Comparison of dry deposition estimates of AERMOD and CALPUFF from area sources in flat terrain

The dry deposition algorithms of AERMOD and CALPUFF were compared, studying emissions from hypothetical area and point sources in flat terrain. The deposited fractions calculated by AERMOD and CALPUFF are different for the C, D and F stability classes. In all the studied scenarios the differences be...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

The dry deposition algorithms of AERMOD and CALPUFF were compared, studying emissions from hypothetical area and point sources in flat terrain. The deposited fractions calculated by AERMOD and CALPUFF are different for the C, D and F stability classes. In all the studied scenarios the differences between the deposited fractions calculated by AERMOD and CALPUFF are much smaller than those calculated previously in complex terrain. Yet, the detected differences in the deposited fractions may affect the ambient concentrations calculated by AERMOD and CALPUFF in the receptor points as a part of an environmental impact assessment and lead to different conclusions on the residents' exposure. The distinct account of AERMOD and CALPUFF to certain wind speeds and stability classes, and their different algorithms for calculating the dispersion coefficients, is the only explanation for the different estimates of deposited fractions between AERMOD and CALPUFF over absolutely flat terrain. Ausführliche Beschreibung