Articles | Volume 10, issue 4
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1767–1787, 2017
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1767-2017
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1767–1787, 2017
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1767-2017

Model evaluation paper 27 Apr 2017

Model evaluation paper | 27 Apr 2017

Spatiotemporal evaluation of EMEP4UK-WRF v4.3 atmospheric chemistry transport simulations of health-related metrics for NO2, O3, PM10, and PM2. 5 for 2001–2010

Chun Lin et al.

Download

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

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision
AR by Mathew Heal on behalf of the Authors (15 Dec 2016)  Author's response    Manuscript
ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (16 Dec 2016) by Volker Grewe
RR by Anonymous Referee #3 (05 Jan 2017)
ED: Reconsider after major revisions (05 Jan 2017) by Volker Grewe
AR by Mathew Heal on behalf of the Authors (14 Feb 2017)  Author's response    Manuscript
ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (16 Feb 2017) by Volker Grewe
RR by Anonymous Referee #3 (10 Mar 2017)
ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (Editor review) (14 Mar 2017) by Volker Grewe
AR by Mathew Heal on behalf of the Authors (23 Mar 2017)  Author's response    Manuscript
ED: Publish as is (29 Mar 2017) by Volker Grewe
Download
Short summary
We evaluated EMEP4UK-WRF v4.3 atmospheric chemistry transport simulations at 5 km horizontal resolution over the UK for use in air pollution epidemiology and health burden assessment. Model-measurement comparison focused on daily and annual means for NO2, O3, PM10, and PM2.5. Important statistics for evaluation of air-quality model output against policy (and hence health)-relevant standards – correlation, bias, and root mean square error – were evaluated by site type, year, month and day-of-week.