EGUsphere - Operational chemical weather forecasting with the ECCC online Regional Air Quality Deterministic Prediction System v

EGUsphere - Operational chemical weather forecasting with the ECCC online Regional Air Quality Deterministic Prediction System version 023 (RAQDPS023) – Part 1: System description
Preprints
Abstract
Assets
Discussion
Metrics
Preprints
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Preprints
Abstract
Assets
Discussion
Metrics
09 Dec 2025
09 Dec 2025
Operational chemical weather forecasting with the ECCC online Regional Air Quality Deterministic Prediction System version 023 (RAQDPS023) – Part 1: System description
Michael D. Moran
Verica Savic-Jovcic
Craig A. Stroud
Sylvain Ménard
Wanmin Gong
Junhua Zhang
Qiong Zheng
Jack Chen
Ayodeji Akingunola
Alexandru Lupu
Konstantinos Menelaou
and
Rodrigo Munoz-Alpizar
Abstract.
The online version of the Regional Air Quality Deterministic Prediction System (RAQDPS) is a chemical weather forecast system that has been employed operationally by Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) since 2009. It is run twice per day to produce 72-hour forecasts of hourly 10 km abundance fields of three key predictands, NO
, O
, and PM
2.5
total mass, as well as other gas-phase chemical species, PM
2.5
chemical components, and dry and wet deposition for Canada, the contiguous U.S., and northern Mexico. The forecasts of NO
, O
, and PM
2.5
are needed to calculate the Air Quality Health Index (AQHI), which is used to communicate current and forecasted pollutant levels to the Canadian public. Version 023 of the RAQDPS (RAQDPS023) went into service at ECCC in December 2021 and was replaced by the RAQDPS025 in June 2024. This paper provides the first full description of any version of the online RAQDPS. After giving a brief history of the ECCC operational air quality forecasting program, we provide a comprehensive description of the RAQDPS023 forecast system as well as shorter descriptions of several upstream and downstream forecast and analysis systems. The latter include two upstream operational meteorological forecast systems that were based on version 5.1.0 of the ECCC Global Environmental Multiscale (GEM) numerical weather prediction model, one which used a global configuration, the Global Deterministic Prediction System (GDPS 8.0.0), and the other which used a regional configuration, the Regional Deterministic Prediction System (RDPS 8.0.0). An emissions processing system, an Updateable Model Output Statistics-based system for bias-corrected station-specific pollutant concentration forecasts (UMOS-AQ), and a regional objective analysis system for surface pollutant concentration fields, the Regional Deterministic Air Quality Analysis system (RDAQA 2.0.0), are also described.
The RAQDPS023 itself consisted of version 3.1.0.0 of the GEM-Modelling Air quality and CHemistry (GEM-MACH) chemistry module, which was embedded with one-way coupling within GEM 5.1.0, its meteorological host model. The meteorological configuration of the RAQDPS023 closely followed that of the RDPS 8.0.0. Details covered in this paper include a summary of the dynamical representations and physical parameterizations used in the three GEM-based forecast systems, which are closely harmonized, the chemical parameterizations used in the MACH chemistry module, numerical solvers, system inputs, including both anthropogenic and natural emissions of chemical species, system outputs, and run configuration, strategies, and timings. One simplification employed to reduce RAQDPS023 execution time for operational deployment was to represent the particulate matter (PM) size distribution with only two aerosol particle size bins, one corresponding to particle diameters in the 0
2.5 µm range (“fine particles” or PM
2.5
) and the other to the 2.5
10 µm range (“coarse fraction” or PM
cf
). A second simplification was to represent the chemical composition of PM
2.5
with only nine chemical components, and a third simplification was to use a longer time step (900 s) for the time integration of atmospheric chemistry than the time step used for time integration of atmospheric dynamics and physics (300 s). Even so, activating the MACH module increased RAQDPS023 run time by a factor of 4.4 on average compared to meteorology only, partly due to the cost of the integration of chemistry but partly to the increased cost of integration of the GEM dynamical core due to the advection with imposed shape preservation and mass conservation of 57 additional chemical tracers.  The role of the RAQDPS-FW023, a second chemical weather forecast system that was identical to the RAQDPS023 except for the addition of near-real-time
biomass burning emissions, is also described.
Biomass burning emissions for Canada and the U.S. estimated from satellite measurements were first calculated by the Canadian Forest Fire Emissions Prediction System (CFFEPS) version 4.1 before each RAQDPS-FW023 run was launched. Outputs from the two RAQDPS versions were then used to produce forecasts of wildfire smoke transport and diffusion.  The paper closes by summarizing the key upgrades made to the RAQDPS025, the current version of the ECCC operational chemical weather forecast system, and then describing some possible future improvements and updates. A companion paper by Moran et al. (2025) presents the results of a comprehensive, five-year performance evaluation of prospective and retrospective annual air quality simulations made with the RAQDPS023.
How to cite.
Moran, M. D., Savic-Jovcic, V., Stroud, C. A., Ménard, S., Gong, W., Zhang, J., Zheng, Q., Chen, J., Akingunola, A., Lupu, A., Menelaou, K., and Munoz-Alpizar, R.: Operational chemical weather forecasting with the ECCC online Regional Air Quality Deterministic Prediction System version 023 (RAQDPS023) – Part 1: System description, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4323, 2025.
Received: 03 Sep 2025
Discussion started: 09 Dec 2025
Publisher's note
: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
Download & links
Preprint (PDF, 2123 KB)
Supplement
(291 KB)
Download & links
Preprint
(2123 KB)
Metadata XML
Supplement
(291 KB)
BibTeX
EndNote
Share
Michael D. Moran
Verica Savic-Jovcic
Craig A. Stroud
Sylvain Ménard
Wanmin Gong
Junhua Zhang
Qiong Zheng
Jack Chen
Ayodeji Akingunola
Alexandru Lupu
Konstantinos Menelaou
and
Rodrigo Munoz-Alpizar
Status
: closed
Comment types
AC
– author |
RC
– referee |
CC
– community |
EC
– editor |
CEC
– chief editor

: Report abuse
RC1
'Comment on egusphere-2025-4323'
, Anonymous Referee #1, 12 Jan 2026
The manuscript provides a very comprehensive description of the RAQDPS023 modeling system used by Environment and Climate Change Canada to provide air quality forecasts to the public. As such, it is a rare example of a one-stop technical and scientific documentation that allows the reader to gain an understanding of the many different aspects that go into building such a system. It is also extremely well written and structured so that despite its length it is easy to follow. I commend the authors for the care they took in compiling the references that underly the scientific formulations of RAQDPS023. This extensive list of references in conjunction with the detailed descriptions of all RAQDPS023 science processes creates a rare repository of knowledge not only about RAQDPS023 but also about the tremendous amount of effort it takes to design, implement, and operationalize air quality modeling systems more generally. My specific comments listed below are minor and/or editorial in nature.
Specific Comments:
Page 3: “Schiermeir, 1978” should be “Schiermeier, 1978”. While the doi of the scanned copy available through the ACS legacy archives (https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es60142a608) indeed mis-spelled the author’s last name, the actual scanned copy available under that doi correctly shows the last name as “Schiermeier”
Page 7, line 218 and Table 1: Consider using “horizontal domain size” instead of “horizontal grid size” since the latter could potentially be misinterpreted to refer to the size (spacing) of individual grid cells which is identical between RAQDPS023 and RDPS 8.0.0.
Page 8, line 255: Maybe change “included a small number of meteorological tracers” to “included two meteorological tracers (water vapour and cloud water)”
Page 8, line 266: Insert “and” between “meteorological” and “chemical”
Page 14, lines 454 - 456: Please clarify relative to which starting point (e.g., 10 bin GEM-MACH configuration, RAQDPS022) this modification of the numerical solution was implemented.
Page 15, line 476: Consider changing “where” to “whereas”
Page 15, lines 495 – 496: This question reveals my lack of understanding of aerosol schemes, but I was still curious what “partially activated” refers to. If there is a critical particle radius above which all aerosol particles are activated as stated on line 489, and if the two bins each represent aerosols of a discrete size, how does partial activation occur? Does each discrete size bin assume an internal distribution of particle radii, allowing a determination of the fraction of particles in a bin that exceed the critical radius above which aerosols are activated?
Page 16, line 521: Would H2O (water vapour) profiles not be available from GEM?
Page 16, lines 537 – 539: Maybe comment on the implications for SOA formation when omitting emissions of organic acids and approaching the decision of which emissions to retain solely from a reactivity point of view.
Page 26, line 877: typo, change “haf already” to “had already”
Page 27, line 898: Could you elaborate on this additional information and how it was used to adjust the inventories?
Page 28, line 942: Should this be “the usual hourly anthropogenic and biogenic emissions” instead of just “the usual hourly anthropogenic emissions”?
Page 30, lines 995 – 1001: Was there any dependency of soil NO emissions on precipitation to represent the pulsing effect described in the Yienger-Levy framework?
Page 33, line 1111: Please check if “for 900 s” is needed here. With the way the end of the sentence is written (“for 900 s for three shorter 300 s time steps”), I am not sure if the only point of the sentence is to say that a single MACH chemistry execution every 900 s still took four times longer than the combined time it took to execute three GEM 300 s physics time steps, or if there is some additional information being conveyed here.
Page 36, lines 1200 – 1211: It might be good to provide a brief summary of which emission inputs (anthropogenic and natural) were used in these MOZART-4 simulations. Did the anthropogenic emissions represent 2009 conditions? Were aircraft, lightning NO, and soil NO emissions considered? Adding such information could set the stage for the updates to LBC in RAQDPS025 and future versions discussed in later sections of the manuscript.
Pages 45, lines 1493 – 1503: Given the episodic nature of processes affecting large-scale distributions of O3, CO, and PM2.5, why did the LBC updates in RAQDPS025 still adopt an approach based on climatology? Were there any differences in the types of anthropogenic and natural emissions considered in the MOZART-4 vs. CAM-chem simulations?
Page 46, lines 1520 – 1522: Does this update eliminate any dependence on the five broad phenological seasons described in the last paragraph of Section 3.9?
Citation
: https://doi.org/
10.5194/egusphere-2025-4323-RC1
AC1
'Reply on RC1'
, Michael Moran, 12 Feb 2026
Authors's responses are provided in the attached PDF file.
Citation
: https://doi.org/
10.5194/egusphere-2025-4323-AC1
RC2
'Comment on egusphere-2025-4323'
, Anonymous Referee #2, 15 Jan 2026
General comments:
This manuscript presents the operational chemical weather forecasting system of ECCC. I would like to express my applause for the authors’ many works to summarize this. This will be beneficial to trace the entire history of modeling development in ECCC, and we can learn from this broad perspective in this manuscript. Therefore, it's unavoidable that it ends up being long. I do not have any critical concerns about its current presentation quality, but I have minor requests for improving the readability.
Specific comments:
Abstract (after line 30): Because the Part 2 manuscript presents the modeling performances not only for PM2.5 but also for gases and depositions, it would be better to provide this relevant information, such as ADOM-2 gas-phase chemistry. The current description just relies on the aerosol.
Lines 967-968: I understand that these emissions were not considered in RAQDPS023, but is there a rationale for excluding them from the forecasting system in Canada? Regarding the aerolian dust, I could see the discussion in the final paragraph of Section 3.12; what about other sources?
Line 3290 (Figure 1): I would like to request an improvement in this figure. For example, RAQDPS includes various sub-components, and it could be included within this figure. As the final application (post-processing), RDAQA and UMOS-AQ are described, but the purposes for each part could be briefly described in the arrow. Moreover, the colors for RDPS and RAQDPS could be unified in Figure 2 for better presentation.
Technical points:
Lines 321, 335, 910, 916, 1150, 1380, 1528, 1531, 1604: For Moran et al. (2025), it will be better to represent this as “a companion paper by Moran et al. (2025)” (Line 52).
Line 520: Use a subscript for the chemical species shown in this line.
Line 577: Use subscript “NH3”.
Line 3263: Please define “LRT”.
Citation
: https://doi.org/
10.5194/egusphere-2025-4323-RC2
AC2
'Reply on RC2'
, Michael Moran, 12 Feb 2026
Authors's responses are provided in the attached PDF file.
Citation
: https://doi.org/
10.5194/egusphere-2025-4323-AC2
Share
Status
: closed
Comment types
AC
– author |
RC
– referee |
CC
– community |
EC
– editor |
CEC
– chief editor

: Report abuse
RC1
'Comment on egusphere-2025-4323'
, Anonymous Referee #1, 12 Jan 2026
The manuscript provides a very comprehensive description of the RAQDPS023 modeling system used by Environment and Climate Change Canada to provide air quality forecasts to the public. As such, it is a rare example of a one-stop technical and scientific documentation that allows the reader to gain an understanding of the many different aspects that go into building such a system. It is also extremely well written and structured so that despite its length it is easy to follow. I commend the authors for the care they took in compiling the references that underly the scientific formulations of RAQDPS023. This extensive list of references in conjunction with the detailed descriptions of all RAQDPS023 science processes creates a rare repository of knowledge not only about RAQDPS023 but also about the tremendous amount of effort it takes to design, implement, and operationalize air quality modeling systems more generally. My specific comments listed below are minor and/or editorial in nature.
