1 / 17

Comparison of NOAA/NCEP 12km CMAQ Forecasts with CalNEX WP-3 Measurements

Comparison of NOAA/NCEP 12km CMAQ Forecasts with CalNEX WP-3 Measurements.

shiri
Télécharger la présentation

Comparison of NOAA/NCEP 12km CMAQ Forecasts with CalNEX WP-3 Measurements

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. Comparison of NOAA/NCEP 12km CMAQ Forecasts with CalNEX WP-3 Measurements Youhua Tang1,2, Jeffery T. McQueen2, Jianping Huang1,2, Marina Tsidulko1,2, Sarah Lu1,2, Ho-Chun Huang1,2, Stuart A. McKeen3, Daewon Byun4, Pius Lee4, R. Bradley Pierce5, Ivanka Stajner6, Thomas B. Ryerson3, Rebecca Washenfelder3, Jeff Peischl3, John S. Holloway3, David D. Parrish3, James M. Roberts3, Joost de Gouw3, and Carsten Warneke3 IMSG, Camp Springs, MD 20746, USA Environmental Modeling Center, NOAA National Centers for Environmental Prediction, 5200 Auth Road, Camp Springs, MD 20746, USA 3. NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory, Boulder, CO 80305, USA 4. NOAA Air Resource Laboratory, Silver Spring, MD 5. NOAA NESDIS/ORA, Madison, WI 6. Office of Science and Technology, NOAA National Weather Service, Silver Spring, MD

  2. Eastern US “1x” Domain FY 04-05 268 grid cells 442 grid cells NAQFC Configuration • Emissions • EPA CEM anthropogenic inventories • 2005 base year projects to the current year w/ EGU point sources • BEIS V3 biogenic emissions • Met Model • North American Mesoscale Forecast System (NAM, WRF-NMM) • 12km 60 vertical levels • AQ Model: • EPA Community Multi-scale Air Quality Model • • CMAQ V4.6: 12km/L22 CONUS domain • • Operational: CB04 gas-phase • • Experimental: CB05/AERO4 aerosol • Output available on National Digital Guidance Database • 48 hour forecasts from 06/12 UTC cycles CONUS “5x” Domain 142 Eastern US “3x” Domain FY 06-07

  3. Current Operational AQ processes NAM (WRF-NMM) run NAM POST to EGRD3D/BGRD3D Horizontally Interpolate to CONUS LCC A-grid Horizontally Interpolate to Hawaii LCC A-grid Horizontally Interpolate to Alaska LCC A-grid PRDGEN PreMAQ Adding point/area /mobile/ Biogenic emissions CONUS CB04 LCC C-grid CONUS CB05 LCC C-grid Hawaii CB05 LCC C-grid Alaska CB05 LCC C-grid CMAQ CONUS CB04 CONUS CB05 Hawaii CB05 Alaska CB05 Static profile lateral boundary condition (LBC) is applied to these AQ runs. One experimental CB05 run (available after May 15 2010) used the LBC from the RAQMS global model (RLBC).

  4. CalNEX Field Campaign http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/csd/calnex/ Photographed by H. Stark NOAA WP-3D flights April-June 2010 Flight Altitude (m)

  5. Ozone WP-3 flight on 05/18 was mainly over Southern California (Los Angeles area) CO

  6. CalNEX WP-3 Flight on 5/18/2010 NO2 SO2

  7. The CB04 and CB05 predicted similar O3 and CO concentrations in the flights mainly over California. The lateral boundary conditions have stronger impact on upper air concentrations.

  8. Over Southern California, the models significantly overepredicted NOy, SO2 as well as VOCs. In CB05 NOy=NO+NO2+HNO3+PAN+PANX+HONO+PNA+NO3+NTR+N2O5*2 In CB04 NOy=NO+NO2+HNO3+PAN+HONO+PNA+NO3+NTR+N2O5*2

  9. O3 is highly correlated to NO2/NOx ratio when CO or VOC is high. This relationship is correctly presented by all the models

  10. NOz (NOy-NOx) versus O3 as the indicator of ozone production efficiency

  11. Same plot but for Southern California (South of 36°N, west of –116°W)

  12. NOx/CO<0.004: Y=21.85+24.32*X R=0.496 0.004<NOx/CO<0.04: Y=20.15+12.99*X R=0.472 NOx/CO>0.04: Y=-40.42+14.71*X R=0.284 NOx/CO<0.004: Y=39.73+5.79*X R=0.783 0.004<NOx/CO<0.04: Y=32.54+6.95*X R=0.519 NOx/CO>0.04: Y=-79.82+16.65*X R=0.190 The NOz versus O3 relationship under certain NOx/CO ranges: < 0.004, 0.004-0.04 and > 0.04 When NOx is relatively high, titration could become more important, and O3 production become less efficient. NOx/CO<0.004: Y=40.49+6.54*X R=0.841 0.004<NOx/CO<0.04: Y=38.39+6.47*X R=0.820 NOx/CO>0.04: Y=-20.38+9.39*X R=0.385

  13. R=0.954 R=0.939 In term of CB04 model versus CB05 model comparison, we have their correlation coefficient rankings: O3 > total NOz >PAN R=0.884

  14. R=0.88 PAN ratio in total NOz correlated to ambient VOC concentration (using Toluene as a representative) The observation shows that PAN/NOz ratio is nearly proportional to the VOC concentration when high O3 is available. O3+ hv  O1D + O2 O1D + H2O 2OH

  15. Summary • Over Los Angeles basin or Southern California, the models systematically overpredicted most primarily emitted species, except CO, methanol and NH3. • The models tend to underestimate background CO by 20-50 ppbv. Using alternative lateral boundary conditions, such as RAQMS, could help improve the CO and O3 predictions in the upper air, but it could also exaggerate the existing O3 high bias in the lower altitudes.

  16. Summary (Continued) • CB04 and CB05 mechanisms show different chemical behavior in predicting the O3/NOz relationship. This difference is not caused by their treatments ofozone photochemical formation, but their predictions for speciated NOz (such as PAN). • The flight measurements show that hydrocarbon depended NOz (like PAN) versus total NOz ratio is highly correlated to ambient hydrocarbon concentrations when O3 (as OH precursor) concentration is relatively high (>75ppbv). However, none of the models is able to capture this feature.

More Related