation controls air pollution transport to the Arctic, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 3, 1769–1778, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-1769-2003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-3-1769-2003</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>Feng, J. L., Zhong, M., Xu, B. H., Du, Y., Wu, M. H., Wang, H. L., and Chen,
C. H.: Concentrations, seasonal and diurnal variations of black carbon in
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M356" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in Shanghai, China, Atmos. Res., 147, 1–9,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2014.04.018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosres.2014.04.018</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>Fiore, A. M., Dentener, F. J., Wild, O., Cuvelier, C., Schultz, M. G., Hess,
P., Textor, C., Schulz, M., Doherty, R. M., Horowitz, L. W., MacKenzie, I.
A., Sanderson, M. G., Shindell, D. T., Stevenson, D. S., Szopa, S., Van
Dingenen, R., Zeng, G., Atherton, C., Bergmann, D., Bey, I., Carmichael, G.,
Collins, W. J., Duncan, B. N., Faluvegi, G., Folberth, G., Gauss, M., Gong,
S., Hauglustaine, D., Holloway, T., Isaksen, I. S. A., Jacob, D. J., Jonson,
J. E., Kaminski, J. W., Keating, T. J., Lupu, A., Marmer, E., Montanaro, V.,
Park, R. J., Pitari, G., Pringle, K. J., Pyle, J. A., Schroeder, S., Vivanco,
M. G., Wind, P., Wojcik, G., Wu, S., and Zuber, A.: Multimodel estimates of
intercontinental source-receptor relationships for ozone pollution, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 114, D04301, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008jd010816" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008jd010816</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>Fu, G. Q., Xu, W. Y., Yang, R. F., Li, J. B., and Zhao, C. S.: The
distribution and trends of fog and haze in the North China Plain over the
past 30 years, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 11949–11958,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-11949-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-11949-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>Fu, J. S., Dong, X. Y., Gao, Y., Wong, D. C., and Lam, Y. F.: Sensitivity
and linearity analysis of ozone in East Asia: The effects of domestic
emission and intercontinental transport, Japca J. Air Waste Ma., 62,
1102–1114, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2012.699014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/10962247.2012.699014</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>Gao, J. H., Woodward, A., Vardoulakis, S., Kovats, S., Wilkinson, P., Li, L.
P., Xu, L., Li, J., Yang, J., Li, J., Cao, L., Liu, X. B., Wu, H. X., and
Liu, Q. Y.: Haze, public health and mitigation measures in China: A review of
the current evidence for further policy response, Sci. Total Environ., 578,
148–157, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.231" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.231</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>Guo, S., Hu, M., Zamora, M. L., Peng, J. F., Shang, D. J., Zheng, J., Du, Z.
F., Wu, Z., Shao, M., Zeng, L. M., Molina, M. J., and Zhang, R. Y.:
Elucidating severe urban haze formation in China, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA,
111, 17373–17378, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1419604111" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.1419604111</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Han, X., Zhang, M. G., Tao, J. H., Wang, L. L., Gao, J., Wang, S. L., and
Chai, F. H.: Modeling aerosol impacts on atmospheric visibility in Beijing
with RAMS-CMAQ, Atmos. Environ., 72, 177–191,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.02.030" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.02.030</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>Henze, D. K., Hakami, A., and Seinfeld, J. H.: Development of the adjoint of
GEOS-Chem, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 2413–2433,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-2413-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-7-2413-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>Ho, K. F., Ho, S. S. H., Huang, R. J., Chuang, H. C., Cao, J. J., Han, Y.
M., Lui, K. H., Ning, Z., Chuang, K. J., Cheng, T. J., Lee, S. C., Hu, D.,
Wang, B., and Zhang, R. J.: Chemical composition and bioreactivity of
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M357" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> during 2013 haze events in China, Atmos Environ, 126, 162–170,
2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>Hua, Y., Cheng, Z., Wang, S. X., Jiang, J. K., Chen, D. R., Cai, S. Y., Fu,
X., Fu, Q. Y., Chen, C. H., Xu, B. Y., and Yu, J. Q.: Characteristics and
source apportionment of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> during a fall heavy haze episode in the
Yangtze River Delta of China, Atmos. Environ., 123, 380–391,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.03.046" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.03.046</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>Huang, K., Zhuang, G., Lin, Y., Fu, J. S., Wang, Q., Liu, T., Zhang, R.,
Jiang, Y., Deng, C., Fu, Q., Hsu, N. C., and Cao, B.: Typical types and
formation mechanisms of haze in an Eastern Asia megacity, Shanghai, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 12, 105–124, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-105-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-105-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>Huneeus, N., Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., Griesfeller, J., Prospero, J., Kinne,
S., Bauer, S., Boucher, O., Chin, M., Dentener, F., Diehl, T., Easter, R.,
Fillmore, D., Ghan, S., Ginoux, P., Grini, A., Horowitz, L., Koch, D., Krol,
M. C., Landing, W., Liu,<?pagebreak page15599?> X., Mahowald, N., Miller, R., Morcrette, J.-J.,
Myhre, G., Penner, J., Perlwitz, J., Stier, P., Takemura, T., and Zender, C.
