MAPAN

, Volume 30, Issue 4, pp 249–260 | Cite as

Comparative Evaluation of Air Quality Dispersion Models for PM2.5 at Air Quality Control Regions in Indian and UK Cities

Original Paper
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Swelling urban populations and increased concentration of automobile traffic in and around cities have resulted in severe air pollution, threatening human health and undermining the productivity of the urban population. Air quality modelling is one of the important components of urban air quality management (UAQM). This paper contains comparative performance results of three most used commercial air quality models (AQMs) e.g. AERMOD, ADMS-urban and ISCST3. The models are evaluated based on their predictive accuracy of 1-h average PM2.5 concentrations at selected air quality control regions (AQCRs) in the Delhi and Chennai cities in India and Newcastle city in the United Kingdom for critical winter period of year 2009. At Delhi AQCR, ISCST3 predictions of PM2.5 concentrations are more accurate (d = 0.66) than AERMOD (d = 0.51) and ADMS-Urban (d = 0.52). Similar performance of the models have been observed at Chennai city AQCR, i.e., index of agreement ‘d’ = 0.52 for ISCST3 and d = 0.40 and 0.47 for AERMOD and ADMS-Urban, respectively. However, at Newcastle city AQCR, the ISCST3 has predicted PM2.5 concentrations with an accuracy having d = 0.56 while AERMOD and ADMS, having d = 0.53 and 0.54, respectively. Differences in ‘d’ values clearly indicate causal nature of these Gaussian based models and their sensitivity to input data as well as their parsimonies (less input data requirement by models and more accuracy in output results) to geographical and meteorological conditions.

Keywords

Urban air quality management plan Air quality control region (AQCR) Air quality models (AQMs) Performance evaluation 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank to HSBC (INDIA) for sponsoring the HSBC-UKIERI Senior Research Fellow who has worked on this project. We also acknowledge with thanks, the CERC, UK who has provided us the ADMS-Urban for academic and research purposes at subsidized cost. We also express our thanks to the UKIERI, Delhi, India, for the research Grant provided to carry out this project.

