Journal Pre-proof

Evaluating the contributions of changed meteorological

conditions and emission to substantial reductions of PM2.5
concentration from winter 2016 to 2017 in Central and Eastern
China

Wenjie Zhang, Hong Wang, Xiaoye Zhang, Yue Peng, Junting

Zhong, Yaqiang Wang, Yifan Zhao

PII: S0048-9697(20)30402-2
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.136892
Reference: STOTEN 136892

To appear in: Science of the Total Environment

Received date: 14 October 2019

Revised date: 24 December 2019
Accepted date: 22 January 2020

Please cite this article as: W. Zhang, H. Wang, X. Zhang, et al., Evaluating the
contributions of changed meteorological conditions and emission to substantial reductions
of PM2.5 concentration from winter 2016 to 2017 in Central and Eastern China, Science
of the Total Environment (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.136892

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such
as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is
not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting,
typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this
version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production
process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers
that apply to the journal pertain.

© 2020 Published by Elsevier.

 Journal Pre-proof

Evaluating the contributions of changed meteorological conditions

and emission to substantial reductions of PM2.5 concentration from

winter 2016 to 2017 in Central and Eastern China

Wenjie Zhang1, Hong Wang1,2, Xiaoye Zhang1,3, Yue Peng1, Junting Zhong1,

Yaqiang Wang1, Yifan Zhao1

of
1
State Key Laboratory of Severe Weather & Key Laboratory of Atmospheric

ro
Chemistry of CMA, Chinese Academy of Meteorological Sciences, Beijing, China
-p
2
Collaborative Innovation Center on Forecast and Evaluation of Meteorological
re

Disasters, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology, Nanjing 210044,

lP

China
na

3
Center for Excellence in Regional Atmospheric Environment, IUE, Chinese

Academy of Sciences, Xiamen, China

ur

Correspondence: Hong Wang (wangh@cma.gov.cn)

Jo

Abstract

The monthly average PM2.5 concentration decreased from 127.15 μg m-3 in December

2016 to 85.54 μg m-3 in December 2017 (approximately 33%) in Central and Eastern

China (33 °N-41 °N, 113 °E-118 °E). This decrease is attributed to the combined

impacts of meteorology and emission sources changes, though the question of which

is more important has raised great concerns. Four sensitivity experiments based on the

1
 Journal Pre-proof

Global-Regional Assimilation and Prediction System coupled with the Chinese

Unified Atmospheric Chemistry Environment (GRAPES-CUACE) model, together

with comparative analysis of the observed meteorological conditions and emission

inventory between 2016 and 2017, are used to evaluate the relative contributions of

meteorology and emission to the substantial reductions of PM2.5 concentration from

December 2016 to December 2017. The results show that the meteorological

of
conditions and emission in December 2017 were both beneficial to the PM2.5 decrease

in Central and Eastern China. Regarding the entire region, 21.9% of the PM2.5

ro
decrease was a result of the favorable meteorological conditions, and 78.1% of the
-p
decrease was a result of emission reductions, showing the distinct contributions of
re

emission reductions on the air quality. The relative contributions of meteorology

lP

varied from 12.2% to 50.9% to the PM2.5 decrease from December 2016 to December
na

2017, while the emission contributed 49.1% to 87.8%, in different cities depending on

geographical location and topography. Meteorology showed the largest contributions

ur

to the PM2.5 decrease from 2016 to 2017 in Beijing (BJ), which caused the greatest
Jo

total decrease of PM2.5 compared to that of other cities. In addition, in Central and

Eastern China, the dominant factors of the decrease of PM2.5 were favorable

meteorological conditions (accounting for 98.2%) during clear periods and emission

reductions (accounting for 72.5-81.2%) during pollution periods.

Key words

Central and Eastern China, meteorological conditions, emission, GRAPES-CUACE

model, PM2.5 concentration

2
 Journal Pre-proof

1 Introduction

Haze pollution with high PM2.5 is China's most serious atmospheric environmental

problem and has endangered people's life and health (Yang et al., 2007; Che et al.,

2015). During recent years, the Central and Eastern China have become the most

PM2.5 polluted areas in the country (Zhang et al., 2013; Sun et al., 2014; Zhang et al.,

of
2015b; Zhang et al., 2016), which has attracted widespread concern.

The PM2.5 level in Central and Eastern China is closely related to meteorological

ro
conditions. Zonal westerly airflow and high-pressure ridge are two major
-p
high-altitude situations affecting the formation of aerosol pollution in the
re

Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei (Jing-Jin-Ji) (Wu et al., 2017). Regarding a haze episode with

lP

high PM2.5 in Central and Eastern China in winter, northerly wind usually facilitates
na

the diffusion of PM2.5, and southerly wind is generally beneficial to the accumulation

of PM2.5 (Streets et al., 2007; Sun et al., 2016; Ma et al., 2017). After studying
ur

persistent heavy aerosol pollution episodes (HPEs) in BJ, the two-way feedback
Jo

mechanism is discovered: when the PM2.5 concentration accumulates to ~100 μg m-3,

the meteorological conditions in the boundary layer are changed significantly (caused

or strengthened inversion, humidification in the lower boundary layer, weakened

turbulence and so on), resulting in the PM2.5 explosive growth (Wang et al., 2015a;

Wang et al., 2015b; Zhong et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2018; Zhong et al., 2018a; Zhong

et al., 2018b; Zhong et al., 2019). Besides, PM2.5 is also affected by pollution

emissions. The emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOX), PM2.5,

3
 Journal Pre-proof

non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs) and ammonia (NH3) in

Jing-Jin-Ji and its surrounding areas decrease yearly, leading to continuous decrease

of PM2.5 concentration; conversely, the emissions increment will increase PM2.5

concentration (Zhou et al., 2010; Cai et al., 2017).

Based on understanding and determining the impact of meteorological conditions and

emission, many studies have investigated their specific contributions to the PM2.5

of
concentration (Liu et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2017; Zhang et al., 2019). In January

2013, the study showed that 83.6% of heavy aerosol pollution in urban BJ was

ro
controlled by local emission, and 16.3% by regional emission (Wang et al., 2017).
-p
Another study illustrated that the worsened meteorological conditions were the
re

leading cause of heavy aerosol pollution in China’s Jing-Jin-Ji area in December 2015,
lP

but emission reductions led to 9% decrease of PM2.5 concentration (Liu et al., 2017).
na

Through sensitivity experiments performed during 2013, 2016 and 2017, it was found

that the decrease of PM2.5 concentration in BJ in 2017 was mainly due to local and
ur

regional emission reductions (Cheng et al., 2019). And compared with 2013 and 2016,
Jo

the emission reductions in 2017 dominated roughly 87.9% and 70% of the decrease in

PM2.5 (Cheng et al., 2019). Moreover, compared with 2013, the average annual PM2.5

concentration in Jing-Jin-Ji increased by 13% and 8% due to unfavorable

meteorological conditions in 2014 and 2015, respectively, and decreased by 9% and 5%

due to favorable meteorological conditions in 2016 and 2017 (Zhang et al., 2019).

From 2013 to 2018, about 12% of PM2.5 decrease was attributable to meteorology by

using a stepwise multiple linear regression (MLR) model (Zhai et al., 2019). However,

4
 Journal Pre-proof

most of the aforementioned studies only focus on the contributions of emission to

PM2.5 concentration in a single area (Jing-Jin-Ji) and do not systematically analyze the

relative contributions of meteorological conditions and emission to PM2.5 level of

different cities in Central and Eastern China from winter 2016 to 2017, especially the

research on the relationship between changed meteorological conditions or emission

and different aerosol pollution periods is very scarce.

of
The PM2.5 concentration sharply decreased from winter 2016 to 2017, the reason of

which has caused widespread concern. The changes of meteorological observations

ro
and pollutants emissions from December 2016 to December 2017 (using December to
-p
represent winter) and their possible relationship are analyzed in Central and Eastern
re

China. Four sensitive experiments are designed using the GRAPES-CUACE model to
lP

quantitatively assess the effects of meteorological conditions and emission on the

na

changes of PM2.5 from December 2016 to December 2017.

