Evaluation of three regional air quality models

This paper summarizes the results of a thorough assessment of existing regional air quality models. Forty-two candidate models were reviewed and three repsesentative models were selected for rigorous and comprehensive assessment. The underlying scientific theories used in the models were evaluated, revealing many limitations. For example, the techniques used in the preparation of meteorological fields that drive the models give insufficient consideration to the physical basis of the relevant atmospheric processes. The primary operational evaluation of each of the models was performed by comparing calculated values with observations from the EPRI Sulfate Regional Experiment (SURE). Both short-term (6-h averages) and long-term (annual averages) comparisons reveal poor correlations for both SO₂ and SO²⁻₄ for the three models evaluated ranging from 0.05 to 0.32 for 3- to 6-h SO₂ concentration to 0.03 to 0.59 for 24-4 and monthly averages; in some cases, the correlations are negative. The results also show that calculated concentrations are generally characterized by high biases for 3- to 6-h concentration predictions. Biases tend to be somewhat smaller for monthly averages. All three models underpredicted wet deposition with average normalized residuals of approximately 0.2 for ENAMAP-2, and 0.5 for RTM-II and ACID.