References

  1. [1]
    J.M. Baldasano, E. Valera and P. Jimenez, Air quality data from large cities, Sci. Total Environ., 307 (2003) 141–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    B.R. Gurjar, T.M. Butler, M.G. Lawrence and J. Lelieveld, Evaluation of emissions and air quality in megacities, Atmos. Environ., 42 (2008) 1593–1606.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    M.G. Badami, Transport and urban air pollution in India, Environ. Manag., 36 (2005) 195–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    A.K. Singh, H.K. Gupta, K. Gupta, P. Singh, V.B. Gupta and R.C. Sharma, A comparative study of air pollution in Indian cities’, Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol., 78 (2007) 411–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    T.V. Ramachandra and K. Shwetmala, Emissions from India’s transport sector: state wise synthesis, Atmos. Environ., 43 (2009) 5510–5517.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    CPCB, Air quality monitoring, emission inventory and source apportionment study for Indian cities, National Summary Report, Central Pollution Control Board, New Delhi, India (2010).Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    A.C. Lloyd and G. Bansal, Emissions from transportation and fuels: the importance of initial and real world measurements for policy making in India. MAPAN-J. Metrol. Soc India, 28 (2009) 227–234.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    S.K. Sharma, T.K. Mandal, M. Kumar, N.C. Gupta, H. Pathak, R.C. Harit and M. Saxena, Measurement of ambient ammonia over the National Capital Region of Delhi, India, MAPAN-J. Metrol. Soc India, 29 (2014) 165–173.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    C.A. Pope, R.T. Burnett, M.J. Thun, E.E. Calle, D. Krewski, K. Ito, G.D. Thurston, Lung cancer, cardiopulmonary mortality and long-term exposure to fine particulate air pollution, J. Am. Med. Assoc., 287 (2002) 1132–1141.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    P. Pant and M.R. Harrison, Critical review of receptor modelling for particulate matter: a case study of India, Atmos. Environ., 49 (2012) 1–12.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    J.W.S. Longhurst, S.J. Lindley, A.F.R. Watson and D.E. Conlan, The introduction of local air quality management in the United Kingdom: a review and theoretical framework, Atmos. Environ., 30 (1996) 3975–3985.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    S. Gokhale and M. Khare, A theoretical framework for the episodic-urban air quality management plan (e-UAQMP), Atmos. Environ., 41 (2007) 7887–7894.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    S.M.S. Nagendra and M. Khare, Line source emission modelling—review, Atmos. Environ., 36 (2002) 2083–2098.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    S. Gulia, S.S. Nagendra, M. Khare and I. Khanna, Urban air quality management—a review, Atmos. Pollut. Res., 6 (2015) 286–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    G. Sriram, M.N. Krishna and V. Gopalaswamy, Sensitivity study of Gaussian dispersion models, J. Sci. Ind. Res., 65 (2006) 321–324.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    C. Seethala, G. Pandithurai, J.D. Fast, S.D. Polade, M.S. Reddy and S.E. Peckham, Evaluating WRF-Chem multi-scale model in simulating aerosol radiative properties over the tropics—a case study over India, MAPAN-J. Metrol. Soc India, 26 (2011) 269–284.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    USEPA, Federal Register, Part-III, 40 CFR Part 51, Revisions to the guideline on air quality models: adoption of a preferred general purpose (Flat and Complex Terrain) dispersion model and Other Revisions; Final Rule, US Environment Protection Agency, USA (2005).Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    CERC, ADMS-Urban user guide. Cambridge Environmental Research Consultant, Cambridge, UK (2006).Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    A.D. Bhanarkar, S.K. Goyal, R. Sivacoumar and C.V.C. Rao, Assessment of contribution of SO2 and NO2 from different sources in Jamshedpur region, India, Atmos. Environ., 39 (2005) 7745–7760.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    S. Sharma and A. Chandra, Simulation of air quality using an ISCST3 dispersion model, J. Clean Soil Air Water, 36 (2008) 118–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    A. Kansal, M. Khare and C.S. Sharma, Air quality modelling study to analyse the impact of the World Bank emission guidelines for thermal power plants in Delhi, J. Atmos. Pollut. Res., 2 (2011) 99–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    A.P. Kesarkar, M. Dalvi, A. Kaginalkar and A. Ojha, Coupling of the weather research and forecasting model with AERMOD for pollutant dispersion modelling, a case study for PM10 dispersion over Pune, India, Atmos. Environ., 41 (2007) 1976–1988.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    J.C. Chang and S.R. Hanna, Air quality model performance evaluation, Meteorol. Atmos. Phys., 87 (2004) 167–196.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    C. Langner and O. Klemm, A comparison of model performance between AERMOD and AUSTAL2000, J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc., 61 (2011) 640–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    M. Mohan, S. Bhati and P. Marrapu, Performance evaluation of AERMOD and ADMS-Urban models in a tropical urban environment, Indian J. Air Pollut. Control, 9 (2009) 47–62.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    A. Kumar, S. Dixit, C. Varadarajan, A. Vijayan and A. Masuraha, Evaluation of the AERMOD dispersion model as a function of atmospheric stability for an urban area, J. Environ. Prog., 25 (2006) 141–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    M. Mohan and A. Kandya, An analysis of annual and seasonal trends of air quality index of Delhi, J. Environ. Monit. Assess., 131 (2007) 267–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    P. Goyal, N. Jaiswal, A. Kumar, J.K. Dadoo and M. Dwarakanath, Air quality impact assessment of NOx and PM due to diesel vehicles in Delhi, Trans. Res. Part D, 15 (2010) 298–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    B. Srimuruganandam and S.M.S. Nagendra, Characteristics of particulate matter and heterogeneous traffic in the urban area of India, Atmos. Environ., 45 (2011) 3091–3102.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    N.S. Leksmono, J.W.S. Longhurst, K.A. Linga, T.J. Chatterton, B.E.A. Fisher and J.G. Irvin, Assessment of the relationship between industrial and traffic sources contributing to air quality objective exceedances: a theoretical modelling exercise, J. Environ. Model. Softw., 21 (2006) 494–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    S. Gulia, S. Nagendra and M. Khare, Performance evaluation of ISCST3, ADMS-Urban and AERMOD for urban air quality management in a mega city of India, Int. J. Sustain. Dev. Plan., 9 (2014) 778–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    S.D. Attri, S. Singh, B. Mukhopadhyay and A.K. Bhatnagar, Atlas of hourly mixing height and assimilative capacity of atmosphere in India. Met. Monograph No. Environment Meteorology-01/2008, Indian Meteorological Department, New Delhi, Govt. of India (2008).Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    ARAI, Emission factor development for Indian vehicles. Project Report: AEF/2006-07/IOCL/Emission Factor Project, Automotive Research Association of India, Pune, India (2007).Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    DEFRA, Emission factor tool kit for road transport version 4.2 (EFTv 4.2), The Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK. http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/review-and-assessment/tools/emissions.html. Accessed 21 June 2010.
  35. [35]
    MoEF, National ambient air quality standards, The Gazette of India, notification number 860, date 16th November 2009, Ministry of Environment and Forest, New Delhi, India (2009).Google Scholar
  36. [36]
    DEFRA, ‘National air quality objectives and European directive limit and target values for the protection of human health, Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK, http://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/documents/National_air_quality_objectives. Accessed 06 December 2012.
  37. [37]
    S.R. Hanna, B.A. Egan and J. Purdum, Evaluation of the ADMS, AERMOD, and ISC3 dispersion models with the OPTEX, Duke Forest, Kincaid, Indianapolis and Lovett Field datasets, Int. J. Environ. Pollut., 16 (2001) 301–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. [38]
    W.B. Faulkner, B.W. Shaw and T. Grosch, Sensitivity of two dispersion models (AERMOD and ISCST3) to input parameters for a rural ground-level area source, J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc., 58 (2008) 1288–1296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. [39]
    S. Righi, P. Lucialli and E. Pollini, Statistical and diagnostic evaluation of the ADMS-Urban model compared with an urban air quality monitoring network, Atmos. Environ., 43 (2009) 3850–3857.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  40. [40]
    D.J. Hall, A.M. Spanton, F. Dunkerley, M. Bennett and R.F. Griffiths, An inter-comparison of the AERMOD, ADMS and ISC dispersion models for regulatory applications, Technical report, P362, ISBN 1 85705-3400, Environment Agency, Bristol, UK (2000).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Metrology Society of India 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Civil Engineering DepartmentIndian Institute of Technology DelhiNew DelhiIndia
  2. 2.Civil Engineering DepartmentIndian Institute of Technology MadrasChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations