Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2020-673
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2020-673
27 Aug 2020
 | 27 Aug 2020
Status: this preprint was under review for the journal ACP. A final paper is not foreseen.

Evaluating the sensitivity of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) simulations to chemical mechanism in Delhi

Chinmay Jena, Sachin D. Ghude, Rachana Kulkarni, Sreyashi Debnath, Rajesh Kumar, Vijay Kumar Soni, Prodip Acharja, Santosh H. Kulkarni, Manoj Khare, Akshara J. Kaginalkar, Dilip M. Chate, Kaushar Ali, Ravi S. Nanjundiah, and Madhavan N. Rajeevan

Abstract. Elevated levels of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) during winter-time have become one of the most important environmental concerns over the Indo-Gangetic Plain (IGP) region of India, and particularly for Delhi. Accurate reconstruction of PM2.5, its optical properties, and dominant chemical components over this region is essential to evaluate the performance of the air quality models. In this study, we investigated the effect of three different aerosol mechanisms coupled with gas-phase chemical schemes on simulated PM2.5 mass concentration in Delhi using the Weather Research and Forecasting model with the Chemistry module (WRF-Chem). The model was employed to cover the entire northern region of India at 10 km horizontal spacing. Results were compared with comprehensive filed data set on dominant PM2.5 chemical compounds from the Winter Fog Experiment (WiFEX) at Delhi, and surface PM2.5 observations in Delhi (17 sites), Punjab (3 sites), Haryana (4 sites), Uttar Pradesh (7 sites) and Rajasthan (17 sites). The Model for Ozone and Related Chemical Tracers (MOZART-4) gas-phase chemical mechanism coupled with the Goddard Chemistry Aerosol Radiation and Transport (GOCART) aerosol scheme (MOZART-GOCART) were selected in the first experiment as it is currently employed in the operational air quality forecasting system of Ministry of Earth Sciences (MoES), Government of India. Other two simulations were performed with the MOZART-4 gas-phase chemical mechanism coupled with the Model for Simulating Aerosol Interactions and Chemistry (MOZART-MOSAIC), and Carbon Bond 5 (CB-05) gas-phase mechanism couple with the Modal Aerosol Dynamics Model for Europe/Secondary Organic Aerosol Model (CB05-MADE/SORGAM) aerosol mechanisms. The evaluation demonstrated that chemical mechanisms affect the evolution of gas-phase precursors and aerosol processes, which in turn affect the optical depth and overall performance of the model for PM2.5. All the three coupled schemes, MOZART-GOCART, MOZART-MOSAIC, and CB05-MADE/SORGAM, underestimate the observed concentrations of major aerosol composition (NO3, SO42−, Cl, BC, OC, and NH4+) and precursor gases (HNO3, NH3, SO2, NO2, and O3) over Delhi. Comparison with observations suggests that the simulations using MOZART-4 gas-phase chemical mechanism with MOSAIC aerosol performed better in simulating aerosols over Delhi and its optical depth over the IGP. The lowest NMB (−18.8 %, MB = −27.4 μg/m3) appeared for the simulations using MOZART-MOSAIC scheme, whereas the NMB was observed 32.5 % (MB = −47.5 μg/m3) for CB05-MADE/SORGAM and −53.3 % (MB = −78 μg/m3) for MOZART-GOCART scheme.

This preprint has been withdrawn.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Chinmay Jena, Sachin D. Ghude, Rachana Kulkarni, Sreyashi Debnath, Rajesh Kumar, Vijay Kumar Soni, Prodip Acharja, Santosh H. Kulkarni, Manoj Khare, Akshara J. Kaginalkar, Dilip M. Chate, Kaushar Ali, Ravi S. Nanjundiah, and Madhavan N. Rajeevan

Interactive discussion

Status: closed
Status: closed
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement

Interactive discussion

Status: closed
Status: closed
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
Chinmay Jena, Sachin D. Ghude, Rachana Kulkarni, Sreyashi Debnath, Rajesh Kumar, Vijay Kumar Soni, Prodip Acharja, Santosh H. Kulkarni, Manoj Khare, Akshara J. Kaginalkar, Dilip M. Chate, Kaushar Ali, Ravi S. Nanjundiah, and Madhavan N. Rajeevan
Chinmay Jena, Sachin D. Ghude, Rachana Kulkarni, Sreyashi Debnath, Rajesh Kumar, Vijay Kumar Soni, Prodip Acharja, Santosh H. Kulkarni, Manoj Khare, Akshara J. Kaginalkar, Dilip M. Chate, Kaushar Ali, Ravi S. Nanjundiah, and Madhavan N. Rajeevan

Viewed

Total article views: 1,447 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
1,060 351 36 1,447 136 34 34
  • HTML: 1,060
  • PDF: 351
  • XML: 36
  • Total: 1,447
  • Supplement: 136
  • BibTeX: 34
  • EndNote: 34
Views and downloads (calculated since 27 Aug 2020)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 27 Aug 2020)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 1,546 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 1,542 with geography defined and 4 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 

Cited

Latest update: 23 May 2024
Download

This preprint has been withdrawn.

Short summary
Simulations of atmospheric particulate matter (PM2.5) with WRF-Chem model with three different aerosol mechanisms coupled with gas-phase chemical schemes are compared to understand the spatial and temporal variability of PM2.5 over the Indo-Gangetic Plain (IGP) in the winter season. All three chemical schemes underestimate the observed concentrations of major aerosol composition and precursor gases over IGP which in turn affect the optical depth and overall performance of the model for PM2.5.
Altmetrics