Comparison of the performances of land use regression modelling and dispersion modelling in estimating small-scale variations in long-term air pollution concentrations in a Dutch urban area |
| |
| Authors: | Rob Beelen Marita Voogt Jan Duyzer Peter Zandveld Gerard Hoek |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Florida, P. O. Box 115706, Gainesville, FL 32601, USA;2. Department of Environmental Engineering Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-5706, USA;3. Shanghai Environmental Monitoring Center, No.55, Sanjiang Rd., Shanghai, 200235, China;4. Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Florida, P. O. Box 115706, Gainesville, FL 32611-5706, USA;5. School of Naval Architecture, Ocean and Civil Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China |
| |
| Abstract: | The performance of a Land Use Regression (LUR) model and a dispersion model (URBIS – URBis Information System) was compared in a Dutch urban area. For the Rijnmond area, i.e. Rotterdam and surroundings, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) concentrations for 2001 were estimated for nearly 70 000 centroids of a regular grid of 100 × 100 m.A LUR model based upon measurements carried out on 44 sites from the Dutch national monitoring network and upon Geographic Information System (GIS) predictor variables including traffic intensity, industry, population and residential land use was developed. Interpolation of regional background concentration measurements was used to obtain the regional background. The URBIS system was used to estimate NO2 concentrations using dispersion modelling. URBIS includes the CAR model (Calculation of Air pollution from Road traffic) to calculate concentrations of air pollutants near urban roads and Gaussian plume models to calculate air pollution levels near motorways and industrial sources. Background concentrations were accounted for using 1 × 1 km maps derived from monitoring and model calculations.Moderate agreement was found between the URBIS and LUR in calculating NO2 concentrations (R = 0.55). The predictions agreed well for the central part of the concentration distribution but differed substantially for the highest and lowest concentrations. The URBIS dispersion model performed better than the LUR model (R = 0.77 versus R = 0.47 respectively) in the comparison between measured and calculated concentrations on 18 validation sites. Differences can be understood because of the use of different regional background concentrations, inclusion of rather coarse land use category industry as a predictor variable in the LUR model and different treatment of conversion of NO to NO2.Moderate agreement was found between a dispersion model and a land use regression model in calculating annual average NO2 concentrations in an area with multiple sources. The dispersion model explained concentrations at validation sites better. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
