Articles | Volume 10, issue 11
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4245-2017
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4245-2017
Methods for assessment of models
 | 
24 Nov 2017
Methods for assessment of models |  | 24 Nov 2017

Source apportionment and sensitivity analysis: two methodologies with two different purposes

Alain Clappier, Claudio A. Belis, Denise Pernigotti, and Philippe Thunis

Related authors

Emission ensemble approach to improve the development of multi-scale emission inventories
Philippe Thunis, Jeroen Kuenen, Enrico Pisoni, Bertrand Bessagnet, Manjola Banja, Lech Gawuc, Karol Szymankiewicz, Diego Guizardi, Monica Crippa, Susana Lopez-Aparicio, Marc Guevara, Alexander De Meij, Sabine Schindlbacher, and Alain Clappier
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3631–3643, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3631-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3631-2024, 2024
Short summary
A multi-pollutant and multi-sectorial approach to screening the consistency of emission inventories
Philippe Thunis, Alain Clappier, Enrico Pisoni, Bertrand Bessagnet, Jeroen Kuenen, Marc Guevara, and Susana Lopez-Aparicio
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 5271–5286, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5271-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5271-2022, 2022
Short summary
Why is the city's responsibility for its air pollution often underestimated? A focus on PM2.5
Philippe Thunis, Alain Clappier, Alexander de Meij, Enrico Pisoni, Bertrand Bessagnet, and Leonor Tarrason
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 18195–18212, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-18195-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-18195-2021, 2021
Short summary
Non-linear response of PM2.5 to changes in NOx and NH3 emissions in the Po basin (Italy): consequences for air quality plans
Philippe Thunis, Alain Clappier, Matthias Beekmann, Jean Philippe Putaud, Cornelis Cuvelier, Jessie Madrazo, and Alexander de Meij
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 9309–9327, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9309-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9309-2021, 2021
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
Modeling of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) from global to regional scales: model development (IAP-AACM_PAH v1.0) and investigation of health risks in 2013 and 2018 in China
Zichen Wu, Xueshun Chen, Zifa Wang, Huansheng Chen, Zhe Wang, Qing Mu, Lin Wu, Wending Wang, Xiao Tang, Jie Li, Ying Li, Qizhong Wu, Yang Wang, Zhiyin Zou, and Zijian Jiang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8885–8907, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8885-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8885-2024, 2024
Short summary
LIMA (v2.0): A full two-moment cloud microphysical scheme for the mesoscale non-hydrostatic model Meso-NH v5-6
Marie Taufour, Jean-Pierre Pinty, Christelle Barthe, Benoît Vié, and Chien Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8773–8798, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8773-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8773-2024, 2024
Short summary
SLUCM+BEM (v1.0): a simple parameterisation for dynamic anthropogenic heat and electricity consumption in WRF-Urban (v4.3.2)
Yuya Takane, Yukihiro Kikegawa, Ko Nakajima, and Hiroyuki Kusaka
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8639–8664, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8639-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8639-2024, 2024
Short summary
NAQPMS-PDAF v2.0: a novel hybrid nonlinear data assimilation system for improved simulation of PM2.5 chemical components
Hongyi Li, Ting Yang, Lars Nerger, Dawei Zhang, Di Zhang, Guigang Tang, Haibo Wang, Yele Sun, Pingqing Fu, Hang Su, and Zifa Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8495–8519, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8495-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8495-2024, 2024
Short summary
Source-specific bias correction of US background and anthropogenic ozone modeled in CMAQ
T. Nash Skipper, Christian Hogrefe, Barron H. Henderson, Rohit Mathur, Kristen M. Foley, and Armistead G. Russell
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8373–8397, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8373-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8373-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Belis, C. A., Karagulian, F., Larsen, B. R., and Hopke, P. K.: Critical review and meta-analysis of ambient particulate matter source apportionment using receptor models in Europe, Atmos. Environ., 69, 94–108, 2013.
Bhave, P. V., Pouliot, G. A., and Zheng, M.: Diagnostic model evaluation for carbonaceous PM2.5 using organic markers measured in the southeastern U.S., Environ. Sci. Technol., 41, 1577–1583, 2007.
Blanchard, C. L.: Methods for attributing ambient air pollutants to emission sources, Annu. Rev. Ener. Env., 24, 329–365, 1999.
Burr, M. J. and Zhang, Y.: Source-apportionment of fine particulate matter over the Eastern U.S. Part II: source apportionment simulations using CAMx/PSAT and comparisons with CMAQ source sensitivity simulations, Atmos. Pollut. Res., 2, 318–336, 2011a.
Burr, M. J. and Zhang, Y.: Source-apportionment of fine particulate matter over the Eastern U.S. Part II: source sensitivity simulations using CMAQ with the Brute Force method, Atmos. Pollut. Res., 2, 300–317, 2011b.
Download
Short summary
This work demonstrates that when the relationship between emissions and concentrations is nonlinear, sensitivity approaches, generally used for air quality planning, are not suitable to retrieve source contributions and source apportionment methods are not appropriate to evaluate the impact of abatement strategies on air quality. A simple theoretical example is used highlighting differences and potential implications for policy.