1 / 18

Leonor Tarrasón, Svetlana Tsyro, Hilde Fagerli and David Simpson EMEP/MSC-W

Initial learnings from the comparison of the first EMEP intensive campaigns with EMEP model results. Leonor Tarrasón, Svetlana Tsyro, Hilde Fagerli and David Simpson EMEP/MSC-W. TFMM workshop 23 October 2007, Dublin, Ireland. Initial feedbacks (I). Main advantage

nelsonbanks
Télécharger la présentation

Leonor Tarrasón, Svetlana Tsyro, Hilde Fagerli and David Simpson EMEP/MSC-W

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Initial learnings from the comparison of the first EMEP intensive campaigns with EMEP model results Leonor Tarrasón, Svetlana Tsyro, Hilde Fagerli and David Simpson EMEP/MSC-W TFMM workshop 23 October 2007, Dublin, Ireland

  2. Initial feedbacks (I) • Main advantage • Very useful information with concurrent and co-located measurements of many PM components (SIA, OC, EC, Na, mineral dust) Many thanks to all contributors! • Useful also to have speciated measurements PM10 and PM2.5 in the same locations • Some drawbacks • Of the 26 participating stations, only 6-7 are to measure all the above mentioned components of PM • Of these 6, we have so far only data from 3 stations has been analyzed for June 2006 with the EMEP model • Considerable effort to compile the measurement data in a harmonized consistent way (Intensive QA/QC at CCC/NILU)

  3. Initial feedbacks (II) • QA/QC takes time ! • Considerable effort to compile the measurement data in a harmonized consistent way (Thanks to CCC/NILU for their intensive QA/QC) Caution! Efforts are still needed to make the data artifact free. In the following, remember that • The data has not been corrected for positive OC artifacts in Birkenes and Melpitz. • In Melpitz, EC data is not corrected for charring. • Note also differences in methods for different components in the same station, especially at Montelibretti !

  4. Results for Melpitz, DE44 (Tsyro et al. 2007) Note problems with primary PM, (EC) OC is summer is expected to be dominated by SOA

  5. Origin of Total Carbon at K-Puszta, Summer Monte Carlo analysis under the CARBOSOL project

  6. Origin of Total Carbon at K-Puszta, Winter Monte Carlo analysis under the CARBOSOL project

  7. Origin of Total Carbon at Aveiro, Summer Monte Carlo analysis under the CARBOSOL project

  8. Origin of Total Carbon at Aveiro, Winter Monte Carlo analysis under the CARBOSOL project

  9. Use of different indicators for PM carbon components in CARBOSOL

  10. Use of levoglucosan Levoglucosane can be used as indicator of OC and EC from wood burning – Useful to understand the measured OC and EC concentrations - Results from CARBOSOL project (Simpson et al., 2007 and Tsyro et al., 2007) – also reported yesterday

  11. Results for Birkenes, NO01 (Tsyro et al. 2007) Note performance for EC here ! OC not corrected for positive artifacts. Note NO3 performance.

  12. Useful information on N-compounds In order to test our understanding of nitrogen-cycle, it would be useful to have co-located information on: • NO2, • NO3- fine and coarse, • HNO3, • NH3, • NH4, • and their vertical profiles

  13. HNO3/NO3- Problems associated with filter-pack measurements used at most EMEP sites for sites with reliable measurements Nitrate: overestimate in cold season, but no systematic biases for nitric acid ! Too little data yet to conclude on model biases and recommend further model development.

  14. NH3/NH4+ NH3 UK National Ammonia Monitoring Network NOFRETETE site NH3 UK: the model cannot capture large spatial gradients (overestimate low, underestimate high concentration) NOFRETETE sites: the model overestimates low concentrations in forest areas Effect of model resolution, combination of forests and agricultural land uses in the same model grid – improvements expected with finer model resolution

  15. Recommendation: Flight campaigns may also include HNO3 and NO3 measurements Need for vertical profile data

  16. Results for Montelibretti, IT01 (Tsyro et al. 2007) Note worsen performance for most components in this station ... except probably for mineral dust !

  17. Undetermined PM and particle-bound water Note that the undertermined PM mass is larger than the model calculated water mass (light blue) Recommendation to increase effort to quantify aerosol water in the measurements

  18. Recommendations for next campaigns • Intensify effort to determine gas and particle concentrations of inorganic components (in particular HNO3 and NO3) • Include quantification of water content in the aerosol • In addition to EC/OC measurements, introduce co-located measurements of indicators such as levoglucosane and 14C • Use of flight measurements and Lidar data for compilation of vertical profile data Funding will rely on co-operation with EUCAARI, NitroEurope, BIAFLUX and EUSAAR projects.

More Related