Specific Comments:
Page 3: “Schiermeir, 1978” should be “Schiermeier, 1978”. While the doi of the scanned copy available through the ACS legacy archives (https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es60142a608) indeed mis-spelled the author’s last name, the actual scanned copy available under that doi correctly shows the last name as “Schiermeier”
Page 7, line 218 and Table 1: Consider using “horizontal domain size” instead of “horizontal grid size” since the latter could potentially be misinterpreted to refer to the size (spacing) of individual grid cells which is identical between RAQDPS023 and RDPS 8.0.0.
Page 8, line 255: Maybe change “included a small number of meteorological tracers” to “included two meteorological tracers (water vapour and cloud water)”
Page 8, line 266: Insert “and” between “meteorological” and “chemical”
Page 14, lines 454 - 456: Please clarify relative to which starting point (e.g., 10 bin GEM-MACH configuration, RAQDPS022) this modification of the numerical solution was implemented.
Page 15, line 476: Consider changing “where” to “whereas”
Page 15, lines 495 – 496: This question reveals my lack of understanding of aerosol schemes, but I was still curious what “partially activated” refers to. If there is a critical particle radius above which all aerosol particles are activated as stated on line 489, and if the two bins each represent aerosols of a discrete size, how does partial activation occur? Does each discrete size bin assume an internal distribution of particle radii, allowing a determination of the fraction of particles in a bin that exceed the critical radius above which aerosols are activated?
Page 16, line 521: Would H2O (water vapour) profiles not be available from GEM?
Page 16, lines 537 – 539: Maybe comment on the implications for SOA formation when omitting emissions of organic acids and approaching the decision of which emissions to retain solely from a reactivity point of view.
Page 26, line 877: typo, change “haf already” to “had already”
Page 27, line 898: Could you elaborate on this additional information and how it was used to adjust the inventories?
Page 28, line 942: Should this be “the usual hourly anthropogenic and biogenic emissions” instead of just “the usual hourly anthropogenic emissions”?
Page 30, lines 995 – 1001: Was there any dependency of soil NO emissions on precipitation to represent the pulsing effect described in the Yienger-Levy framework?
Page 33, line 1111: Please check if “for 900 s” is needed here. With the way the end of the sentence is written (“for 900 s for three shorter 300 s time steps”), I am not sure if the only point of the sentence is to say that a single MACH chemistry execution every 900 s still took four times longer than the combined time it took to execute three GEM 300 s physics time steps, or if there is some additional information being conveyed here.
Page 36, lines 1200 – 1211: It might be good to provide a brief summary of which emission inputs (anthropogenic and natural) were used in these MOZART-4 simulations. Did the anthropogenic emissions represent 2009 conditions? Were aircraft, lightning NO, and soil NO emissions considered? Adding such information could set the stage for the updates to LBC in RAQDPS025 and future versions discussed in later sections of the manuscript.
Pages 45, lines 1493 – 1503: Given the episodic nature of processes affecting large-scale distributions of O3, CO, and PM2.5, why did the LBC updates in RAQDPS025 still adopt an approach based on climatology? Were there any differences in the types of anthropogenic and natural emissions considered in the MOZART-4 vs. CAM-chem simulations?
Page 46, lines 1520 – 1522: Does this update eliminate any dependence on the five broad phenological seasons described in the last paragraph of Section 3.9?
Citation
: https://doi.org/
10.5194/egusphere-2025-4323-RC1
AC1
'Reply on RC1'
, Michael Moran, 12 Feb 2026
Authors's responses are provided in the attached PDF file.
Citation
: https://doi.org/
10.5194/egusphere-2025-4323-AC1
RC2
'Comment on egusphere-2025-4323'
, Anonymous Referee #2, 15 Jan 2026
General comments:
This manuscript presents the operational chemical weather forecasting system of ECCC. I would like to express my applause for the authors’ many works to summarize this. This will be beneficial to trace the entire history of modeling development in ECCC, and we can learn from this broad perspective in this manuscript. Therefore, it's unavoidable that it ends up being long. I do not have any critical concerns about its current presentation quality, but I have minor requests for improving the readability.
Specific comments:
Abstract (after line 30): Because the Part 2 manuscript presents the modeling performances not only for PM2.5 but also for gases and depositions, it would be better to provide this relevant information, such as ADOM-2 gas-phase chemistry. The current description just relies on the aerosol.
Lines 967-968: I understand that these emissions were not considered in RAQDPS023, but is there a rationale for excluding them from the forecasting system in Canada? Regarding the aerolian dust, I could see the discussion in the final paragraph of Section 3.12; what about other sources?
Line 3290 (Figure 1): I would like to request an improvement in this figure. For example, RAQDPS includes various sub-components, and it could be included within this figure. As the final application (post-processing), RDAQA and UMOS-AQ are described, but the purposes for each part could be briefly described in the arrow. Moreover, the colors for RDPS and RAQDPS could be unified in Figure 2 for better presentation.
Technical points:
Lines 321, 335, 910, 916, 1150, 1380, 1528, 1531, 1604: For Moran et al. (2025), it will be better to represent this as “a companion paper by Moran et al. (2025)” (Line 52).
Line 520: Use a subscript for the chemical species shown in this line.
Line 577: Use subscript “NH3”.
Line 3263: Please define “LRT”.
Citation
: https://doi.org/
10.5194/egusphere-2025-4323-RC2
AC2
'Reply on RC2'
, Michael Moran, 12 Feb 2026
Authors's responses are provided in the attached PDF file.
Citation
: https://doi.org/
10.5194/egusphere-2025-4323-AC2
Share
Michael D. Moran
Verica Savic-Jovcic
Craig A. Stroud
Sylvain Ménard
Wanmin Gong
Junhua Zhang
Qiong Zheng
Jack Chen
Ayodeji Akingunola
Alexandru Lupu
Konstantinos Menelaou
and
Rodrigo Munoz-Alpizar
Supplement
Model code and software
Global Environmental Multiscale model‒Modelling Atmospheric CHemistry (GEM-MACH) version 3.1.0.0
Verica Savic-Jovcic and Michael D. Moran
GEM-MACHv3.1.1.2
GEM-MACH development team
Canadian Fire Emissions Prediction System (CFFEPS) v4.1
Kerry Anderson and Jack Chen
Version 5.1 package for the Global Environmental Multiscale (GEM) model (ECCC-ASTD-MRD/gem: 5.1.0)
Environment and Climate Change Canada
Michael D. Moran
Verica Savic-Jovcic
Craig A. Stroud
Sylvain Ménard
Wanmin Gong
Junhua Zhang
Qiong Zheng
Jack Chen
Ayodeji Akingunola
Alexandru Lupu
Konstantinos Menelaou
and
Rodrigo Munoz-Alpizar
Viewed
Total article views: 820
(including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML
PDF
XML
Total
Supplement
BibTeX
EndNote
379
409
32
820
63
26
27
HTML: 379
PDF: 409
XML: 32
Total: 820
Supplement: 63
BibTeX: 26
EndNote: 27
Views and downloads
(calculated since 09 Dec 2025)
Cumulative views and downloads
(calculated since 09 Dec 2025)
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Total article views: 787
(including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Thereof 787 with geography defined
and 0 with unknown origin.
Country
Views
Total:
HTML:
PDF:
XML:
Latest update: 22 Apr 2026
Michael D. Moran
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
mike.moran@ec.gc.ca
Air Quality Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
retired
Verica Savic-Jovcic
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
verica.savic-jovcic@ec.gc.ca
Air Quality Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Craig A. Stroud
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
craig.stroud@ec.gc.ca
Air Quality Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Sylvain Ménard
Canadian Centre for Meteorological and Environmental Prediction, ECCC, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Wanmin Gong
Air Quality Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Junhua Zhang
Air Quality Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Qiong Zheng
Air Quality Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Jack Chen
Air Quality Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Ayodeji Akingunola
Air Quality Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Alexandru Lupu
Air Quality Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Konstantinos Menelaou
Canadian Centre for Meteorological and Environmental Prediction, ECCC, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Rodrigo Munoz-Alpizar
Canadian Centre for Meteorological and Environmental Prediction, ECCC, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Preprint
(2123 KB)
Metadata XML
Supplement
(291 KB)
BibTeX
EndNote
Short summary
Canada's weather agency uses an online chemical weather forecast system to produce forecasts of key air pollutants over North America. Here we describe two recent versions of this Regional Air Quality Deterministic Prediction System (RAQDPS), including the meteorological host model, embedded chemistry module, and two downstream systems. Three simplifications to reduce run time are also described. A companion paper presents results from a comprehensive, 5-year evaluation of RAQDPS predictions.
Canada's weather agency uses an online chemical weather forecast system to produce forecasts of...
Share