Articles | Volume 8, issue 9
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-2877-2015
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-2877-2015
Development and technical paper
 | 
15 Sep 2015
Development and technical paper |  | 15 Sep 2015

Evaluation of the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model v5.0 against size-resolved measurements of inorganic particle composition across sites in North America

C. G. Nolte, K. W. Appel, J. T. Kelly, P. V. Bhave, K. M. Fahey, J. L. Collett Jr., L. Zhang, and J. O. Young

Related authors

Examining Spin-Up Behaviour within WRF Dynamical Downscaling Applications
Megan S. Mallard, Tanya Spero, Jared Bowden, Jeff Willison, Christopher G. Nolte, and Anna M. Jalowska
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2352,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2352, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
The Detailed Emissions Scaling, Isolation, and Diagnostic (DESID) module in the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system version 5.3.2
Benjamin N. Murphy, Christopher G. Nolte, Fahim Sidi, Jesse O. Bash, K. Wyat Appel, Carey Jang, Daiwen Kang, James Kelly, Rohit Mathur, Sergey Napelenok, George Pouliot, and Havala O. T. Pye
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3407–3420, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3407-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3407-2021, 2021
Short summary
The Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model versions 5.3 and 5.3.1: system updates and evaluation
K. Wyat Appel, Jesse O. Bash, Kathleen M. Fahey, Kristen M. Foley, Robert C. Gilliam, Christian Hogrefe, William T. Hutzell, Daiwen Kang, Rohit Mathur, Benjamin N. Murphy, Sergey L. Napelenok, Christopher G. Nolte, Jonathan E. Pleim, George A. Pouliot, Havala O. T. Pye, Limei Ran, Shawn J. Roselle, Golam Sarwar, Donna B. Schwede, Fahim I. Sidi, Tanya L. Spero, and David C. Wong
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2867–2897, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2867-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2867-2021, 2021
Short summary
The potential effects of climate change on air quality across the conterminous US at 2030 under three Representative Concentration Pathways
Christopher G. Nolte, Tanya L. Spero, Jared H. Bowden, Megan S. Mallard, and Patrick D. Dolwick
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 15471–15489, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-15471-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-15471-2018, 2018
Short summary
Southeast Atmosphere Studies: learning from model-observation syntheses
Jingqiu Mao, Annmarie Carlton, Ronald C. Cohen, William H. Brune, Steven S. Brown, Glenn M. Wolfe, Jose L. Jimenez, Havala O. T. Pye, Nga Lee Ng, Lu Xu, V. Faye McNeill, Kostas Tsigaridis, Brian C. McDonald, Carsten Warneke, Alex Guenther, Matthew J. Alvarado, Joost de Gouw, Loretta J. Mickley, Eric M. Leibensperger, Rohit Mathur, Christopher G. Nolte, Robert W. Portmann, Nadine Unger, Mika Tosca, and Larry W. Horowitz
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 2615–2651, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2615-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2615-2018, 2018
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
UA-ICON with the NWP physics package (version ua-icon-2.1): mean state and variability of the middle atmosphere
Markus Kunze, Christoph Zülicke, Tarique A. Siddiqui, Claudia C. Stephan, Yosuke Yamazaki, Claudia Stolle, Sebastian Borchert, and Hauke Schmidt
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3359–3385, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3359-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3359-2025, 2025
Short summary
Integrated Methane Inversion (IMI) 2.0: an improved research and stakeholder tool for monitoring total methane emissions with high resolution worldwide using TROPOMI satellite observations
Lucas A. Estrada, Daniel J. Varon, Melissa Sulprizio, Hannah Nesser, Zichong Chen, Nicholas Balasus, Sarah E. Hancock, Megan He, James D. East, Todd A. Mooring, Alexander Oort Alonso, Joannes D. Maasakkers, Ilse Aben, Sabour Baray, Kevin W. Bowman, John R. Worden, Felipe J. Cardoso-Saldaña, Emily Reidy, and Daniel J. Jacob
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3311–3330, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3311-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3311-2025, 2025
Short summary
HTAP3 Fires: towards a multi-model, multi-pollutant study of fire impacts
Cynthia H. Whaley, Tim Butler, Jose A. Adame, Rupal Ambulkar, Steve R. Arnold, Rebecca R. Buchholz, Benjamin Gaubert, Douglas S. Hamilton, Min Huang, Hayley Hung, Johannes W. Kaiser, Jacek W. Kaminski, Christoph Knote, Gerbrand Koren, Jean-Luc Kouassi, Meiyun Lin, Tianjia Liu, Jianmin Ma, Kasemsan Manomaiphiboon, Elisa Bergas Masso, Jessica L. McCarty, Mariano Mertens, Mark Parrington, Helene Peiro, Pallavi Saxena, Saurabh Sonwani, Vanisa Surapipith, Damaris Y. T. Tan, Wenfu Tang, Veerachai Tanpipat, Kostas Tsigaridis, Christine Wiedinmyer, Oliver Wild, Yuanyu Xie, and Paquita Zuidema
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3265–3309, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3265-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3265-2025, 2025
Short summary
Using a data-driven statistical model to better evaluate surface turbulent heat fluxes in weather and climate numerical models: a demonstration study
Maurin Zouzoua, Sophie Bastin, Fabienne Lohou, Marie Lothon, Marjolaine Chiriaco, Mathilde Jome, Cécile Mallet, Laurent Barthes, and Guylaine Canut
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3211–3239, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3211-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3211-2025, 2025
Short summary
Pochva: a new hydro-thermal process model in soil, snow, and vegetation for application in atmosphere numerical models
Oxana Drofa
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3175–3209, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3175-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3175-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Allen, D. J., Pickering, K. E., Pinder, R. W., Henderson, B. H., Appel, K. W., and Prados, A.: Impact of lightning-NO on eastern United States photochemistry during the summer of 2006 as determined using the CMAQ model, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 1737–1758, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-1737-2012, 2012.
Appel, K. W., Bhave, P. V., Gilliland, A. B., Sarwar, G., and Roselle, S. J.: Evaluation of the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model version 4.5: sensitivities impacting model performance; Part II – Particulate matter, Atmos. Environ., 42, 6057–6066, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.03.036, 2008.
Appel, K. W., Pouliot, G. A., Simon, H., Sarwar, G., Pye, H. O. T., Napelenok, S. L., Akhtar, F., and Roselle, S. J.: Evaluation of dust and trace metal estimates from the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model version 5.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 883–899, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-883-2013, 2013.
Asgharian, B., Hofmann, W., and Bergmann, R.: Particle deposition in a multiple-path model of the human lung, Aerosol Sci. Technol., 34, 332–339, 2001.
Baker, K. R. and Foley, K. M.: A nonlinear regression model estimating single source concentrations of primary and secondarily formed PM2.5, Atmos. Environ., 45, 3758–3767, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.03.074, 2011.
Download
Short summary
This study is the most comprehensive evaluation of CMAQ inorganic aerosol size-composition distributions conducted to date. We compare two methods of inferring PM2.5 concentrations from the model: (1) based on the sum of the masses in the fine aerosol modes, as is most commonly done in CMAQ model evaluation; and (2) computed using the simulated size distributions. Differences are generally less than 1 microgram/m3, and are largest over the eastern USA during the summer.
Share