S.: Global dust model intercomparison in AeroCom phase I, Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
11, 7781–7816, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-7781-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-7781-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>Im, U., Christensen, J. H., Geels, C., Hansen, K. M., Brandt, J., Solazzo,
E., Alyuz, U., Balzarini, A., Baro, R., Bellasio, R., Bianconi, R., Bieser,
J., Colette, A., Curci, G., Farrow, A., Flemming, J., Fraser, A.,
Jimenez-Guerrero, P., Kitwiroon, N., Liu, P., Nopmongcol, U.,
Palacios-Peña, L., Pirovano, G., Pozzoli, L., Prank, M., Rose, R., Sokhi,
R., Tuccella, P., Unal, A., Vivanco, M. G., Yarwood, G., Hogrefe, C., and
Galmarini, S.: Influence of anthropogenic emissions and boundary conditions
on multi-model simulations of major air pollutants over Europe and North
America in the framework of AQMEII3, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 8929–8952,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-8929-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-8929-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>Janssens-Maenhout, G., Crippa, M., Guizzardi, D., Dentener, F., Muntean, M.,
Pouliot, G., Keating, T., Zhang, Q., Kurokawa, J., Wankmüller, R., Denier
van der Gon, H., Kuenen, J. J. P., Klimont, Z., Frost, G., Darras, S., Koffi,
B., and Li, M.: HTAP_v2.2: a mosaic of regional and global emission grid
maps for 2008 and 2010 to study hemispheric transport of air pollution,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 11411–11432,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11411-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-11411-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Jia, P. and Wang, L.: Peering into China's thick haze of air pollution, Chem.
Eng. News, 95, 19–22, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>Kong, S., Han, B., Bai, Z., Chen, L., Shi, J., Xu, Z.: Receptor modelling of
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M360" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and TSP in different seasons and long-range transport
analysis at a coastal site of Tianjin China, Sci. Total Environ., 408,
4681–4694, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.06.005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.06.005</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>Leibensperger, E. M., Mickley, L. J., Jacob, D. J., and Barrett, S. R. H.:
Intercontinental influence of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M361" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and CO emissions on
particulate matter air quality, Atmos. Environ., 45, 3318–3324,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.02.023" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.02.023</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>Li, M., Zhang, Q., Kurokawa, J.-I., Woo, J.-H., He, K., Lu, Z., Ohara, T.,
Song, Y., Streets, D. G., Carmichael, G. R., Cheng, Y., Hong, C., Huo, H.,
Jiang, X., Kang, S., Liu, F., Su, H., and Zheng, B.: MIX: a mosaic Asian
anthropogenic emission inventory under the international collaboration
framework of the MICS-Asia and HTAP, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 935–963,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-935-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-935-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>Li, W. J., Cao, Y., Li, R. K., Ma, X. M., Chen, J. Y., Wu, Z. L., and Xu,
Q.: The spatial variation in the effects of air pollution on cardiovascular
mortality in Beijing, China, J. Expo. Sci. Env. Epid., 28, 297–304,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/jes.2016.21" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/jes.2016.21</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>Li, Y. and Zhu, L.: Cost of energy saving and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions reduction in
China's iron and steel sector, Appl. Energ., 130, 603–616, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>Liu, J., Mauzerall, D. L., and Horowitz, L. W.: Source-receptor relationships
between East Asian sulfur dioxide emissions and Northern Hemisphere sulfate
concentrations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 3721–3733,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-3721-2008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-8-3721-2008</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>Liu, L. W., Chen, C. X., Zhao, Y. F., and Zhao, E. D.: China's
carbon-emissions trading: Overview, challenges and future, Renew. Sust.
Energ. Rev., 49, 254–266, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.076" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.076</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>Lu, Z., Streets, D. G., Zhang, Q., Wang, S., Carmichael, G. R., Cheng, Y. F.,
Wei, C., Chin, M., Diehl, T., and Tan, Q.: Sulfur dioxide emissions in China
and sulfur trends in East Asia since 2000, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10,
6311–6331, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-6311-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-6311-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>Rao, S. T., Galmarini, S., and Puckett, K.: Air Quality Model Evaluation
International Initiative (AQMEII) Advancing the State of the Science in
Regional Photochemical Modeling and Its Applications, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc.,
92, 23–30, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Rienecker, M. M., Suarez, M. J., Todling, R., Bacmeister, J., Takacs, L.,
Liu, H.-C., Gu, W., Sienkiewicz, M., Koster, R. D., Gelaro, R., Stajner, I.,
and Nielsen, J. E.: The GEOS-5 Data Assimilation System – Documentation of
Versions 5.0.1, 5.1.0, and 5.2.0, NASA, Publication series: NASA/TM;
2008-104606, Technical report series on global modeling and data
assimilation, Vol. 27, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>Shen, R. R., Schafer, K., Shao, L. Y., Schnelle-Kreis, J., Wang, Y. S., Li,
F. X., Liu, Z. R., Emeis, S., and Schmid, H. P.: Chemical characteristics of
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> during haze episodes in spring 2013 in Beijing, Urban Clim., 22,
51–63, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2016.01.003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.uclim.2016.01.003</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>Simpson, D., Benedictow, A., Berge, H., Bergström, R., Emberson, L. D.,
Fagerli, H., Flechard, C. R., Hayman, G. D., Gauss, M., Jonson, J. E.,
Jenkin, M. E., Nyíri, A., Richter, C., Semeena, V. S., Tsyro, S., Tuovinen,
J.-P., Valdebenito, Á., and Wind, P.: The EMEP MSC-W chemical transport
model – technical description, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 7825–7865,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-7825-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-7825-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>Stjern, C. W., Samset, B. H., Myhre, G., Bian, H., Chin, M., Davila, Y.,
Dentener, F., Emmons, L., Flemming, J., Haslerud, A. S., Henze, D., Jonson,
J. E., Kucsera, T., Lund, M. T., Schulz, M., Sudo, K., Takemura, T., and
Tilmes, S.: Global and regional radiative forcing from 20 % reductions in
BC, OC and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> – an HTAP2 multi-model study, Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
16, 13579–13599, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-13579-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-13579-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>Stohl, A., Eckhardt, S., Forster, C., James, P., and Spichtinger, N.: On the
pathways and timescales of intercontinental air pollution transport, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 107, ACH 6-1–ACH 6-17, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001396" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001JD001396</ext-link>,
2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>Streets, D. G., van Aardenne, J., Battye, B., Garivait, S., Grano, D.,
Guenther, A., Klimont, Z., Lamarque, J. F., Lu, Z., Maenhout, G., Ohara, T.,
Parrish, D. J., Smith, S. J., and Vallack, H.: Emission Inventories and
Projections, in: Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution (2010) Part A: Ozone
and Particulate Matter, chap. 3, Air Pollution Studies No. 17, edited by:
Dentener, F., Keating, T., and Akimoto, H., UNECE Information Service,
Geneva, Switzerland, 77–133, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>Sudo, K., Takahashi, M., Kurokawa, J., and Akimoto, H.: CHASER: A global
chemical model of the troposphere – 1. Model description, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 107, ACH 7-1–ACH 7-20, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001113" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001JD001113</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>Takemura, T., Nozawa, T., Emori, S., Nakajima, T. Y., and Nakajima, T.:
Simulation of climate response to aerosol direct and indirect effects with
aerosol transport-radiation model, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 110, D02202,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004jd005029" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004jd005029</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page15600?><ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>Tie, X. X., Wu, D., and Brasseur, G.: Lung cancer mortality and exposure to
atmospheric aerosol particles in Guangzhou, China, Atmos. Environ., 43,
2375–2377, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.01.036" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.01.036</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>Tilmes, S., Lamarque, J.-F., Emmons, L. K., Kinnison, D. E., Marsh, D.,
Garcia, R. R., Smith, A. K., Neely, R. R., Conley, A., Vitt, F., Val Martin,
M., Tanimoto, H., Simpson, I., Blake, D. R., and Blake, N.: Representation of
the Community Earth System Model (CESM1) CAM4-chem within the
Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative (CCMI), Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1853–1890,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1853-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-9-1853-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>Tørseth, K., Aas, W., Breivik, K., Fjæraa, A. M., Fiebig, M., Hjellbrekke,
A. G., Lund Myhre, C., Solberg, S., and Yttri, K. E.: Introduction to the
European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme (EMEP) and observed atmospheric
composition change during 1972–2009, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 5447–5481,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-5447-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-5447-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>Wang, J. D., Wang, S. X., Jiang, J. K., Ding, A. J., Zheng, M., Zhao, B.,
Wong, D. C., Zhou, W., Zheng, G. J., Wang, L., Pleim, J. E., and Hao, J. M.:
Impact of aerosol-meteorology interactions on fine particle pollution during
