On the Impact of Time-Resolved Boundary Conditions on the Simulation of Surface Ozone and PM10

Curci, Gabriele

doi:10.5772/33703

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This calls into cause the static model boundary conditions used in WRF/Chem standard version used here (see section 2.1), that might be inadequate to describe the monthly variability of O 3 low‐level inflow from North America, especially in spring [ Auvray and Bey , 2005]. Several studies showed that the agreement with measurements of simulated O 3 improves when time‐dependent boundary conditions are included in place of static profiles (see Curci [2012] for a review). We performed a sensitivity simulation in the period 15 March–15 May with doubled values of O 3 boundary conditions on the western border of the domain.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling of gas and aerosol with WRF/Chem over Europe: Evaluation and sensitivity study

Tuccella¹,

Curci²,

Visconti³

et al. 2012

J. Geophys. Res.

Self Cite

218

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

[1] The "online" meteorological and chemical transport Weather Research and Forecasting/Chemistry (WRF/Chem) model has been implemented over a European domain, run without aerosol-cloud feedbacks for the year 2007, and validated against ground-based observations. To this end, we integrated the European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme (EMEP) anthropogenic emission inventory into the model pre-processor. The simulated average temperature shows a very small negative bias, the relative humidity and the wind speed are overpredicted by 1.5% (8%) and 1.0 m/s (76%), respectively. Hourly ozone (O 3 ) exhibits a correlation with observations of 0.62 and daily maxima are underestimated by about 4%. A general ozone underestimation (overestimation) is found in spring (fall), probably related to misrepresentation of intercontinental transport with time-invariant boundary conditions. Daily nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) is reproduced within AE15% with a correlation of 0.57. Daily PM 2.5 aerosol mass shows mean bias of about À4.0 mg/m 3 (À7.3%), mainly attributable to the carbonaceous fraction. The model underpredicts particulate sulphate by a factor of 2, and overpredicts ammonium and nitrate by about factor of 2. Possible reasons for this bias are investigated with sensitivity tests and revealed that the aqueous phase oxidation of sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) by hydrogen peroxide (H 2 O 2 ) and O 3 , missing in the configuration of WRF/Chem without aerosol-cloud feedbacks, explains the discrepancy.Citation: Tuccella, P., G. Curci, G. Visconti, B. Bessagnet, L. Menut, and R. J. Park (2012), Modeling of gas and aerosol with WRF/Chem over Europe: Evaluation and sensitivity study,

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling of gas and aerosol with WRF/Chem over Europe: Evaluation and sensitivity study

Tuccella¹,

Curci²,

Visconti³

et al. 2012

J. Geophys. Res.

Self Cite

218

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…ICs and BCs are required to solve the stiff differential equations which describe the evolution of the chemical species in the atmosphere in the three-dimensional air quality models (Jiménez et al, 2007). The LCBCs are included in the model during the entire simulation period in specific time intervals, and they provide information about the atmosphere chemical state outside the simulation domain, allowing to account for the inflow of pollutants from outside the simulation area and assess their impact in the local air quality (Curci, 2012;Gavidia-Calderón et al, 2018).…”

Section: Lateral Chemical Boundary Conditions (Lcbcs)mentioning

confidence: 99%

An uncertainty for clean air: Air quality modeling implications of underestimating VOC emissions in urban inventories

Zhu

Kinnon

Shaffer

et al. 2019

Atmospheric Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although many studies tackle the impact of chemical and physical processes, initial and boundary conditions, or emissions on absolute concentrations or trends (Curci 2012;de Meij et al 2009;Dufour et al 2021;Huang et al 2020;Huertas et al 2021;Khan and Kumar 2019;Li et al 2021; Kees Cuvelier retired with Active Senior Agreement.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of the sensitivity of model responses to urban emission changes in support of emission reduction strategies

Bessagnet,

Cuvelier,

de Meij

et al. 2023

Air Qual Atmos Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sensitivity of air quality model responses to modifications in input data (e.g. emissions, meteorology and boundary conditions) or model configurations is recognized as an important issue for air quality modelling applications in support of air quality plans. In the framework of FAIRMODE (Forum of Air Quality Modelling in Europe, https://fairmode.jrc.ec.europa.eu/) a dedicated air quality modelling exercise has been designed to address this issue. The main goal was to evaluate the magnitude and variability of air quality model responses when studying emission scenarios/projections by assessing the changes of model output in response to emission changes. This work is based on several air quality models that are used to support model users and developers, and, consequently, policy makers. We present the FAIRMODE exercise and the participating models, and provide an analysis of the variability of O3 and PM concentrations due to emission reduction scenarios. The key novel feature, in comparison with other exercises, is that emission reduction strategies in the present work are applied and evaluated at urban scale over a large number of cities using new indicators such as the absolute potential, the relative potential and the absolute potency. The results show that there is a larger variability of concentration changes between models, when the emission reduction scenarios are applied, than for their respective baseline absolute concentrations. For ozone, the variability between models of absolute baseline concentrations is below 10%, while the variability of concentration changes (when emissions are similarly perturbed) exceeds, in some instances 100% or higher during episodes. Combined emission reductions are usually more efficient than the sum of single precursor emission reductions both for O3 and PM. In particular for ozone, model responses, in terms of linearity and additivity, show a clear impact of non-linear chemistry processes. This analysis gives an insight into the impact of model’ sensitivity to emission reductions that may be considered when designing air quality plans and paves the way of more in-depth analysis to disentangle the role of emissions from model formulation for present and future air quality assessments.

show abstract

On the Impact of Time-Resolved Boundary Conditions on the Simulation of Surface Ozone and PM10

Cited by 4 publications

References 37 publications

Modeling of gas and aerosol with WRF/Chem over Europe: Evaluation and sensitivity study

Modeling of gas and aerosol with WRF/Chem over Europe: Evaluation and sensitivity study

An uncertainty for clean air: Air quality modeling implications of underestimating VOC emissions in urban inventories

Assessment of the sensitivity of model responses to urban emission changes in support of emission reduction strategies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About