Geoscientific Model Development www.geosci-model-dev.net 1991-959X 1991-9603 3 1 2010 10.5194/gmd-3-309-2010 http://www.geosci-model-dev.net/3/309/2010/ http://www.geosci-model-dev.net/3/309/2010/gmd-3-309-2010.html http://www.geosci-model-dev.net/3/309/2010/gmd-3-309-2010.pdf 309 320 2010-04-16 Assessment of bias-adjusted PM_2.5 air quality forecasts over the continental United States during 2007 D. Kang kang.daiwen@epa.gov R. Mathur S. Trivikrama Rao Computer Science Corporation, Research Triangle Park, 79 T.W. Alexander Drive, NC 27709, USA Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA To develop fine particulate matter (PM_2.5) air quality forecasts for the US, a National Air Quality Forecast Capability (NAQFC) system, which linked NOAA's North American Mesoscale (NAM) meteorological model with EPA's Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model, was deployed in the developmental mode over the continental United States during 2007. This study investigates the operational use of a bias-adjustment technique called the Kalman Filter Predictor approach for improving the accuracy of the PM_2.5 forecasts at monitoring locations. The Kalman Filter Predictor bias-adjustment technique is a recursive algorithm designed to optimally estimate bias-adjustment terms using the information extracted from previous measurements and forecasts. <br><br> The bias-adjustment technique is found to improve PM_2.5 forecasts (i.e. reduced errors and increased correlation coefficients) for the entire year at almost all locations. The NAQFC tends to overestimate PM_2.5 during the cool season and underestimate during the warm season in the eastern part of the continental US domain, but the opposite is true for the Pacific Coast. In the Rocky Mountain region, the NAQFC system overestimates PM_2.5 for the whole year. The bias-adjusted forecasts can quickly (after 2–3 days' lag) adjust to reflect the transition from one regime to the other. The modest computational requirements and systematic improvements in forecast outputs across all seasons suggest that this technique can be easily adapted to perform bias adjustment for real-time PM_2.5 air quality forecasts. 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, doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.03.036, 2008. Barnes, L. R., Schultz, D. M., Gruntfest, E. C., Hayden, M. H., and Benight, C. C.: Corrigendum: False Alarm Rate or False Alarm Ratio, Weather Forecast., 24, 1452–1454, doi:10.1175/2009WAF2222300.1, 2009. Black, T.: The new NMC mesoscale Eta Model: Description and forecast examples, Weather Forecast., 9, 265–278, 1994. Byun, D. W. and Schere, K. L.: Review of the governing equations, computational algorithms, and other components of the Models-3 Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system, Appl. Mech. Rev., 59, 51–77, 2006. Delle Monache, L., Nipen, T., Deng, X., Zhou, Y., and Stull, R.: Ozone ensemble forecasts: 2. A Kalman filter predictor bias correction, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D05308, doi:10.1029/2005JD006311, 2006. Delle Monache, L., Wilczak, J., Mckeen, S., Grell, G., Pagowski, M., Peckham, S., Stull, R., McHenry, J., and McQueen, J.: A Kalman-filter bias correction method applied to deterministic, ensemble averaged, and probabilistic forecasts of surface ozone, Tellus Ser. B, 60, 238–249, doi:10.111/j.1600-0889.2007.00332.x, 2008. Donahue, N. M., Robinson, A. L., and Pandis, S. N.: Atmospheric particulate matter: from smoke to secondary organic aerosol, Atmos. Environ., 43, 94–106, doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.09.055, 2009. Eder, B., Davis, J., and Bloomfield, P.: A characterization of the spatiotemporal variation of non-urban ozone in the eastern United States, Atmos. Environ., 27A, 2645–2668, 1993. Eder, B., Kang, D., Mathur, R., Yu, S., and Schere, K.: An operational evaluation of the Eta-CMAQ air quality forecast model, Atmos. Environ., 40, 4894–4905, 2006. Eder, B., Kang, D., Mathur, R., Pleim, J., Yu, S., Otte, T., and Pouliot, G.: A performance evaluation of the national air quality forecast capability for the summer of 2007, Atmos. Environ., 43, 2312–2320, doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.01.033, 2009. Eatough, D. J., Long, R. W., Modey, W. K., and Eatough, N. L.: Semi-volatile secondary organic aerosol in urban atmospheres: meeting a measurement challenge, Atmos. Environ., 37, 1277–1292, doi:10.1016/S1352-2130(02)01020-8, 2003. Gego, E. L., Porter, P. S., Irwin, J. S., Hogrefe, C., and Rao, S. T.: Assessing the comparability of ammonium, nitrate and sulfate concentrations measured by three air quality monitoring networks, Pure Appl. Geophys., 162, 1919–1939, doi:10.1007/s00024-005-2698-3, 2005. Glahn, H. R. and Lowry, D. A.: The use of model output statistics (MOS) in objective weather forecasting, J. Appl. Meteor., 11, 1203–1211, 1972. Grover, B. D., Kleinman, M., Eatough, N. L., Eatough, D. J., Hopke, P. K., Long, R. W., Wilson, W. E., Meyer, M. B., and Ambs, J. L.: Measurement of total PM$_2.5 $ mass (nonvolatile plus semivolatile) with the Filter Dynamic Measurement System tapered element oscillating microbalance monitor, J. Geophys. Res., 110, D07S03, doi:10.1029/2004JD004995, 2005. Kalman, R. E.: A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems, J. Basic Eng., 82, 35–45, 1960. Kang, D., Mathur, R., Rao, S. T., and Yu, S.: Bias adjustment techniques for improving ozone air quality forecasts, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D23308, doi:10.1029/2008JD010151, 2008. Kang, D., Eder, B. K., Stein, A. F., Grell, G. A., Peckham, S. E., and McHenry, J.: The New England air quality forecasting pilot program: Development of an evaluation protocol and performance benchmark, J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc., 55, 1782–1796, 2005. Mathur, R., Yu, S., Kang, D., and Schere, K. L.: Assessment of the wintertime performance of developmental particulate matter forecasts with the Eta-Community Multiscale Air Quality modeling system, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D02303, doi:10.1029/2007JD008580, 2008. McHenry, J. N., Ryan, W. F., Seaman, N. L., Coats Jr., C. J., Pudykiewicz, J., Arunachalam, S., and Vukovich, J. M.: A real-time Eulerian photochemical model forecast system: Overview and initial ozone forecast performance in the northeast U. S. corridor, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 85, 525–548, 2004. McKeen, S., Wilczak, J., Grell, G., et al.: Assessment of an ensemble of seven real-time ozone forecasts over eastern North America during the summer of 2004, J. Geophys. Res., 110, D21307, doi:10.1029/2005JD005858, 2005. McKeen, S., Chung, S. H., Wilczak, J., et al.: Evaluation of several PM2.5 forecast models using data collected during the ICARTT/NEAQS 2004 field study, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D10S20, doi:10.1029/2006JD007608, 2007. McMurry, P. A.: A review of atmospheric aerosol measurements, Atmos. Environ., 34, 1959–1999, 2000. National Research Council: Research Priorities for Particulate Matter 1: Immediate Priorities and a Long-Range Research Portfolio, Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, D.C., 1998. Otte, T. L., Pouliot, G., Pleim, J. E., et al.: Linking the Eta Model with the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system to build a national air quality forecasting system, Weather Forecast., 20, 367–384, 2005. Rogers, E., Black, T. L., Deaven, D. G., DiMego, G. J., Zhao, O., Baldwin, M., Junker, N. W., and Lin, Y.: Changes to the operational "early" Eta Analysis/Forecast System at the National Centers for Environmental Prediction, Weather Forecast., 11, 391–413, 1996. Schwede, D., Pouliot, G., and Pierce, T.: Changes to the Biogenic Emissions Inventory System Version 3 (BEIS3) at the 4th Annual CMAS Models-3 User's Conference, 26–28~September~2005, Chapel Hill, NC, USA, 2005. Wilczak, J., McKeen, S., Djalalova, I., Grell, G., Peckham, S., Gong, W., Bouchet, V., Moffet, R., McHenry, J., Lee, P., Tang, Y., and Carmichael, G. R.: Bias-corrected ensemble and probabilistic forecasts of surface ozone over eastern North America during the summer of 2004, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D23S28, doi:10.1029/2006JD007598, 2006. Willmott, C. J.: On the validation of models, Phys. Geogr., 2, 184–194, 1981. Yu, S., Mathur, R., Schere, K., Kang, D., Pleim, J., Young, J., Tong, D., Pouliot, G., Mckeen, S., and Rao, S. T.: Evaluation of real-time PM2.5 forecasts and process analysis for PM2.5 formation over the eastern United States using Eta-CMAQ forecast model during the 2004 ICARTT study, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D06204, doi:10.1029/2007JD009226, 2008.