Implementation and evaluation of updated photolysis rates in the EMEP MSC-W chemical transport model using Cloud-J v7.3e

The present work describes the implementation of the state of the art Cloud-J v7.3 photolysis rate calculation code in the EMEP MSC-W chemistry-transport model. Cloud-J calculates photolysis rates and accounts for cloud and aerosol optical properties at model run time, replacing the old system based on tabulated values. The performance of Cloud-J is evaluated against aerial photolysis rate observations made over the Pacific Ocean and against surface observations from three measurement sites in Europe. Numerical experiments are performed to investigate the sensitivity of the calculated photolysis rates to the spatial and temporal model resolution, input meteorology model, simulated ozone column, and cloud effect parameterization. These experiments indicate that the calculated photolysis rates are most sensitive to the choice of input meteorology model and cloud effect parameterization while also showing that surface ozone photolysis rates can vary by up to 20 % due to daily variations in total ozone column. Further analysis investigates the impact of Cloud-J on the oxidizing capacity of the troposphere, aerosol–photolysis interactions, and surface air quality predictions. Results find that the annual mean mass-weighted tropospheric hydroxyl concentration is increased by 26 %, while the photolytic impact of aerosols is mostly limited to large tropical biomass-burning regions. Overall, Cloud-J represents a major improvement over the tabulated system, leading to improved model performance for predicting carbon monoxide and daily maximum ozone surface concentrations

AeroCom phase III multi-model evaluation of the aerosol life cycle and optical properties using ground- and space-based remote sensing as well as surface in situ observations

Within the framework of the AeroCom (Aerosol Comparisons between Observations and Models) initiative, the state-of-the-art modelling of aerosol optical properties is assessed from 14 global models participating in the phase III control experiment (AP3). The models are similar to CMIP6/AerChemMIP Earth System Models (ESMs) and provide a robust multi-model ensemble. Inter-model spread of aerosol species lifetimes and emissions appears to be similar to that of mass extinction coefficients (MECs), suggesting that aerosol optical depth (AOD) uncertainties are associated with a broad spectrum of parameterised aerosol processes. Total AOD is approximately the same as in AeroCom phase I (AP1) simulations. However, we find a 50% decrease in the optical depth (OD) of black carbon (BC), attributable to a combination of decreased emissions and lifetimes. Relative contributions from sea salt (SS) and dust (DU) have shifted from being approximately equal in AP1 to SS contributing about 2/3 of the natural AOD in AP3. This shift is linked with a decrease in DU mass burden, a lower DU MEC, and a slight decrease in DU lifetime, suggesting coarser DU particle sizes in AP3 compared to AP1. Relative to observations, the AP3 ensemble median and most of the participating models underestimate all aerosol optical properties investigated, that is, total AOD as well as fine and coarse AOD (AOD(f), AOD(c)), Angstrom exponent (AE), dry surface scattering (SCdry), and absorption (AC(dry)) coefficients. Compared to AERONET, the models underestimate total AOD by ca. 21% +/- 20% (as inferred from the ensemble median and interquartile range). Against satellite data, the ensemble AOD biases range from -37% (MODIS-Terra) to -16% (MERGED-FMI, a multi-satellite AOD product), which we explain by differences between individual satellites and AERONET measurements themselves. Correlation coefficients (R) between model and observation AOD records are generally high (R > 0.75), suggesting that the models are capable of capturing spatiotemporal variations in AOD. We find a much larger underestimate in coarse AOD(c) (similar to-45% +/- 25 %) than in fine AOD(f) (similar to-15% +/- 25 %) with slightly increased inter-model spread compared to total AOD. These results indicate problems in the modelling of DU and SS. The AOD(c) bias is likely due to missing DU over continental land masses (particularly over the United States, SE Asia, and S. America), while marine AERONET sites and the AATSR SU satellite data suggest more moderate oceanic biases in AOD(c). Column AEs are underestimated by about 10% +/- 16 %. For situations in which measurements show AE > 2, models underestimate AERONET AE by ca. 35 %. In contrast, all models (but one) exhibit large overestimates in AE when coarse aerosol dominates (bias ca. +140% if observed AE < 0.5). Simulated AE does not span the observed AE variability. These results indicate that models overestimate particle size (or underestimate the fine-mode fraction) for fine-dominated aerosol and underestimate size (or overestimate the fine-mode fraction) for coarse-dominated aerosol. This must have implications for lifetime, water uptake, scattering enhancement, and the aerosol radiative effect, which we can not quantify at this moment. Comparison against Global Atmosphere Watch (GAW) in situ data results in mean bias and inter-model variations of -35% +/- 25% and -20% +/- 18% for SCdry and AC(dry), respectively. The larger underestimate of SCdry than AC(dry) suggests the models will simulate an aerosol single scattering albedo that is too low. The larger underestimate of SCdry than ambient air AOD is consistent with recent findings that models overestimate scattering enhancement due to hygroscopic growth. The broadly consistent negative bias in AOD and surface scattering suggests an underestimate of aerosol radiative effects in current global aerosol models. Considerable inter-model diversity in the simulated optical properties is often found in regions that are, unfortunately, not or only sparsely covered by ground-based observations. This includes, for instance, the Sahara, Amazonia, central Australia, and the South Pacific. This highlights the need for a better site coverage in the observations, which would enable us to better assess the models, but also the performance of satellite products in these regions. Using fine-mode AOD as a proxy for present-day aerosol forcing estimates, our results suggest that models underestimate aerosol forcing by ca. -15 %, however, with a considerably large interquartile range, suggesting a spread between -35% and +10 %.Peer reviewe