2 Data
ur

2.1 Observational data

Jo

(1) Hourly PM2.5 concentration in December 2016 and December 2017 from the

national monitoring stations of the Ministry of Ecology and Environment of China.

(2) Hourly ground observational data of the meteorological automatic stations from

the China Meteorological Administration, which mainly includes: wind, temperature,

and relative humidity (RH).

(3) Per second atmospheric vertical observations (temperature and RH) from the

ground to 1500 m measured by L-band radiosonde in BJ and Xingtai (XT).

5
 Journal Pre-proof

2.2 Emission inventory data

The 2016 and 2017 anthropogenic emission data for atmospheric pollutants originates

from the Multi-resolution Emission Inventory for China (MEIC) model of Tsinghua

University, which covers 10 major atmospheric pollutants and greenhouse gases (SO2,

NOx, CO, NMVOC, NH3, CO2, PM2.5, PM10, BC and OC) and more than 700

anthropogenic emission, previous studies have introduced the calculation, update and

of
application methods of MEIC (Zhang et al., 2007; Lei et al., 2011; Li et al., 2014; Liu

et al., 2016; Li et al., 2017a; Li et al., 2017b; Zheng et al., 2018b). In these works,

ro
national statistics (industry, energy consumption, road networks and motor vehicles,
-p
etc.) were used to update the emission inventory data to 2016-2017. More accurate
re

emission inventory data needs to be collected in the future (Liu et al., 2016; Zheng et
lP

al., 2018a; Zheng et al., 2018b).

na

3 Model introduction

GRAPES_Meso is a regional numerical weather prediction model developed by the

ur

China Meteorological Administration (Chen, 2006; Chen et al., 2008; Zhang and Shen,
Jo

2008). CUACE is an independent atmospheric chemical system developed by the

Chinese Academy of Meteorological Sciences, which can effectively provide

calculations of atmospheric chemical composition and characteristics (Gong and

Zhang, 2008; Wang et al., 2010; Zhou et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2015b).

CUACE and GRAPES_Meso are online coupled to form the GRAPES-CUACE

model. The chemical mechanism in GRAPES-CUACE is Regional Acid Deposition

Model (RADM), which includes 66 gaseous species, 21 photochemical reactions and

6
 Journal Pre-proof

121 gas phase reactions. At the same time, dry and wet deposition, liquid-phase

chemical balance and other processes are also included. In this model, there are 7

species of aerosol: sulfates (SF), soil dust (SD), black carbon (BC), organic carbon

(OC), sea salts (SS), nitrates (NI) and ammonium salts (AM). CUACE also includes

the major aerosol processes such as hygroscopic growth, nucleation, condensation,

below-cloud scavenging and so on. GRAPES-CUACE has been widely used in

of
simulation studies of haze pollution, aerosol transportation, pollution source tracking

and inversion, and aerosol-radiation-precipitation-weather interactions in China (Jiang

ro
et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2015a; Wang et al., 2015b; An et al., 2016).
-p
3.1 Model configuration
re

The simulated area includes the entire Chinese region (15 °N-60 °N, 70 °E-145 °E)
lP

(Fig. 1), which has a horizontal resolution of 0.15° × 0.15° and 33 vertical layers
na

(from the ground to about 31 km (10 hPa)). The model applies the GRAPES

semi-implicit and semi-Lagrangian temporal advection scheme, which improves the

ur

calculation accuracy, and selects the Noah land surface (Chen and Dudhia, 2001;
Jo

Mitchell, 2002), WSM6 cloud microphysics (water vapor, rain, snow, cloud water,

cloud ice and graupel) (Hong et al., 2004; Hong and Lim, 2006), rrtm long-wave

radiation (Mlawer et al., 1997), Dudhia short-wave radiation (Dudhia and Jimy, 1989),

Monin-Obukhov near-ground layer (Chen et al., 1997; Janić, 2001), MRF boundary

layer (Hong and Pan, 1996), Betts-Miller-Janjic cumulus parameterization (Betts and

J. Miller, 1986; Janjić, 1994), RADM2 gas-phase chemistry (Stockwell et al., 1990)

and CUACE aerosol schemes (Gong and Zhang, 2008).

7
 Journal Pre-proof

The initial field data used by the model are National Centers for Environmental

Prediction (NCEP) reanalysis data in December 2016 and December 2017 with the

resolution of 0.25° × 0.25° and the time interval of 6 hours. The emission data are

national anthropogenic emission in December 2016 and December 2017.

3.2 Experiments design and analysis methods

In this paper, four experiments are performed (Table 1), which represent the true

of
PM2.5 in December 2016 and December 2017 (EXP16.16 and EXP17.17), and quantify

the contributions of meteorology (EXP17.16) and emission (EXP16.17) to the changes of

ro
PM2.5 from December 2016 to December 2017, respectively. To evaluate the
-p
contributions of meteorology and emission to the changes of PM2.5 concentration via a
re

linear additive relationship, the normalization process is calculated using the

lP

following equations.
𝑃𝑀 𝐸𝑋𝑃 − 𝑃𝑀 𝐸𝑋𝑃
na

Con(Met) = 𝑃𝑀2.5 𝐸𝑋𝑃16.16 − 𝑃𝑀2.5 𝐸𝑋𝑃17.16 (1),

2.5 16.16 2.5 17.17

𝑃𝑀 𝐸𝑋𝑃 − 𝑃𝑀 𝐸𝑋𝑃
Con(Emi) = 𝑃𝑀2.5 𝐸𝑋𝑃16.16 − 𝑃𝑀2.5 𝐸𝑋𝑃16.17 (2),
ur

2.5 16.16 2.5 17.17

Con(Met)
NCon(Met) = Con(Met)+Con(Emi) (3),
Jo

Con(Emi)
NCon(Emi) = Con(Met)+Con(Emi) (4).

PM2.5EXP16.16 represents the PM2.5 concentration simulated by EXP16.16. Similarly,

PM2.5EXP17.16, PM2.5EXP16.17 and PM2.5EXP17.17 represent the PM2.5 concentration

simulated by EXP17.16, EXP16.17 and EXP17.17, respectively. Con(Met) and Con(Emi)

represent the contributions of meteorology and emission. NCon(Met) and NCon(Emi)

represent the normalized contributions of meteorology and emission.

8
 Journal Pre-proof

(a) Dec-2016

(b) Dec-2017

of
ro
-p
re
lP
na

Fig. 1. The spatial distribution of monthly average PM 2.5 concentration (μg m-3). (a) December 2016; (b) December

2017. The shading shows the simulated PM2.5 concentration, and the shaded dots show the observed PM2.5
ur

concentration.
Jo

Table 1. Design of the GRAPES-CUACE sensitivity experiments.

Experiment Description

EXP16.16 Model run with 2016 meteorology and 2016 emission

EXP17.16 Model run with 2017 meteorology and 2016 emission

EXP16.17 Model run with 2016 meteorology and 2017 emission

EXP17.17 Model run with 2017 meteorology and 2017 emission

4. Results and discussion

9
 Journal Pre-proof

4.1 Model validation

This paper mainly compares the simulation data of EXP16.16 and EXP17.17 to the 2016

and 2017 observational data for model evaluation. First, we evaluate the

meteorological conditions that are closely related to haze pollution, including 500 hPa

geopotential height field (Fig. 3), sea level pressure field (Fig. 3), wind speed and

direction (Table 4 and Fig. 4), vertical temperature (Fig. 5), and near-surface RH (Fig.

of
6). These results show that the simulations can basically reproduce the meteorological

conditions in December 2016 and December 2017, in which the 500 hPa geopotential

ro
height field, sea level pressure field, wind speed and vertical temperature show high
-p
agreement with the observations.
re

Then, the simulated PM2.5 concentration is evaluated. Fig. 1 shows the observations
lP

and simulations in December 2016 (a) and December 2017 (b). It can be seen that the
na

simulated monthly average PM2.5 concentration agrees well with the observational

data. We focus on analyzing the PM2.5 simulation results of six major cities in Central
ur

and Eastern China (BJ, Tianjin (TJ), Shijiazhuang (SZJ), XT, Jinan (JN), and
Jo

Zhengzhou (ZZ)). Fig. 2 shows the comparison of PM2.5 simulations and observations

in December 2016 and December 2017 and corresponding statistical analytical data

(Table 2 and Table 3). The correlation coefficient (CORR) is between 0.45 (ZZ,

December 2016) and 0.65 (SJZ, December 2017), and the normalized mean bias

(NMB) is between 6.34% (SJZ, December 2016) and 53.70% (TJ, December 2016).

The normalized mean error (NME) is between 38.77% (SJZ, December 2016) and

73.62% (TJ, December 2016). Overall, the simulation results in December 2017 are

10
 Journal Pre-proof

better than those in December 2016. The simulations of both years are acceptable and

can be used to study and quantify PM2.5 in Central and Eastern China.

(a) Dec-2016 (b) Dec-2017

Region Region

BJ BJ

TJ TJ

of
SJZ SJZ

ro
XT XT
-p
JN JN
re

ZZ ZZ
lP
na

Fig. 2. The temporal variations of hourly PM2.5 (μg m-3) in entire region and six cities (BJ, TJ, SZJ, XT, JN and

ZZ). (a) December 2016; (b) December 2017. The orange and blue lines represent the simulation results. The gray
ur

dots represent the observations. The black dotted boxes represent HPEs.
Jo

Table 2. Comparison of simulated and observed hourly PM2.5 in December 2016.

Mean-sim

Area (mean-obs) CORR NB NE RMSE NMB NME

(μg m-3)

154.51
Region 0.73 27.34 38.22 45.56 21.51% 30.06%
(127.15)

BJ 172.82 0.62 34.99 80.69 104.41 25.39% 58.54%

11
 Journal Pre-proof

(137.83)

231.48
TJ 0.55 90.04 118.27 149.58 53.70% 73.62%
(141.44)

234.13
SJZ 0.59 -15.85 96.93 129.68 -6.34% 38.77%
(249.98)

249.05
XT 0.54 65.4 102.84 133.66 35.54% 55.89%

of
(184.01)

ro
177.12
JN 0.56 51.49 75.77 90.59 40.99% 60.03%
(125.63)
-p
198.23
re
ZZ 0.45 35.21 96.27 120.44 21.60% 59.06%
(163.02)
lP

Table 3. Comparison of simulated and observed hourly PM2.5 in December 2017.

na

Mean-sim

Area (mean-obs) CORR NB NE RMSE NMB NME

ur

(μg m-3)
Jo

82.77
Region 0.75 -2.76 25.99 31.78 -3.23% 30.39%
(85.54)

48.88
BJ 0.63 4.07 26.84 40.99 9.11% 59.82%
(44.81)

88.34
TJ 0.42 24.05 47.22 63.35 37.40% 63.44%
(64.29)

SJZ 87.31 0.65 -5.35 38.75 58.22 -5.77% 41.81%

12
 Journal Pre-proof

(92.66)

101.87
XT 0.57 -1.09 42.49 63.67 -1.06% 41.27%
(102.96)

86.75
JN 0.54 -1.12 41.07 54.55 -1.27% 46.74%
(87.87)

91.11
ZZ 0.48 -3.8 52.28 69.57 -4.00% 56.13%

of
(94.91)

ro
4.2 Changing PM2.5 concentration from December 2016 to December 2017
-p
According to the Ministry of Ecology and Environment of China, when the PM2.5

concentration is less than 35 μg m-3, it is defined as a clear period; when the PM2.5
re

concentration exceeds 75 μg m-3, it is deemed a pollution period, which can be

lP

divided into a light pollution period (less than 300 μg m-3) or a heavy pollution period
na

(more than 300 μg m-3). A process during which the PM2.5 concentration increases

from less than 75 μg m-3 to more than 300 μg m-3 is known as a heavy aerosol
ur

pollution episode (HPE). As shown in Fig. 2, in December 2016, heavy aerosol

Jo

pollution occurred in Central and Eastern China (the regional average PM2.5

concentration was 127.2 μg m-3). The average PM2.5 concentration in BJ, TJ, SJZ, XT,

JN, ZZ were 137.8, 141.4, 249.9, 184.1, 125.6 and 163.1 μg m-3, respectively, and

HPEs occurred 5, 4, 4, 3, 3, and 3 times. For example, HPEs occurred in the

aforementioned six cities from December 16 to 21, when the highest PM2.5

concentration exceeded 600 μg m-3. However, in December 2017, PM2.5 in Central

and Eastern China significantly decreased (the regional average PM2.5 concentration

13
 Journal Pre-proof

was 85.54 μg m-3 decreasing by 33%). The PM2.5 concentration in the six major cities

were 44.8, 64.3, 92.7, 102.9, 87.9 and 94.9 μg m-3 (decreasing by 67.5%, 54.5%,

62.9%, 44.1%, 30.1% and 41.2%), respectively. HPEs occurred only twice in SJZ and

once in XT, JN, and ZZ. Compared to December 2016, the PM2.5 concentration

significantly decreased in Central and Eastern China; particularly, the greatest PM2.5

decrease was in BJ. The simulated PM2.5 corresponds to the actual PM2.5, and the

of
decrease in the entire region and six cities are 48.4%, 71.2%, 61.8%, 62.7%, 59.1%,

51.1% and 54.1%, respectively, which are overestimated.

ro
4.3 Changes of meteorological conditions from December 2016 to 2017
-p
In December 2016 (Fig. 3(a)), the Central and Eastern China were in front of the 500
re

hPa high-pressure ridge and the geopotential height lines were sparse, showing a trend
lP

of zonal westerly airflow. The ground was governed by uniform pressure field, and
na

the Mongolian high pressure was approximately 1030 hPa. This situation was

conducive to the formation of stable atmosphere in Central and Eastern China. At the
ur

same time, inversion and light/calm wind readily occurred at the near-surface, which
Jo

inhibited aerosol pollution diffusion. In December 2017 (Fig. 3(b)), Central and

Eastern China remained in front of the 500 hPa high-pressure ridge, but it was nearer

the upper-level trough with denser geopotential height lines. And the Mongolian high

pressure increased to above 1040 hPa, leading to instability of the atmosphere and

increase in wind speed near the surface, which was conducive to PM2.5 diffusion. The

simulated circulation (Fig. 3(c-d)) also shows the changes: the 500 hPa geopotential

height lines became denser in EXP17.17 over Central and Eastern China, compared to

14
 Journal Pre-proof

those in EXP16.16; the Mongolian high pressure controlling Central and Eastern China

also increased to above 1035 hPa in EXP17.17.

(a) Dec-2016 (b) Dec-2017

obs

of
(c) EXP16.16 (d) EXP17.17

ro
-p
sim
re
lP
na

Fig. 3. Monthly average 500 hPa geopotential height and sea level pressure over Eurasia in December. (a)

Observations in December 2016; (b) observations in December 2017; (c) simulations in December 2016; (d)
ur

simulations in December 2017. The contours show the geopotential height at 500 hPa, and the shading shows the
Jo

sea level pressure. The white rectangle is Central and Eastern China.

Different circulation situations will cause changes in the wind field and affect the

PM2.5 concentration. Table 4 shows the statistics of the wind direction and wind speed

in Central and Eastern China. In December 2016, the region was under the condition

of light/calm wind. The average wind speed in BJ, TJ, SJZ, XT, JN and ZZ were 1.65,

1.68, 1.10, 1.62, 1.49, and 1.44 m s-1, respectively, and the frequencies of northerly

wind were 56%, 45%, 40%, 41%, 35%, and 29%. PM2.5 was prone to accumulation

15
 Journal Pre-proof

with the low frequencies of northerly wind and low wind speed. However, the overall

wind speed increased to a certain extent in the six cities(2.15, 2.18, 1.62, 1.95, 1.65,

and 1.75 m s-1, respectively) in December 2017, and the frequency of the northerly

wind increased by about 20%, which was conducive to aerosol pollution diffusion.

The changes in the simulated wind speed and wind direction are basically in line with

the observations. In addition, the Fig. 4 shows that in BJ and XT, the observed

of
average vertical wind speed in December 2017 was greater than that in December

2016, which was conducive to the diffusion of aerosol pollution. The simulated

ro
vertical wind speed shows similar changing trend from December 2016 to December
-p
2017 with that of observations, though there are certain differences of the wind speed
re

values between the two.

lP

Table 4. Simulated and observed wind speed (m s-1) and northerly wind frequencies in December 2016 and
na

December 2017. The simulations are in the brackets.

Observed average wind speed Observed northerly wind frequency

ur

City (simulations) (simulations)

Jo

Dec-2016 Dec-2017 Dec-2016 Dec-2017

BJ 1.65（1.54） 2.15（2.49） 56%（63%） 72%（78%）

TJ 1.68（2.41） 2.18（3.16） 45%（55%） 56%（65%）

SJZ 1.10（1.31） 1.62（1.96） 40%（44%） 52%（62%）

XT 1.62（1.82） 1.95（2.11） 41%（43%） 49%（61%）

JN 1.49（1.88） 1.65（2.01） 35%（38%） 46%（53%）

16
 Journal Pre-proof

ZZ 1.44（1.71） 1.75（2.06） 29%（39%） 44%（59%）

(a) BJ (b) XT
EXP16.16
EXP16.16
EXP17.17
EXP17.17

Dec-2016 Dec-2016
Dec-2017 Dec-2017

of
Fig. 4. Simulated and observed monthly average wind speed (m s-1) profiles in December 2016 and December

ro
2017. (a) BJ; (b) XT. The red lines show December 2016 and the blue lines show December 2017. Gray lines show
-p
the simulated wind speed profiles.
re
Stable atmospheric conditions with light/calm wind in boundary layer are conducive
lP

to the accumulation of PM2.5, especially PM2.5 concentration will significantly

increase when inversion appears or inversion intensity increases. Temperature

na

generally decreases with height, otherwise it is called inversion when the temperature
ur

increases with height which is often used to characterize stable atmospheric level. The
Jo

difference in temperature between the upper-level and lower-level atmosphere is

therefore used to represent atmospheric stability here. The difference in monthly

average temperature between 1050 m and 50 m (dt1) represents monthly atmospheric

stability, and the difference in temperature between 600 m and 50 m (dt2) represents

average inversion intensity of the heavy pollution period. Fig. 5 shows that dt12017

(-5.4 °C) was greater than that of dt12016 (-3.5 °C) in BJ (Table 5), which meant the

monthly average temperature in the vertical direction in December 2017 decreased

much with height than that in December 2016, indicating that the atmosphere in
17
 Journal Pre-proof

December 2016 was much stable than that in 2017. At the same time, in December

2017, the inversion intensity was weakened (dt22016 (0.9 °C) was greater than that of

dt22017 (0.6 °C)) in BJ. The similar phenomenon had also occurred in XT. Combined

with Fig. 2, this study also confirms the relationship between inversion and PM2.5.

The simulated dt1 by EXP17.17 (-4.6 °C in BJ and -4 °C in XT ) decreased much than

those by EXP16.16 (-3.1 °C in BJ and -3.1 °C in XT). The average inversion intensity

of
(dt2) during heavy pollution periods by EXP17.17 (1.3 °C in BJ and 0.5 °C in XT ) was

weaker than those by EXP16.16 (2.8 °C in BJ and 2.7 °C in XT ). The simulated

ro
temperature profiles and inversion intensity by EXP16.16 and EXP17.17 in BJ and XT
-p
show the similar results with those of observations.
re

(a) BJ Dec-2016 (b) XT EXP16.16 Dec-2016

lP

EXP16.16 Dec-2017 Dec-2017

Sim Sim
na

EXP17.17
EXP17.17
ur

dt12017 dt12016 dt12017 dt12016

Jo

(c) BJ Dec-2016 Dec-2016

Dec-2016
(d) XT
Dec-2017
Dec-2017 Dec-2017
Dec-2017
Sim Sim

EXP17.17 EXP16.16
EXP16.16 EXP17.17

dt22017 dt22016 dt22017 dt22016

Fig. 5. Simulated and observed temperature profiles (°C) in December 2016 and December 2017. (a) Monthly

average temperature profiles in BJ; (b) monthly average temperature profiles in XT; (c) average inversion profiles

in BJ during heavy pollution periods; (d) average inversion profiles in XT during heavy pollution periods. The red
18
 Journal Pre-proof

lines show December 2016 and the blue lines show December 2017. Gray lines show the simulated temperature

profiles. The short solid lines: the approximate boundary-layer height. The dt1 and dt2 show difference in

temperature in vertical direction.

Table 5. Simulated and observed dt1 (°C) and dt2 (°C) in BJ and XT. The simulations are in the brackets.

dt1 dt2
City
Dec-2016 Dec-2017 Dec-2016 Dec-2017

of
BJ -3.5（-3.1） -5.4（-4.6） 0.9（2.8） 0.6（1.3）

ro
XT -2.3（-3.1） -3.8（-4） 1.7（2.7） 0.6（0.5）
-p
Inversion and water vapor transportation via southerly wind in Central and Eastern
re
China can lead to increase in RH near the surface, which is beneficial to the

hygroscopic growth of PM2.5 (Zhang et al., 2015a; Zhong et al., 2017). Fig. 6 shows
lP

that in December 2016, the average RH near the surface in six cities in Central and
na

Eastern China was 50%-80% with the highest RH ( ~78%) in XT. However, the
ur

average RH decreased to 20%-50% in December 2017. For example, in BJ, the RH in

2016 was 53% and in 2017 it fell to 38%, correspondingly, the PM2.5 concentration in
Jo

December 2016 was higher than that in December 2017. The simulation results can

also basically reflect the decrease in RH near the surface.