China's severe haze episode in January 2013, Environ. Res. Lett., 9, 094002,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/9/094002" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/9/9/094002</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>Wang, L. T., Wei, Z., Yang, J., Zhang, Y., Zhang, F. F., Su, J., Meng, C. C.,
and Zhang, Q.: The 2013 severe haze over southern Hebei, China: model
evaluation, source apportionment, and policy implications, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 14, 3151–3173, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-3151-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-3151-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>Wang, Q. Z., Zhuang, G. S., Huang, K., Liu, T. N., Deng, C. R., Xu, J., Lin,
Y. F., Guo, Z. G., Chen, Y., Fu, Q. Y., Fu, J. S. S., and Chen, J. K.:
Probing the severe haze pollution in three typical regions of China:
Characteristics, sources and regional impacts, Atmos. Environ., 120, 76–88,
2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>Wang, Y. J., Li, L., Chen, C. H., Huang, C., Huang, H. Y., Feng, J. L.,
Wang, S. X., Wang, H. L., Zhang, G., Zhou, M., Cheng, P., Wu, M. H., Sheng,
G. Y., Fu, J. M., Hu, Y., Russell, A. G., and Wumaer, A.: Source
apportionment of fine particulate matter during autumn haze episodes in
Shanghai, China, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 1903–1914,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD019630" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013JD019630</ext-link>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>West, J. J., Naik, V., Horowitz, L. W., and Fiore, A. M.: Effect of regional
precursor emission controls on long-range ozone transport – Part 1:
Short-term changes in ozone air quality, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 6077–6093,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-6077-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-9-6077-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>WorldBank, T.: Cost of Pollution in China, Rural Development, Natural
Resources and Environmetn Management Unit, Washington, DC, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>Xu, P., Chen, Y. F., and Ye, X. J.: Haze, air pollution, and health in
China, Lancet, 382, 2067–2067, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62693-8" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62693-8</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>Yin, L. Q., Niu, Z. C., Chen, X. Q., Chen, J. S., Xu, L. L., and Zhang, F.
W.: Chemical compositions of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M365" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> aerosol during haze periods in the
mountainous city of Yong'an, China, J. Environ. Sci.-China, 24, 1225–1233,
2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, L., Jacob, D. J., Kopacz, M., Henze, D. K., Singh, K., and Jaffe, D.
A.: Intercontinental source attribution of ozone pollution at western US
sites using an adjoint method, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L11810,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009gl037950" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009gl037950</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, X. Y., Wang, Y. Q., Niu, T., Zhang, X. C., Gong, S. L., Zhang, Y. M.,
and Sun, J. Y.: Atmospheric aerosol compositions in China: spatial/temporal
variability, chemical signature, regional haze distribution and comparisons
with global aerosols, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 779–799,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-779-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-779-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>Zhu, J. L., Liao, H., and Li, J. P.: Increases in aerosol concentrations
over eastern China due to the decadal-scale weakening of the East Asian
summer monsoon, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L09809, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012gl051428" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012gl051428</ext-link>,
2012.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Long-range transport impacts on surface aerosol concentrations and the contributions to haze events in China: an HTAP2 multi-model study</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>Haze has been severely affecting the densely populated areas in China
recently. While many of the efforts have been devoted to investigating the
impact of local anthropogenic emission, limited attention has been paid to
the contribution from long-range transport. In this study, we apply
simulations from six participating models supplied through the Task Force on
Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution phase 2 (HTAP2) exercise to
investigate the long-range transport impact of Europe (EUR) and
Russia–Belarus–Ukraine (RBU) on the surface air quality in eastern Asia
(EAS), with special focus on their contributions during the haze episodes in
China. The impact of 20&thinsp;% anthropogenic emission perturbation from the
source region is extrapolated by a factor of 5 to estimate the full impact.
We find that the full impacts from EUR and RBU are 0.99&thinsp;µg m<sup>−3</sup>
(3.1&thinsp;%) and 1.32&thinsp;µg m<sup>−3</sup> (4.1&thinsp;%) during haze episodes,
while the annual averaged full impacts are only 0.35&thinsp;µg m<sup>−3</sup>
(1.7&thinsp;%) and 0.53&thinsp;µg m<sup>−3</sup> (2.6&thinsp;%). By estimating the aerosol
response within and above the planetary boundary layer (PBL), we find that
long-range transport from EUR within the PBL contributes to 22–38&thinsp;% of the
total column density of aerosol response in EAS. Comparison with the HTAP
phase 1 (HTAP1) assessment reveals that from 2000 to 2010, the long-range
transport from Europe to eastern Asia has decreased significantly by a factor
of 2–10 for surface aerosol mass concentration due to the simultaneous
emission reduction in source regions and emission increase in the receptor
region. We also find the long-range transport from the Europe and RBU regions
increases the number of haze events in China by 0.15&thinsp;% and 0.11&thinsp;%, and
the North China Plain and southeastern China has 1–3 extra haze days ( &lt; 3&thinsp;%). This study is the first investigation into the contribution of
long-range transport to haze in China with multi-model experiments.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Akimoto, H.: Global air quality and pollution, Science, 302, 1716–1719,
2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>Cao, Q. L., Liang, Y., and Niu, X. T.: China's Air Quality and Respiratory
Disease Mortality Based on the Spatial Panel Model, Int. J. Environ. Res.
Pu., 14, 1081, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/Ijerph14091081" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/Ijerph14091081</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>Carmichael, G. R., Sakurai, T., Streets, D., Hozumi, Y., Ueda, H., Park, S.
U., Fung, C., Han, Z., Kajino, M., Engardt, M., Bennet, C., Hayami, H.,
Sartelet, K., Holloway, T., Wang, Z., Kannari, A., Fu, J., Matsuda, K.,
Thongbooncho, N., and Amann, M.: MICS-Asia II: The model intercomparison
study for Asia Phase II methodology and overview of findings, Atmos.
Environ., 42, 3468–3490, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>Chen, Y., Schleicher, N., Fricker, M., Cen, K., Liu, X. L., Kaminski, U.,
Yu, Y., Wu, X. F., and Norra, S.: Long-term variation of black carbon and
PM<sub>2.5</sub> in Beijing, China with respect to meteorological conditions and
governmental measures, Environ. Pollut., 212, 269–278,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.01.008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.01.008</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Dong, X., Fu, J. S., Huang, K., Tong, D., and Zhuang, G.: Model development
of dust emission and heterogeneous chemistry within the Community Multiscale
Air Quality modeling system and its application over East Asia, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 16, 8157–8180, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-8157-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-8157-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>Dong, X. Y. and Fu, J. S.: Understanding interannual variations of biomass
burning from Peninsular Southeast Asia, part I: Model evaluation and analysis
of systematic bias, Atmos. Environ., 116, 293–307, 2015a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>Dong, X. Y. and Fu, J. S.: Understanding interannual variations of biomass
burning from Peninsular Southeast Asia, part II: Variability and different
influences in lower and higher atmosphere levels, Atmos. Environ., 115,
9–18, 2015b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>Dubovik, O., Smirnov, A., Holben, B. N., King, M. D., Kaufman, Y. J., Eck,
T. F., and Slutsker, I.: Accuracy assessments of aerosol optical properties
retrieved from Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET) Sun and sky radiance
measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 9791–9806, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
EANET: EANET Data Report 2006, Acid Deposition Monitoring
Network in East Aisa (EANET), 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Eckhardt, S., Stohl, A., Beirle, S., Spichtinger, N., James, P., Forster, C.,
Junker, C., Wagner, T., Platt, U., and Jennings, S. G.: The North Atlantic
Oscillation controls air pollution transport to the Arctic, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 3, 1769–1778, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-1769-2003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-1769-2003</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>Feng, J. L., Zhong, M., Xu, B. H., Du, Y., Wu, M. H., Wang, H. L., and Chen,
C. H.: Concentrations, seasonal and diurnal variations of black carbon in
PM<sub>2.5</sub> in Shanghai, China, Atmos. Res., 147, 1–9,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2014.04.018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2014.04.018</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>Fiore, A. M., Dentener, F. J., Wild, O., Cuvelier, C., Schultz, M. G., Hess,
P., Textor, C., Schulz, M., Doherty, R. M., Horowitz, L. W., MacKenzie, I.
A., Sanderson, M. G., Shindell, D. T., Stevenson, D. S., Szopa, S., Van
Dingenen, R., Zeng, G., Atherton, C., Bergmann, D., Bey, I., Carmichael, G.,
Collins, W. J., Duncan, B. N., Faluvegi, G., Folberth, G., Gauss, M., Gong,
S., Hauglustaine, D., Holloway, T., Isaksen, I. S. A., Jacob, D. J., Jonson,
J. E., Kaminski, J. W., Keating, T. J., Lupu, A., Marmer, E., Montanaro, V.,
Park, R. J., Pitari, G., Pringle, K. J., Pyle, J. A., Schroeder, S., Vivanco,
M. G., Wind, P., Wojcik, G., Wu, S., and Zuber, A.: Multimodel estimates of
intercontinental source-receptor relationships for ozone pollution, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 114, D04301, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008jd010816" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008jd010816</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Fu, G. Q., Xu, W. Y., Yang, R. F., Li, J. B., and Zhao, C. S.: The
distribution and trends of fog and haze in the North China Plain over the
past 30 years, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 11949–11958,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-11949-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-11949-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>Fu, J. S., Dong, X. Y., Gao, Y., Wong, D. C., and Lam, Y. F.: Sensitivity
and linearity analysis of ozone in East Asia: The effects of domestic
emission and intercontinental transport, Japca J. Air Waste Ma., 62,
1102–1114, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2012.699014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2012.699014</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>Gao, J. H., Woodward, A., Vardoulakis, S., Kovats, S., Wilkinson, P., Li, L.
P., Xu, L., Li, J., Yang, J., Li, J., Cao, L., Liu, X. B., Wu, H. X., and
Liu, Q. Y.: Haze, public health and mitigation measures in China: A review of
the current evidence for further policy response, Sci. Total Environ., 578,
148–157, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.231" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.231</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>Guo, S., Hu, M., Zamora, M. L., Peng, J. F., Shang, D. J., Zheng, J., Du, Z.
F., Wu, Z., Shao, M., Zeng, L. M., Molina, M. J., and Zhang, R. Y.:
Elucidating severe urban haze formation in China, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA,
111, 17373–17378, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1419604111" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1419604111</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Han, X., Zhang, M. G., Tao, J. H., Wang, L. L., Gao, J., Wang, S. L., and
Chai, F. H.: Modeling aerosol impacts on atmospheric visibility in Beijing
with RAMS-CMAQ, Atmos. Environ., 72, 177–191,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.02.030" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.02.030</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Henze, D. K., Hakami, A., and Seinfeld, J. H.: Development of the adjoint of
GEOS-Chem, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 2413–2433,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-2413-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-2413-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>Ho, K. F., Ho, S. S. H., Huang, R. J., Chuang, H. C., Cao, J. J., Han, Y.
M., Lui, K. H., Ning, Z., Chuang, K. J., Cheng, T. J., Lee, S. C., Hu, D.,
Wang, B., and Zhang, R. J.: Chemical composition and bioreactivity of
PM<sub>2.5</sub> during 2013 haze events in China, Atmos Environ, 126, 162–170,
2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>Hua, Y., Cheng, Z., Wang, S. X., Jiang, J. K., Chen, D. R., Cai, S. Y., Fu,
X., Fu, Q. Y., Chen, C. H., Xu, B. Y., and Yu, J. Q.: Characteristics and
source apportionment of PM<sub>2.5</sub> during a fall heavy haze episode in the
Yangtze River Delta of China, Atmos. Environ., 123, 380–391,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.03.046" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.03.046</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Huang, K., Zhuang, G., Lin, Y., Fu, J. S., Wang, Q., Liu, T., Zhang, R.,
Jiang, Y., Deng, C., Fu, Q., Hsu, N. C., and Cao, B.: Typical types and
formation mechanisms of haze in an Eastern Asia megacity, Shanghai, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 12, 105–124, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-105-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-105-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Huneeus, N., Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., Griesfeller, J., Prospero, J., Kinne,
S., Bauer, S., Boucher, O., Chin, M., Dentener, F., Diehl, T., Easter, R.,
Fillmore, D., Ghan, S., Ginoux, P., Grini, A., Horowitz, L., Koch, D., Krol,
M. C., Landing, W., Liu, X., Mahowald, N., Miller, R., Morcrette, J.-J.,
Myhre, G., Penner, J., Perlwitz, J., Stier, P., Takemura, T., and Zender, C.
S.: Global dust model intercomparison in AeroCom phase I, Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
11, 7781–7816, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-7781-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-7781-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Im, U., Christensen, J. H., Geels, C., Hansen, K. M., Brandt, J., Solazzo,
E., Alyuz, U., Balzarini, A., Baro, R., Bellasio, R., Bianconi, R., Bieser,
J., Colette, A., Curci, G., Farrow, A., Flemming, J., Fraser, A.,
Jimenez-Guerrero, P., Kitwiroon, N., Liu, P., Nopmongcol, U.,
Palacios-Peña, L., Pirovano, G., Pozzoli, L., Prank, M., Rose, R., Sokhi,
R., Tuccella, P., Unal, A., Vivanco, M. G., Yarwood, G., Hogrefe, C., and
Galmarini, S.: Influence of anthropogenic emissions and boundary conditions
on multi-model simulations of major air pollutants over Europe and North
America in the framework of AQMEII3, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 8929–8952,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-8929-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-8929-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Janssens-Maenhout, G., Crippa, M., Guizzardi, D., Dentener, F., Muntean, M.,
Pouliot, G., Keating, T., Zhang, Q., Kurokawa, J., Wankmüller, R., Denier
van der Gon, H., Kuenen, J. J. P., Klimont, Z., Frost, G., Darras, S., Koffi,
B., and Li, M.: HTAP_v2.2: a mosaic of regional and global emission grid
maps for 2008 and 2010 to study hemispheric transport of air pollution,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 11411–11432,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11411-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11411-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Jia, P. and Wang, L.: Peering into China's thick haze of air pollution, Chem.
Eng. News, 95, 19–22, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Kong, S., Han, B., Bai, Z., Chen, L., Shi, J., Xu, Z.: Receptor modelling of
PM<sub>2.5</sub>, PM<sub>10</sub> and TSP in different seasons and long-range transport
analysis at a coastal site of Tianjin China, Sci. Total Environ., 408,
4681–4694, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.06.005" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.06.005</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>Leibensperger, E. M., Mickley, L. J., Jacob, D. J., and Barrett, S. R. H.:
Intercontinental influence of NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> and CO emissions on
particulate matter air quality, Atmos. Environ., 45, 3318–3324,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.02.023" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.02.023</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Li, M., Zhang, Q., Kurokawa, J.-I., Woo, J.-H., He, K., Lu, Z., Ohara, T.,
Song, Y., Streets, D. G., Carmichael, G. R., Cheng, Y., Hong, C., Huo, H.,
Jiang, X., Kang, S., Liu, F., Su, H., and Zheng, B.: MIX: a mosaic Asian
anthropogenic emission inventory under the international collaboration
framework of the MICS-Asia and HTAP, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 935–963,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-935-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-935-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>Li, W. J., Cao, Y., Li, R. K., Ma, X. M., Chen, J. Y., Wu, Z. L., and Xu,
Q.: The spatial variation in the effects of air pollution on cardiovascular
mortality in Beijing, China, J. Expo. Sci. Env. Epid., 28, 297–304,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/jes.2016.21" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/jes.2016.21</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>Li, Y. and Zhu, L.: Cost of energy saving and CO<sub>2</sub> emissions reduction in
China's iron and steel sector, Appl. Energ., 130, 603–616, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, J., Mauzerall, D. L., and Horowitz, L. W.: Source-receptor relationships
between East Asian sulfur dioxide emissions and Northern Hemisphere sulfate
concentrations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 3721–3733,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-3721-2008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-3721-2008</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>Liu, L. W., Chen, C. X., Zhao, Y. F., and Zhao, E. D.: China's
carbon-emissions trading: Overview, challenges and future, Renew. Sust.
Energ. Rev., 49, 254–266, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.076" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.076</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Lu, Z., Streets, D. G., Zhang, Q., Wang, S., Carmichael, G. R., Cheng, Y. F.,
Wei, C., Chin, M., Diehl, T., and Tan, Q.: Sulfur dioxide emissions in China
and sulfur trends in East Asia since 2000, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10,
6311–6331, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-6311-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-6311-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>Rao, S. T., Galmarini, S., and Puckett, K.: Air Quality Model Evaluation
International Initiative (AQMEII) Advancing the State of the Science in
Regional Photochemical Modeling and Its Applications, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc.,
92, 23–30, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Rienecker, M. M., Suarez, M. J., Todling, R., Bacmeister, J., Takacs, L.,
Liu, H.-C., Gu, W., Sienkiewicz, M., Koster, R. D., Gelaro, R., Stajner, I.,
and Nielsen, J. E.: The GEOS-5 Data Assimilation System – Documentation of
Versions 5.0.1, 5.1.0, and 5.2.0, NASA, Publication series: NASA/TM;
2008-104606, Technical report series on global modeling and data
assimilation, Vol. 27, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>Shen, R. R., Schafer, K., Shao, L. Y., Schnelle-Kreis, J., Wang, Y. S., Li,
F. X., Liu, Z. R., Emeis, S., and Schmid, H. P.: Chemical characteristics of
PM<sub>2.5</sub> during haze episodes in spring 2013 in Beijing, Urban Clim., 22,
51–63, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2016.01.003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2016.01.003</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Simpson, D., Benedictow, A., Berge, H., Bergström, R., Emberson, L. D.,
Fagerli, H., Flechard, C. R., Hayman, G. D., Gauss, M., Jonson, J. E.,
Jenkin, M. E., Nyíri, A., Richter, C., Semeena, V. S., Tsyro, S., Tuovinen,
J.-P., Valdebenito, Á., and Wind, P.: The EMEP MSC-W chemical transport
model – technical description, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 7825–7865,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-7825-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-7825-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Stjern, C. W., Samset, B. H., Myhre, G., Bian, H., Chin, M., Davila, Y.,
Dentener, F., Emmons, L., Flemming, J., Haslerud, A. S., Henze, D., Jonson,
J. E., Kucsera, T., Lund, M. T., Schulz, M., Sudo, K., Takemura, T., and
Tilmes, S.: Global and regional radiative forcing from 20&thinsp;% reductions in
BC, OC and SO<sub>4</sub> – an HTAP2 multi-model study, Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
16, 13579–13599, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-13579-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-13579-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>Stohl, A., Eckhardt, S., Forster, C., James, P., and Spichtinger, N.: On the
pathways and timescales of intercontinental air pollution transport, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 107, ACH 6-1–ACH 6-17, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001396" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001396</a>,
2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>Streets, D. G., van Aardenne, J., Battye, B., Garivait, S., Grano, D.,
Guenther, A., Klimont, Z., Lamarque, J. F., Lu, Z., Maenhout, G., Ohara, T.,
Parrish, D. J., Smith, S. J., and Vallack, H.: Emission Inventories and
Projections, in: Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution (2010) Part A: Ozone
and Particulate Matter, chap. 3, Air Pollution Studies No. 17, edited by:
Dentener, F., Keating, T., and Akimoto, H., UNECE Information Service,
Geneva, Switzerland, 77–133, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>Sudo, K., Takahashi, M., Kurokawa, J., and Akimoto, H.: CHASER: A global
chemical model of the troposphere – 1. Model description, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 107, ACH 7-1–ACH 7-20, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001113" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001113</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>Takemura, T., Nozawa, T., Emori, S., Nakajima, T. Y., and Nakajima, T.:
Simulation of climate response to aerosol direct and indirect effects with
aerosol transport-radiation model, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 110, D02202,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004jd005029" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004jd005029</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>Tie, X. X., Wu, D., and Brasseur, G.: Lung cancer mortality and exposure to
atmospheric aerosol particles in Guangzhou, China, Atmos. Environ., 43,
2375–2377, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.01.036" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.01.036</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Tilmes, S., Lamarque, J.-F., Emmons, L. K., Kinnison, D. E., Marsh, D.,
Garcia, R. R., Smith, A. K., Neely, R. R., Conley, A., Vitt, F., Val Martin,
M., Tanimoto, H., Simpson, I., Blake, D. R., and Blake, N.: Representation of
the Community Earth System Model (CESM1) CAM4-chem within the
Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative (CCMI), Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1853–1890,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1853-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1853-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Tørseth, K., Aas, W., Breivik, K., Fjæraa, A. M., Fiebig, M., Hjellbrekke,
A. G., Lund Myhre, C., Solberg, S., and Yttri, K. E.: Introduction to the
European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme (EMEP) and observed atmospheric
composition change during 1972–2009, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 5447–5481,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-5447-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-5447-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>Wang, J. D., Wang, S. X., Jiang, J. K., Ding, A. J., Zheng, M., Zhao, B.,
Wong, D. C., Zhou, W., Zheng, G. J., Wang, L., Pleim, J. E., and Hao, J. M.:
Impact of aerosol-meteorology interactions on fine particle pollution during
China's severe haze episode in January 2013, Environ. Res. Lett., 9, 094002,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/9/094002" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/9/094002</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, L. T., Wei, Z., Yang, J., Zhang, Y., Zhang, F. F., Su, J., Meng, C. C.,
and Zhang, Q.: The 2013 severe haze over southern Hebei, China: model
evaluation, source apportionment, and policy implications, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 14, 3151–3173, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-3151-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-3151-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>Wang, Q. Z., Zhuang, G. S., Huang, K., Liu, T. N., Deng, C. R., Xu, J., Lin,
Y. F., Guo, Z. G., Chen, Y., Fu, Q. Y., Fu, J. S. S., and Chen, J. K.:
Probing the severe haze pollution in three typical regions of China:
Characteristics, sources and regional impacts, Atmos. Environ., 120, 76–88,
2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>Wang, Y. J., Li, L., Chen, C. H., Huang, C., Huang, H. Y., Feng, J. L.,
Wang, S. X., Wang, H. L., Zhang, G., Zhou, M., Cheng, P., Wu, M. H., Sheng,
G. Y., Fu, J. M., Hu, Y., Russell, A. G., and Wumaer, A.: Source
apportionment of fine particulate matter during autumn haze episodes in
Shanghai, China, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 1903–1914,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD019630" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD019630</a>, 2014.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
West, J. J., Naik, V., Horowitz, L. W., and Fiore, A. M.: Effect of regional
precursor emission controls on long-range ozone transport – Part 1:
Short-term changes in ozone air quality, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 6077–6093,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-6077-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-6077-2009</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>WorldBank, T.: Cost of Pollution in China, Rural Development, Natural
Resources and Environmetn Management Unit, Washington, DC, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>Xu, P., Chen, Y. F., and Ye, X. J.: Haze, air pollution, and health in
China, Lancet, 382, 2067–2067, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62693-8" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62693-8</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>Yin, L. Q., Niu, Z. C., Chen, X. Q., Chen, J. S., Xu, L. L., and Zhang, F.
W.: Chemical compositions of PM<sub>2.5</sub> aerosol during haze periods in the
mountainous city of Yong'an, China, J. Environ. Sci.-China, 24, 1225–1233,
2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, L., Jacob, D. J., Kopacz, M., Henze, D. K., Singh, K., and Jaffe, D.
A.: Intercontinental source attribution of ozone pollution at western US
sites using an adjoint method, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L11810,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009gl037950" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009gl037950</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, X. Y., Wang, Y. Q., Niu, T., Zhang, X. C., Gong, S. L., Zhang, Y. M.,
and Sun, J. Y.: Atmospheric aerosol compositions in China: spatial/temporal
variability, chemical signature, regional haze distribution and comparisons
with global aerosols, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 779–799,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-779-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-779-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>Zhu, J. L., Liao, H., and Li, J. P.: Increases in aerosol concentrations
over eastern China due to the decadal-scale weakening of the East Asian
summer monsoon, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L09809, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012gl051428" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012gl051428</a>,
2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
