Notice

This is not the latest version of this item. The latest version can be found at:https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/133613.2

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHenneman, Lucas RF
dc.contributor.authorDedoussi, Irene C
dc.contributor.authorCasey, Joan A
dc.contributor.authorChoirat, Christine
dc.contributor.authorBarrett, Steven RH
dc.contributor.authorZigler, Corwin M
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-27T19:53:49Z
dc.date.available2021-10-27T19:53:49Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/133613
dc.description.abstract© 2020, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc. Expanded use of reduced complexity approaches in epidemiology and environmental justice investigations motivates detailed evaluation of these modeling approaches. Chemical transport models (CTMs) remain the most complete representation of atmospheric processes but are limited in applications that require large numbers of runs, such as those that evaluate individual impacts from large numbers of sources. This limitation motivates comparisons between modern CTM-derived techniques and intentionally simpler alternatives. We model population-weighted PM2.5 source impacts from each of greater than 1100 coal power plants operating in the United States in 2006 and 2011 using three approaches: (1) adjoint PM2.5 sensitivities calculated by the GEOS-Chem CTM; (2) a wind field-based Lagrangian model called HyADS; and (3) a simple calculation based on emissions and inverse source-receptor distance. Annual individual power plants’ nationwide population-weighted PM2.5 source impacts calculated by HyADS and the inverse distance approach have normalized mean errors between 20 and 28% and root mean square error ranges between 0.0003 and 0.0005 µg m−3 compared with adjoint sensitivities. Reduced complexity approaches are most similar to the GEOS-Chem adjoint sensitivities nearby and downwind of sources, with degrading performance farther from and upwind of sources particularly when wind fields are not accounted for.en_US
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSpringer Science and Business Media LLCen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1038/S41370-020-0219-1en_US
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alikeen_US
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/en_US
dc.sourcePMCen_US
dc.titleComparisons of simple and complex methods for quantifying exposure to individual point source air pollution emissionsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.relation.journalJournal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiologyen_US
dc.eprint.versionAuthor's final manuscripten_US
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticleen_US
eprint.statushttp://purl.org/eprint/status/PeerRevieweden_US
dc.date.updated2021-09-20T15:00:41Z
dspace.orderedauthorsHenneman, LRF; Dedoussi, IC; Casey, JA; Choirat, C; Barrett, SRH; Zigler, CMen_US
dspace.date.submission2021-09-20T15:00:43Z
mit.journal.volume31en_US
mit.journal.issue4en_US
mit.licenseOPEN_ACCESS_POLICY
mit.metadata.statusAuthority Work and Publication Information Neededen_US
mit.metadata.statusAuthority Work and Publication Information Needed


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

VersionItemDateSummary

*Selected version