19
 Journal Pre-proof

(a) Dec-2016 (b) Dec-2017

Fig. 6. Spatial distribution of monthly average RH (%) near the surface. (a) December 2016; (b) December 2017.

of
The shaded quadrilateral represents the observed RH. The shaded base map represents the simulated RH.

ro
4.4 Comparison of pollutants emissions from 2016 to 2017
-p
Fig. 7 shows the spatial distribution of various pollutants, and it can be seen that in
re
December 2016, the different pollutants emissions in Central and Eastern China were
lP

relatively higher. The total emissions of PMFINE, SO2, NOX and VOCs were 50.2,

238.6, 313.4 and 488.1 Kt (Table 6), respectively. Compared to Henan and southern
na

Shandong, the PMFINE and SO2 emissions in southern Jing-Jin-Ji and northern
ur

Shandong were higher and the VOCs emissions were lower. The NOX emissions were
Jo

only higher in the major cities (BJ, XT, SJZ, etc.), mainly due to industries, energy

and transportation. In December 2017, the pollutants emissions in Central and Eastern

China were 25.3, 135.7, 260.6, and 447.6 Kt (decreasing by 49.6%, 47.3%, 16.8%,

and 8.3%, respectively). Particularly, the decrease in PMFINE and SO2 was the most

obvious, which affected formation of the PM2.5 concentration. Both the local and

regional emission affect the PM2.5 concentration in a specific area, but this study only

calculates emission in Central and Eastern China, and does not extend to the

surrounding region, which results in a certain degree of underestimation of emissions.

20
 Journal Pre-proof

However, for the six major cities included in this study, the calculation includes

regional emission; and this study focuses on the difference between December 2017

and December 2016, thus this underestimation will not have a significant impact on

the results. More accurate calculations of emissions remain to be further studied.

(a) Dec-2016 (b) Dec-2017

of
PMFINE

ro
-p
re

SO2
lP
na
ur

NOX
Jo

VOCS

Fig. 7. Spatial distribution of the monthly average emissions concentration of PMFINE, SO2, NOX, and VOCs (Kt

21
 Journal Pre-proof

km-2). (a) December 2016; (b) December 2017. The shading indicates the amount of emissions.

Table 6. Pollutants emissions in December 2016 and December 2017 in the Central and Eastern China.

Total emissions in December Total emissions in December

Pollutant
2016 (Kt) 2017 (Kt)

PMFINE 50.2 25.3

SO2 238.6 135.7

of
NOX 313.4 260.6

ro
VOCs 488.1 447.6

4.5 Relative contributions to the PM2.5 changes from meteorology and emission
-p
According to observations and simulations, the more favorable meteorological
re

conditions and reduced emissions in Central and Eastern China in December 2017
lP

enhanced the diffusion of PM2.5 and decreased the formation of PM2.5, which together
na

led to significant decrease in the PM2.5 concentration. Fig. 8 shows the spatial

distribution of the average PM2.5 of the four sensitivity experiments in Central and
ur

Eastern China. The PM2.5 concentration by EXP16.16 representing the ture PM2.5
Jo

concentration in December 2016 (Fig. 8(a)) in Central and Eastern China, was greater

than 150 μg m-3 in general in the studied area resulting in heavy haze pollution.

However, the PM2.5 concentration by EXP17.17 representing the true pollution

condition in December 2017 (Fig. 8(d)), significantly decreased (basically less than

100 μg m-3) compared to that in 2016, which was a comprehensive result of favorable

meteorological conditions and reduced pollutants emissions. EXP17.16 shows the

model runs with the meteorological initial and lateral boundary field input of

22
 Journal Pre-proof

December 2017 and the emission inventory of 2016 (Fig. 8(b)). The overall average

PM2.5 concentration in Central and Eastern China decreased by about 17.4 μg m-3,

11.3% less than the PM2.5 concentration by EXP16.16 (Fig. 9), which is attributed to the

meteorological contributions. If the model runs with the meteorological initial and

lateral boundary fields input in December 2016 and the emission inventory of 2017

(EXP16,17) (Fig. 8(c)), the regional average PM2.5 concentration decreased by 62.1 μg

m-3, 40.2% less than the PM2.5 concentration by EXP16.16 (Fig. 9), which was

of
attributed to the changing emission. According to the normalization process, the

ro
meteorological conditions controlled about 21.9% of the total PM2.5 decrease, while
-p
the reduced emissions controlled about 78.1% of the total PM2.5 total decrease from
re

2016 to 2017.
lP

(a) EXP16.16 (b) EXP17.16

na
ur
Jo

(c) EXP16.17 (d) EXP17.17

23
 Journal Pre-proof

Fig. 8. Spatial distribution of the monthly average simulated PM2.5 concentration (μg m-3) of four sensitivity

experiments. (a) EXP16.16; (b) EXP17.16; (c) EXP16.17; (d) EXP17.17. The shading represents the simulated PM2.5

concentration. The black circle dots indicate BJ, TJ, SJZ, XT, JN, and ZZ.

Meteorological
conditions
21.9%

of
78.1%

ro
Emission
-p
re
Fig. 9. Monthly average PM2.5 concentration (μg m-3) of four sensitivity experiments (EXP16.16, EXP17.16, EXP16.17,
lP

EXP17.17) in the entire region. The pie chart represents contributions of meteorological conditions and emission.

For the entire region, the decrease of PM2.5 concentration in December 2017 was
na

mainly controlled by changes of emission; however, the relative contributions varied

ur

in different cities in Central and Eastern China. Fig. 10 shows the PM2.5 concentration
Jo

from the four sensitivity experiments in BJ, TJ, SJZ, XT, JN and ZZ. It can be seen

that in the six cities, PM2.5 by EXP17.16 decreased by 85, 65.9, 70.1, 58.5, 10.8 and

20.7 μg m-3 (48.1%, 28.1%, 29.8%, 23.5%, 6.2% and 10.3% less than the PM2.5

concentration by EXP16.16), respectively, which was caused by the changes of

meteorological conditions. PM2.5 by EXP16.17 decreased by 81.5, 109.8, 107.6, 116.8,

82.5 and 92.8 μg m-3 (46.3%, 46.8%, 45.9%, 46.4%, 46.6% and 46.2% less than the

PM2.5 concentration by EXP16.16), respectively, which was caused by changes of

emission.
24
 Journal Pre-proof

In summary, via the normalization process, the meteorological conditions in BJ, TJ,

SJZ, XT, JN and ZZ, contributed 50.9%, 36.5%, 39.4%, 33.6%, 12.2% and 18.2% of

the total decrease in the PM2.5 concentration form December 2016 to December 2017,

while the reduced emissions contributed 49.1%, 63.5%, 60.6%, 66.4%, 87.8% and

81.8%, respectively.

In addition, notably, BJ was the city with the greatest decrease in PM2.5 in Central and

of
Eastern China, which was mainly due to the more favorable meteorological conditions

in BJ, whose contributions were higher than those of emission. According to the

ro
changes in the meteorological conditions described in Section 4.3, we found that the
-p
wind speed in BJ increased by 0.5 m s-1 in December 2017 which was same as SJZ
re

and TJ (the highest degree in this region), but the frequency of northerly wind in BJ
lP

was higher than that in SJZ and TJ, which often brought clean and cold air to be
na

conducive to pollution diffusion. At the same time, compared to that in XT, the

change of dt1 in BJ from December 2016 to December 2017 was more significant.
ur

The greater contributions of meteorology on PM2.5 changes from winter 2016 to 2017
Jo

in BJ than those in other cities may be related to its northerly location and

mountainous terrain, where is easy to be impacted by cold air from the north. Further

research is needed.

25
 Journal Pre-proof

Fig. 10. Monthly average PM2.5 concentration (μg m-3) in BJ, TJ, SJZ, XT, JN and ZZ in four sensitivity

of
experiments.

ro
4.6 Contributions variation of meteorological conditions and emission during

different pollution periods

-p
For the entire period from December 2016 to December 2017, the role of emission
re

reductions in Central and Eastern China was more significant, but for different
lP

pollution periods, meteorological conditions and emission would have various

na

contributions. BJ is used as a representative city in Central and Eastern China to study

the contributions of meteorological conditions and emission to pollution periods and

ur

clear periods. Fig. 11 shows the changing process of PM2.5 from December 16 to
Jo

December 22 in BJ, including the pollution and clear periods. It can be seen that the

contributions of the meteorological conditions and emission to the changes of the

PM2.5 concentration during the pollution periods were greater than those during the

clear periods. For example, on December 16 and 17, the PM2.5 concentration by

EXP16.16 continued to increase from about 75 to 300 μg m-3, while the gaps between

the simulated PM2.5 concentrations by EXP17.16 (or EXP16.17) and that by EXP16.16

were increasingly greater (from 50 μg m-3 on December 16 to 100 μg m-3 on

26
 Journal Pre-proof

December 17). Similar phenomena occurred in other Central and Eastern cities.

Moreover, by counting the different pollution periods of six cities in the four

experiments, we found that during the clear periods, the favorable meteorological

conditions dominated the changes of PM2.5 (accounting for 98.2%), and the emission

reductions had limited effects (1.8%) (Fig. 12(a)). However, during the light pollution

periods, favorable meteorological conditions only contributed 18.8% of the decrease

of
in PM2.5 and 27.5% during the heavy pollution periods; emission reductions

controlled 81.2% and 72.5%, respectively (Fig. 12(b-c)). All of these results are

normalized and calculated using equations (1-4).

ro
-p
BJ
re
lP

EXP16.16 Dec-2016-obs

EXP16.17
na

EXP17.17 Dec-2017-obs
ur

EXP17.16

Fig. 11. The changes of PM2.5 concentration (μg m-3) from December 16 to December 22 (including the heavy
Jo

aerosol pollution periods and the cleaning periods). Gray dots show the observed PM2.5 concentration. The

combination of hexagonal stars and lines filled by different colors show the four sensitivity experiments of

EXP16.16, EXP17.16, EXP16.17 and EXP17.17.

(a) (b) (c)

27
 Journal Pre-proof

Fig. 12. The variations of average PM2.5 concentration (μg m-3) controlled by four experiments during different

periods in six cities in Central and Eastern China. (a) Clear periods; (b) light pollution periods; (c) heavy pollution

periods.

5 Conclusions

The meteorological conditions, including geopotential height, wind, temperature and

RH, and anthropogenic emission inventory data from December 2016 to December

of
2017 are achieved to study the reasons for the substantial reductions of PM2.5 from

December 2016 to December 2017. Using the atmospheric chemical model

ro
GRAPES-CUACE, four sensitivity experiments based on the emission inventory of
-p
2016, 2017 and meteorology initial input of 2016, 2017 (EXP16.16, EXP17.16, EXP16.17,
re

EXP17.17) are designed to quantitatively estimate the relative contributions of the

lP

meteorological conditions and emission sources to the reductions of PM2.5 from

na

December 2016 to December 2017 in Central and Eastern China.

The simulated and observed studies show that: regional average PM2.5 concentration
ur

significantly decreased (by ~33%) in Central and Eastern China form 127.15 μg m-3
Jo

in December 2016 to 85.54 μg m-3 in December 2017. This result was caused by

combination effects of more favorable meteorological conditions and emission

reductions. Eurasia's 500 hPa geopotential height lines were denser; the region was

controlled by Mongolian high pressure which increased by above 10 hPa from winter

2016 to 2017; the wind speed increased from 1.10-1.68 m s-1 to 1.62-2.18 m s-1

(approximately ~27%); and the frequency of northerly wind increased (by ~20%); few

inversion (which decreased by ~18%) in the boundary layer occurred; the RH near the

28
 Journal Pre-proof

surface decreased to about 20-60% from winter 2016 to 2017. In addition, the changes

of meteorological conditions varied depending on different cities with different

geographical location and topography; the changes of meteorological conditions from

winter 2016 to 2017 in BJ were more favorable than those of other cities in Central

and Eastern China. At the same time, the regional average emissions of PMFINE, SO2,

NOX and VOCs decreased by 49.6%, 47.3%, 16.8%, and 8.3%, respectively. The

of
meteorological conditions and emission in December 2016 were conducive to the

formation and accumulation of PM2.5, while those in December 2017 were conducive

ro
to the reductions and diffusion of PM2.5. The changes of PM2.5 concentration and
-p
meteorological conditions between December 2016 and December 2017 simulated by
re

the GRAPES-CUACE model are basically in agreement with the observations.

lP

The results of the four model sensitivity experiments (EXP16.16, EXP17.16, EXP16.17 and
na

EXP17.17) show that 21.9% of the total decrease in the entire region from winter 2016

to 2017 was attributed to more favorable meteorological conditions and that 78.1%
ur

was attributed to the emission reductions in 2017. The model results also show the
Jo

relative contributions of meteorology and emission varied in different cities due to

their different geographical location and topography. The meteorological conditions

contributed 50.9% in BJ, 36.5% in TJ, 39.4% in SJZ, 33.6% in XT, 12.2% in JN and

18.2% in ZZ, (emission contributed 49.1%, 63.5%, 60.6%, 66.4%, 87.8% and 81.8%)

to the total decrease in PM2.5 from December 2016 to December 2017. In general, the

contributions of emission reductions on the PM2.5 total decrease from winter 2016 to

2017 were higher than those of the meteorological conditions in the Central and

29
 Journal Pre-proof

Eastern China. Due to the special geographical location, in December 2017, more

favorable meteorological conditions led to higher contributions to the greatest

decrease in PM2.5 (67.5%) in BJ compared with other cities. Moreover, in Central and

Eastern China from December 2016 to December 2017, the meteorological conditions

dominated the decrease of PM2.5 during the clear periods (accounting for 98.2%),

while the contributions of reduced emissions (72.5-81.2%) were greater than those of

of
meteorological conditions (18.8-27.5%) during the pollution periods.

The relationship between PM2.5 and meteorological conditions and emission is not

ro
linear and is completely independent. Therefore, there is a certain error in calculating
-p
the contribution of meteorological conditions or emission alone to PM2.5. The error
re

has evaluated according to previous research (Zhang et al., 2017; Cheng et al., 2019).
lP

At the same time, the errors are acceptable and can be used to determine the
na

contributions of meteorological conditions in this study, though further research is

needed.
ur

Acknowledgement
Jo

This study is supported by the National Key Project of the Ministry of Science and

Technology of China (2016YFC0203306), the National Natural Science Foundation

of China (41590874) and the Basic Scientific Research Project of the Chinese

Academy of Meteorological Sciences (2016Z001).

30
 Journal Pre-proof

References

An, X. Q., Zhai, S. X., Jin, M., Gong, S. and Wang, Y., 2016. Development of an adjoint model of

GRAPES–CUACE and its application in tracking influential haze source areas in north China.

Geosci. Model Dev., 9(6): 2153-2165.

Betts, A. and J. Miller, M., 1986. A new convective adjustment scheme. Part II: Single column tests

using GATE wave, BOMEX, ATEX and arctic air-mass data sets. Quarterly Journal of the

of
Royal Meteorological Society, 112: 693-709.

Cai, S., Wang, Y., Zhao, B., Wang, S., Chang, X. and Hao, J., 2017. The impact of the “Air Pollution

ro
Prevention and Control Action Plan” on PM2.5 concentrations in Jing-Jin-Ji region during
-p
2012–2020. Science of The Total Environment, 580: 197-209.
re
Che, H., Zhang, X. Y., Xia, X., Goloub, P., Holben, B., Zhao, H., Wang, Y., Zhang, X. C., Wang, H. and
lP

Blarel, L., 2015. Ground-Based Aerosol Climatology of China: Aerosol Optical Depths from
na

the China Aerosol Remote Sensing Network (CARSNET) 2002-2013. Atmospheric Chemistry

& Physics, 15(8): 7619-7652.

ur

Chen, D., 2006. Recent Progress on GRAPES Research and Application. Journal of Applied
Jo

Meteorological Science.

Chen, D. H., Xue, J., Yang, X., Zhang, H., Shen, X., Hu, J., Wang, Y., Ji, L. and Chen, J., 2008. New

generation of multi-scale NWP system (GRAPES): general scientific design. Chinese Science

Bulletin, 53(22): 3433-3445.

Chen, F. and Dudhia, J., 2001. Coupling an advanced land surface–hydrology model with the Penn

State–NCAR MM5 modeling system. Part I: Model implementation and sensitivity. Monthly

Weather Review, 129(4): 569-585.

31
 Journal Pre-proof

Chen, F., Janjić, Z. and Mitchell, K., 1997. Impact of Atmospheric Surface-layer Parameterizations in

the new Land-surface Scheme of the NCEP Mesoscale Eta Model. Boundary-Layer

Meteorology, 85(3): 391-421.

Cheng, J., Su, J., Cui, T., Li, X., Dong, X., Sun, F., Yang, Y., Tong, D., Zheng, Y., Li, Y., Li, J., Zhang,

Q. and He, K., 2019. Dominant role of emission reduction in PM2.5 air quality improvement

in Beijing during 2013–2017: a model-based decomposition analysis. Atmos. Chem. Phys.,

of
19(9): 6125-6146.

ro
Dudhia and Jimy, 1989. Numerical Study of Convection Observed during the Winter Monsoon

Experiment Using a Mesoscale Two-Dimensional Model. J.atmos.sci, 46(46): 3077-3107.

-p
Gong, S. and Zhang, X., 2008. CUACE/Dust–an integrated system of observation and modeling
re
systems for operational dust forecasting in Asia. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 8(9):
lP

2333-2340.
na

Hong, S.-Y., Dudhia, J. and Chen, S.-H., 2004. A Revised Approach to Ice Microphysical Processes for

the Bulk Parameterization of Clouds and Precipitation. Monthly Weather Review, 132(1):
ur

103-120.
Jo

Hong, S.-Y. and Lim, J.-O. J., 2006. The WRF single-moment 6-class microphysics scheme (WSM6).

Asia-Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Sciences, 42(2): 129-151.

Hong, S.-Y. and Pan, H.-L., 1996. Nonlocal Boundary Layer Vertical Diffusion in a Medium-Range

Forecast Model. Monthly Weather Review, 124(10): 2322-2339.

Janić, Z. I., 2001. Nonsingular implementation of the Mellor-Yamada level 2.5 scheme in the NCEP

Meso model.

Janjić, Z. I., 1994. The Step-Mountain Eta Coordinate Model: Further Developments of the Convection,

32
 Journal Pre-proof

Viscous Sublayer, and Turbulence Closure Schemes. Mon.wea.rev, 122(5): 927.

Jiang, C., Wang, H., Zhao, T., Li, T. and Che, H., 2015. Modeling study of PM_2.5

pollutant transport across cities in China's Jing–Jin–Ji region during a severe haze episode in

December 2013. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15(10): 5803-5814.

Lei, Y., Zhang, Q., He, K. and Streets, D., 2011. Primary anthropogenic aerosol emission trends for

China, 1990–2005. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 11(3): 931-954.

of
Li, M., Liu, H., Geng, G., Hong, C., Liu, F., Song, Y., Tong, D., Zheng, B., Cui, H. and Man, H., 2017a.

ro
Anthropogenic emission inventories in China:a review. National Science Review(6).

Li, M., Zhang, Q., Kurokawa, J.-i., Woo, J.-H., He, K., Lu, Z., Ohara, T., Song, Y., Streets, D. G. and
-p
Carmichael, G. R., 2017b. MIX: a mosaic Asian anthropogenic emission inventory under the
re
international collaboration framework of the MICS-Asia and HTAP. Atmospheric Chemistry
lP

and Physics (Online), 17(2).

na

Li, M., Zhang, Q., Streets, D., He, K., Cheng, Y., Emmons, L., Huo, H., Kang, S., Lu, Z. and Shao, M.,

2014. Mapping Asian anthropogenic emissions of non-methane volatile organic compounds to

ur

multiple chemical mechanisms. Atmos. Chem. Phys, 14(11): 5617-5638.

Jo

Liu, F., Zhang, Q., van der A, R. J., Zheng, B., Tong, D., Yan, L., Zheng, Y. and He, K., 2016. Recent

reduction in NO x emissions over China: synthesis of satellite observations and emission

inventories. Environmental Research Letters, 11(11): 114002.

Liu, T., Gong, S., He, J., Yu, M., Wang, Q., Li, H., Liu, W., Zhang, J., Li, L., Wang, X., Li, S., Lu, Y.,

Du, H., Wang, Y., Zhou, C., Liu, H. and Zhao, Q., 2017. Attributions of meteorological and

emission factors to the 2015 winter severe haze pollution episodes in China's Jing-Jin-Ji area.

Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17(4): 2971-2980.

33
 Journal Pre-proof

Ma, Q., Wu, Y., Zhang, D., Wang, X., Xia, Y., Liu, X., Tian, P., Han, Z., Xia, X., Wang, Y. and Zhang,

R., 2017. Roles of regional transport and heterogeneous reactions in the PM2.5 increase

during winter haze episodes in Beijing. Science of The Total Environment, 599-600: 246-253.

Mitchell, K., 2002. The community Noah land surface model (LSM)-User's guide, 15th AMS Conf. on

Hydrology, 2002.

Mlawer, E. J., Taubman, S. J., Brown, P. D., Iacono, M. J. and Clough, S. A., 1997. Radiative transfer

of
for inhomogeneous atmospheres: RRTM, a validated correlated-k model for the longwave.

ro
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 102(D14): 16663-16682.

Stockwell, W. R., Middleton, P., Chang, J. S. and Tang, X., 1990. The second generation regional acid
-p
deposition model chemical mechanism for regional air quality modeling. Journal of
re
Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 95(D10): 16343-16367.
lP

Streets, D. G., Fu, J. S., Jang, C. J., Hao, J., He, K., Tang, X., Zhang, Y., Wang, Z., Li, Z. and Qiang, Z.,
na

2007. Air quality during the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. Atmospheric Environment, 41(3):

480-492.
ur

Sun, Y., Jiang, Q., Wang, Z., Fu, P., Li, J., Yang, T. and Yin, Y., 2014. Investigation of the sources and
Jo

evolution processes of severe haze pollution in Beijing in January 2013. Journal of

Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 119(7): 4380-4398.

Sun, Z. b., Liao, X. n., Wang, Z. s., Zi-Ming, L. I., Zhao, X. j. and Hua, C., 2016. Scavenging Effect of

Rime and East Wind on PM_(2.5) Under Air Heavy Pollution in Beijing. Environmental

Science.

Wang, H., Gong, S., Zhang, H., Chen, Y., Shen, X., Chen, D., Xue, J., Shen, Y., Wu, X. and Jin, Z.,

2010. A new-generation sand and dust storm forecasting system GRAPES_CUACE/Dust:

34
 Journal Pre-proof

Model development, verification and numerical simulation. Chinese Science Bulletin, 55(7):

635-649.

Wang, H., Peng, Y., Zhang, X., Liu, H., Zhang, M., Che, H., Cheng, Y. and Zheng, Y., 2018.

Contributions to the explosive growth of PM2.5 mass due to aerosol–radiation feedback and

decrease in turbulent diffusion during a red alert heavy haze in Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei, China.

Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18(23): 17717-17733.

of
Wang, H., Shi, G. Y., Zhang, X. Y., Gong, S. L., Tan, S. C., Chen, B., Che, H. Z. and Li, T., 2015a.

ro
Mesoscale modelling study of the interactions between aerosols and PBL meteorology during

a haze episode in China Jing–Jin–Ji and its near surrounding region – Part 2: Aerosols'
-p
radiative feedback effects. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15(6): 3277-3287.
re
Wang, H., Xue, M., Zhang, X. Y., Liu, H. L., Zhou, C. H., Tan, S. C., Che, H. Z., Chen, B. and Li, T.,
lP

2015b. Mesoscale modeling study of the interactions between aerosols and PBL meteorology
na

during a haze episode in Jing–Jin–Ji (China) and its nearby surrounding region – Part 1:

Aerosol distributions and meteorological features. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15(6): 3257-3275.
ur

Wang, Y., Bao, S., Wang, S., Hu, Y., Shi, X., Wang, J., Zhao, B., Jiang, J., Zheng, M., Wu, M., Russell,
Jo

A. G., Wang, Y. and Hao, J., 2017. Local and regional contributions to fine particulate matter

in Beijing during heavy haze episodes. Science of The Total Environment, 580: 283-296.

Wu, P., Ding, Y. and Liu, Y., 2017. Atmospheric circulation and dynamic mechanism for persistent haze

events in the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei region. Advances in Atmospheric Sciences, 34(4):

429-440.

Yang, L. X., Wang, D. C., Cheng, S. H., Wang, Z., Zhou, Y., Zhou, X. H. and Wang, W. X., 2007.

Influence of meteorological conditions and particulate matter on visual range impairment in

35
 Journal Pre-proof

Jinan, China. Science of the Total Environment, 383(1): 164-173.

Zhai, S., Jacob, D. J., Wang, X., Shen, L., Li, K., Zhang, Y., Gui, K., Zhao, T. and Liao, H., 2019. Fine

particulate matter (PM2.5) trends in China, 2013–2018: separating contributions from

anthropogenic emissions and meteorology. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19(16): 11031-11041.

Zhang, H., Wang, S., Hao, J., Wang, X., Wang, S., Chai, F. and Li, M., 2016. Air pollution and control

action in Beijing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112: 1519-1527.

of
Zhang, Q., Jiang, X., Tong, D., Davis, S. J., Zhao, H., Geng, G., Feng, T., Zheng, B., Lu, Z. and Streets,

ro
D. G., 2017. Transboundary health impacts of transported global air pollution and

international trade. Nature, 543(7647): 705-709.

-p
Zhang, Q., Quan, J., Tie, X., Li, X., Liu, Q., Gao, Y. and Zhao, D., 2015a. Effects of meteorology and
re
secondary particle formation on visibility during heavy haze events in Beijing, China. Science
lP

of The Total Environment, 502: 578-584.

na

Zhang, Q., Streets, D. G., He, K. and Klimont, Z., 2007. Major components of China’s anthropogenic

primary particulate emissions. Environmental Research Letters, 2(4): 045027.

ur

Zhang, R. H. and Shen, X., 2008. On the development of the GRAPES—A new generation of the
Jo

national operational NWP system in China. Chinese Science Bulletin, 53(22): 3429-3432.

Zhang, X., Sun, J., Wang, Y., Li, W., Zhang, Q., Wang, W., Quan, J., Cao, G., Wang, J. and Yang, Y.,

2013. Factors contributing to haze and fog in China. Chinese Science Bulletin, 58(13):

1178-1187.

Zhang, X., Xu, X., Ding, Y., Liu, Y., Zhang, H., Wang, Y. and Zhong, J., 2019. The impact of

meteorological changes from 2013 to 2017 on PM2.5 mass reduction in key regions in China.

SCIENCE CHINA Earth Sciences(1674-7313).

36
 Journal Pre-proof

Zhang, X. Y., Wang, J. Z., Wang, Y. Q., Liu, H. L., Sun, J. Y. and Zhang, Y. M., 2015b. Changes in

chemical components of aerosol particles in different haze regions in China from 2006 to 2013

and contribution of meteorological factors. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 15(22):

12935-12952.

Zheng, B., Chevallier, F., Ciais, P., Yi, Y., Deeter, M. N., Worden, H. M., Wang, Y., Qiang, Z. and He,

K., 2018a. Rapid decline in carbon monoxide emissions and export from East Asia between

of
years 2005 and 2016. Environmental Research Letters, 13(4): 044007.

ro
Zheng, B., Tong, D., Li, M., Liu, F., Hong, C., Geng, G., Li, H., Li, X., Peng, L., Qi, J., Yan, L., Zhang,

Y., Zhao, H., Zheng, Y., He, K. and Zhang, Q., 2018b. Trends in China's anthropogenic
-p
emissions since 2010 as the consequence of clean air actions. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18(19):
re
14095-14111.
lP

Zhong, J., Zhang, X., Dong, Y., Wang, Y., Liu, C., Wang, J., Zhang, Y. and Che, H., 2018a. Feedback
na

effects of boundary-layer meteorological factors on cumulative explosive growth of PM2.5

during winter heavy pollution episodes in Beijing from 2013 to 2016. Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
ur

18(1): 247-258.
Jo

Zhong, J., Zhang, X. and Wang, Y., 2019. Reflections on the threshold for PM2.5 explosive growth in

the cumulative stage of winter heavy aerosol pollution episodes (HPEs) in Beijing. Tellus B:

Chemical and Physical Meteorology, 71(1): 1-7.

Zhong, J., Zhang, X., Wang, Y., Liu, C. and Dong, Y., 2018b. Heavy aerosol pollution episodes in

winter Beijing enhanced by radiative cooling effects of aerosols. Atmospheric Research, 209:

59-64.

Zhong, J., Zhang, X., Wang, Y., Sun, J., Zhang, Y. and Wang, J., 2017. Relative Contributions of

37
 Journal Pre-proof

Boundary-Layer Meteorological Factors to the Explosive Growth of PM2.5 during the

Red-Alert Heavy Pollution Episodes in Beijing in December 2016. Journal of Meteorological

Research, 31(5): 809-819.

Zhou, C.-H., Gong, S., Zhang, X.-Y., Liu, H.-L., Xue, M., Cao, G.-L., An, X.-Q., Che, H.-Z., Zhang,

Y.-M. and Niu, T., 2012. Towards the improvements of simulating the chemical and optical

properties of Chinese aerosols using an online coupled model – CUACE/Aero. Tellus B:

of
Chemical and Physical Meteorology, 64(1): 18965.

ro
Zhou, Y., Wu, Y., Liu, Y., Fu, L., He, K., Wang, S., Hao, J., Chen, J. and Li, C., 2010. The impact of

transportation control measures on emission reductions during the 2008 Olympic Games in
-p
Beijing, China. Atmospheric Environment, 44(3): 285-293.
re
lP
na
ur
Jo

38
 Journal Pre-proof

Declaration of interests

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal
relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

☒The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be
considered as potential competing interests:

of
ro
-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo

39
 Journal Pre-proof

Highlights

The substantial reductions of PM2.5 in Central and Eastern China were caused by

favorable meteorological conditions and emission reductions

21.9% of the total decrease in PM2.5 was controlled by favorable meteorological

conditions, and 78.1% was controlled by emission reductions

The largest decrease in PM2.5 in BJ was caused by more favorable meteorological

of
conditions compared with other cities

Emission reductions dominated 72.5-81.2% of the decrease in PM2.5 during pollution

periods
ro
-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo

40