the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Assessing the Effectiveness of SO2, NOx, and NH3 Emission Reductions in Mitigating Winter PM2.5 in Taiwan Using CMAQ Model
Abstract. Taiwan experiences higher air pollution in winter when particulate matter (PM2.5) levels frequently surpass national standards. This study employs the Community Multiscale Air Quality model to assess the effectiveness of reducing NH3, NOx, and SO2 emissions on PM2.5 secondary inorganic species (i.e., SO42-, NO3-, and NH4+). For sulfate, ~ 43.7 % is derived from the chemical reactions of local SO2 emission, emphasizing the substantial contribution of regional transported sulfate. In contrast, local NOx and NH3 emissions predominantly influence nitrate and ammonium. Reducing SO2 emissions decreases sulfate, thereby influencing NH3 partitioning and resulting in a decreased ammonium. Similarly, reducing NOx emissions lowers HNO3, impacting nitrate and ammonium concentrations due to changes in HNO3 and NH3 partitioning. A particularly significant finding is that NH3 emissions reduction decreases not only nitrate and ammonium but also sulfate by altering cloud droplet pH and SO2 oxidation processes. While SO2 reduction's PM2.5 impact is less than NOx and NH3, it emphasizes the complexity of regional sensitivities. Most of western Taiwan is NOx-sensitive, so reducing NOx emissions has a more substantial impact on lowering PM2.5. However, given the higher mass emissions of NOx than NH3 in Taiwan, NH3 has a more significant consequence in mitigating PM2.5 per unit mass emission reduction. The cost-effectiveness analysis suggests that NH3 reduction outperforms SO2 and NOx. Nevertheless, cost estimates vary due to methodological differences and regional emission sources. Overall, this study considers both efficiency and costs, highlighting NH3 emissions reduction as a promising strategy for PM2.5 mitigation in the studied Taiwan's environment.
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(1808 KB)
-
Supplement
(2330 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(1808 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(2330 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-343', Anonymous Referee #2, 07 May 2024
This study assessed the effectiveness of reducing NH3, NOx, and SO2 emissions on PM2.5 in December 2018 by using the CMAQ model. In general, the method is well recognized, and the study is logically designed. A few modifications and clarifications are needed.
- The title can be modified as ‘mitigating winter PM2.5 in Taiwan’ to be more accurate.
- Equation 3: I don’t understand how the log calculation appeared here.
- Model performance: For evaluation model performance on meteorology and air quality, there are certain criteria and statistical matrix to evaluate. The model performance can be accepted when compared to these criteria. A reference can be: Chem. Phys., 16, 10333–10350, 2016.
- Some more detailed discussion on performance on the components should be provided, such as time series plots of obs vs. pre sulfate, nitrate and ammonium, as these are the core of the study.
- The results in Fig. S7 and S9 are averages from 1-14 December. Why?
- It will be more interesting to see whether the ‘effectiveness’ differs during the ‘high pollution’ period (such as beginning of December and middle December) and during relatively clean period.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-343-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', H. M. Hung, 17 Jun 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-343/egusphere-2024-343-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-343', Anonymous Referee #1, 18 May 2024
This study is of value in that it provides PM2.5 species measurements in Taiwan and assessed the emission control effects. However, the paper is not presented in a professional way. Many places are using non-scientific expressions in the field of atmospheric chemistry. Therefore, the whole paper needs to be substantially improved before it can be published on ACP. The problematic wording includes but not limited to –
- Abstract line 1: “when particulate matter (PM2.5) levels …” should be “when fine particulate matter (PM2.5) levels …”
- Line 13 please revise “In contrast, local NOx …”.
- Line 35, it is misleading to say “such as sulfate, nitrate, and ammonium” after “gas-phase precursors”.
- 3.1 section title: “sulfate sources” sounds better than “sulfate contribution”.
- 3.2 section title "sulfate formation pathways".
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-343-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', H. M. Hung, 17 Jun 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-343/egusphere-2024-343-AC2-supplement.pdf
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-343', Anonymous Referee #2, 07 May 2024
This study assessed the effectiveness of reducing NH3, NOx, and SO2 emissions on PM2.5 in December 2018 by using the CMAQ model. In general, the method is well recognized, and the study is logically designed. A few modifications and clarifications are needed.
- The title can be modified as ‘mitigating winter PM2.5 in Taiwan’ to be more accurate.
- Equation 3: I don’t understand how the log calculation appeared here.
- Model performance: For evaluation model performance on meteorology and air quality, there are certain criteria and statistical matrix to evaluate. The model performance can be accepted when compared to these criteria. A reference can be: Chem. Phys., 16, 10333–10350, 2016.
- Some more detailed discussion on performance on the components should be provided, such as time series plots of obs vs. pre sulfate, nitrate and ammonium, as these are the core of the study.
- The results in Fig. S7 and S9 are averages from 1-14 December. Why?
- It will be more interesting to see whether the ‘effectiveness’ differs during the ‘high pollution’ period (such as beginning of December and middle December) and during relatively clean period.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-343-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', H. M. Hung, 17 Jun 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-343/egusphere-2024-343-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-343', Anonymous Referee #1, 18 May 2024
This study is of value in that it provides PM2.5 species measurements in Taiwan and assessed the emission control effects. However, the paper is not presented in a professional way. Many places are using non-scientific expressions in the field of atmospheric chemistry. Therefore, the whole paper needs to be substantially improved before it can be published on ACP. The problematic wording includes but not limited to –
- Abstract line 1: “when particulate matter (PM2.5) levels …” should be “when fine particulate matter (PM2.5) levels …”
- Line 13 please revise “In contrast, local NOx …”.
- Line 35, it is misleading to say “such as sulfate, nitrate, and ammonium” after “gas-phase precursors”.
- 3.1 section title: “sulfate sources” sounds better than “sulfate contribution”.
- 3.2 section title "sulfate formation pathways".
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-343-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', H. M. Hung, 17 Jun 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-343/egusphere-2024-343-AC2-supplement.pdf
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Data sets
CMAQ_dataset_2018_Dec Ping-Chieh Huang, Hui-Ming Hung, and Hsin-Chih Lai https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10623526
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
296 | 105 | 25 | 426 | 37 | 20 | 18 |
- HTML: 296
- PDF: 105
- XML: 25
- Total: 426
- Supplement: 37
- BibTeX: 20
- EndNote: 18
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1
Ping-Chieh Huang
Hsin-Chih Lai
Charles C.-K. Chou
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(1808 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(2330 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper