Abstract

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has implemented a Bayesian spatial data fusion model called the Downscaler (DS) model to generate daily air quality surfaces for PM2.5 across the contiguous U.S. Previous implementations of DS relied on monitoring data from EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) network, which is largely concentrated in urban areas. In this work, we introduce to the DS modeling framework an additional PM2.5 input dataset from the Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) network located mainly in remote sites. In the western U.S. where IMPROVE sites are relatively dense (compared to the eastern U.S.), the inclusion of IMPROVE PM2.5 data to the DS model runs reduces predicted annual averages and 98th percentile concentrations by as much as 1.0 and 4 μg m−3, respectively. Some urban areas in the western U.S., such as Denver, Colorado, had moderate increases in the predicted annual average concentrations, which led to a sharpening of the gradient between urban and remote areas. Comparison of observed and DS-predicted concentrations for the grid cells containing IMPROVE and AQS sites revealed consistent improvement at the IMPROVE sites but some degradation at the AQS sites. Cross-validation results of common site-days withheld in both simulations show a slight reduction in the mean bias but a slight increase in the mean square error when the IMPROVE data is included. These results indicate that the output of the DS model (and presumably other Bayesian data fusion models) is sensitive to the addition of geographically distinct input data, and that the application of such models should consider the prediction domain (national or urban focused) when deciding to include new input data.

Highlights

  • Several recent epidemiology and exposure studies linking air pollution concentrations to health effects have transitioned from using composite monitors to continuous air quality surfaces [1,2,3], necessitating the need for additional refinement and evaluation of the methods used to generate these surfaces

  • The two data sources combine the accuracy of measurement data and the spatial coverage of Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) predictions to create an accurate air quality surface with realistic gradients

  • The differences between the baseline and w/Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) DS annual average predictions are largest in areas near IMPROVE monitors across the western U.S, the Ozarks region of Arkansas, and the Appalachian Mountains

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Several recent epidemiology and exposure studies linking air pollution concentrations to health effects have transitioned from using composite monitors to continuous air quality surfaces [1,2,3], necessitating the need for additional refinement and evaluation of the methods used to generate these surfaces. Continuous surfaces are an improvement because they capture the gradients of exposure fields that composite monitors neglect. These studies have generated air quality surfaces by fusing monitoring data with chemical transport models, satellite-based estimates, land surface models, and/or population density estimates [4,5,6,7]. For a recent review of the different input data and statistical models used for data fusion of ambient air pollution, see Atmosphere 2020, 11, 103; doi:10.3390/atmos11010103 www.mdpi.com/journal/atmosphere. Few of these past studies, describe the sensitivity of these surfaces to the spatial coverage of observed input data used to derive the fields

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call