Abstract
This study evaluates AERMOD and CALPUFF dispersion calculations of particulate matter emissions from stone quarries in two mountainous regions against TSP and PM10 measurements, using both observational and WRF-modeled meteorological data. Due to different model parameterization, AERMOD dispersion predictions were in better agreement with the measured concentrations than those obtained by CALPUFF. As expected, the smaller the distance between the meteorological station, the source (quarry) and the receptors, the better the predictions of both AERMOD and CALPUFF. In contrast, using in-situ wind field obtained by runs of the WRF meteorological model for the complex terrain study area provided, in general, less accurate dispersion estimates than when using (even remote) meteorological observations. In particular, using the three-dimensional WRF-modeled wind field within CALPUFF did not provide any advantage over using the two-dimensional wind field, which is the common procedure of AERMOD and CALPUFF. Dry deposition was more significant for ambient concentration estimation in AERMOD than in CALPUFF.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
