Next Article in Journal
Relationships between Exposure to Bioaerosols, Moldy Surface and Symptoms in French Mold-Damaged Homes
Previous Article in Journal
A Collaborative Approach between Japan and China for Implementing Interlaboratory Evaluation of Olfactometry
Previous Article in Special Issue
Impacts of Biomass Burning Emission Inventories and Atmospheric Reanalyses on Simulated PM10 over Indochina
Open AccessArticle

Model Inter-Comparison for PM2.5 Components over urban Areas in Japan in the J-STREAM Framework

1
Graduate School of Maritime Sciences, Kobe University, Kobe, Hyogo 658-0022, Japan
2
National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8506, Japan
3
Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, Abiko, Chiba 270-1194, Japan
4
Ehime University, Matsuyama, Ehime 790-8566, Japan
5
Japan Agency for Marine—Earth Science and Technology, Yokohama, Kanagawa 236-0001, Japan
6
Japan Automobile Research Institute, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0822, Japan
7
Japan Meteorological Corporation, Osaka 556-0021, Japan
8
Japan Weather Association, Toshima, Tokyo 170-6055, Japan
9
Kanagawa Environmental Research Center, Hiratsuka, Kanagawa 254-0014, Japan
10
School of Science and Engineering, Meisei University, Hino, Tokyo 191-8506, Japan
11
Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka University, Suita, Osaka 565-0871, Japan
12
Suuri-Keikaku, Chiyoda, Tokyo 101-0003, Japan
13
Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Aichi 464-8601, Japan
14
Tokyo Electric Power Services Co., Ltd., Koto, Tokyo 135-0062, Japan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Atmosphere 2020, 11(3), 222; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11030222
Received: 14 January 2020 / Revised: 14 February 2020 / Accepted: 19 February 2020 / Published: 25 February 2020
A model inter-comparison of secondary pollutant simulations over urban areas in Japan, the first phase of Japan’s study for reference air quality modeling (J-STREAM Phase I), was conducted using 32 model settings. Simulated hourly concentrations of nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2), which are primary pollutant precursors of particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 µm or less (PM2.5), showed good agreement with the observed concentrations, but most of the simulated hourly sulfur oxide (SO2) concentrations were much higher than the observations. Simulated concentrations of PM2.5 and its components were compared to daily observed concentrations by using the filter pack method at selected ambient air pollution monitoring stations (AAPMSs) for each season. In general, most models showed good agreement with the observed total PM2.5 mass concentration levels in each season and provided goal or criteria levels of model ensemble statistics in warmer seasons. The good performances of these models were associated with the simulated reproducibility of some dominant components, sulfates (SO42−) and ammonium (NH4+). The other simulated PM2.5 components, i.e., nitrates (NO3), elemental carbon (EC), and organic carbon (OC), often show clear deviations from the observations. The considerable underestimations (approximately 30 µg/m3 for total PM2.5) of all participant models found on heavily polluted days with approximately 40–50 µg/m3 for total PM2.5 indicated some problems in the simulated local meteorology such as the atmospheric stability. This model inter-comparison suggests that these deviations may be owing to a need for further improvements both in the emission inventories and additional formation pathways in chemical transport models, and meteorological conditions also require improvement to simulate elevated atmospheric pollutants. Additional accumulated observations are likely needed to further evaluate the simulated concentrations and improve the model performance. View Full-Text
Keywords: PM2.5; PM2.5 components; three-dimensional chemical transport model; model inter-comparison; urban scale; secondary particles PM2.5; PM2.5 components; three-dimensional chemical transport model; model inter-comparison; urban scale; secondary particles
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Yamaji, K.; Chatani, S.; Itahashi, S.; Saito, M.; Takigawa, M.; Morikawa, T.; Kanda, I.; Miya, Y.; Komatsu, H.; Sakurai, T.; Morino, Y.; Kitayama, K.; Nagashima, T.; Shimadera, H.; Uranishi, K.; Fujiwara, Y.; Hashimoto, T.; Sudo, K.; Misaki, T.; Hayami, H. Model Inter-Comparison for PM2.5 Components over urban Areas in Japan in the J-STREAM Framework. Atmosphere 2020, 11, 222.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop