the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 02 Apr 2024
Description and validation of VERT 1.0, an R-based framework for estimating road transport emissions from traffic flows
Abstract. VERT is an R package developed to estimate traffic emissions of a wide range of pollutants and greenhouse gases based on traffic estimates and vehicle fleet composition data, following the EMEP/EEA methodology. Compared to other tools available in the literature, VERT is characterised by ease of use and rapid configuration, while maintaining great flexibility in user input. In this paper, case studies conducted at both urban and regional scales demonstrate VERT's ability to accurately assess transport emissions. In an urban setting, VERT is integrated with the Lagrangian dispersion model GRAMM-GRAL and provides NOx concentrations in line with observed trends at monitoring stations, especially near traffic hotspots. On a regional scale, VERT simulations provide emission estimates that are highly consistent with the reference inventories for the Emilia-Romagna region (Italy). These findings make VERT a valuable tool for air quality management and traffic emission scenarios assessment.
-
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
(6018 KB)
-
Supplement
(161 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(6018 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(161 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-636', Anonymous Referee #1, 22 Apr 2024
The paper presents VERT, an R package to estimate traffic emissions following the EMEP/EEA methodology. The article is well organized showing some practical applications of the package. In general, I would like to suggest also to include specific section or comments regarding the foreseen calculation time and efforts also in relation to the resolution of the estimates.
Referring the line number of the preprint, please find here some specific comments:
Line 41 – the non-exhaust and resuspension emissions are treated in VERT. I suggest adding specific comments also in this abstract on traffic emissions.
Line 136 – please add in text or refer how the vehicle speed is calculated.
Line 435 – The authors try to explain the calculation differences between VERT and similar software:
“Differences can be identified in the aggregation of vehicle classes of the fleet composition and the way this data is used in the calculation. INEMAR uses the total number of registered vehicles in the region (ACI, 2023) and assumes that these vehicles travel on the reference road network according to the flows simulated by PTV VISUM. Emissions are then calculated on the basis of vehicle 440 movements. Conversely, VERT uses a percentage fleet composition to estimate an average EF for each vehicle category of the simulated flows. The reference EF are then multiplied by the simulated flows to obtain the final emissions. In addition, the fleet composition processed by INEMAR is not normalised by actual kilometres travelled by vehicle category.”
These comments are not clear. To support the analysis, it will be useful reporting a synoptic table resuming all the main hypothesis between the two model on all the input variables, also specifying e.g. if the road network, main fluxes and fleet composition are the same and how they are treated by the models.
It will be useful also adding some comments on the road network resolution; are all the streets treated by the model? If not, is it possible to propose how estimating emissions on all the roads?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-636-RC1 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Giorgio Veratti, 27 Jun 2024
Dear Reviewer,
We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to reviewing our manuscript. Your comments and suggestions have enhanced the quality of our work.
We have carefully considered and addressed all of your feedback and have made the necessary revisions to the manuscript. Attached you will find the updated manuscript along with a detailed rebuttal document outlining our responses to each of your comments.
We hope that our revisions meet your expectations and we look forward to your further feedback.
Kind regards,
The authors
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Giorgio Veratti, 27 Jun 2024
-
CEC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-636 - No compliance with GMD's policy', Juan Antonio Añel, 11 May 2024
Dear authors,
Unfortunately, after checking your manuscript, it has come to our attention that it does not comply with our "Code and Data Policy".
https://www.geoscientific-model-development.net/policies/code_and_data_policy.html
Your manuscript says that the VERT code will be made available upon acceptance. We do not admit this, which is clearly stated in our policy. All the code and data used or produced in the work described in your manuscript must be available publicly and open with a DOI at the moment of submission. In this regard, you have stored code in a GitHub repository, which does not comply with our requirements. GitHub is not a suitable repository for scientific publication. GitHub itself instructs authors to use other long-term archival and publishing alternatives, such as Zenodo.
Therefore, please publish your code in one of the appropriate repositories as soon as possible and reply to this comment with the relevant information (link and DOI) as quickly as possible, as it should be available before the Discussions stage. Also, please include the relevant primary input/output data.
If you do not fix this problem expeditiously, we will have to reject your manuscript for publication in our journal. I should note that, given this lack of compliance with our policy, your manuscript should not have been accepted in Discussions. Therefore, the current situation with your manuscript is irregular.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive EditorCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-636-CEC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Giorgio Veratti, 12 May 2024
Dear Prof. Juan A. Añel,
Thank you for bringing this important issue to our attention. We have taken immediate action to address the concerns raised about our manuscript. In accordance with the journal's Code and Data Policy, we have now made the VERT model code publicly available on Zenodo, along with the relevant input and output data. The repository and associated Digital Object Identifier (DOI) can be found at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10728332.
Kind regards,
Giorgio Veratti
University of Modena and Reggio Emilia
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-636-AC1 -
CEC2: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 12 May 2024
Dear authors,
Many thanks for your quick reply. Now we can consider this issue solved.
Best regards,Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive EditorCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-636-CEC2
-
CEC2: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 12 May 2024
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Giorgio Veratti, 12 May 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-636', Larysa Pysarenko, 08 Jun 2024
\Paper entitled “Description and validation of VERT 1.0, an R-based framework for estimating road transport emissions from traffic flows”, describes VERT (Vehicular Emissions from Road Traffic) created in R package, that allows estimating traffic emissions. This topic is essential for improving emission inventories for different spatial and temporal resolutions. In general, minor revision is recommended.
General comments:
1) Line 134 and Eq. 3. The authors mention experimental coefficients. What are the values of these coefficients? Are they incorporated into the VERT code? It would be better to provide more details on the procedure for their estimation. Were these coefficients approximated by a polynomial trend or somehow else?
Also, there are some hesitations concerning the term “D/velocity” in Eq.3. Taking into account that VERT can be used for simulating hourly emissions, do authors consider the possibility of almost zero vehicle speeds? It relatively frequently occurs in megapolises during rush hours or under some emergency conditions on the roads.
2) Line 314-320. The authors mentioned the complex topography of the studied domain. It will be useful to provide additional details on land cover and topography data input to the model. Also, there is no information about meteorological input, including its temporal and spatial resolution.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-636-RC2 -
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Giorgio Veratti, 27 Jun 2024
Dear Reviewer,
We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to reviewing our manuscript. Your comments and suggestions have enhanced the quality of our work.
We have carefully considered and addressed all of your feedback and have made the necessary revisions to the manuscript. Attached you will find the updated manuscript along with a detailed rebuttal document outlining our responses to each of your comments.
We hope that our revisions meet your expectations and we look forward to your further feedback.
Kind regards,
The authors
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Giorgio Veratti, 27 Jun 2024
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-636', Anonymous Referee #1, 22 Apr 2024
The paper presents VERT, an R package to estimate traffic emissions following the EMEP/EEA methodology. The article is well organized showing some practical applications of the package. In general, I would like to suggest also to include specific section or comments regarding the foreseen calculation time and efforts also in relation to the resolution of the estimates.
Referring the line number of the preprint, please find here some specific comments:
Line 41 – the non-exhaust and resuspension emissions are treated in VERT. I suggest adding specific comments also in this abstract on traffic emissions.
Line 136 – please add in text or refer how the vehicle speed is calculated.
Line 435 – The authors try to explain the calculation differences between VERT and similar software:
“Differences can be identified in the aggregation of vehicle classes of the fleet composition and the way this data is used in the calculation. INEMAR uses the total number of registered vehicles in the region (ACI, 2023) and assumes that these vehicles travel on the reference road network according to the flows simulated by PTV VISUM. Emissions are then calculated on the basis of vehicle 440 movements. Conversely, VERT uses a percentage fleet composition to estimate an average EF for each vehicle category of the simulated flows. The reference EF are then multiplied by the simulated flows to obtain the final emissions. In addition, the fleet composition processed by INEMAR is not normalised by actual kilometres travelled by vehicle category.”
These comments are not clear. To support the analysis, it will be useful reporting a synoptic table resuming all the main hypothesis between the two model on all the input variables, also specifying e.g. if the road network, main fluxes and fleet composition are the same and how they are treated by the models.
It will be useful also adding some comments on the road network resolution; are all the streets treated by the model? If not, is it possible to propose how estimating emissions on all the roads?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-636-RC1 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Giorgio Veratti, 27 Jun 2024
Dear Reviewer,
We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to reviewing our manuscript. Your comments and suggestions have enhanced the quality of our work.
We have carefully considered and addressed all of your feedback and have made the necessary revisions to the manuscript. Attached you will find the updated manuscript along with a detailed rebuttal document outlining our responses to each of your comments.
We hope that our revisions meet your expectations and we look forward to your further feedback.
Kind regards,
The authors
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Giorgio Veratti, 27 Jun 2024
-
CEC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-636 - No compliance with GMD's policy', Juan Antonio Añel, 11 May 2024
Dear authors,
Unfortunately, after checking your manuscript, it has come to our attention that it does not comply with our "Code and Data Policy".
https://www.geoscientific-model-development.net/policies/code_and_data_policy.html
Your manuscript says that the VERT code will be made available upon acceptance. We do not admit this, which is clearly stated in our policy. All the code and data used or produced in the work described in your manuscript must be available publicly and open with a DOI at the moment of submission. In this regard, you have stored code in a GitHub repository, which does not comply with our requirements. GitHub is not a suitable repository for scientific publication. GitHub itself instructs authors to use other long-term archival and publishing alternatives, such as Zenodo.
Therefore, please publish your code in one of the appropriate repositories as soon as possible and reply to this comment with the relevant information (link and DOI) as quickly as possible, as it should be available before the Discussions stage. Also, please include the relevant primary input/output data.
If you do not fix this problem expeditiously, we will have to reject your manuscript for publication in our journal. I should note that, given this lack of compliance with our policy, your manuscript should not have been accepted in Discussions. Therefore, the current situation with your manuscript is irregular.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive EditorCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-636-CEC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Giorgio Veratti, 12 May 2024
Dear Prof. Juan A. Añel,
Thank you for bringing this important issue to our attention. We have taken immediate action to address the concerns raised about our manuscript. In accordance with the journal's Code and Data Policy, we have now made the VERT model code publicly available on Zenodo, along with the relevant input and output data. The repository and associated Digital Object Identifier (DOI) can be found at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10728332.
Kind regards,
Giorgio Veratti
University of Modena and Reggio Emilia
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-636-AC1 -
CEC2: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 12 May 2024
Dear authors,
Many thanks for your quick reply. Now we can consider this issue solved.
Best regards,Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive EditorCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-636-CEC2
-
CEC2: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 12 May 2024
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Giorgio Veratti, 12 May 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-636', Larysa Pysarenko, 08 Jun 2024
\Paper entitled “Description and validation of VERT 1.0, an R-based framework for estimating road transport emissions from traffic flows”, describes VERT (Vehicular Emissions from Road Traffic) created in R package, that allows estimating traffic emissions. This topic is essential for improving emission inventories for different spatial and temporal resolutions. In general, minor revision is recommended.
General comments:
1) Line 134 and Eq. 3. The authors mention experimental coefficients. What are the values of these coefficients? Are they incorporated into the VERT code? It would be better to provide more details on the procedure for their estimation. Were these coefficients approximated by a polynomial trend or somehow else?
Also, there are some hesitations concerning the term “D/velocity” in Eq.3. Taking into account that VERT can be used for simulating hourly emissions, do authors consider the possibility of almost zero vehicle speeds? It relatively frequently occurs in megapolises during rush hours or under some emergency conditions on the roads.
2) Line 314-320. The authors mentioned the complex topography of the studied domain. It will be useful to provide additional details on land cover and topography data input to the model. Also, there is no information about meteorological input, including its temporal and spatial resolution.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-636-RC2 -
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Giorgio Veratti, 27 Jun 2024
Dear Reviewer,
We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to reviewing our manuscript. Your comments and suggestions have enhanced the quality of our work.
We have carefully considered and addressed all of your feedback and have made the necessary revisions to the manuscript. Attached you will find the updated manuscript along with a detailed rebuttal document outlining our responses to each of your comments.
We hope that our revisions meet your expectations and we look forward to your further feedback.
Kind regards,
The authors
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Giorgio Veratti, 27 Jun 2024
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 309 | 105 | 35 | 449 | 42 | 17 | 16 |
- HTML: 309
- PDF: 105
- XML: 35
- Total: 449
- Supplement: 42
- BibTeX: 17
- EndNote: 16
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
Giorgio Veratti
Alessandro Bigi
Sergio Teggi
Grazia Ghermandi
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(6018 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(161 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper