SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Atmospheric Pollution Research / 2019 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 1

Investigation on air pollution control strategy in Hangzhou for post-G20/pre-Asian-games period (2018–2020)

Rui Feng ZHAO
Qing WANG
Cheng-chen HUANG
Jin LİANG
Jian-ren FAN
Ke-fa CEN
Pages
197–208
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results show the local emission sources account for 15.8%, 68.6%, 48.3% and 59.2% ofthe overall SO2,NO2,PM2.5and PM10concentration in 2017, respectively.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:For the purpose of offering a detailed atmospheric pollution control strategy to the Hangzhou government tomake the major atmospheric pollutants (SO2,NO2,PM2.5and PM10) meet the environmental regulation aimrequired by the 13th Five Year Plan of Hangzhou, the WRF/CMAQ model is used to simulate the pollution levelover Hangzhou.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Observed data fromfive local environmental monitoring stations in the downtown Hangzhouare selected to evaluate the performance of simulation.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results show the local emission sources account for 15.8%, 68.6%, 48.3% and 59.2% ofthe overall SO2,NO2,PM2.5and PM10concentration in 2017, respectively.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

For the purpose of offering a detailed atmospheric pollution control strategy to the Hangzhou government tomake the major atmospheric pollutants (SO2,NO2,PM2.5and PM10) meet the environmental regulation aimrequired by the 13th Five Year Plan of Hangzhou, the WRF/CMAQ model is used to simulate the pollution levelover Hangzhou. Observed data fromfive local environmental monitoring stations in the downtown Hangzhouare selected to evaluate the performance of simulation. The indicator factors confirm the accuracy of the WRF/CMAQ modeling system. Results show the local emission sources account for 15.8%, 68.6%, 48.3% and 59.2% ofthe overall SO2,NO2,PM2.5and PM10concentration in 2017, respectively. And the research on the separate localsectors indicates traffic donates 71.6% of local NO2emission while industry contributes 73.8%, 53.2% and56.7% of the total local emission of SO2,PM2.5and PM10, respectively. The more severe pollution during thewintertime was mainly due to low wet deposition, low temperature, low wind speed, prevailing wind direction,the condition of local deciduous plants and urban heat island. If the local traffic and industry are cut down by 6%and 10%, respectively, the air pollution control targets on SO2,NO2,PM2.5and PM10in 2020 can be hit.

🔖

Cite This Article

ZHAO, R. F., WANG, Q., HUANG, C., LİANG, J., FAN, J., CEN, K. (2019). Investigation on air pollution control strategy in Hangzhou for post-G20/pre-Asian-games period (2018–2020). Atmospheric Pollution Research, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 1, 197–208. https://ajindex.com/articles/351556

References (14)

  1. Astitha, M., Luo, H., Rao, T., Hogrefe, C., Mathur, R., Kumar, N., 2017. Dynamic eva-luation of two decades of WRF/CMAQ ozone simulations over the contiguous UnitedStates. Atmos. Environ. 164, 102–116.
  2. Boylan, J.W., Russell, A.G., 2006. PM and light extinction model performance metrics,goals, and criteria for three-dimensional air quality models. Atmos. Environ. 40 (26),4946–4959.
  3. Byun, D., Schere, K.L., 2006. Review of the governing equations, computational algo-rithms, and other components of the Models-3 community multiscale air quality(CMAQ) modeling system. Appl. Mech. Rev. 59 (2), 51–77.
  4. Chen, F., Mitchell, K., Schaake, J., Xue, Y., Pan, H.L., Koren, V., Duan, Q.Y., Betts, A.,1996. Modeling of land surface evaporation by four schemes and comparison withFIFE observations. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 101 (D3), 7251–7268.
  5. Chen, W., Tang, H., Zhao, H., 2016. Urban air quality evaluations under two versions ofthe national ambient air quality standards of China. Atmos. Pollut. Res. 7 (1), 49–57.
  6. Cho, S., Morris, R., McEachern, P., Shah, T., Johnson, J., Nopmongcol, U., 2012. Emissionsources sensitivity study for ground-level ozone and PM2.5due to oil sands devel-opment using air quality modeling system: Part II- Source apportionment modeling.Atmos. Environ. 55, 542–556.
  7. Chou, M., Suarez, M.J., HO, C., Yan, M.M., Lee, K., 1998. Parameterizations for cloudoverlapping and shortwave single-scattering properties for use in general circulationand cloud ensemble models. J. Clim. 11 (2), 202–214.
  8. Emami, F., Masiol, M., Hopke, P.K., 2018.
  9. Air pollution at Rochester, NY: long-termtrends and multivariate analysis of upwind SO2 source impacts. Sci. Total Environ.612, 1506–1515.
  10. Grell, G.A., Dévényi, D.A., 2002. A generalized approach to parameterizing convectioncombining ensemble and data assimilation techniques. Geophys. Res. Lett. 29 (14),587–590.
  11. Guenther, A., Karl, T., Harley, P., Wiedinmyer, C., Palmer, P.I., Geron, C., 2006. Estimatesof global terrestrial isoprene emissions using MEGAN (model of emissions of gasesand aerosols from nature). Atmos. Chem. Phys. 6 (11), 3181–3210.
  12. Hadley, O.L., 2017. Background PM2.5 source apportionment in the remote NorthwesternUnited States. Atmos. Environ. 167 (2017), 298–308.
  13. Hong, S., Lim, J.J., 2006. The WRF single-moment 6-class microphysics scheme (WSM6).Asia-Pac. J. Atmos. Sci. 42, 129–151.
  14. Hong, S., Noh, Y., Dudhia, J., 2006. A new vertical diffusion package with an explicittreatment of entrainment processes. Mon. Weather Rev