A single-point modeling approach for the intercomparison and evaluation of ozone dry deposition across chemical transport models (Activity 2 of AQMEII4).

Autor:	Clifton OE; NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, New York, NY, USA.; Center for Climate Systems Research, Columbia Climate School, Columbia University in the City of New York, New York, NY, USA., Schwede D; Office of Research and Development, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA., Hogrefe C; Office of Research and Development, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA., Bash JO; Office of Research and Development, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA., Bland S; Stockholm Environment Institute, Environment and Geography Department, University of York, York, UK., Cheung P; Air Quality Research Division, Atmospheric Science and Technology Directorate, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Toronto, Canada., Coyle M; United Kingdom Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian, UK.; The James Hutton Institute, Craigiebuckler, Aberdeen, UK., Emberson L; Environment and Geography Department, University of York, York, UK., Flemming J; European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Reading, UK., Fredj E; Department of Computer Science, The Jerusalem College of Technology, Jerusalem, Israel., Galmarini S; Joint Research Centre (JRC), European Commission, Ispra, Italy., Ganzeveld L; Meteorology and Air Quality Section, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands., Gazetas O; Joint Research Centre (JRC), European Commission, Ispra, Italy., Goded I; Joint Research Centre (JRC), European Commission, Ispra, Italy., Holmes CD; Department of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA., Horváth L; ELKH-SZTE Photoacoustic Research Group, Department of Optics and Quantum Electronics, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary., Huijnen V; Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute, De Bilt, the Netherlands., Li Q; The Institute of Environmental Sciences, The Robert H. Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Environment, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot, Israel., Makar PA; Air Quality Research Division, Atmospheric Science and Technology Directorate, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Toronto, Canada., Mammarella I; Institute for Atmospheric and Earth System Research/Physics, Faculty of Science, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland., Manca G; Joint Research Centre (JRC), European Commission, Ispra, Italy., Munger JW; School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.; Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA., Pérez-Camanyo JL; Computer Science School, Technical University of Madrid (UPM), Madrid, Spain., Pleim J; Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA., Ran L; Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Greensboro, NC, USA., Jose RS; Computer Science School, Technical University of Madrid (UPM), Madrid, Spain., Silva SJ; Department of Earth Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA., Staebler R; Air Quality Research Division, Atmospheric Science and Technology Directorate, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Toronto, Canada., Sun S; Earth and Environmental Sciences Programme, Faculty of Science, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China., Tai APK; Earth and Environmental Sciences Programme, Faculty of Science, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.; State Key Laboratory of Agrobiotechnology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.; Institute of Environment, Energy and Sustainability, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China., Tas E; The Institute of Environmental Sciences, The Robert H. Smith Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Environment, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot, Israel., Vesala T; Institute for Atmospheric and Earth System Research/Physics, Faculty of Science, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.; Institute for Atmospheric and Earth System Research/Forest Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland., Weidinger T; Department of Meteorology, Institute of Geography and Earth Sciences, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary., Wu Z; ORISE Fellow at Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA., Zhang L; Air Quality Research Division, Atmospheric Science and Technology Directorate, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Toronto, Canada.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Atmospheric chemistry and physics [Atmos Chem Phys] 2023 Sep 06; Vol. 23 (17), pp. 9911-9961.
DOI:	10.5194/acp-23-9911-2023
Abstrakt:	A primary sink of air pollutants and their precursors is dry deposition. Dry deposition estimates differ across chemical transport models, yet an understanding of the model spread is incomplete. Here, we introduce Activity 2 of the Air Quality Model Evaluation International Initiative Phase 4 (AQMEII4). We examine 18 dry deposition schemes from regional and global chemical transport models as well as standalone models used for impact assessments or process understanding. We configure the schemes as single-point models at eight Northern Hemisphere locations with observed ozone fluxes. Single-point models are driven by a common set of site-specific meteorological and environmental conditions. Five of eight sites have at least 3 years and up to 12 years of ozone fluxes. The interquartile range across models in multiyear mean ozone deposition velocities ranges from a factor of 1.2 to 1.9 annually across sites and tends to be highest during winter compared with summer. No model is within 50 % of observed multiyear averages across all sites and seasons, but some models perform well for some sites and seasons. For the first time, we demonstrate how contributions from depositional pathways vary across models. Models can disagree with respect to relative contributions from the pathways, even when they predict similar deposition velocities, or agree with respect to the relative contributions but predict different deposition velocities. Both stomatal and nonstomatal uptake contribute to the large model spread across sites. Our findings are the beginning of results from AQMEII4 Activity 2, which brings scientists who model air quality and dry deposition together with scientists who measure ozone fluxes to evaluate and improve dry deposition schemes in the chemical transport models used for research, planning, and regulatory purposes. Competing Interests: Author contributions. OEC led the manuscript’s direction and writing, data processing and analysis, and coordination among authors. DS and CH contributed to the manuscript’s direction, data processing, and coordination among authors. JOB contributed CMAQ STAGE results and documentation. SB contributed DO3SE results and documentation. PC contributed GEM-MACH results and documentation. MC contributed data from Easter Bush and Auchencorth Moss. LE contributed DO3SE results and documentation and assisted with direction. JF contributed IFS results and documentation and assisted with direction. EF, QL, and ET contributed data from Ramat Hanadiv. SG assisted with direction. LG contributed MLC-CHEM results and documentation. OG, IG, and GM contributed data from Ispra. CDH assisted with direction and contributed GEOS-Chem results and documentation. LH and TW contributed data from Bugacpuszta. VH contributed model results and documentation from IFS. PAM contributed model results and documentation from GEM-MACH and assisted with direction. IM and TV contributed data from Hyytiälä. JWM contributed data from Harvard Forest. JLPC and RSJ contributed WRF-Chem results and documentation. JP and LR contributed M3Dry results and documentation. RS, ZW, and LZ contributed data from Borden Forest. SJS assisted with data processing and assisted with direction. SS and APKT contributed TEMIR results and documentation. All authors contributed to manuscript writing and useful discussions on data analysis and processing and results. Competing interests. At least one of the (co-)authors is a member of the editorial board of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics. The peer-review process was guided by an independent editor, and the authors also have no other competing interests to declare.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu