<?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">
  <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-21-6411-2021</article-id><title-group><article-title>Air quality and health benefits from ultra-low emission control
policy indicated by continuous emission monitoring: a case study <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>in the
Yangtze River Delta region, China</article-title><alt-title>Air quality and health benefits from ultra-low emission control
policy</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Air quality and health benefits from ultra-low emission control
policy}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{Y. Zhang et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Yan</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff3">
          <name><surname>Zhao</surname><given-names>Yu</given-names></name>
          <email>yuzhao@nju.edu.cn</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Gao</surname><given-names>Meng</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8657-3541</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5">
          <name><surname>Bo</surname><given-names>Xin</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff6">
          <name><surname>Nielsen</surname><given-names>Chris P.</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8043-2409</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse and School of the Environment, Nanjing University, <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>163 Xianlin Rd., Nanjing, Jiangsu 210023, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Jiangsu Environmental Engineering and Technology Co., Ltd., Jiangsu
Environmental Protection Group Co., Ltd., <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>8 East Jialingjiang St., Nanjing,
Jiangsu 210019, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Jiangsu Collaborative Innovation Center of Atmospheric Environment and Equipment Technology (CICAEET), Nanjing University of Information Science
and Technology, Jiangsu 210044, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Department of Geography, State Key Laboratory of Environmental and
Biological Analysis, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong SAR, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>5</label><institution>The Appraisal Center for Environment and Engineering, Ministry of
Environmental Protection, Beijing 100012, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff6"><label>6</label><institution>Harvard-China Project on Energy, Economy and Environment, John A. Paulson
School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University, 29 Oxford
St., Cambridge, MA 02138, USA</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Yu Zhao (yuzhao@nju.edu.cn)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>27</day><month>April</month><year>2021</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>21</volume>
      <issue>8</issue>
      <fpage>6411</fpage><lpage>6430</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>4</day><month>August</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>20</day><month>November</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>13</day><month>March</month><year>2021</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>16</day><month>March</month><year>2021</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2021 </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2021</copyright-year>
      <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/.html">This article is available from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e158">To evaluate the improved emission estimates from online monitoring, we
applied the Models-3/CMAQ (Community Multiscale Air Quality) system to
simulate the air quality of the Yangtze River Delta (YRD) region using two
emission inventories with and without incorporated data from continuous emission
monitoring systems (CEMSs) at coal-fired power plants (cases 1 and 2,
respectively). The normalized mean biases (NMBs) between the observed and
simulated hourly concentrations of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in case 2 were <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, 56.3 %, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, all
smaller in absolute value than those in case 1 at 8.2 %, 68.9 %,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">24.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, and 7.6 %, respectively. The results indicate that incorporation
of CEMS data in the emission inventory reduced the biases between simulation
and observation and could better reflect the actual sources of regional air
pollution. Based on the CEMS data, the air quality changes and corresponding
health impacts were quantified for different implementation levels of
China's recent “ultra-low” emission policy. If the coal-fired power sector
met the requirement alone (case 3), the differences in the simulated monthly
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and 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> concentrations compared to those
of case 2, our base case for policy comparisons, would be less than 7 % for
all pollutants. The result implies a minor benefit of ultra-low emission
control if implemented in the power sector alone, which is attributed to its limited
contribution to the total emissions in the YRD after years of pollution
control (11 %, 7 %, and 2 % of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and primary particle
matter (PM) in case 2, respectively). If the ultra-low emission policy was
enacted at both power plants and selected industrial sources including
boilers, cement, and iron and steel factories (case 4), the simulated
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations compared to the base
case would be 33 %–64 %, 16 %–23 %, and 6 %–22 % lower, respectively,
depending on the month (January, April, July, and October 2015). Combining
CMAQ and the Integrated Exposure Response (IER) model, we further estimated
that 305 deaths and 8744 years of life loss (YLL) attributable to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
exposure could be avoided with the implementation of the ultra-low emission
policy in the power sector in the YRD region. The analogous values would be
much higher, at 10 651 deaths and 316 562 YLL avoided, if both power and
industrial sectors met the ultra-low emission limits. In order to improve
regional air<?pagebreak page6412?> quality and to reduce human health risk effectively,
coordinated control of multiple sources should be implemented, and the
ultra-low emission policy should be substantially expanded to major emission
sources in industries other than the power industry.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e339">Due to swift economic development and associated growth in demand for
electricity, coal-fired power plants have played an important role in energy
consumption and air pollutant emissions for a long time in China. For
example, Zhao et al. (2008) for the first time developed a “unit-based”
emission inventory of primary air pollutants from the coal-fired power
sector in China and found that the sector contributed 53 % and 36 % to
the national total emissions of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, in
2005. Subsequently, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from the power sector
were estimated to account, respectively, for 28 %–53 % and 29 %–31 %
of the total annual emissions in China during 2006–2010 according to the
Multi-resolution Emission Inventory for China (MEIC; <uri>http://www.meicmodel.org</uri>, last access: 19 April 2021). To reduce high emissions and improve air
quality in China, advanced air pollutant control devices (APCDs) have been
gradually applied in the power sector including flue gas desulfurization
(FGD) for SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> control, selective catalytic reduction (SCR) for NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
control, and high-efficiency dust collectors for primary particulate matter
(PM) control. In recent years, moreover, an ultra-low emission
retrofitting policy has been widely implemented, seeking to reduce the
emission levels of coal-fired power plants to those of gas-fired ones (i.e.,
35, 50, and 5 mg m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM concentrations in the
flue gas). The expanded use of associated technologies has induced great
changes in the magnitude and spatiotemporal distribution of emissions from
the power sector, which have been analyzed and quantified by a series of
studies (Y. Zhao et al., 2013; Zhang et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2019; Tang et
al., 2019; Y. Zhang et al., 2019). With the updated unit-level information,
for example, MEIC estimated that the power sector shares of national total
emissions declined from 28 % to 22 % and from 29 % to 21 % for
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> during 2010–2015, respectively. Incorporating data
from continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMSs), Tang et al. (2019) found
that China's annual power sector emissions of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM
declined by 65 %, 60 %, and 72 %, respectively, during 2014–2017, due to
the enhanced control measures. With a method of collecting, examining, and
applying CEMS data, similarly, our previous work indicated that the
estimated emissions from the power sector would be 75 %, 63 %, and 76 %
smaller than those calculated without CEMS data for SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
PM, respectively (Y. Zhang et al., 2019).<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?></p>
      <p id="d1e486">Evaluations of emission estimates and the changed air quality from emission
abatement provide useful information on the sources of air pollution and the
effectiveness of pollution control measures. Air quality modeling is an
important tool for evaluating emission inventories, by comparing simulation
results with available observation data. Developed by the US Environmental
Protection Agency (US EPA), the Models-3/Community Multiscale Air Quality
(CMAQ) system has been widely used in China (Li et al., 2012; An et al.,
2013; Wang et al., 2014; Han et al., 2015; Zheng et al., 2017; Zhou et al.,
2017; Chang et al., 2019). Han et al. (2015) conducted CMAQ simulations with
different emission inventories for East Asia and found that the simulated
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> columns using the emission inventory for the Intercontinental
Chemical Transport Experiment Phase B (INTEX-B; Zhang et al., 2009) agreed
better with the satellite observations of the Ozone Monitoring Instrument
(OMI) than the simulations using the Regional Emission Inventory in Asia
(REAS v1.11; Ohara et al., 2007). Zhou et al. (2017) applied CMAQ to
evaluate the national, regional, and provincial emission inventories for the
Yangtze River Delta (YRD) region, and the best model performance with the
provincial inventory confirmed that the emission estimate with more detailed
information incorporated on individual power and industrial plants helped
improve the air quality simulation at relatively high horizontal resolution.
With air quality modeling, moreover, many studies have explored the
environmental benefits of emission control measures taken in recent years (B. Zhao et al., 2013; Huang et al., 2014; Li et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2015;
Tan et al., 2017). Wang et al. (2015) found that the implementation of the
new Emission Standard of Air Pollutants for Thermal Power Plants
(GB13223-2011) could effectively reduce pollutant emissions in China, and
the ambient concentrations of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> would
decrease by 31.6 %, 24.3 %, and 14.7 %, respectively, in 2020 compared
with a baseline scenario for 2010. Li et al. (2015) found that the simulated
concentrations of 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> in the YRD region would decrease by 8.7 %,
15.9 %, and 24.3 % from 2013 to 2017 in three scenarios with weak,
moderate, and strong emission reduction assumptions in the Clean Air Action
Plan, respectively.</p>
      <p id="d1e534">Besides air quality, the health risk caused by air pollution exposures in
China is a major concern, especially to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, a dominant pollutant in
haze conditions. Lim et al. (2012) has identified air pollution as a primary
cause of global burden of disease, especially in low- and middle-income
countries, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> pollution was ranked the fourth leading cause of
death in China. Studies have shown that PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is closely related to
several causes of death (Dockery et al., 1993; Hoek et al., 2013; Lelieveld
et al., 2015; Butt et al., 2017; Gao et al., 2018; Maji et al., 2018). For example, Lelieveld et al. (2015) estimated that nearly 1.4
million people died each year due to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure in China, 18 %
of which were related to the emissions from the power sector. Based on
simulated PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> using WRF-Chem (Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model coupled with chemistry) and the<?pagebreak page6413?> Integrated Exposure Response
(IER) model, Gao et al. (2018) estimated that emissions from the power
sector results in 15 million years of life lost per year in China. In
addition to assessment of health risk based on observations of actual air
pollution levels, studies have also analyzed the health benefits of emission
control policies (Lei et al., 2015; Li and Li, 2018; Dai et al., 2019; Q. Zhang et al., 2019; X. Zhang et al., 2019). Combining available observation
and CMAQ modeling, Q. Zhang et al. (2019) identified improved emission
controls on industrial and residential pollution sources as the main drivers
of reductions in PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations from 2013 to 2017 in China and
estimated an annual reduction of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-related deaths at 0.41 million.
Lei et al. (2015) evaluated the health benefit of the Air Pollution
Prevention and Control Action Plan of China and found that full realization
of the air quality goal in this plan could avoid 89 000 premature
deaths of urban residents and reduce 120 000 inpatient cases and 9.4 million outpatient service and emergency cases. Focusing more regionally, X. Zhang et al. (2019) estimated the health impact of a “coal-to-electricity”
policy for residential energy use in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei (BTH) region.
They projected that the reduction in PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations from the
policy would avoid nearly 22 200 cases of premature death and 607 800 cases
of disease in the region in 2020. For areas with strong, industry-based
economies, the impact of air quality on public health can be more
significant, attributed both to relatively large and dense populations and
to high pollution levels. Until now, however, there have been few studies
focusing on air quality improvement and corresponding health benefits
attributed to the implementation of the latest emission control policies,
notably China's ultra-low emission policy introduced above, at a regional
scale.</p>
      <p id="d1e610">As one of the most densely populated and economically developed regions, the
YRD region encompassing Shanghai and Anhui, Jiangsu, and Zhejiang provinces
is a key area for air pollution prevention and control in China (Huang et
al., 2011; Li et al., 2011, 2012). It is also one of the regions
with the earliest implementation of the ultra-low emission policy on the
power sector in the country. Quantification of emission reductions as well as
subsequent changes in air quality is crucial for full understanding of the
environmental benefits of the policy. To test the possible improvement in
the regional emission inventory, this study evaluated the air quality
modeling performance without and with CEMS data incorporated in the
estimation of emissions of the coal-fired power sector for the YRD region.
The changes in regional air quality and health risk resulting from the
implementation of the ultra-low emission policy for key industries were
quantified combining the air quality modeling and the health risk model. The
results provide scientific support for incorporation of online monitoring
data to improve the estimation of air pollutant emissions and for better
design of emission control policies based on their simulated environmental
effects.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e616">The modeling domain and the locations of the concerned provinces
and their capital cities. The numbers 1–4 represent the cities of Nanjing,
Hefei, Shanghai, and Hangzhou, respectively. The map data, provided by the
Resource and Environment Data Cloud Platform, are freely available for
academic use (<uri>http://www.resdc.cn/data.aspx?DATAID=201</uri>, last access: 19 April 2021), © Institute of Geographic Sciences &amp; Natural Resources Research, Chinese
Academy of Sciences.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/6411/2021/acp-21-6411-2021-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Methodology and data</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Air quality modeling</title>
      <p id="d1e643">In this study, we adopted CMAQ version 4.7.1 (UNC, 2010) to conduct air
quality simulations and to evaluate various emission inventories for the YRD
region. The model has performed well in Asia (Zhang et al., 2006; Uno et
al., 2007; Fu et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2009). Two one-way nested domains
were adopted for the simulations, and the horizontal resolutions were set at
27 and 9 km square grid cells, respectively, as shown in Fig. 1. The mother
domain (D1, 177 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 127 cells) covered most of China and all or parts
of surrounding countries in east, southeast, and south Asia. The second
modeling region (D2, 118 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 121 cells) covered the YRD region,
including Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Shanghai, Anhui, and parts of surrounding
provinces. Lambert conformal conic projection was applied for the entire
simulation area centered at 34<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 110<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E with two
true latitudes (40<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and 25<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N). The<?pagebreak page6414?> simulated periods
were January, April, July, and October 2015, as representative of the four
seasons. The first 5 d in each month were set as a spin-up period to
provide initial conditions for later simulations. The Carbon Bond gas-phase
mechanism (CB05) and AERO5 aerosol module were adopted in all the CMAQ
modules, with details of the model configuration found in Zhou et al. (2017). The initial concentrations and boundary conditions for the D1 mother
domain were the default clean profile, while they were extracted from CMAQ
outputs of D1 simulations for the nested D2 domain. Normalized mean bias
(NMB), normalized mean error (NME), and the correlation coefficient (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>)
between the simulations and observations were selected to evaluate the
performance of CMAQ modeling (Yu et al., 2006). The hourly concentrations of
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> were observed at 230
state-operated ground stations of the national monitoring network in the YRD
region and were collected from Qingyue Open Environmental Data Center
(<uri>https://data.epmap.org</uri>, last access: 19 April 2021).</p>
      <p id="d1e744">The Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Model version 3.4 (<uri>http://www.wrf-model.org/index.php</uri>, last access: 19 April 2021; Skamarock et al., 2008) was applied to
provide meteorological fields for CMAQ. Terrain and land-use data were taken
from global data of the US Geological Survey (USGS), and the first-guess
fields of meteorological modeling were obtained from the final operational
global analysis data (ds083.2) by the National Centers for Environmental
Prediction (NCEP). Statistical indicators including bias, index of agreement
(IOA), and root mean squared error (RMSE) were chosen to evaluate the
performance of WRF modeling against observations (Baker et al., 2004; Zhang
et al., 2006). Ground observations at 3 h intervals of four meteorological
parameters including temperature at 2 m (T2), relative humidity at 2 m
(RH2), and wind speed and direction at 10 m (WS10 and WD10) of 42 surface
meteorological stations in the YRD region were downloaded from the National
Climatic Data Center (NCDC). The statistical indicators for WS10, WD10, T2,
and RH2 in the YRD region are summarized by month in Table S1 in the
Supplement. The discrepancies between WRF simulations and observations of
these meteorological parameters were generally acceptable (Emery et al.,
2001). Better agreements were found for T2 and RH2 with their biases ranging
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.62</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.12<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>6.60 %, respectively, and
their IOA values were all within the benchmarks (Emery et al., 2001). In general,
WRF captured well the characteristics of main meteorological conditions for
the region.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Emission inventories and cases</title>
      <p id="d1e802">The anthropogenic emissions from industry, residential, and transportation
sectors for D1 and D2 were obtained from the national emission inventory
developed in our previous work (Xia et al., 2016). The total emissions
excluding those of the power sector of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM for the YRD
region were estimated at 1501.0, 3468.4, and 2711.2 Gg for 2015,
respectively. The emission inventory in Xia et al. (2016) was developed
using activity data at the provincial level, and the spatial distribution of
emissions by sector was conducted according to that of MEIC with the
original spatial resolution of 0.25<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.25<inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in
this study. The gridded emissions were further downscaled to horizontal
resolutions of 27 and 9 km in D1 and D2, respectively, based on the spatial
distribution of population (for residential sources), industrial gross
domestic product (for industrial sources), and the road network (for on-road
vehicles). The monthly variations of emissions from each sector were assumed
to be the same as in MEIC. Constrained by available ground observation, a
larger monthly variation in the emissions of black carbon aerosols was found
for the central YRD region than that in MEIC. Limited improvement in air
quality model performance was consequently achieved, implying that the bias
from the temporal variation was insignificant (Zhao et al., 2019). In
addition, the Model Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature modeling system developed
under the Monitoring Atmospheric Composition and Climate project
(MEGAN-MACC; Guenther et al., 2012; Sindelarova et al., 2014) was applied
as the biogenic emission inventory, and the emissions of Cl, HCl, and
lightning NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> were obtained from the Global Emissions InitiAtive (GEIA;
Price et al., 1997).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e861">The air pollutant emissions by sector for cases 1–5 in the YRD (unit:
Gg).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.9}[.9]?><oasis:tgroup cols="16">
     <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="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="11" colname="col11" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="12" colname="col12" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="13" colname="col13" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="14" colname="col14" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="15" colname="col15" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="16" colname="col16" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Case</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col4" align="center" colsep="1">Power </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col5" nameend="col7" align="center" colsep="1">Industry </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col8" nameend="col10" align="center" colsep="1">Residential  </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col11" nameend="col13" align="center" colsep="1">Transportation </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col14" nameend="col16" align="center">Total </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">PM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">PM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">PM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">PM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">PM</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Case 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">606.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">863.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">376.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1305.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1294.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1817.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">133.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">326.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">787.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">62.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">1847.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">105.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">2107.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">4331.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">3087.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Case 2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">179.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">245.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">45.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1305.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1294.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1817.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">133.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">326.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">787.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">62.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">1847.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">105.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">1680.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">3713.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">2756.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Case 3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">56.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">110.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">8.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1305.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1294.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1817.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">133.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">326.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">787.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">62.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">1847.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">105.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">1557.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">3578.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">2720.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Case 4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">56.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">110.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">8.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">249.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">426.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">539.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">133.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">326.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">787.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">62.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">1847.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">105.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">500.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">2710.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">1441.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Case 5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1305.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1294.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1817.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">133.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">326.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">787.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">62.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">1847.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">105.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">1501.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col15">3468.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col16">2711.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.9}[.9]?><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e864">Note that for case 1, the emissions of coal-fired power sector were estimated based
on the emission factor method without CEMS data. For case 2, the emissions of
coal-fired power sector were estimated based on the improved method by Y. Zhang et al. (2019), with CEMS data incorporated. For case 3, all the coal-fired
power plants in the YRD region were assumed to meet the requirement of the
ultra-low emission policy. For case 4, all the coal-fired power plants and
certain industrial sources including boilers, cement, and iron and steel
factories in the YRD region were assumed to meet the requirement of the
ultra-low emission policy. For case 5, the emissions of all coal-fired power
plants were set at zero.</p></table-wrap-foot><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e1332">For the power sector in the YRD region specifically, we adopted the
unit-level emission estimates from our previous study and allocated the
emissions according to the actual locations of individual units (Y. Zhang et
al., 2019). As described in that study, the detailed information at the
power unit level was compiled based on official environmental statistics
including the geographic location, installed capacity, fossil fuel
consumption, combustion technology, and APCDs. Besides the commonly used
method, Y. Zhang et al. (2019) developed a new method of examining,
screening and applying CEMS data to improve the estimates of power sector
emissions. CEMS data were collected for over 1000 power units, including
operation condition; monitoring time; flue gas flow; and hourly
concentrations of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM. The emissions of individual
units were calculated based on the hourly concentrations of air pollutants
obtained from CEMSs and the theoretical flue gas volume estimated based on
the unit-level information mentioned above. Compared to MEIC, a larger
monthly variation in emissions was found based on the online emission
monitoring. More details can be found in Y. Zhang et al. (2019). In this
work, five emission cases were set for the air quality simulation. Cases 1
and 2 used estimates of power sector emissions with and without incorporation of
CEMS data and were compared against each other to evaluate the benefit of
online emission monitoring information in air quality simulation. Note that case 2 was set as the base case for further analysis of the effects of emission
controls. Based on the unit-level information from<?pagebreak page6415?> CEMSs, case 3 assumed that
only power plants would meet the requirement of the ultra-low emission
policy, while case 4 assumed both power plants and selected industrial
sources including boilers, cement, and iron and steel factories would meet
the requirement. As summarized in Table S2 in the Supplement, the ultra-low
emission limits for the flue gas concentrations were obtained from the most
recent national or local standards by sector (Yang et al., 2021). The model
performances were compared with the base case to quantify the air quality
improvements that result from the policy. Case 5 removed all the emissions
from the power sector and thus helped to specify the contribution of the
power sector to air pollution in the YRD region.</p>
      <p id="d1e1354">The air pollutant emissions for all the cases are summarized by sector in
Table 1. With the CEMS data for the power sector incorporated, the total
emissions of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM for the YRD region in case 2 were
estimated as 427, 618, and 331 Gg smaller than those in case 1, with relative
reductions of 20 %, 14 %, and 11 %, respectively. Benefiting from the
implementation of the ultra-low emission policy in the coal-fired power
sector, the total emissions of anthropogenic SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM in
case 3 would further decline 123, 135, and 36 Gg compared to case 2,
respectively. The analogous numbers for case 4 were 1180, 1003, and 1315 Gg,
and the reduction rates compared to case 2 were 70 %, 27 %, and 48 %
for SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and PM, respectively. The implementation of the
ultra-low emission policy for both power and industrial sectors would
significantly reduce the primary pollutant emissions for the YRD region. In
case 5 where the emissions from the power sector were set as zero, the total
emissions of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM were estimated to decrease by 11 %,
7 %, and 2 %, respectively, compared to case 2.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>Health effect analysis</title>
      <p id="d1e1438">We applied the IER model of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study 2015
(Cohen et al., 2017) and quantified the impact of emission control policy on
the human health risk due to long-term exposure of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the YRD
region. The model has been well developed and widely applied in quantifying
the impact of air pollution control policies on health burden (Li et al.,
2019; Yue et al., 2020; Zheng et al., 2019). Compared to another widely used
model Global Exposure Mortality Model (GEMM; Burnett et al., 2018), IER was
expected to provide relatively conservative estimates for China (Yang et
al., 2021). The number of attributable deaths and years of life lost (YLL)
caused by long-term PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure for selected emission cases were
calculated for various diseases in this study. In particular, YLL represents
the years of life lost because of premature death from a particular cause or
disease. As the number of deaths alone could not provide a comprehensive
picture of the burden that deaths impose on the population, we calculated
YLL caused by PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure to help describe the extent to which the
lives of people exposed to air pollution were cut short. We considered the
four adult diseases of the GBD study, including ischemic heart disease
(IHD), stroke (STK, including ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke), lung cancer
(LC), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), as well as acute lower respiratory infection (LRI), which is a common disease among young children.</p>
      <p id="d1e1468">The health risks in the different emission cases were estimated following
Gao et al. (2018) with the updated information for 2015. First, the relative
risk (RR) for each disease was calculated using Eq. (1):
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M92" display="block"><mml:mtable rowspacing="8.535827pt" columnspacing="1em" class="split" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>RR</mml:mtext><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mtext>Cl</mml:mtext><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced open="{" close=""><mml:mtable class="array" columnalign="left left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>Cl</mml:mtext><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>Cl</mml:mtext><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>Cl</mml:mtext><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>;</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> represent the age, gender, and disease type, respectively;
“Cl” is the annual average PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration simulated with WRF-CMAQ (the
average of January, April, July, and October in this work); <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the
counterfactual concentration; and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> are the
parameters that describe the IER functions, as reported by Cohen et al. (2017).</p>
      <?pagebreak page6416?><p id="d1e1679">Secondly, the population attributable fractions (PAFs) were calculated with
RR following Eq. (2) by disease, age, and gender subgroup:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><label>2</label><mml:math id="M101" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>PAF</mml:mtext><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>RR</mml:mtext><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mtext>Cl</mml:mtext><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mtext>RR</mml:mtext><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mtext>Cl</mml:mtext><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          Moreover, the mortality attributable to 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> exposure (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was
calculated using Eq. (2), where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the current age–gender-specific
mortality rate, and “Pop” represents the exposed population in the
age–gender-specific group in grid cell <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><label>3</label><mml:math id="M106" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mtext>PAF</mml:mtext><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Pop</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          The population data of the four provinces and cities in the YRD region were
obtained from statistical yearbooks (AHBS, 2016; JSBS, 2016; SHBS, 2016;
ZJBS, 2016), and the gender distribution by province is shown in Table S3 in
the Supplement. As the high-resolution spatial pattern of age structure was
unavailable, we assumed the same age structure for all the model grids
according to Gao et al. (2018). The baseline age–gender–disease-specific
mortality rates for the five diseases in China for 2015 were obtained from
the Global Health Data Exchange database (GHDx,
<uri>https://vizhub.healthdata.org</uri>, last access: 19 April 2021), as shown in Table S4 in the Supplement, and
those by province were calculated based on the provincial proportions in Xie
et al. (2016). The national population with the spatial resolution at
1 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1 km in 2015 was provided by the LandScan global demographic
dynamic analysis database developed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL)
of the US Department of Energy. As shown in Fig. S1 in the Supplement,
the population densities in the YRD region are larger in Shanghai, southern
Jiangsu, and northern Zhejiang.</p>
      <p id="d1e1892">Finally, the year of life lost (YLL) due to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure was calculated
from the number of deaths multiplied by a standard life expectancy at the
age at which death occurs, as shown in Eq. (4), where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> represents the number
of deaths in each age–gender-specific group, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mi>L</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> reflects the remaining
life expectancy of the group:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><label>4</label><mml:math id="M111" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>YLL</mml:mtext><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mo>∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          The remaining life expectancies by age data were obtained from the life tables
from the World Health Organization (WHO, <uri>https://www.who.int</uri>, last access: 19 April 2021),
as summarized in Table S5 in the Supplement. The life expectancies at birth
of Chinese males and females in 2015 were 74.8 and 77.7 years, respectively.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results and discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Evaluation of emission estimates with air quality simulation</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1.SSS1">
  <label>3.1.1</label><title>Model performances with and without CEMS data</title>
      <p id="d1e1988">Air quality simulations based on emission inventories with and without
incorporation of CEMS data for the coal-fired power sector (cases 1 and 2,
respectively) were conducted to test the improvement of emission estimates.
Because of the combined influences of regional transport and chemical
reactions of air pollutants in the atmosphere, nonlinear relationships were
found between the changes of primary emissions and ambient concentrations of
air pollutants. Compared to case 1, the simulated annual average
concentrations of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and 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> in the YRD region were
10 %, 7 %, and 6 % lower, respectively, in case 2, while that of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
was 7 % higher, due to combined effects of emissions of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> precursors (Gao et al., 2005; Yang et al.,
2012). Previous studies have shown that O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> formation in most of the YRD
region is under the “VOCs-limited” regime, i.e., the generation and
removal of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is more sensitive to VOCs and would be inhibited with
high NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in the atmosphere (Zhang et al., 2008; Liu et
al., 2010; Wang et al., 2010; Xing et al., 2011). Therefore, the simulated
reduced NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations from greater NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emission control could
elevate the O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e2094">Comparison of the observed and simulated hourly SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations by month for cases 1 and 2 in the YRD
region. In total, 230 state-operated observation sites were included in the
comparison.</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="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col2">Pollutant </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col3" nameend="col4" align="center" colsep="1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col5" nameend="col6" align="center" colsep="1">NMB (%) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col7" nameend="col8" align="center">NME (%) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Case 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Case 2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Case 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Case 2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Case 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Case 2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Jan</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.89<inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">11.44</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.52<inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo>*</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">26.83</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">24.22<inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Apr</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.45<inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>18.45</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>22.62</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">31.65</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">34.81</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Jul</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">36.84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">15.72<inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo>*</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">58.69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">48.44<inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Oct</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.59</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">14.59</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.15<inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo>*</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">32.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">29.22<inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Jan</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.73<inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">42.74</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">34.92<inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">44.25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">37.88<inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Apr</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.69<inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">69.24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">48.72<inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo>*</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">70.24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">51.81<inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>*</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Jul</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">145.42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">131.65<inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">145.42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">131.65<inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Oct</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.70</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">58.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">47.73<inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">58.86</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">49.41<inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Jan</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.74</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.75<inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>16.90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>6.40<inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo>*</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">30.53</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">28.60<inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Apr</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>14.88</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>9.89<inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">23.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">27.48</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Jul</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.79<inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>34.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>28.46<inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">37.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">32.77<inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Oct</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.80</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>30.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>28.28<inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">34.32</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">33.60<inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Jan</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.89</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.90<inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.63</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">16.27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">15.21<inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Apr</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">9.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.57<inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo>*</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">21.30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">19.26<inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Jul</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.63</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">30.44</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">24.08<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo>*</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">37.66</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">34.29<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mo>↑</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Oct</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">5.40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>11.80</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">23.34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">22.28</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e2133">Note that the arrows indicate that the simulation values in case 2 were improved
compared to case 1. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>*</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>*</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> symbols indicate the improvements are
statistically significant with confidence levels of 90 %, 95 %, and 99 %, respectively. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, NMB, and NME were calculated using the following
equations (where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mi>O</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> represent the simulation, observation, averaged
simulation, and averaged observation values, respectively):
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>NMB</mml:mtext><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><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:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><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:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:msub><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</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>;
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>NME</mml:mtext><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><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:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mfenced open="|" close="|"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><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:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:msub><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</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>;
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><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:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:msqrt><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:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><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:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

      <?pagebreak page6417?><p id="d1e3377">The model performance was evaluated with available ground observation. The
hourly concentrations were observed at 230 state-operated air quality
monitoring stations within YRD, and the averages of hourly concentrations of
those sites were compared with the simulations in cases 1 and 2, as
summarized in Table 2. Similar model performances were found for the two
emission cases, with overestimation of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> as well as
underestimation of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. The NMEs between the simulated and observed
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations were all smaller than
50 % for both cases and slightly worse simulation performances were found
in July compared to the other 3 months. In particular, the correlation
coefficients (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) between the simulated and observed SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in July were
only 0.17 and 0.14 for cases 1 and 2, respectively, and the NMEs between the
simulated and observed NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> were larger than 100 %. In addition,
greater overestimation of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> by the model was found in
July compared to other months, likely attributable to the bias of WRF modeling. On the
one hand, the simulated WS10 in the YRD region in July (2.67 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) was
slightly lower than the observation (2.75 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). The underestimation in wind
speed could weaken the horizontal diffusion and lead to overestimation in
air pollutant concentrations. Compared with the results from the
European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF, <uri>https://apps.ecmwf.int/datasets</uri>, last access: 19 April 2021), on the other hand, the simulated
boundary layer height (BLH) was lower in WRF for all months. The NMBs of the
WRF and ECMWF BLH in January, April, and October were around <inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, while
that in July reached <inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">24</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %. The lower BLH would limit the vertical
convection and diffusion of pollutants and thereby increase the surface
concentrations of air pollutants. Similar to previous studies (An et al.,
2013; Liao et al., 2015; Tang et al., 2015; Gao et al., 2016; Wang et al.,
2016; Zhou et al., 2017), underestimation of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> was commonly found. The
NMBs between the simulation and observation for the two cases ranged from
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">34.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % and NMEs from 23.1 % to 37.1 %, respectively. The
underestimation in O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> likely resulted from bias in the estimation of
precursor emissions. Suggested by the positive NMBs of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> modeling
in Table 2, the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions were expected to be overestimated in the
two cases, even for case 2 with the CEMS data incorporated (which reflect
the emission control benefits in recent years, as discussed in Y. Zhang et
al., 2019). In addition, underestimation of VOC emissions is likely due to
incomplete accounting of emission sources, particularly for uncontrolled or
fugitive leakage (Zhao et al., 2017). As most of YRD was identified as a
VOC-limited region for O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> formation (Wang et al., 2019; Yang et al.,
2021), the overestimation of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and underestimation of VOCs could
contribute to the underestimation in O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations with air quality
modeling. The simulations of both cases captured well the temporal
variations of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations, with the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> between the observed and
simulated concentrations around 0.9.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e3639">The spatial distributions of the simulated monthly SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations for case 2 in D2 (unit:
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/6411/2021/acp-21-6411-2021-f02.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e3708">In general, better modeling performance in the YRD region was found in case 2 than case 1. The NMBs between the simulated and observed concentrations of
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> for the whole simulation period
were <inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, 56.3 %, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % for case 2, which were smaller in
absolute value than those for case 1 at 8.2 %, 68.9 %, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">24.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, and
7.6 %, respectively. The bootstrap sampling (Gleser et al., 1996; He et
al., 2017) was further applied to test the significance of the improvements
of case 2 over case 1. (A significant difference is demonstrated if the
confidence intervals of given statistical indices sampled from the two cases
do not overlap.) As can be seen in Table 2, the modeling performances of the
concerned species in case 2 were improved significantly in most instances
compared to case 1. For example, the improvement of NMB for the SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
simulation was significant at the 99 % confidence level for July and
October and 95 % for January. The improvement of NMB and NME for NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
was significant at confidence levels of 99 % and 95 %, respectively, for
April. The improvement of NMB for O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> was significant at the 95 %
confidence level for January and that of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> at 95 % for April and
99 % for July. The statistical test confirms that incorporation of online
monitoring data in the emission inventory can improve the regional air
quality modeling for the YRD region. Besides the emission data, it should
also be noted that the changes in model schemes would affect the model
performance. For example, the newer version of CMAQ incorporated the
chemistry schemes of bromine and iodine and was expected to influence the
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> simulation importantly. According to our recent test in the YRD
region (Lu et al., 2020), the impact of CMAQ version on the simulation of
difference species was<?pagebreak page6418?> inconclusive, implying the necessity of further
intercomparison and evaluation studies for the region.</p>
      <p id="d1e3834">Figure 2 illustrates the spatial patterns of the simulated monthly SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations for case 2. For a given
species, similar patterns were found for different months. In general, the
simulated concentrations of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> were larger in
central and northern Anhui, southern Jiangsu, Shanghai, and coastal areas in
Zhejiang, where large power and industrial plants are concentrated, as shown
in Fig. S2 in the Supplement. In the highly populated cities (Shanghai,
Nanjing, Hangzhou, and Hefei; see their locations in Fig. 1), the
simulated concentrations of pollutants were significantly larger than their
surrounding areas. For example, the simulated SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in Nanjing were 1.4, 1.3, and 1.2 times of those in
its nearby cities. The analogous numbers for Hangzhou were 2.5, 1.5, and 1.3.
In contrast, the simulated O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations were smaller in urban
areas and larger in suburban ones. For instance, the simulated O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in
Nanjing, Shanghai, Hefei, and Hangzhou were 0.7, 0.4, 0.6, and 0.6 times of
those in their surrounding areas, respectively. The spatial distributions of
the simulated NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in Fig. 2 also indicated
that O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations were less in the regions with higher NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations, such as the megacity of Shanghai. The simulated high
concentrations of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in urban areas promotes titration of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
reducing its concentrations. In addition, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations could
remain relatively high after transport from urban to the suburban areas due
to relatively small emissions of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the latter.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d1e4023">The relative (%) and absolute changes (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, in
parentheses) of the simulated monthly pollutant concentrations in different
cases relative to case 2 in the YRD region.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="13">
     <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="right"/>
     <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:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="11" colname="col11" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="12" colname="col12" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="13" colname="col13" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Pollutant</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col5" align="center" colsep="1">(case 3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> case 2) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> case 2 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col6" nameend="col9" align="center" colsep="1">(case 4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> case 2) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> case 2 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col10" nameend="col13" align="center">(case 5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> case 2) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> case 2 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Jan</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Apr</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Jul</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Oct</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Jan</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Apr</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Jul</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">Oct</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">Jan</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">Apr</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">Jul</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">Oct</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>4.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>6.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>4.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>32.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>57.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>64.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>55.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>4.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>11.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>12.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>12.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.5)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>16.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>21.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>17.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>22.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>5.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>4.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>6.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>3.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>3.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>3.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.0)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">9.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">14.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">2.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">4.5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(0.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(0.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">(0.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">(0.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">(2.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">(4.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">(0.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">(4.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">(1.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">(1.5)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M321" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M322" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>6.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M323" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>14.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>21.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>14.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>4.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M332" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M333" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>4.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M335" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>6.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M336" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>6.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>6.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M338" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M341" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.4)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e5062">The spatial distributions of the relative changes (%) in the
simulated monthly SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M344" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations between cases 2 and 3 in D2 ((case 3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M346" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> case 2) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> case 2).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/6411/2021/acp-21-6411-2021-f03.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e5125">The spatial distributions of the relative changes (%) in the
simulated monthly SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M349" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and 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> concentrations between cases 2 and 4 in D2 ((case 4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> case 2) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> case 2).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/6411/2021/acp-21-6411-2021-f04.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1.SSS2">
  <label>3.1.2</label><title>Benefits of the ultra-low emission controls on air quality</title>
      <?pagebreak page6420?><p id="d1e5193">Table 3 summarizes the absolute and relative changes of the simulated
monthly concentrations of the concerned air pollutants in cases 3–5 compared
to the base case (case 2). The average contributions of the power sector to
the total ambient concentrations of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M355" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and 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> for
the four simulated months are estimated at 10.0 %, 4.7 %, and 2.3 %,
respectively, based on comparison of cases 2 and 5. The contributions to the
concentrations were close to those of emissions at 10.7 %, 6.6 %, and
1.6 % for the three species (as indicated in Table 1), respectively. The
larger power sector contribution to the ambient 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> concentrations
than to primary PM emissions reflects high emissions of precursors of
secondary sulfate and nitrate aerosols. In general, limited contributions
from the power sector were found for all concerned species except SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
which is attributed to the gradually improved controls in the sector. The further
implementation of the ultra-low emission policy in the sector, therefore, is
expected to result in limited additional benefits for air quality. As shown
in Table 3, the absolute changes of the simulated SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M360" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M361" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in case 3 compared to case 2 were all
smaller than 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for the 4 months. Larger changes were
found for primary pollutants (SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M365" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M366" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> than for those of secondary
ones (O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M367" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M368" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>): the simulated monthly concentrations of
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M369" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M370" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> were 2.7 %–6.1 % and 2.0 %–2.9 % lower, while
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M371" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> was only 0.1 %–1.3 % lower and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M372" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.8 %–2.2 %
higher, respectively. Much larger benefits were found when the ultra-low
emission policy was broadened from the power sector to the industrial sector
(case 4), which is attributed to the dominant role of industry in air pollutant
emissions in the YRD region (Table 1). The simulated monthly concentrations
of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M373" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M374" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M375" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> were 1.5–2.0, 2.5–3.7, and 4.6–6.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M376" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M377" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> lower compared to the base case, respectively, or
reduction rates of 32.9 %–64.1 %, 16.4 %–22.8 %, and
6.2 %–21.6 %. In contrast, the simulated O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M378" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration was
0.8–4.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M379" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M380" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> higher, with growth rates ranging
2.6 %–14.0 %. As mentioned earlier, the YRD was identified as a
VOC-limited region, and reducing NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M381" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions without any VOC controls
would enhance O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M382" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations. Currently, CEMSs do not report VOC
concentrations in the flue gas, and the ultra-low emission policy does
not include a VOC limit, either. In order to alleviate regional air pollution
including O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M383" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, coordinated controls of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M384" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and VOC emissions are
urgently required. These would include measures to reduce large sources of
VOCs, notably in industries other than the power industry such as the chemicals and refining industry and in
solvent use (Zhao et al., 2017).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e5491">The spatial distributions of the annual PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M385" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations
(average of January, April, July, and October) for case 2 <bold>(a)</bold> and the reduced
annual PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M386" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations for cases 3 <bold>(b)</bold> and 4 <bold>(c)</bold> in the YRD
region (unit: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M387" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M388" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). Note the different color ranges in the
panels for easier visualization.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/6411/2021/acp-21-6411-2021-f05.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e5548">The relative changes in the simulated pollutant concentrations varied by
month, due to the combined influences of meteorology and secondary
chemistry, and larger relative changes were found for SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M389" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M390" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in summer. As shown in Table 3, for example, the average
simulated PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M391" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in July were 0.4 and 6.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M392" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M393" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> lower, respectively, under cases 3 and 4 compared to case 2, with
the larger reduction than other 3 months. This could result partly from
the faster response of ambient concentrations to the changed emissions of
air pollutants with shorter lifetimes in summer. The formation of secondary
pollutants like PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M394" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> would be enhanced in summer, with more oxidative
atmospheric conditions under high temperature and strong sunlight. Moreover,
the relatively low concentrations in summer also contributed to the largest
percentage changes in SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M395" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M396" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> simulation for the season.</p>
      <p id="d1e5627">Figures 3 and 4 illustrate the spatial distributions of the relative changes
of simulated pollutant concentrations in cases 3 and 4 compared to case 2,
respectively. As shown in Fig. 3, the overall changes across the region
due to ultra-low emission controls in the power sector only were less than
10 % for primary pollutants SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M397" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M398" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and 5 % for secondary
pollutants PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M399" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M400" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. Larger changes in simulated SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M401" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations were found in central and northern Anhui as well as central
and southern Jiangsu, with relatively concentrated distribution of
coal-fired power plants. The changes of simulated SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M402" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M403" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in
Shanghai were tiny, due to few remaining power plants subject to the
ultra-low emission policy and thus few emission reductions. Compared to case 2, the SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M404" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M405" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in case 3 were estimated to be
2.2 % and 0.8 % lower, respectively, for Shanghai, i.e., much smaller than for
other provinces (6.1 % and 2.5 % for Anhui, 9.5 % and 4.4 % for
Jiangsu, and 5.5 % and 2.7 % for Zhejiang). The results suggest that the
potential of emission reduction and air quality improvement is limited from
implementation of more stringent control measures in the power sector alone,
particularly in highly developed cities where<?pagebreak page6421?> air pollution controls have
already reached a relatively high level.</p>
      <p id="d1e5712">In case 4, where both power plants and selected industrial sources meet the
ultra-low emission requirement, the average reduction rates of simulated
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M406" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M407" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations compared to case 2 were above 40 %
and 25 %, respectively, for the whole region, and the changes of secondary
pollutants O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M408" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M409" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> were also significantly larger than those
of case 3 in most of the region. The relative changes of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M410" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> were found
to be more significant than other species, as the SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M411" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations
are greatly affected by primary emissions. Due to the large number and wide
distribution of industrial plants throughout the YRD, moreover, there was
little regional disparity in the changed ambient SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M412" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> levels. Compared
to other areas, the relatively less reduction in the simulated NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M413" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in
central YRD resulted in significant enhancement of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M414" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations
(note that much more reduction in NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M415" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> resulted in similar enhancement
of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M416" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in southern Anhui for October). The comparison implies that the
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M417" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> formation in central YRD was more sensitive to NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M418" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emission
abatement than other VOC-limited regions in the YRD. The result suggests
a particularly great challenge of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M419" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> pollution control in central YRD,
and more efforts on VOC emission abatement would be required for those
developed areas.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e5845">The population fractions exposed to different levels of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M420" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
in the YRD region for cases 2 <bold>(a)</bold>, 3 <bold>(b)</bold>, and 4 <bold>(c)</bold>.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/6411/2021/acp-21-6411-2021-f06.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page6422?><sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Evaluation of health benefits</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2.SSS1">
  <label>3.2.1</label><?xmltex \opttitle{PM${}_{{2.5}}$ exposures in the YRD region}?><title>PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M421" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposures in the YRD region</title>
      <p id="d1e5898">Figure 5 illustrates the spatial distributions of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M422" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations
for the base case (case 2) and the differences of cases 3 and 4 compared to
the base case. The reduction of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M423" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations from the
implementation of the ultra-low emission policy in the power sector was less
than 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M424" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M425" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> over the YRD region (Fig. 5b). Larger reductions
(above 0.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M426" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M427" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) were found in northern Anhui and northern and
southern Jiangsu provinces, as those regions are the energy base of eastern
China, with abundant coal mines and power plants with large installed
capacities. With the policy expanded to certain industrial sectors, the
simulated average PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M428" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations were 5.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M429" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M430" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> lower
for the whole region (Fig. 5c). In particular, the difference was greater
than 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M431" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M432" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> along the Yangtze River, as there are many
industrial parks located along the river containing a large number of big
cement, iron and steel, and chemical industry plants. Stringent emission
controls at those plants would result in significant benefits in air quality
for local residents.</p>
      <p id="d1e6009">We further calculated the fractions of the population with different annual
average PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M433" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure levels in cases 2–4, as shown in Fig. 6.
Compared to case 2, slight differences in the population distribution by
exposure level were found in case 3, while the differences were much more
significant in case 4. The population fractions exposed to the average
annual concentrations of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M434" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> smaller than 35, 35–45, and 45–55 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M435" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M436" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> were estimated to grow from 14 %
in case 2 to 21 % in case 4, from 11 % to 16 %, and from 16 % to
30 %, respectively (note that 35 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M437" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M438" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> is the annual PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M439" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentration limit in the current National Ambient Air Quality Standard for
China). Accordingly, the fraction exposed to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M440" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations
larger than 55 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M441" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M442" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> declined from 59 % to 33 %. The
implementation of ultra-low emission policy on both power plants and
industry sources thus proved an effective way in limiting the population
exposed to high PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M443" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> levels.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Table 4</label><caption><p id="d1e6121">The estimated mortality and YLL attributable to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M444" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposures
in case 2 over the YRD region.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.95}[.95]?><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <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="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">STK</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">IHD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">COPD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">LC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">LRI</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Total</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col7">Deaths (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M445" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M446" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> persons) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Anhui</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">19.6 (10.7–29.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">19.1 (11.0–29.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">15.2 (9.8–21.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">8.0 (5.5–10.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3.1 (2.4–3.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">65.0 (39.4–93.9)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Shanghai</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.3 (2.3–6.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4.2 (2.4–6.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4.4 (2.7–6.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.6 (1.7–3.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.8 (0.6–1.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">16.3 (9.8–23.4)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Jiangsu</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">23.6 (12.7–35.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">31.3 (17.8–48.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">12.8 (8.1–17.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">8.1 (5.5–10.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3.7 (2.8–4.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">79.5 (46.8–116.5)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Zhejiang</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">8.7 (4.2–13.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">6.8 (3.6–10.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">10.8 (6.2–15.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">5.0 (3.1–6.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.6 (1.1–2.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">32.9 (18.2–48.2)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">YRD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">56.2 (29.9–83.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">61.4 (34.7–95.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">43.3 (26.8–60.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">23.6 (15.8–31.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">9.2 (7.0–11.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">193.8 (114.2–281.9)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col7">YLL (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M447" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M448" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> years) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Anhui</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">30.1 (16.6–44.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">29.6 (17.3–45.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">66.0 (42.3–91.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">34.5 (23.7–44.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">13.6 (10.4–16.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">173.7 (110.3–241.5)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Shanghai</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">6.7 (3.6–9.8)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">6.5 (3.8–10.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">19.0 (11.9–26.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">11.0 (7.4–14.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3.5 (2.7–4.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">46.7 (29.4–64.8)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Jiangsu</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">36.2 (19.7–53.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">48.6 (28.0–74.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">55.6 (35.0–76.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">35.0 (23.6–45.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">16.0 (12.3–19.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">191.4 (118.5–269.5)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Zhejiang</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">13.3 (6.5–20.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">10.6 (5.7–16.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">46.9 (26.7–66.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">21.8 (13.6–30.0)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">6.8 (4.8–8.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">99.4 (57.2–141.9)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">YRD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">86.3 (46.3–127.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">95.3 (54.7–146.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">187.4 (115.9–260.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">102.3 (68.3–134.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">40.0 (30.1–48.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">511.3 (315.5–717.7)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e6482">The spatial distributions of the mortality <bold>(a)</bold> and YLL <bold>(b)</bold>
attributable to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M449" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure in case 2 at a horizontal resolution of
9 km.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/6411/2021/acp-21-6411-2021-f07.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2.SSS2">
  <label>3.2.2</label><title>Human health risk with base case emissions</title>
      <p id="d1e6514">The mortality and YLL caused by atmospheric PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M450" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure with the
base case emissions (case 2) in the YRD region are shown in Table 4. The
values in brackets represent the 95 % confidence interval (CI) attributed
to the uncertainty of IER curves (i.e., uncertainties from other sources
were excluded in the 95 % CI estimation such as air quality model
mechanisms, emission inventories, and population data). With the base case
emissions, the NMB of the simulated and observed annual PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M451" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations (based on the four representative months) was calculated at
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M452" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % for the YRD region. Therefore, the influence of the biases between
the simulations and observations on the estimated health risks was
negligible and thus not considered in this study. The total attributable
deaths due to all diseases caused by PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M453" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure in the YRD region
were estimated at 194 000 (114 000–282 000), with STK, IHD, and COPD causing
the most deaths, accounting for 29 %, 32 %, and 22 % of the total,
respectively. With larger populations in Anhui and Jiangsu (32 % and
37 % of the regional total, respectively), more deaths caused by PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M454" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
exposure were found in these two provinces, at 34 % and 41 % of the
total deaths, respectively. Among all the diseases, STK was found to cause
the largest number of mortalities (19 600) in Anhui with PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M455" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
exposure, IHD in Jiangsu (31 300), and COPD in Shanghai (4400) and Zhejiang
(10 800). The total YLL caused by PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M456" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure in the YRD region was
5.11 million years (3.16–7.18 million years). More YLL caused by
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M457" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure was found in Anhui and Jiangsu, accounting for 34 %
and 37 % of the total in the YRD region, respectively. YLL values caused by COPD
were the largest in all the provinces, with 0.66 million, 0.19 million, 0.56 million, and 0.47 million years estimate for Anhui, Shanghai, Jiangsu, and Zhejiang,
respectively. The spatial distribution of attributable deaths and YLL caused
by PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M458" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure was basically consistent with that of population in
the YRD region, with correlation coefficients of 0.94 and 0.96, respectively.
As shown in Fig. 7, higher health risks attributed to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M459" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> pollution
in the base case (case 2) were commonly found in the areas with larger
population densities, including the areas along the Yangtze River, central
Shanghai and some urban areas in Anhui. We further compared the population
deaths attributable to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M460" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure calculated in this study with the
reported total deaths in provincial<?pagebreak page6423?> statistical yearbooks (AHBS, 2016; JSBS,
2016; SHBS, 2016; ZJBS, 2016) and found that the deaths caused by
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M461" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure accounted for 18 %, 14 %, 15 %, and 11 % of the
total deaths in Anhui, Jiangsu, Shanghai, and Zhejiang, respectively, for 2015.
The numbers were larger than the estimate (6.9 %) by Maji et al. (2018),
which focused on 161 cities in China. As one of the most developed and
industrialized regions in China, the YRD suffered higher PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M462" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> pollution
level than the national average, leading to the larger fraction of premature
death due to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M463" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure. Moreover, the baseline disease-specific
mortality rates applied in this study (from GHDx) were commonly higher than
those in Maji et al. (2018) except for LRI, resulting in the larger estimate
of death rates exposed to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M464" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e6657">Comparisons of the estimated mortality attributable to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M465" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
exposure in various studies for the YRD region.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/6411/2021/acp-21-6411-2021-f08.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e6675">Many studies have focused on the human health risks attributable to air
pollution in China, with considerable disparities between them due to
different estimation methods and health endpoints selected. Figure 8
compares the estimates of premature deaths caused by PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M466" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure in
the YRD region in this and previous studies. Relatively close results are
found between studies for the same regions and periods. For example, Hu et
al. (2017) and Liu et al. (2016) estimated that the premature deaths of
adults (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M467" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 30 years old) due to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M468" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure were 223 000
and 245 000, respectively, in 2013 in the YRD region. However, the health
endpoints in these two studies were not completely consistent. COPD, LC, IHD,
and CEV (cerebrovascular disease) were selected in Hu et al. (2017), while
COPD, LC, IHD, and STK were chosen by Liu et al. (2016). The deaths caused by
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M469" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure in Shanghai were estimated at 19 000, 15 000, and 16 000 in Maji et al. (2018), Song et al. (2017), and this study,
respectively. The IER model and the same<?pagebreak page6424?> health endpoints were adopted in
all three studies, while the PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M470" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations were derived from
ground observations in the former two studies instead of air quality
simulation in this study. The premature deaths attributable to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M471" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
exposure in the YRD region in 2015 were estimated at 122 000 in Maji et al. (2018) and 194 000 in this study, respectively. Besides the different
baseline mortality rates adopted in the two studies as mentioned earlier,
the smaller estimate by Maji et al. (2018) could also result partly from
inclusion of only typical cities instead of all cities in the YRD region.
There are clear disparities in estimates of premature deaths for different
years. For example, the death estimates caused by PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M472" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure in
2015 were generally smaller than those in 2013. As the population and age
distributions remained relatively stable over the 2 years (AHBS, 2016;
JSBS, 2016; SHBS, 2016; ZJBS, 2016), the reduced estimated premature deaths
result to some extent from emission abatement and air quality improvement.
According to relevant studies of Shanghai in particular (Lelieveld et al.,
2013, 2015; Liu et al., 2016; Xie et al., 2016; Hu et al., 2017; Song et
al., 2017; Maji et al., 2018), the premature deaths attributable to
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M473" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure increased from 2005 to 2013 and then declined
afterwards, reflecting the health benefit of air pollution control measures
in Shanghai in recent years.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Table 5</label><caption><p id="d1e6753">The reduced attributable deaths (persons) and rates (in parentheses)
resulting from implementation of the ultra-low emission policy in the YRD
region.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <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="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">STK</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">IHD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">COPD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">LC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">LRI</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Total</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col7">Case 3 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Anhui</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">26 (0.13 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">19 (0.10 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">24 (0.16 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">18 (0.22 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">6 (0.18 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">92 (0.14 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Shanghai</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1 (0.03 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1 (0.02 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1 (0.03 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1 (0.04 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0 (0.04 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">5 (0.03 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Jiangsu</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">51 (0.22 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">51 (0.16 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">34 (0.27 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">30 (0.37 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">11 (0.31 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">177 (0.22 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Zhejiang</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">7 (0.08 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4 (0.06 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">11 (0.10 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">7 (0.14 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2 (0.13 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">31 (0.10 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">YRD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">85 (0.15 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">74 (0.12 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">71 (0.16 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">55 (0.23 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">19 (0.21 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">305 (0.16 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col7">Case 4 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Anhui</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">901 (4.59 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">650 (3.41 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">848 (5.56 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">605 (7.60 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">196 (6.23 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3200 (4.92 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Shanghai</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">281 (6.46 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">204 (4.84 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">348 (7.95 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">277 (10.86 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">75 (9.20 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1185 (7.26 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Jiangsu</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1192 (5.05 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1179 (3.76 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">794 (6.19 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">684 (8.47 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">264 (7.14 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4114 (5.17 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Zhejiang</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">475 (5.49 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">283 (4.16 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">765 (7.06 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">491 (9.77 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">138 (8.72 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2152 (6.54 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">YRD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2848 (5.06 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2316 (3.77 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2755 (6.37 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2058 (8.71 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">673 (7.28 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">10 651 (5.50 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Table 6</label><caption><p id="d1e7073">The reduced cases and rates (in parentheses) of YLL resulting from
implementation of the ultra-low emission policy in the YRD region.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <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="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">STK</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">IHD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">COPD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">LC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">LRI</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Total</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col7">Case 3 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Anhui</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">396 (0.13 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">285 (0.10 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1058 (0.16 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">760 (0.22 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">243 (0.18 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2743 (0.16 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Shanghai</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">17 (0.03 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">13 (0.02 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">60 (0.03 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">45 (0.04 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">13 (0.04 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">148 (0.03 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Jiangsu</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">783 (0.22 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">774 (0.16 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1480 (0.27 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1282 (0.37 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">491 (0.31 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4809 (0.25 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Zhejiang</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">107 (0.08 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">66 (0.06 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">483 (0.10 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">301 (0.14 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">87 (0.13 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1044 (0.11 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">YRD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1303 (0.15 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1138 (0.12 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3118 (0.16 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2388 (0.23 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">834 (0.21 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">8744 (0.17 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col7">Case 4 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Anhui</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">13 733 (4.56 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">9946 (3.36 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">36 709 (5.56 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">26 218 (7.60 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">8480 (6.23 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">95 086 (5.47 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Shanghai</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4284 (6.43 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3127 (4.78 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">15 083 (7.95 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">11 993 (10.86 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3233 (9.20 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">37 719 (8.07 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Jiangsu</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">18 192 (5.02 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">18 066 (3.72 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">34 393 (6.19 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">29 638 (8.47 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">11 451 (7.14 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">111 740 (5.84 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Zhejiang</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">7297 (5.49 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4380 (4.13 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">33 115 (7.06 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">21 255 (9.77 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5972 (8.72 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">72 018 (7.25 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">YRD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">43 506 (5.04 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">35 518 (3.73 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">119 300 (6.37 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">89 104 (8.71 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">29 135 (7.28 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">316 562 (6.19 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2.SSS3">
  <label>3.2.3</label><title>Benefits of emission controls on human health</title>
      <p id="d1e7398">Tables 5 and 6, respectively, summarize the avoided premature deaths and YLL
by disease and region that would result from implementation of the ultra-low
emission control policy and thereby reduced PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M474" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> pollution in the YRD
region. If only the coal-fired power sector met the ultra-low emission
limits (case 3), nearly 305 premature deaths would be avoided compared to
the base case emissions in 2015, with a tiny reduction rate of only
0.16 %. If the policy is strictly implemented for selected industrial
sectors as well (case 4), 10 651 premature deaths could be avoided with a
reduction rate at 5.50 %. The largest numbers of avoided premature deaths
were found in Anhui and Jiangsu, accounting collectively for 88.2 % and
68.7 % of the total avoided deaths in cases 3 and 4, respectively. The
greatest impacts from reduced PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M475" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations were found for STK,
of which the avoided deaths were calculated at 85 and 2848 in cases 3 and 4,
respectively. The health effects of emission control policies in the YRD
region have been investigated in previous studies. Using the IER model, Dai
et al. (2019) chose the premature deaths from IHD, CEV, COPD, and LC as
health endpoints and found that the Clean Air Action Plan would avoid 3439
deaths caused by PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M476" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure in Shanghai, which is more than those in both
case 3 and case 4 in this study (5 and 1185, respectively). Applying
environmental health risk and valuation methods, Li and Li (2018) found that
15 709 premature deaths attributable to air pollution could be avoided in
2015 if the PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M477" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in Jiangsu province were assumed to
meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (GB3095-2012, 35 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M478" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M479" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> as the annual average). The estimate is much more than those
calculated in case 3 and case 4 (177 and 4114 deaths, respectively). The
larger health benefits estimated in those two studies result from their
assumption of emission control measures covering a much wider range of
sectors including energy, industry, transportation, construction, and
agriculture, while only the ultra-low emission policy was assumed for the
power and industry sectors in this study. The comparisons illustrate that
the health benefits<?pagebreak page6425?> from emission control in the power sector alone is
limited, and that controls in other sectors are essential. In addition, the
different methods and inconsistent data sources partly led to the
discrepancies. For the particle exposure estimation, as an example, Dai et
al. (2019) adopted the BENMAP-CE model (Environmental Benefits Mapping and
Analysis Program – Community Edition; Yang et al., 2013) to simulate the
ambient PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M480" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations, while Li and Li (2018) used the average
of monitored PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M481" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations. As shown in Table 6, the avoided YLL values
for case 3 and case 4 were estimated at 8744 and 316 562 years, respectively,
compared to the base case, confirming again the greatly improved health
benefits from implementation of ultra-low emission policy for the industry
sector in addition to the power sector. The largest avoided YLL values were found
in Anhui and Jiangsu in the YRD region, accounting collectively for 86 %
and 65 % of the total avoided YLL in cases 3 and 4, respectively. Compared
to case 3, the fractions of Shanghai and Zhejiang to total YRD for both
avoided deaths (Table 5) and YLL (Table 6) values were clearly higher in case 4,
implying a greater health benefit of emission controls at industry sources
in these relatively industrialized urban regions. The reduced PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M482" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations led to the largest avoided YLL of COPD in both cases (3118
and 119 300 years in cases 3 and 4, respectively).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e7487">The spatial distributions of the avoided deaths and YLL
attributable to the reduced PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M483" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure with ultra-low emission
policy implementation at a horizontal resolution of 9 km. Note the different
color ranges in the panels for easier visualization.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/6411/2021/acp-21-6411-2021-f09.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?pagebreak page6426?><p id="d1e7505">Figure 9 illustrates the spatial distributions of the avoided deaths and YLL
from the ultra-low emission policy in the YRD region. When the policy was
implemented only for coal-fired power plants, the health benefits were small
and the regional differences relatively insignificant, with the avoided
deaths and YLL smaller than 10 persons and 100 years, respectively, for all of
the grid cells (Fig. 9a and b). When the policy was implemented both in
power and industry sectors, more avoided deaths (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M484" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 40 person per grid
cell) and YLL (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M485" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 400 years per grid cell) were found in northern
Anhui, southern Jiangsu, central Shanghai, and northern Zhejiang (Fig. 9c
and d). The spatial correlation coefficient between the avoided YLL in case 4 and population was 0.93, indicating that the implementation of the
emission control policy would lead to greater health benefits for areas with
intensive economic activity and dense populations.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>4</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e7532">We evaluated the improvement of emission estimation by incorporating CEMS
data for the power sector, and we explored the air quality and health benefits
from the ultra-low emission control policy for the YRD region through air
quality modeling. In general, the bias between ground observations and
simulations based on the emission inventory with CEMS data incorporated was
smaller than that without, suggesting that appropriate use of online
monitoring information helped improve the emission estimation and model
performance. Compared to the base case in which CEMS data were incorporated
in emission estimation, the simulated monthly concentrations of all the
concerned species (SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M486" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M487" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M488" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M489" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) differed
less than 7 % when the ultra-low emission policy was enacted only in the
coal-fired power sector, given its small fraction of total emissions. When
the policy was implemented for selected industrial sectors as well, larger
differences in air quality from the base case were found, with the simulated
concentrations of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M490" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M491" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M492" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively,
33 %–64 %, 16 %–23 %, and 6 %–22 % lower with O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M493" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> 3 %–14 %
higher, depending on the month.</p>
      <?pagebreak page6427?><p id="d1e7608">Nearly 305 premature deaths and 8744 years of YLL would be avoided if the
policy were implemented for the power sector alone, and benefits would reach
10 651 premature deaths and 316 562 YLL avoided with the policy enacted for
both power and industrial sectors. The study revealed the limited potential
for further emission reduction and air quality improvement via controls in
the power sector alone. Along with stringent emission control in that
sector, the coordinated control of emissions from industrial
sources (other than the power industry) would be essential to effectively improve air quality and reduce
associated human health risks. Moreover, more attention needs to be paid to
control of VOCs to limit O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M494" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> formation resulting from reduction of
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M495" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the region.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e7634">All data in this study are available from the authors upon request.</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e7637">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6411-2021-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6411-2021-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e7646">YZhang developed the strategy and methodology of the work and wrote the
draft. YZhao improved the methodology and revised the article. MG
provided useful comments on the health risk analysis. XB provided emission
monitoring data. CPN revised the article.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e7652">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e7658">This work was sponsored by the Natural Science Foundation of China (41922052 and 91644220), National Key Research and Development Program of China (2017YFC0210106), a Harvard Global Institute award to the Harvard-China Project on Energy, Economy and Environment, and the Key Program for Coordinated Control of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M496" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and Ozone for Jiangsu Province (2019023). We would also like to thank Tsinghua University for the free use of national emissions data (MEIC).</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e7672">This research has been supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant nos. 41922052 and 91644220), the National Key Research and Development Program of China (grant no. 2017YFC0210106), and the Key Program for Coordinated Control of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M497" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and Ozone for Jiangsu Province (2019023).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e7687">This paper was edited by Min Shao and reviewed by three anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
An, X., Sun, Z., Lin, W., Jin, M., and Li, N.: Emission inventory evaluation
using observations of regional atmospheric background stations of China, J.
Environ. Sci., 25, 537–536, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
AHBS (Anhui Bureau of Statistics): Statistical Yearbook of Anhui, China
Statistics Press, Beijing, 2016 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Baker, K., Johnson, M., and King, S.: Meteorological modeling performance
summary for application to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M498" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>/haze/ozone modeling projects, Lake
Michigan Air Directors Consortium, Midwest Regional Planning Organization,
Des Plaines, Illinois, USA, 57 pp., 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Burnett, R., Chen, H., Szyszkowicz, M., Fann, N., Hubbell, B., Pope III, C. A., Apte, J. S., Brauer, M., Cohen, A., Weichenthal, S., Coggins, J., Di, Q., Brunekreef, B., Frostad, J., Lim, S. S., Kan, H., Walker, K. D., Thurston, G. D., Hayes, R. B., Lim, C. C., Turner, M. C., Jerrett, M., Krewski, D., Gapstur, S. M., Diver, W. R., Ostro, B., Goldberg, D., Crouse, D. L., Martin, R. V., Peters, P., Pinault, L., Tjepkema, M., van Donkelaar, A., Villeneuve, P. J., Miller, A. B., Yin, P., Zhou, M., Wang, L., Janssen, N. A. H., Marra, M., Atkinson, R. W., Tsang, H., Thach, T. Q, Cannon, J. B., Allen, R. T., Hart, J. E., Laden, F., Cesaroni, G., Forastiere, F., Weinmayr, G., Jaensch, A., Nagel, G., Concin, H., and Spadaro, J. V.: Global estimates of mortality associated with long-term exposure to outdoor fine particulate matter, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 115, 9592–9597, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1803222115" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.1803222115</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Butt, E. W., Turnock, S. T., Rigby, R., Reddington, C. L., Yoshioka, M.,
Johnson, J. S., Regayre, L. A., Pringle, K. J., Mann, G. W., and Spracklen,
D. V.: Global and regional trends in particulate air pollution and
attributable health burden over the past 50 years, Environ. Res. Lett., 12, 104017,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa87be" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/aa87be</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Chang, X., Wang, S., Zhao, B., Xing, J., Liu, X., Wei, L., Song, Y., Wu, W.,
Cai, S., Zheng, H., Ding, D., and Zheng, M.: Contributions of inter-city and
regional transport to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M499" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei
region and its implications on regional joint air pollution control, Sci.
Total. Environ., 660, 1191–1200, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.474" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.474</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Cohen, A. J., Brauer, M., Burnett, R., Anderson, H. R., Frostad, J., Estep, K., Balakrishnan, K., Brunekreef, B., Dandona, L., Dandona, R., Feigin, V., Freedman,G., Hubbell, B., Jobling, A., Kan, H., Knibbs, L., Liu, Y., Randall M; Morawska, L., Pope, C. A., Shin, H., Straif, K., Shaddick, G., Thomas, M., Dingenen, R. V., Donkelaar, A. V., Vos, T., Murray, C. J. L., and Forouzanfar, M. H.: Estimates and 25-year trends of the global burden of disease
attributable to ambient air pollution: an analysis of data from the Global
Burden of Diseases Study 2015, Lancet, 389, 1907–1918, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dai, H. X., An, J. Y., Li, L., Huang, C., Yan, R. S., Zhu, S. H., Ma, Y. G.,
Song, W. M., and Kan, H. D.: Health Benefit Analyses of the Clean Air Action
Plan Implementation in Shanghai, Huan Jing Ke Xue, 40, 24–32, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.13227/j.hjkx.201804201" ext-link-type="DOI">10.13227/j.hjkx.201804201</ext-link>, 2019 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dockery, D. W., Pope, C. A., Xu, X. P., Spengler, J. D., Ware, J. H., Fay,
M. E., Ferris, B. G., and Speizer, F. E.: An Assocation between
air-pollution and mortality in 6 United-States cities, N. Engl. J. Med.,
329, 1753–1759, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199312093292401" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1056/nejm199312093292401</ext-link>, 1993.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page6428?><ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Emery, C., Tai, E., and Yarwood, G.: Enhanced meteorological modeling and
performance evaluation for two Texas episodes, Report to the Texas Natural
Resources Conservation Commission, prepared by ENVIRON, International Corp,
Novato, CA, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Fu, J. S., Jang, C. J., Streets, D. G., Li, Z., Kwok, R., Park, R., and Han,
Z.: MICS-Asia II: Modeling gaseous pollutants and evaluating an advanced
modeling system over East Asia, Atmos. Environ., 42, 3571–3583, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.07.058" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.07.058</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gao, J., Wang, T., Ding, A. J., and Liu, C. B.: Observational study of ozone
and carbon monoxide at the summit of mount Tai (1534 m a.s.l.) in
central-eastern China, Atmos. Environ., 39, 4779–4791, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.030" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.030</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Gao, J. H., Zhu, B., Xiao, H., Kang, H. Q., Hou, X. W., and Shao, P.: A case
study of surface ozone source apportionment during a high concentration
episode, under frequent shifting wind conditions over the Yangtze River
Delta, China, Sci. Total Environ., 544, 853–863, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gao, M., Beig, G., Song, S., Zhang, H., Hu, J., Ying, Q., Liang, F., Liu,
Y., Wang, H., Lu, X., Zhu, T., Carmichael, G. R., Nielsen, C. P., and
McElroy, M. B.: The impact of power generation emissions on ambient
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M500" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> pollution and human health in China and India, Environ. Int.,
121, 250–259, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.09.015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.envint.2018.09.015</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Gleser, L. J.: Bootstrap confidence intervals, Stat. Sci., 11,
219–221, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Guenther, A. B., Jiang, X., Heald, C. L., Sakulyanontvittaya, T., Duhl, T., Emmons, L. K., and Wang, X.: The Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature version 2.1 (MEGAN2.1): an extended and updated framework for modeling biogenic emissions, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 1471–1492, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-1471-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-5-1471-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Han, K. M., Lee, S., Chang, L. S., and Song, C. H.: A comparison study between CMAQ-simulated and OMI-retrieved NO2 columns over East Asia for evaluation of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M501" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emission fluxes of INTEX-B, CAPSS, and REAS inventories, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 1913–1938, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-1913-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-1913-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>He, J. J., Yu, Y., Yu, L. J., Liu, N., and Zhao, S. P.: Impacts of
uncertainty in land surface information on simulated surface temperature and
precipitation over China, Int. J. Climatol., 37, 829–847, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5041" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/joc.5041</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hoek, G., Krishnan, R. M., Beelen, R., Peters, A., Ostro, B., Brunekreef,
B., and Kaufman, J. D.: Long-term air pollution exposure and cardio-
respiratory mortality: a review, Environ. Health, 12, 43, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-069x-12-43" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1186/1476-069x-12-43</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hu, J., Huang, L., Chen, M., Liao, H., and Ying, Q.: Premature mortality
attributable to particulate matter in China: source contributions and
responses to reductions, Environ. Sci. Technol., 51, 9950–9959, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Huang, C., Chen, C. H., Li, L., Cheng, Z., Wang, H. L., Huang, H. Y., Streets, D. G., Wang, Y. J., Zhang, G. F., and Chen, Y. R.: Emission inventory of anthropogenic air pollutants and VOC species in the Yangtze River Delta region, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 4105–4120, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-4105-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-4105-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Huang, K., Fu, J., Gao, Y., Dong, X., Zhuang, G., Yang, G., and Lin, Y.: Role of sectoral and multi-pollutant emission control strategies in improving atmospheric visibility in the Yangtze river delta, china, Environ. Pollut., 184, 426–434, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
JSBS (Jiangsu Bureau of Statistics): Statistical Yearbook of Jiangsu, China
Statistics Press, Beijing, 2016 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lei, Y., Xue, W. B., Zhang, Y. S., and Xu, Y. L.: Health benefit evaluation
for air pollution prevention and control action plan in China, Chinese
Environ. Manage., 5, 50–53, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.16868/j.cnki.1674-6252.2015.05.009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.16868/j.cnki.1674-6252.2015.05.009</ext-link>, 2015 (in
Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lelieveld, J., Barlas, C., Giannadaki, D., and Pozzer, A.: Model calculated global, regional and megacity premature mortality due to air pollution, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 7023–7037, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-7023-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-7023-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lelieveld, J., Evans, J. S., Fnais, M., Giannadaki, D., and Pozzer, A.: The
contribution of outdoor air pollution sources to premature mortality on a
global scale, Nature, 525, 367-371, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature15371" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/nature15371</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Li, H. J. and Li, M. Q.: Assessment on health benefit of air pollution
control in Jiangsu province, Chinese Public Health, 34, 12, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.11847/zgggws1117789" ext-link-type="DOI">10.11847/zgggws1117789</ext-link>, 2018 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Li, L., Chen, C. H., Fu, J. S., Huang, C., Streets, D. G., Huang, H. Y., Zhang, G. F., Wang, Y. J., Jang, C. J., Wang, H. L., Chen, Y. R., and Fu, J. M.: Air quality and emissions in the Yangtze River Delta, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 1621–1639, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-1621-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-1621-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Li, L., Chen, C. H., Huang, C., Huang, H. Y., Zhang, G. F., Wang, Y. J., Wang, H. L., Lou, S. R., Qiao, L. P., Zhou, M., Chen, M. H., Chen, Y. R., Streets, D. G., Fu, J. S., and Jang, C. J.: Process analysis of regional ozone formation over the Yangtze River Delta, China using the Community Multi-scale Air Quality modeling system, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 10971–10987, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-10971-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-10971-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Li, L., An, J. Y., and Lu, Q.: Modeling Assessment of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M502" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
Concentrations Under implementation of Clean Air Action Plan in the Yangtze
River Delta Region, Res. Environ. Sci., 28, 1653–1661, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.13198/j.issn.1001-6929.2015.11.01" ext-link-type="DOI">10.13198/j.issn.1001-6929.2015.11.01</ext-link>, 2015 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Li, M., Zhang, D., Li, C.-T., Selin, N. E., and Karplus, V. J.: Co-benefits of
China's climate policy for air quality and human health in China and
transboundary regions in 2030, Environ. Res. Lett., 14, 084006, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab26ca" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/ab26ca</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liao, J. B., Wang, T. J., Jiang, Z. Q., Zhuang, B. L., Xie, M., Yin, C. Q.,
Wang, X. M.., Zhu, J. L., Fu, Y., and Zhang, Y.: WRF/Chem modeling of the
impacts of urban expansion on regional climate and air pollutants in Yangtze
River Delta, China, Atmos. Environ., 106, 204–214, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.01.059" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.01.059</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Lim, S. S., Vos, T., Flaxman, A. D., Danaei, G., Shibuya, K., Adair-Rohani, H., AlMazroa, M. A., Amann, M., Anderson, H. R., Andrews, K. G., Aryee, M., Atkinson, C., Bacchus, L. J., Bahalim, A. N., Balakrishnan, K., Balmes, J., Barker-Collo, S., Baxter, A., Bell, M. L., Blore, J. D., Blyth, F., Bonner, C., Borges, G., Bourne, R., Boussinesq, M., Brauer, M., Brooks, P., Bruce, N. G., Brunekreef, B., Bryan-Hancock, C., and Buc, C.: A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury
attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions,
1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study
2010, Lancet, 380, 2224–2260, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page6429?><ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, J., Han, Y., Tang, X., Zhu, J., and Zhu, T.: Estimating adult mortality
attributable to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M503" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure in China with assimilated PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M504" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations based on a ground monitoring network, Sci. Total Environ.,
568, 1253–1262, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, X., Gao, X., Wu, X., Yu, W., Chen, L., Ni, R., Zhao, Y., Duan, H.,
Zhao, F., Chen, L., Gao, S., Xu, K., Lin, J., and Ku, A. Y.: Updated Hourly
Emissions Factors for Chinese Power Plants Showing the Impact of Widespread
Ultralow Emissions Technology Deployment, Environ. Sci. Technol., 53,
2570–2578, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b07241" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/acs.est.8b07241</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, X. H., Zhang, Y., Xing, J., Zhang, Q., Wang, K., Streets, D. G., Jiang,
C., Wang, W. X., and Hao, J. M.: Understanding of regional air pollution
over China using CMAQ, part II. Process analysis and sensitivity of ozone
and particulate matter to precursor emissions, Atmos. Environ., 44,
3719–3727, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.03.036" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.03.036</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lu, Y., Zhao, X., and Zhao, Y.: The comparison and evaluation of air pollutant
simulation for the Yangtze River Delta region with different versions of air
quality model. Environ. Monit. Forewarn., 12, 6–14, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-6732.2020.03.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3969/j.issn.1674-6732.2020.03.001</ext-link>, 2020 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Maji, K. J., Dikshit, A. K., Arora, M., and Deshpande, A.: Estimating
premature mortality attributable to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M505" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure and benefit of air
pollution control policies in China for 2020, Sci. Total Environ., 612,
683–693, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.254" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.254</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ohara, T., Akimoto, H., Kurokawa, J., Horii, N., Yamaji, K., Yan, X., and Hayasaka, T.: An Asian emission inventory of anthropogenic emission sources for the period 1980–2020, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 4419–4444, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-4419-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-7-4419-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Price, C., Penner, J., and Prather, M.: NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M506" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> from lightning: 1. Global
distribution based on lightning physics, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 102,
5929–5941, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/96jd03504" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/96jd03504</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Shanghai Bureau of Statistics (SHBS): Statistical Yearbook of Shanghai,
China Statistics Press, Beijing, 2016 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sindelarova, K., Granier, C., Bouarar, I., Guenther, A., Tilmes, S., Stavrakou, T., Müller, J.-F., Kuhn, U., Stefani, P., and Knorr, W.: Global data set of biogenic VOC emissions calculated by the MEGAN model over the last 30 years, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 9317–9341, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-9317-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-9317-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Skamarock, W. C., Klemp, J. B., Dudhia, J., Gill, D. O., Barker, D. M.,
Duda, M. G., Huang, X.-Y., Wang, W., and Powers, J. G.: A Description of the
Advanced Research WRF Version 3, NCAR Tech. Note NCAR/TN-475<inline-formula><mml:math id="M507" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>STR, 113 pp., <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5065/D68S4MVH" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5065/D68S4MVH</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Song, C., He, J., Wu, L., Jin, T., Chen, X., Li, R., Ren, P., Zhang, L., and
Mao, H.: Health burden attributable to ambient PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M508" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in China, Environ.
Pollut., 223, 575–586, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tan, J., Fu, J. S., Huang, K., Yang, C.-E., Zhuang, G., and Sun, J.:
Effectiveness of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M509" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emission control policy on power plants in the
Yangtze River Delta, China-post-assessment of the 11th Five-Year Plan,
Environ. Sci. Pollut. R., 24, 8243–8255, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-8412-z" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11356-017-8412-z</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tang, L., Qu, J. B., Mi, Z. F., Bo, X., Chang, X. Y., Anadon, L. D., Wang,
S. Y., Xue, X. D., Li, S. B., Wang, X., and Zhao, X. H.: Substantial
emission reductions from Chinese power plants after the introduction of
ultra-low emissions standards, Nat. Energy, 4, 929–938, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-019-0468-1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41560-019-0468-1</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tang, Y., An, J., Wang, F., Li, Y., Qu, Y., Chen, Y., and Lin, J.: Impacts of an unknown daytime HONO source on the mixing ratio and budget of HONO, and hydroxyl, hydroperoxyl, and organic peroxy radicals, in the coastal regions of China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 9381–9398, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9381-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-9381-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC): Operational Guidance for
the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Modeling System Version 4.7.1
(June 2010 Release), available at: <uri>http://www.cmaq-model.org</uri> (last access: 10 February 2020), 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Uno, I., He, Y., Ohara, T., Yamaji, K., Kurokawa, J.-I., Katayama, M., Wang, Z., Noguchi, K., Hayashida, S., Richter, A., and Burrows, J. P.: Systematic analysis of interannual and seasonal variations of model-simulated tropospheric NO2 in Asia and comparison with GOME-satellite data, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 1671–1681, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-1671-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-7-1671-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wang, G., Zhang, R., Gomez, M. E., Yang, L., Levy, Zamora, M., Hu, M.; Lin, Y., Peng, J., Guo, S., Meng, J., Li, J., Cheng, C., Hu, T., Ren, Y., Wang, Y., Gao, J., Cao, J., An, Z., Zhou, W., Li, G., Wang, J., Tian, P., MarreroOrtiz, W., Secrest, J., Du, Z., Zheng, J., Shang, D., Zeng, L., Shao, M., Wang, W., Huang, Y., Wang, Y., Zhu, Y., Li, Y., Hu, J., Pan, B., Cai, L., Cheng, Y., Ji, Y., Zhang, F., Rosenfeld, D., Liss, P. S., Duce, R. A., Kolb, C. E., and Molina, M. J.: Persistent sulfate formation from London Fog to Chinese haze. P. Natl.
Acad. Sci., 48, 13630–13635, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1616540113" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.1616540113</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wang, K., Zhang, Y., Jang, C., Phillips, S., and Wang, B.: Modeling
intercontinental air pollution transport over the trans-Pacific region in
2001 using the Community Multiscale Air Quality modeling system, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 114, D04307, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008jd010807" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008jd010807</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wang, L. T., Jang, C., Zhang, Y., Wang, K., Zhang, Q., Streets, D. G., Fu,
J., Lei, Y., Schreifels, J., He, K. B., Hao, J. M., Lam, Y, Lin, J.,
Meskhidze, N., Voorhees, S., Evarts, D., and Phillips, S.: Assessment of air
quality benefits from national air pollution control policies in China. Part
II: Evaluation of air quality predictions and air quality benefits
assessment, Atmos. Environ., 44, 3449–3457, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.05.051" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.05.051</ext-link>,
2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><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.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wang, N., Lyu, X., Deng, X., Huang, X., Jiang, F., and Ding, A.: Aggravating
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M510" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> pollution due to NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M511" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emission control in eastern China, Sci. Total
Environ., 677, 732–744, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wang, Z., Pan, L., Li, Y., Zhang, D., Ma, J., Sun, F., Xu, W., and Wang, X.:
Assessment of air quality benefits from the national pollution control
policy of thermal power plants in China: A numerical simulation, Atmos.
Environ., 106, 288–304, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.01.022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.01.022</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Xia, Y., Zhao, Y., and Nielsen, C. P.: Benefits of of China's efforts in
gaseous pollutant control indicated by the bottom-up emissions and satellite
observations 2000–2014, Atmos. Environ., 136, 43–53, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.04.013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.04.013</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page6430?><ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Xie, R., Sabel, C. E., Lu, X., Zhu, W., Kan, H., Nielsen, C. P., and Wang,
H.: Long-term trend and spatial pattern of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M512" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> induced premature
mortality in China, Environ. Int., 97, 180–186, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2016.09.003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.envint.2016.09.003</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Xing, J., Wang, S. X., Jang, C., Zhu, Y., and Hao, J. M.: Nonlinear response of ozone to precursor emission changes in China: a modeling study using response surface methodology, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 5027–5044, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-5027-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-5027-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yang, C. F. O., Lin, N. H., Sheu, G. R., Lee, C. T., and Wang, J. L.:
Seasonal and diurnal variations of ozone at a high-altitude mountain
baseline station in East Asia, Atmos. Environ., 46, 279–288, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.09.060" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.09.060</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yang, J., Zhao, Y., Cao, J., and Nielsen, C.: Co-benefits of carbon and
pollution control policies on air quality and health till 2030 in China,
Environ. Int., 152, 106482, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2021.106482" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.envint.2021.106482</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yang, Y., Zhao, Y., Zhang, L., Zhang, J., Huang, X., Zhao, X., Zhang, Y., Xi, M., and Lu, Y.: Improvement of the satellite-derived NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M513" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions on air quality modeling and its effect on ozone and secondary inorganic aerosol formation in the Yangtze River Delta, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1191–1209, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1191-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-1191-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yang, Y., Zhu, Y., Jang, C., Xie, J. P., Wang, S. X., Fu, J., Lin, C. J.,
Ma, J., Ding, D., Qiu, X. Z., and Lao, Y. W.: Research and development of
environmental benefits mapping and analysis program: Community edition, Acta
Scientiae Circumstantiae, 33, 2395–2401, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.13671/j.hjkxxb.2013.09.022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.13671/j.hjkxxb.2013.09.022</ext-link>, 2013
(in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yue, H., He, C., Huang, Q., Yin, D., and Bryan, B. A.: Stronger policy
required to substantially reduce deaths from PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M514" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> pollution in China, Nat.
Commun., 11, 1462, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-15319-4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41467-020-15319-4</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yu, S., Mathur, R., Kang, D., Schere, K., Eder, B., and Pleirn, J.:
Performance and diagnostic evaluation of ozone predictions by the
eta-community multiscale air quality forecast system during the 2002 New
England Air Quality Study, J. Air Waste Manage., 56, 1459–1471, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10473289.2006.10464554" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/10473289.2006.10464554</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, L., Zhao, T., Gong, S., Kong, S., Tang, L., Liu, D., Wang, Y., Jin, L., Shan, Y., Tan, C., Zhang, Y., and Guo, X.: Updated emission inventories of power plants in simulating air quality during haze periods over East China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 2065–2079, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2065-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-2065-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, M., Uno, I., Zhang, R., Han, Z., Wang, Z., and Pu, Y.: Evaluation of
the Models-3 Community Multi-scale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system with
observations obtained during the TRACE-P experiment: Comparison of ozone and
its related species, Atmos. Environ., 40, 4874–4882, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmonsenv.2005.06.063" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmonsenv.2005.06.063</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, Q., Streets, D. G., Carmichael, G. R., He, K. B., Huo, H., Kannari, A., Klimont, Z., Park, I. S., Reddy, S., Fu, J. S., Chen, D., Duan, L., Lei, Y., Wang, L. T., and Yao, Z. L.: Asian emissions in 2006 for the NASA INTEX-B mission, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 5131–5153, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-5131-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-9-5131-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, Q., Zheng, Y., Tong, D., Shao, M., Wang, S., Zhang, Y., Xu, X., Wang, J., He, H., Liu, W., Ding, Y., Lei, Y., Li, J., Wang, Z., Zhang, X., Wang, Y., Cheng, J., Liu, Y., Shi, Q., Yan, L., Geng, G., Hong, C., Li, M., Liu, F., Zheng, B., Cao, J., Ding, A., Gao, J., Fu, Q., Huo, J., Liu, B., Liu, Z., Yang, F., He, K., and Hao, J.:
Drivers of improved PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M515" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> air quality in China from 2013 to 2017, P.
Natl. Acad. Sci., 116, 24463–24469, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, X., Dai, H. C., Jin, Y. N., and Zhang, S. Q.: Evaluation of health
and economic benefits from “Coal to Electricity” Policy in the residential
sector in the Jing-Jin-Ji Region, Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis
Pekinensis, 55, 2, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.13209/j.0479-8023.2018.098" ext-link-type="DOI">10.13209/j.0479-8023.2018.098</ext-link>, 2019 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Y., Bo, X., Zhao, Y., and Nielsen, C. P.: Benefits of current and
future policies on emissions of China's coal-fired power sector indicated by
continuous emission monitoring, Environ. Pollut., 251, 415–424, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, Y. H., Su, H., Zhong, L. J., Cheng, Y. F., Zeng, L. M., and Wang, X.
S.: Regional ozone pollution and observation-based approach for analyzing
ozone–precursor relationship during the PRIDE-PRD2004 campaign, Atmos.
Environ., 42, 6203–6218, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.05.002" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.05.002</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhao, B., Wang, S. X., Dong, X. Y., Wang, J. D., Duan, L., Fu, X., Hao, J.
M., and Fu, J.: Environmental effects of the recent emission changes in
China: implications for particulate matter pollution and soil acidification,
Environ. Res. Lett., 8, 024031, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024031" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024031</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhao, X., Zhao, Y., Chen, D., Li, C., and Zhang, J.: Top-down estimate of black carbon emissions for city clusters using ground observations: a case study in southern Jiangsu, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 2095–2113, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-2095-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-2095-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhao, Y., Wang, S., Duan, L., Lei, Y., Cao, P., and Hao, J.: Primary air pollutant emissions of coal-fired power plants in China: Current status and future prediction, Atmos. Environ., 42, 8442–8452, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.08.021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.08.021</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhao, Y., Zhang, J., and Nielsen, C. P.: The effects of recent control policies on trends in emissions of anthropogenic atmospheric pollutants and CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M516" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 487–508, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-487-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-487-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhao, Y., Mao, P., Zhou, Y., Yang, Y., Zhang, J., Wang, S., Dong, Y., Xie, F., Yu, Y., and Li, W.: Improved provincial emission inventory and speciation profiles of anthropogenic non-methane volatile organic compounds: a case study for Jiangsu, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 7733–7756, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7733-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-7733-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zheng, B., Zhang, Q., Tong, D., Chen, C., Hong, C., Li, M., Geng, G., Lei, Y., Huo, H., and He, K.: Resolution dependence of uncertainties in gridded emission inventories: a case study in Hebei, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 921–933, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-921-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-921-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zheng, H., Zhao, B., Wang, S., Wang, T., Ding, D., Chang, X., Liu, K., and
Xing, J.: Transition in source contributions of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M517" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exposure and
associated premature mortality in China during 2005–2015, Environ. Int. 132,
105111, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.105111" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.envint.2019.105111</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhou, Y., Zhao, Y., Mao, P., Zhang, Q., Zhang, J., Qiu, L., and Yang, Y.: Development of a high-resolution emission inventory and its evaluation and application through air quality modeling for Jiangsu Province, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 211–233, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-211-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-211-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
ZJBS (Zhejiang Bureau of Statistics): Statistical Yearbook of Zhejiang,
China Statistics Press, Beijing, 2016 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Air quality and health benefits from ultra-low emission control policy indicated by continuous emission monitoring: a case study in the Yangtze River Delta region, China</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>To evaluate the improved emission estimates from online monitoring, we
applied the Models-3/CMAQ (Community Multiscale Air Quality) system to
simulate the air quality of the Yangtze River Delta (YRD) region using two
emission inventories with and without incorporated data from continuous emission
monitoring systems (CEMSs) at coal-fired power plants (cases 1 and 2,
respectively). The normalized mean biases (NMBs) between the observed and
simulated hourly concentrations of SO<sub>2</sub>, NO<sub>2</sub>, O<sub>3</sub>, and
PM<sub>2.5</sub> in case 2 were −3.1&thinsp;%, 56.3&thinsp;%, −19.5&thinsp;%, and −1.4&thinsp;%, all
smaller in absolute value than those in case 1 at 8.2&thinsp;%, 68.9&thinsp;%,
−24.6&thinsp;%, and 7.6&thinsp;%, respectively. The results indicate that incorporation
of CEMS data in the emission inventory reduced the biases between simulation
and observation and could better reflect the actual sources of regional air
pollution. Based on the CEMS data, the air quality changes and corresponding
health impacts were quantified for different implementation levels of
China's recent <q>ultra-low</q> emission policy. If the coal-fired power sector
met the requirement alone (case 3), the differences in the simulated monthly
SO<sub>2</sub>, NO<sub>2</sub>, O<sub>3</sub>, and PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations compared to those
of case 2, our base case for policy comparisons, would be less than 7&thinsp;% for
all pollutants. The result implies a minor benefit of ultra-low emission
control if implemented in the power sector alone, which is attributed to its limited
contribution to the total emissions in the YRD after years of pollution
control (11&thinsp;%, 7&thinsp;%, and 2&thinsp;% of SO<sub>2</sub>, NO<sub><i>X</i></sub>, and primary particle
matter (PM) in case 2, respectively). If the ultra-low emission policy was
enacted at both power plants and selected industrial sources including
boilers, cement, and iron and steel factories (case 4), the simulated
SO<sub>2</sub>, NO<sub>2</sub>, and PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations compared to the base
case would be 33&thinsp;%–64&thinsp;%, 16&thinsp;%–23&thinsp;%, and 6&thinsp;%–22&thinsp;% lower, respectively,
depending on the month (January, April, July, and October 2015). Combining
CMAQ and the Integrated Exposure Response (IER) model, we further estimated
that 305 deaths and 8744 years of life loss (YLL) attributable to PM<sub>2.5</sub>
exposure could be avoided with the implementation of the ultra-low emission
policy in the power sector in the YRD region. The analogous values would be
much higher, at 10&thinsp;651 deaths and 316&thinsp;562 YLL avoided, if both power and
industrial sectors met the ultra-low emission limits. In order to improve
regional air quality and to reduce human health risk effectively,
coordinated control of multiple sources should be implemented, and the
ultra-low emission policy should be substantially expanded to major emission
sources in industries other than the power industry.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
An, X., Sun, Z., Lin, W., Jin, M., and Li, N.: Emission inventory evaluation
using observations of regional atmospheric background stations of China, J.
Environ. Sci., 25, 537–536, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
AHBS (Anhui Bureau of Statistics): Statistical Yearbook of Anhui, China
Statistics Press, Beijing, 2016 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Baker, K., Johnson, M., and King, S.: Meteorological modeling performance
summary for application to PM<sub>2.5</sub>/haze/ozone modeling projects, Lake
Michigan Air Directors Consortium, Midwest Regional Planning Organization,
Des Plaines, Illinois, USA, 57 pp., 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Burnett, R., Chen, H., Szyszkowicz, M., Fann, N., Hubbell, B., Pope III, C. A., Apte, J. S., Brauer, M., Cohen, A., Weichenthal, S., Coggins, J., Di, Q., Brunekreef, B., Frostad, J., Lim, S. S., Kan, H., Walker, K. D., Thurston, G. D., Hayes, R. B., Lim, C. C., Turner, M. C., Jerrett, M., Krewski, D., Gapstur, S. M., Diver, W. R., Ostro, B., Goldberg, D., Crouse, D. L., Martin, R. V., Peters, P., Pinault, L., Tjepkema, M., van Donkelaar, A., Villeneuve, P. J., Miller, A. B., Yin, P., Zhou, M., Wang, L., Janssen, N. A. H., Marra, M., Atkinson, R. W., Tsang, H., Thach, T. Q, Cannon, J. B., Allen, R. T., Hart, J. E., Laden, F., Cesaroni, G., Forastiere, F., Weinmayr, G., Jaensch, A., Nagel, G., Concin, H., and Spadaro, J. V.: Global estimates of mortality associated with long-term exposure to outdoor fine particulate matter, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 115, 9592–9597, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1803222115" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1803222115</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Butt, E. W., Turnock, S. T., Rigby, R., Reddington, C. L., Yoshioka, M.,
Johnson, J. S., Regayre, L. A., Pringle, K. J., Mann, G. W., and Spracklen,
D. V.: Global and regional trends in particulate air pollution and
attributable health burden over the past 50 years, Environ. Res. Lett., 12, 104017,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa87be" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa87be</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Chang, X., Wang, S., Zhao, B., Xing, J., Liu, X., Wei, L., Song, Y., Wu, W.,
Cai, S., Zheng, H., Ding, D., and Zheng, M.: Contributions of inter-city and
regional transport to PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei
region and its implications on regional joint air pollution control, Sci.
Total. Environ., 660, 1191–1200, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.474" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.474</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Cohen, A. J., Brauer, M., Burnett, R., Anderson, H. R., Frostad, J., Estep, K., Balakrishnan, K., Brunekreef, B., Dandona, L., Dandona, R., Feigin, V., Freedman,G., Hubbell, B., Jobling, A., Kan, H., Knibbs, L., Liu, Y., Randall M; Morawska, L., Pope, C. A., Shin, H., Straif, K., Shaddick, G., Thomas, M., Dingenen, R. V., Donkelaar, A. V., Vos, T., Murray, C. J. L., and Forouzanfar, M. H.: Estimates and 25-year trends of the global burden of disease
attributable to ambient air pollution: an analysis of data from the Global
Burden of Diseases Study 2015, Lancet, 389, 1907–1918, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Dai, H. X., An, J. Y., Li, L., Huang, C., Yan, R. S., Zhu, S. H., Ma, Y. G.,
Song, W. M., and Kan, H. D.: Health Benefit Analyses of the Clean Air Action
Plan Implementation in Shanghai, Huan Jing Ke Xue, 40, 24–32, <a href="https://doi.org/10.13227/j.hjkx.201804201" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.13227/j.hjkx.201804201</a>, 2019 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Dockery, D. W., Pope, C. A., Xu, X. P., Spengler, J. D., Ware, J. H., Fay,
M. E., Ferris, B. G., and Speizer, F. E.: An Assocation between
air-pollution and mortality in 6 United-States cities, N. Engl. J. Med.,
329, 1753–1759, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199312093292401" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199312093292401</a>, 1993.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Emery, C., Tai, E., and Yarwood, G.: Enhanced meteorological modeling and
performance evaluation for two Texas episodes, Report to the Texas Natural
Resources Conservation Commission, prepared by ENVIRON, International Corp,
Novato, CA, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Fu, J. S., Jang, C. J., Streets, D. G., Li, Z., Kwok, R., Park, R., and Han,
Z.: MICS-Asia II: Modeling gaseous pollutants and evaluating an advanced
modeling system over East Asia, Atmos. Environ., 42, 3571–3583, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.07.058" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.07.058</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Gao, J., Wang, T., Ding, A. J., and Liu, C. B.: Observational study of ozone
and carbon monoxide at the summit of mount Tai (1534&thinsp;m a.s.l.) in
central-eastern China, Atmos. Environ., 39, 4779–4791, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.030" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.030</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Gao, J. H., Zhu, B., Xiao, H., Kang, H. Q., Hou, X. W., and Shao, P.: A case
study of surface ozone source apportionment during a high concentration
episode, under frequent shifting wind conditions over the Yangtze River
Delta, China, Sci. Total Environ., 544, 853–863, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Gao, M., Beig, G., Song, S., Zhang, H., Hu, J., Ying, Q., Liang, F., Liu,
Y., Wang, H., Lu, X., Zhu, T., Carmichael, G. R., Nielsen, C. P., and
McElroy, M. B.: The impact of power generation emissions on ambient
PM<sub>2.5</sub> pollution and human health in China and India, Environ. Int.,
121, 250–259, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.09.015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.09.015</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Gleser, L. J.: Bootstrap confidence intervals, Stat. Sci., 11,
219–221, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Guenther, A. B., Jiang, X., Heald, C. L., Sakulyanontvittaya, T., Duhl, T., Emmons, L. K., and Wang, X.: The Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature version 2.1 (MEGAN2.1): an extended and updated framework for modeling biogenic emissions, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 1471–1492, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-1471-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-1471-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Han, K. M., Lee, S., Chang, L. S., and Song, C. H.: A comparison study between CMAQ-simulated and OMI-retrieved NO2 columns over East Asia for evaluation of NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> emission fluxes of INTEX-B, CAPSS, and REAS inventories, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 1913–1938, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-1913-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-1913-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
He, J. J., Yu, Y., Yu, L. J., Liu, N., and Zhao, S. P.: Impacts of
uncertainty in land surface information on simulated surface temperature and
precipitation over China, Int. J. Climatol., 37, 829–847, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5041" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5041</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Hoek, G., Krishnan, R. M., Beelen, R., Peters, A., Ostro, B., Brunekreef,
B., and Kaufman, J. D.: Long-term air pollution exposure and cardio-
respiratory mortality: a review, Environ. Health, 12, 43, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-069x-12-43" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-069x-12-43</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Hu, J., Huang, L., Chen, M., Liao, H., and Ying, Q.: Premature mortality
attributable to particulate matter in China: source contributions and
responses to reductions, Environ. Sci. Technol., 51, 9950–9959, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Huang, C., Chen, C. H., Li, L., Cheng, Z., Wang, H. L., Huang, H. Y., Streets, D. G., Wang, Y. J., Zhang, G. F., and Chen, Y. R.: Emission inventory of anthropogenic air pollutants and VOC species in the Yangtze River Delta region, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 4105–4120, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-4105-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-4105-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Huang, K., Fu, J., Gao, Y., Dong, X., Zhuang, G., Yang, G., and Lin, Y.: Role of sectoral and multi-pollutant emission control strategies in improving atmospheric visibility in the Yangtze river delta, china, Environ. Pollut., 184, 426–434, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
JSBS (Jiangsu Bureau of Statistics): Statistical Yearbook of Jiangsu, China
Statistics Press, Beijing, 2016 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Lei, Y., Xue, W. B., Zhang, Y. S., and Xu, Y. L.: Health benefit evaluation
for air pollution prevention and control action plan in China, Chinese
Environ. Manage., 5, 50–53, <a href="https://doi.org/10.16868/j.cnki.1674-6252.2015.05.009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.16868/j.cnki.1674-6252.2015.05.009</a>, 2015 (in
Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Lelieveld, J., Barlas, C., Giannadaki, D., and Pozzer, A.: Model calculated global, regional and megacity premature mortality due to air pollution, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 7023–7037, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-7023-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-7023-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Lelieveld, J., Evans, J. S., Fnais, M., Giannadaki, D., and Pozzer, A.: The
contribution of outdoor air pollution sources to premature mortality on a
global scale, Nature, 525, 367-371, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature15371" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/nature15371</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Li, H. J. and Li, M. Q.: Assessment on health benefit of air pollution
control in Jiangsu province, Chinese Public Health, 34, 12, <a href="https://doi.org/10.11847/zgggws1117789" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.11847/zgggws1117789</a>, 2018 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Li, L., Chen, C. H., Fu, J. S., Huang, C., Streets, D. G., Huang, H. Y., Zhang, G. F., Wang, Y. J., Jang, C. J., Wang, H. L., Chen, Y. R., and Fu, J. M.: Air quality and emissions in the Yangtze River Delta, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 1621–1639, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-1621-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-1621-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Li, L., Chen, C. H., Huang, C., Huang, H. Y., Zhang, G. F., Wang, Y. J., Wang, H. L., Lou, S. R., Qiao, L. P., Zhou, M., Chen, M. H., Chen, Y. R., Streets, D. G., Fu, J. S., and Jang, C. J.: Process analysis of regional ozone formation over the Yangtze River Delta, China using the Community Multi-scale Air Quality modeling system, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 10971–10987, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-10971-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-10971-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Li, L., An, J. Y., and Lu, Q.: Modeling Assessment of PM<sub>2.5</sub>
Concentrations Under implementation of Clean Air Action Plan in the Yangtze
River Delta Region, Res. Environ. Sci., 28, 1653–1661, <a href="https://doi.org/10.13198/j.issn.1001-6929.2015.11.01" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.13198/j.issn.1001-6929.2015.11.01</a>, 2015 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Li, M., Zhang, D., Li, C.-T., Selin, N. E., and Karplus, V. J.: Co-benefits of
China's climate policy for air quality and human health in China and
transboundary regions in 2030, Environ. Res. Lett., 14, 084006, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab26ca" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab26ca</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Liao, J. B., Wang, T. J., Jiang, Z. Q., Zhuang, B. L., Xie, M., Yin, C. Q.,
Wang, X. M.., Zhu, J. L., Fu, Y., and Zhang, Y.: WRF/Chem modeling of the
impacts of urban expansion on regional climate and air pollutants in Yangtze
River Delta, China, Atmos. Environ., 106, 204–214, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.01.059" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.01.059</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Lim, S. S., Vos, T., Flaxman, A. D., Danaei, G., Shibuya, K., Adair-Rohani, H., AlMazroa, M. A., Amann, M., Anderson, H. R., Andrews, K. G., Aryee, M., Atkinson, C., Bacchus, L. J., Bahalim, A. N., Balakrishnan, K., Balmes, J., Barker-Collo, S., Baxter, A., Bell, M. L., Blore, J. D., Blyth, F., Bonner, C., Borges, G., Bourne, R., Boussinesq, M., Brauer, M., Brooks, P., Bruce, N. G., Brunekreef, B., Bryan-Hancock, C., and Buc, C.: A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury
attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions,
1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study
2010, Lancet, 380, 2224–2260, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, J., Han, Y., Tang, X., Zhu, J., and Zhu, T.: Estimating adult mortality
attributable to PM<sub>2.5</sub> exposure in China with assimilated PM<sub>2.5</sub>
concentrations based on a ground monitoring network, Sci. Total Environ.,
568, 1253–1262, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, X., Gao, X., Wu, X., Yu, W., Chen, L., Ni, R., Zhao, Y., Duan, H.,
Zhao, F., Chen, L., Gao, S., Xu, K., Lin, J., and Ku, A. Y.: Updated Hourly
Emissions Factors for Chinese Power Plants Showing the Impact of Widespread
Ultralow Emissions Technology Deployment, Environ. Sci. Technol., 53,
2570–2578, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b07241" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b07241</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, X. H., Zhang, Y., Xing, J., Zhang, Q., Wang, K., Streets, D. G., Jiang,
C., Wang, W. X., and Hao, J. M.: Understanding of regional air pollution
over China using CMAQ, part II. Process analysis and sensitivity of ozone
and particulate matter to precursor emissions, Atmos. Environ., 44,
3719–3727, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.03.036" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.03.036</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Lu, Y., Zhao, X., and Zhao, Y.: The comparison and evaluation of air pollutant
simulation for the Yangtze River Delta region with different versions of air
quality model. Environ. Monit. Forewarn., 12, 6–14, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-6732.2020.03.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-6732.2020.03.001</a>, 2020 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Maji, K. J., Dikshit, A. K., Arora, M., and Deshpande, A.: Estimating
premature mortality attributable to PM<sub>2.5</sub> exposure and benefit of air
pollution control policies in China for 2020, Sci. Total Environ., 612,
683–693, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.254" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.254</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Ohara, T., Akimoto, H., Kurokawa, J., Horii, N., Yamaji, K., Yan, X., and Hayasaka, T.: An Asian emission inventory of anthropogenic emission sources for the period 1980–2020, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 4419–4444, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-4419-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-4419-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Price, C., Penner, J., and Prather, M.: NO<sub><i>X</i></sub> from lightning: 1. Global
distribution based on lightning physics, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 102,
5929–5941, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/96jd03504" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/96jd03504</a>, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Shanghai Bureau of Statistics (SHBS): Statistical Yearbook of Shanghai,
China Statistics Press, Beijing, 2016 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Sindelarova, K., Granier, C., Bouarar, I., Guenther, A., Tilmes, S., Stavrakou, T., Müller, J.-F., Kuhn, U., Stefani, P., and Knorr, W.: Global data set of biogenic VOC emissions calculated by the MEGAN model over the last 30 years, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 9317–9341, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-9317-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-9317-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Skamarock, W. C., Klemp, J. B., Dudhia, J., Gill, D. O., Barker, D. M.,
Duda, M. G., Huang, X.-Y., Wang, W., and Powers, J. G.: A Description of the
Advanced Research WRF Version 3, NCAR Tech. Note NCAR/TN-475+STR, 113 pp., <a href="https://doi.org/10.5065/D68S4MVH" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5065/D68S4MVH</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Song, C., He, J., Wu, L., Jin, T., Chen, X., Li, R., Ren, P., Zhang, L., and
Mao, H.: Health burden attributable to ambient PM<sub>2.5</sub> in China, Environ.
Pollut., 223, 575–586, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Tan, J., Fu, J. S., Huang, K., Yang, C.-E., Zhuang, G., and Sun, J.:
Effectiveness of SO<sub>2</sub> emission control policy on power plants in the
Yangtze River Delta, China-post-assessment of the 11th Five-Year Plan,
Environ. Sci. Pollut. R., 24, 8243–8255, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-8412-z" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-8412-z</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Tang, L., Qu, J. B., Mi, Z. F., Bo, X., Chang, X. Y., Anadon, L. D., Wang,
S. Y., Xue, X. D., Li, S. B., Wang, X., and Zhao, X. H.: Substantial
emission reductions from Chinese power plants after the introduction of
ultra-low emissions standards, Nat. Energy, 4, 929–938, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-019-0468-1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-019-0468-1</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Tang, Y., An, J., Wang, F., Li, Y., Qu, Y., Chen, Y., and Lin, J.: Impacts of an unknown daytime HONO source on the mixing ratio and budget of HONO, and hydroxyl, hydroperoxyl, and organic peroxy radicals, in the coastal regions of China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 9381–9398, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9381-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9381-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC): Operational Guidance for
the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Modeling System Version 4.7.1
(June 2010 Release), available at: <a href="http://www.cmaq-model.org" target="_blank"/> (last access: 10 February 2020), 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Uno, I., He, Y., Ohara, T., Yamaji, K., Kurokawa, J.-I., Katayama, M., Wang, Z., Noguchi, K., Hayashida, S., Richter, A., and Burrows, J. P.: Systematic analysis of interannual and seasonal variations of model-simulated tropospheric NO2 in Asia and comparison with GOME-satellite data, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 1671–1681, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-1671-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-1671-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, G., Zhang, R., Gomez, M. E., Yang, L., Levy, Zamora, M., Hu, M.; Lin, Y., Peng, J., Guo, S., Meng, J., Li, J., Cheng, C., Hu, T., Ren, Y., Wang, Y., Gao, J., Cao, J., An, Z., Zhou, W., Li, G., Wang, J., Tian, P., MarreroOrtiz, W., Secrest, J., Du, Z., Zheng, J., Shang, D., Zeng, L., Shao, M., Wang, W., Huang, Y., Wang, Y., Zhu, Y., Li, Y., Hu, J., Pan, B., Cai, L., Cheng, Y., Ji, Y., Zhang, F., Rosenfeld, D., Liss, P. S., Duce, R. A., Kolb, C. E., and Molina, M. J.: Persistent sulfate formation from London Fog to Chinese haze. P. Natl.
Acad. Sci., 48, 13630–13635, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1616540113" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1616540113</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, K., Zhang, Y., Jang, C., Phillips, S., and Wang, B.: Modeling
intercontinental air pollution transport over the trans-Pacific region in
2001 using the Community Multiscale Air Quality modeling system, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 114, D04307, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008jd010807" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008jd010807</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, L. T., Jang, C., Zhang, Y., Wang, K., Zhang, Q., Streets, D. G., Fu,
J., Lei, Y., Schreifels, J., He, K. B., Hao, J. M., Lam, Y, Lin, J.,
Meskhidze, N., Voorhees, S., Evarts, D., and Phillips, S.: Assessment of air
quality benefits from national air pollution control policies in China. Part
II: Evaluation of air quality predictions and air quality benefits
assessment, Atmos. Environ., 44, 3449–3457, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.05.051" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.05.051</a>,
2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</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.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, N., Lyu, X., Deng, X., Huang, X., Jiang, F., and Ding, A.: Aggravating
O<sub>3</sub> pollution due to NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> emission control in eastern China, Sci. Total
Environ., 677, 732–744, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, Z., Pan, L., Li, Y., Zhang, D., Ma, J., Sun, F., Xu, W., and Wang, X.:
Assessment of air quality benefits from the national pollution control
policy of thermal power plants in China: A numerical simulation, Atmos.
Environ., 106, 288–304, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.01.022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.01.022</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Xia, Y., Zhao, Y., and Nielsen, C. P.: Benefits of of China's efforts in
gaseous pollutant control indicated by the bottom-up emissions and satellite
observations 2000–2014, Atmos. Environ., 136, 43–53, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.04.013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.04.013</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Xie, R., Sabel, C. E., Lu, X., Zhu, W., Kan, H., Nielsen, C. P., and Wang,
H.: Long-term trend and spatial pattern of PM<sub>2.5</sub> induced premature
mortality in China, Environ. Int., 97, 180–186, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2016.09.003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2016.09.003</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Xing, J., Wang, S. X., Jang, C., Zhu, Y., and Hao, J. M.: Nonlinear response of ozone to precursor emission changes in China: a modeling study using response surface methodology, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 5027–5044, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-5027-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-5027-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Yang, C. F. O., Lin, N. H., Sheu, G. R., Lee, C. T., and Wang, J. L.:
Seasonal and diurnal variations of ozone at a high-altitude mountain
baseline station in East Asia, Atmos. Environ., 46, 279–288, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.09.060" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.09.060</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Yang, J., Zhao, Y., Cao, J., and Nielsen, C.: Co-benefits of carbon and
pollution control policies on air quality and health till 2030 in China,
Environ. Int., 152, 106482, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2021.106482" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2021.106482</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Yang, Y., Zhao, Y., Zhang, L., Zhang, J., Huang, X., Zhao, X., Zhang, Y., Xi, M., and Lu, Y.: Improvement of the satellite-derived NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> emissions on air quality modeling and its effect on ozone and secondary inorganic aerosol formation in the Yangtze River Delta, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1191–1209, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1191-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1191-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Yang, Y., Zhu, Y., Jang, C., Xie, J. P., Wang, S. X., Fu, J., Lin, C. J.,
Ma, J., Ding, D., Qiu, X. Z., and Lao, Y. W.: Research and development of
environmental benefits mapping and analysis program: Community edition, Acta
Scientiae Circumstantiae, 33, 2395–2401, <a href="https://doi.org/10.13671/j.hjkxxb.2013.09.022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.13671/j.hjkxxb.2013.09.022</a>, 2013
(in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Yue, H., He, C., Huang, Q., Yin, D., and Bryan, B. A.: Stronger policy
required to substantially reduce deaths from PM<sub>2.5</sub> pollution in China, Nat.
Commun., 11, 1462, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-15319-4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-15319-4</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
Yu, S., Mathur, R., Kang, D., Schere, K., Eder, B., and Pleirn, J.:
Performance and diagnostic evaluation of ozone predictions by the
eta-community multiscale air quality forecast system during the 2002 New
England Air Quality Study, J. Air Waste Manage., 56, 1459–1471, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10473289.2006.10464554" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/10473289.2006.10464554</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, L., Zhao, T., Gong, S., Kong, S., Tang, L., Liu, D., Wang, Y., Jin, L., Shan, Y., Tan, C., Zhang, Y., and Guo, X.: Updated emission inventories of power plants in simulating air quality during haze periods over East China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 2065–2079, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2065-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2065-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, M., Uno, I., Zhang, R., Han, Z., Wang, Z., and Pu, Y.: Evaluation of
the Models-3 Community Multi-scale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system with
observations obtained during the TRACE-P experiment: Comparison of ozone and
its related species, Atmos. Environ., 40, 4874–4882, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmonsenv.2005.06.063" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmonsenv.2005.06.063</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Q., Streets, D. G., Carmichael, G. R., He, K. B., Huo, H., Kannari, A., Klimont, Z., Park, I. S., Reddy, S., Fu, J. S., Chen, D., Duan, L., Lei, Y., Wang, L. T., and Yao, Z. L.: Asian emissions in 2006 for the NASA INTEX-B mission, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 5131–5153, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-5131-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-5131-2009</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Q., Zheng, Y., Tong, D., Shao, M., Wang, S., Zhang, Y., Xu, X., Wang, J., He, H., Liu, W., Ding, Y., Lei, Y., Li, J., Wang, Z., Zhang, X., Wang, Y., Cheng, J., Liu, Y., Shi, Q., Yan, L., Geng, G., Hong, C., Li, M., Liu, F., Zheng, B., Cao, J., Ding, A., Gao, J., Fu, Q., Huo, J., Liu, B., Liu, Z., Yang, F., He, K., and Hao, J.:
Drivers of improved PM<sub>2.5</sub> air quality in China from 2013 to 2017, P.
Natl. Acad. Sci., 116, 24463–24469, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, X., Dai, H. C., Jin, Y. N., and Zhang, S. Q.: Evaluation of health
and economic benefits from “Coal to Electricity” Policy in the residential
sector in the Jing-Jin-Ji Region, Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis
Pekinensis, 55, 2, <a href="https://doi.org/10.13209/j.0479-8023.2018.098" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.13209/j.0479-8023.2018.098</a>, 2019 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Y., Bo, X., Zhao, Y., and Nielsen, C. P.: Benefits of current and
future policies on emissions of China's coal-fired power sector indicated by
continuous emission monitoring, Environ. Pollut., 251, 415–424, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Y. H., Su, H., Zhong, L. J., Cheng, Y. F., Zeng, L. M., and Wang, X.
S.: Regional ozone pollution and observation-based approach for analyzing
ozone–precursor relationship during the PRIDE-PRD2004 campaign, Atmos.
Environ., 42, 6203–6218, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.05.002" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.05.002</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>
Zhao, B., Wang, S. X., Dong, X. Y., Wang, J. D., Duan, L., Fu, X., Hao, J.
M., and Fu, J.: Environmental effects of the recent emission changes in
China: implications for particulate matter pollution and soil acidification,
Environ. Res. Lett., 8, 024031, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024031" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024031</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>
Zhao, X., Zhao, Y., Chen, D., Li, C., and Zhang, J.: Top-down estimate of black carbon emissions for city clusters using ground observations: a case study in southern Jiangsu, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 2095–2113, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-2095-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-2095-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation>
Zhao, Y., Wang, S., Duan, L., Lei, Y., Cao, P., and Hao, J.: Primary air pollutant emissions of coal-fired power plants in China: Current status and future prediction, Atmos. Environ., 42, 8442–8452, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.08.021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.08.021</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation>
Zhao, Y., Zhang, J., and Nielsen, C. P.: The effects of recent control policies on trends in emissions of anthropogenic atmospheric pollutants and CO<sub>2</sub> in China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 487–508, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-487-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-487-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation>
Zhao, Y., Mao, P., Zhou, Y., Yang, Y., Zhang, J., Wang, S., Dong, Y., Xie, F., Yu, Y., and Li, W.: Improved provincial emission inventory and speciation profiles of anthropogenic non-methane volatile organic compounds: a case study for Jiangsu, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 7733–7756, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7733-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7733-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation>
Zheng, B., Zhang, Q., Tong, D., Chen, C., Hong, C., Li, M., Geng, G., Lei, Y., Huo, H., and He, K.: Resolution dependence of uncertainties in gridded emission inventories: a case study in Hebei, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 921–933, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-921-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-921-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation>
Zheng, H., Zhao, B., Wang, S., Wang, T., Ding, D., Chang, X., Liu, K., and
Xing, J.: Transition in source contributions of PM<sub>2.5</sub> exposure and
associated premature mortality in China during 2005–2015, Environ. Int. 132,
105111, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.105111" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.105111</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation>
Zhou, Y., Zhao, Y., Mao, P., Zhang, Q., Zhang, J., Qiu, L., and Yang, Y.: Development of a high-resolution emission inventory and its evaluation and application through air quality modeling for Jiangsu Province, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 211–233, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-211-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-211-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><mixed-citation>
ZJBS (Zhejiang Bureau of Statistics): Statistical Yearbook of Zhejiang,
China Statistics Press, Beijing, 2016 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