The effects of intercontinental emission sources on European air pollution levels

This study is based on model results from TF HTAP (Task Force on Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution) phase II, in which a set of source receptor model experiments have been defined, reducing global (and regional) anthropogenic emissions by 20% in different source regions throughout the globe, with the main focus on the year 2010. All the participating models use the same set of anthropogenic emissions. Comparisons of model results to measurements are shown for selected European surface sites and for ozone sondes, but the main focus here is on the contributions to European ozone levels from different world regions, and how and why these contributions differ depending on the model. We investigate the origins by use of a novel stepwise approach, combining simple tracer calculations and calculations of CO and O3. To highlight the differences, we analyse the vertical transects of the midlatitude effects from the 20% emission reductions. The spread in the model results increases from the simple CO tracer to CO and then to ozone as the complexity of the physical and chemical processes involved increase. As a result of non-linear ozone chemistry, the contributions from non-European relative to European sources are larger for ozone compared to the CO and the CO tracer. For annually averaged ozone the contributions from the rest of the world is larger than the effects from European emissions alone, with the largest contributions from North America and eastern Asia. There are also considerable contributions from other nearby regions to the east and from international shipping. The calculated contributions to European annual average ozone from other major source regions relative to all contributions from all major sources (RAIR – Relative Annual Intercontinental Response) have increased from 43% in HTAP1 to 82% in HTAP2. This increase is mainly caused by a better definition of Europe, with increased emissions outside of Europe relative to those in Europe, and by including a nearby non-European source for external-to-Europe regions. European contributions to ozone metrics reflecting human health and ecosystem damage, which mostly accumulated in the summer months, are larger than for annual ozone. Whereas ozone from European sources peaks in the summer months, the largest contributions from non-European sources are mostly calculated for the spring months, when ozone production over the polluted continents starts to increase, while at the same time the lifetime of ozone in the free troposphere is relatively long. At the surface, contributions from non-European sources are of similar magnitude for all European subregions considered, defined as TF HTAP receptor regions (north-western, south-western, eastern and south-eastern Europe).JRC.D.5-Food Securit

A regional air quality forecasting system over Europe : the MACC-II daily ensemble production

This paper describes the pre-operational analysis and forecasting system developed during MACC (Monitoring Atmospheric Composition and Climate) and continued in the MACC-II (Monitoring Atmospheric Composition and Climate: Interim Implementation) European projects to provide air quality services for the European continent. This system is based on seven state-of-the art models developed and run in Europe (CHIMERE, EMEP, EURAD-IM, LOTOS-EUROS, MATCH, MOCAGE and SILAM). These models are used to calculate multi-model ensemble products. The paper gives an overall picture of its status at the end of MACCII (summer 2014) and analyses the performance of the multi-model ensemble. The MACC-II system provides daily 96 h forecasts with hourly outputs of 10 chemical species/aerosols (O-3, NO2, SO2, CO, PM10, PM2.5, NO, NH3, total NMVOCs (non-methane volatile organic compounds) and PAN + PAN precursors) over eight vertical levels from the surface to 5 km height. The hourly analysis at the surface is done a posteriori for the past day using a selection of representative air quality data from European monitoring stations. The performance of the system is assessed daily, weekly and every 3 months (seasonally) through statistical indicators calculated using the available representative air quality data from European monitoring stations. Results for a case study show the ability of the ensemble median to forecast regional ozone pollution events. The seasonal performances of the individual models and of the multi-model ensemble have been monitored since September 2009 for ozone, NO2 and PM10. The statistical indicators for ozone in summer 2014 show that the ensemble median gives on average the best performances compared to the seven models. There is very little degradation of the scores with the forecast day but there is a marked diurnal cycle, similarly to the individual models, that can be related partly to the prescribed diurnal variations of anthropogenic emissions in the models. During summer 2014, the diurnal ozone maximum is underestimated by the ensemble median by about 4 mu g m(-3) on average. Locally, during the studied ozone episodes, the maxima from the ensemble median are often lower than observations by 30-50 mu g m(-3). Overall, ozone scores are generally good with average values for the normalised indicators of 0.14 for the modified normalised mean bias and of 0.30 for the fractional gross error. Tests have also shown that the ensemble median is robust to reduction of ensemble size by one, that is, if predictions are unavailable from one model. Scores are also discussed for PM10 for winter 2013-1014. There is an underestimation of most models leading the ensemble median to a mean bias of 4.5 mu g m(-3). The ensemble median fractional gross error is larger for PM10 (similar to 0.52) than for ozone and the correlation is lower (similar to 0.35 for PM10 and similar to 0.54 for ozone). This is related to a larger spread of the seven model scores for PM10 than for ozone linked to different levels of complexity of aerosol representation in the individual models. In parallel, a scientific analysis of the results of the seven models and of the ensemble is also done over the Mediterranean area because of the specificity of its meteorology and emissions. The system is robust in terms of the production availability. Major efforts have been done in MACC-II towards the operationalisation of all its components. Foreseen developments and research for improving its performances are discussed in the conclusion