Modelling carbonaceous aerosol from residential solid fuel burning with different assumptions for emissions

Abstract

Abstract. Evidence is accumulating that emissions of primary particulate matter (PM) from residential wood and coal combustion in the UK may be underestimated and/or spatially misclassified. In this study, different assumptions for the spatial distribution and total emission of PM from solid fuel (wood and coal) burning in the UK were tested using an atmospheric chemical transport model. Modelled concentrations of the PM components were compared with measurements from aerosol mass spectrometers at four sites in central and Greater London (ClearfLo campaign, 2012), as well as with measurements from the UK black carbon network.The two main alternative emission scenarios modelled were Base4x and combRedist. For Base4x, officially reported PM 2.5 from the residential and other non-industrial combustion source sector were increased by a factor of four. For the combRedist experiment, half of the baseline emissions from this same source were redistributed by residential population density to simulate the effect of allocating some emissions to the smoke control areas (that are assumed in the national inventory to have no emissions from this source). The Base4x scenario yielded better daily and hourly correlations with measurements than the combRedist scenario for yearlong comparisons of the solid fuel organic aerosol (SFOA) component at the two London sites. However, the latter scenario better captured mean measured concentrations across all four sites. A third experiment, Redist -all emissions redistributed linearly to population density, is also presented as an indicator of the maximum concentrations an assumption like this could yield.The modelled elemental carbon (EC) concentrations derived from the combRedist experiments also compared well with seasonal average concentrations of black carbon observed across the network of UK sites. Together, the two model scenario simulations of SFOA and EC suggest both that residential solid fuel emissions may be higher than inventory estimates and that the spatial distribution of residenPublished by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. 4498 R. Ots et al.: Modelling carbonaceous aerosol from residential solid fuel burning tial solid fuel burning emissions, particularly in smoke control areas, needs re-evaluation. The model results also suggest the assumed temporal profiles for residential emissions may require review to place greater emphasis on evening (including "discretionary") solid fuel burning.

GenChem v1.0 – a chemical pre-processing and testing system for atmospheric modelling

“…), according to the so-called "SNAP" classifications (Selected Nomenclature for sources of Air Pollution, EEA, 2007, as used in the EMEP model, Simpson et al, 2012. The provided data are based upon average UK emission profiles from Passant (2002) and emissions from 2010, and they have been adapted in this work for each base chemistry scheme.…”

Integrated Assessment Modelling of Future Air Quality in the UK to 2050, and Synergies with Net Zero Strategies

“…A comprehensive evaluation of the UKIAM has been reported elsewhere [14] which includes a direct comparison against the complex Eulerian EMEP4UK model for selected core scenarios reported here. This is important because UKIAM is a reduced-form model which can evaluate multiple scenarios quickly whereas EMEP4UK is a complex ACTM with full chemistry which has been tested widely against measurement data [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] and shows good performance. Used in combination for policy support, this facilitates analysis of many alternative policy strategies at the same time as quantifying the potential effects of inter-annual variability in meteorology and non-linear atmospheric chemistry.…”

Reduced-Form and Complex Actm Modelling for Air Quality Policy Development: A Model Inter-Comparison

“…EMEP4UK is a full Eulerian atmospheric chemistry and transport model which simulates the emissions, transport, chemical transformations and deposition of a wide range of pollutants and provides hourly outputs (Vieno et al, 2009;Vieno et al, 2010;Ots et al, 2016;Vieno et al, 2016a;Vieno et al, 2016b;Ots et al, 2018;Aleksankina et al, 2019;Carnell et al, 2019). It is a UK high-spatial resolution implementation of the European EMEP MSC-W model (Simpson et al, 2012; https://github.com/metno/emep-ctm), which is used within the framework of the UNECE Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP) to assess country-to-country transport of air pollutants, the exceedance of critical loads thresholds for ecosystems and underpins the setting of European emission ceilings.…”

“…The EMEP4UK-WRF modelling system has been tested widely against measurement data (Vieno et al, 2009;Vieno et al, 2010;Ots et al, 2016;Vieno et al, 2016a;Vieno et al, 2016b;Ots et al, 2018;Aleksankina et al, 2019;Carnell et al, 2019) and shows good performance, except for roadside sites where the 3 km resolution is inadequate to capture the local enhancement. The UKIAM model, run at 1 km resolution, would be expected to perform better, although it will still not capture the true roadside increment.…”