WRF-Chem Modeling of Enhanced Upper Tropospheric Ozone due to Deep Convection and Lightning During the 2006 AEROSE II Cruise Jo nathan W. Smith 1,2, Kenneth.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MOPITT CO Louisa Emmons, David Edwards Atmospheric Chemistry Division Earth & Sun Systems Laboratory National Center for Atmospheric Research.
Advertisements

CO budget and variability over the U.S. using the WRF-Chem regional model Anne Boynard, Gabriele Pfister, David Edwards National Center for Atmospheric.
Variability in Ozone Profiles at TexAQS within the Context of an US Ozone Climatology Mohammed Ayoub 1, Mike Newchurch 1 2, Brian Vasel 3 Bryan Johnson.
Data assimilation of trace gases in a regional chemical transport model: the impact on model forecasts E. Emili 1, O. Pannekoucke 1,2, E. Jaumouillé 2,
Integrating satellite observations for assessing air quality over North America with GEOS-Chem Mark Parrington, Dylan Jones University of Toronto
Comparisons of TES v002 Nadir Ozone with GEOS-Chem by Ray Nassar & Jennifer Logan Thanks to: Lin Zhang, Inna Megretskaia, Bob Yantosca, Phillipe LeSager,
Effects of Urban-Influenced Thunderstorms on Atmospheric Chemistry Kenneth E. Pickering Department of Meteorology University of Maryland HEAT Planning.
CLARIS WP4.3 : Continental-scale air Pollution in South America.
Tianfeng Chai 1,2, Alice Crawford 1,2, Barbara Stunder 1, Roland Draxler 1, Michael J. Pavolonis 3, Ariel Stein 1 1.NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, College.
Impact of Mexico City on Regional Air Quality Louisa Emmons Jean-François Lamarque NCAR/ACD.
Henry Fuelberg Nick Heath Sean Freeman FSU WRF-Chem During SEAC 4 RS.
Long-range transport of ozone from the Los Angeles Basin: A case study A.O. Langford 1, C. J. Senff 2, R.J Alvarez 1 II, R. M. Banta 1, R.M. Hardesty 1.
Improving Cloud Simulation in Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Through Assimilation of GOES Satellite Observations Andrew White Advisor: Dr. Arastoo.
Ability of GEO-CAPE to Detect Lightning NOx and Resulting Upper Tropospheric Ozone Enhancement Conclusions When NO emissions from lightning were included.
Assessing the Lightning NO x Parameterization in GEOS-Chem with HNO 3 Columns from IASI Matthew Cooper 1 Randall Martin 1,2, Catherine Wespes 3, Pierre-Francois.
Prediction of Future North American Air Quality Gabriele Pfister, Stacy Walters, Mary Barth, Jean-Francois Lamarque, John Wong Atmospheric Chemistry Division,
Template Improving Sources of Stratospheric Ozone and NOy and Evaluating Upper Level Transport in CAMx Chris Emery, Sue Kemball-Cook, Jaegun Jung, Jeremiah.
Vertical Ozone Profiles at TEXAQS 2000 Mike Newchurch 1 2, Mohammed Ayoub 1, Brian Vasel 3 Bryan Johnson 3, Sam Oltmans 3, Richard McNider 1 1. Department.
Importance of Lightning NO for Regional Air Quality Modeling Thomas E. Pierce/NOAA Atmospheric Modeling Division National Exposure Research Laboratory.
MIR OZONE ISSUES Horizontal (STE) and vertical transport (long life time in UTLS) Photochemical production by precursors (biomass burning, lightning,..)
Estimating the Influence of Lightning on Upper Tropospheric Ozone Using NLDN Lightning Data Lihua Wang/UAH Mike Newchurch/UAH Arastoo Biazar/UAH William.
Earth&Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Tech Modeling the impacts of convective transport and lightning NOx production over North America: Dependence on cumulus.
1 Using Hemispheric-CMAQ to Provide Initial and Boundary Conditions for Regional Modeling Joshua S. Fu 1, Xinyi Dong 1, Kan Huang 1, and Carey Jang 2 1.
Improved representation of boreal fire emissions for the ICARTT period S. Turquety, D. J. Jacob, J. A. Logan, R. M. Yevich, R. C. Hudman, F. Y. Leung,
Workshop Bauru STUDY OF THE IMPACT OF THE 8 FEB 2001 CONVECTIVE SYSTEM ON THE UTLS AIR COMPOSITION V. Marécal 1, E. D. Rivière 1, G. Held 2, S.
Non-hydrostatic Numerical Model Study on Tropical Mesoscale System During SCOUT DARWIN Campaign Wuhu Feng 1 and M.P. Chipperfield 1 IAS, School of Earth.
R C Hudman, D J Jacob, S Turquety, L Murray, S Wu, Q Liang,A Gilliland, M Avery, T H Bertram, E Browell, W Brune, R C Cohen, J E Dibb, F M Flocke, J Holloway,
Estimating anthropogenic NOx emissions over the US using OMI satellite observations and WRF-Chem Anne Boynard Gabriele Pfister David Edwards AQAST June.
Pathways for North American Outflow - Hindcast for ICART 2 Qinbin Li, Daniel J. Jacob, Rokjin Park, Colette L. Heald, Yuxuan Wang, Rynda Hudman, Robert.
The effect of pyro-convective fires on the global troposphere: comparison of TOMCAT modelled fields with observations from ICARTT Sarah Monks Outline:
Ozone Lidar Observations for Air Quality Studies Lihua Wang 1, Mike Newchurch 1, Shi Kuang 1, John F. Burris 2, Guanyu Huang 3, Arastoo Pour-Biazar 1,
Comparison of CMAQ Lightning NOx Schemes and Their Impacts Youhua Tang 1,2, Li Pan 1,2, Pius Lee 1, Jeffery T. McQueen 4, Jianping Huang 4,5, Daniel Tong.
Impact of lightning-NO and radiatively- interactive ozone on air quality over CONUS, and their relative importance in WRF-Chem M a t u s M a r t i n i.
Methods for Incorporating Lightning NO x Emissions in CMAQ Ken Pickering – NASA GSFC, Greenbelt, MD Dale Allen – University of Maryland, College Park,
Ozone Production from Biomass Burning in the Amazon: Preliminary WRF-Chem Simulations and Comparison with In-Situ Data from the CO-CLAIM Experiment M.
Itsushi UNO*, Youjiang HE, Research Institute for Applied Mechanics, Kyushu University, Kasuga, Fukuoka, JAPAN Toshimasa OHARA, Jun-ichi KUROKAWA, Hiroshi.
Chemical forecast from NASA, U.Iowa & NCAR Arlindo DaSilva, NASA Goddard Pablo Saide, Greg Carmichael, U. Iowa Louisa Emmons, Mary Barth, Mijeong.
Modeling Elevated Upper Tropospheric Ozone Due To Deep Convection During the 2006 AEROSE II Cruise Jonathan W. Smith 1,2, Gregory S. Jenkins 1, Kenneth.
Model evolution of a START08 observed tropospheric intrusion Dalon Stone, Kenneth Bowman, Cameron Homeyer - Texas A&M Laura Pan, Simone Tilmes, Doug Kinnison.
Status of the Development of a Tropospheric Ozone Product from OMI Measurements Jack Fishman 1, Jerald R. Ziemke 2,3, Sushil Chandra 2,3, Amy E. Wozniak.
AMMA WP4.1.3 meeting at Service d'Aéronomie, Jussieu, Paris 2-3 July D modeling with Méso-NH over West Africa Marielle SAUNOIS, Céline MARI, Valérie.
The Deep Convective Clouds and Chemistry (DC3) Field Experiment Mary C. Barth (NCAR), W. H. Brune (PSU), C. A. Cantrell (U. Colorado), S. A. Rutledge (CSU),
Ray Nassar, Jennifer Logan, Lee Murray, Lin Zhang, Inna Megretskaia Harvard University COSPAR, Montreal, 2008 July Investigating Tropical Tropospheric.
Introduction North China, or Huabei region, located between 32°- 42°N latitude in eastern China, is one of the most severely polluted regions in China.
Influence of Lightning-produced NOx on upper tropospheric ozone Using TES/O3&CO, OMI/NO2&HCHO in CMAQ modeling study M. J. Newchurch 1, A. P. Biazar.
MOPITT and MOZART for Flight Planning and Analysis of INTEX-B Louisa Emmons Peter Hess, Avelino Arellano, Gabriele Pfister, Jean-François Lamarque, David.
Analysis of TES and MLS tropospheric data for ozone and CO in 2005 and 2006 using the GMI and GEOS-Chem global models. Jennifer A. Logan, Ray Nassar, Inna.
LNOx Influence on Upper Tropospheric Ozone Lihua Wang 1, Mike Newchurch 1, Arastoo Biazar 1, Williams Koshak 2, Xiong Liu 3 1 Univ. of Alabama in Huntsville,
M. Newchurch 1, A. Biazar 1, M. Khan 2, B. Koshak 3, U. Nair 1, K. Fuller 1, L. Wang 1, Y. Park 1, R. Williams 1, S. Christopher 1, J. Kim 4, X. Liu 5,6,
Analysis of Satellite Observations to Estimate Production of Nitrogen Oxides from Lightning Randall Martin Bastien Sauvage Ian Folkins Chris Sioris Chris.
The effect of pyro-convective fires on the global troposphere: comparison of TOMCAT modelled fields with observations from the International Consortium.
Forecasting Air quality in China Using CAMS Boundary Conditions: the PANDA Project Guy P. Brasseur and Idir Bouarar June 206.
Yuqiang Zhang1, Owen R, Cooper2,3, J. Jason West1
Literature Review: Impacts of background ozone production on Houston and Dallas, TX Air Quality during the TexAQS field mission R. Bradley Pierce (NOAA/NESDIS),
INTERCONTINENTAL TRANSPORT: CONCENTRATIONS AND FLUXES
LNOx Influence on Upper Tropospheric Ozone Mike Newchurch1, Lihua Wang1, Arastoo Biazar1, Williams Koshak2, Xiong Liu3 1Univ. of Alabama in Huntsville,
Jianyu Liang (York U.) Yongsheng Chen (York U.) Zhiquan Liu (NCAR)
1st TEMPO Applications Workshop
Atmospheric modelling of the Laki eruption
evaluation with MOPITT satellite observations for the summer 2004
16th Annual CMAS Conference
Charles University in Prague
Aura Science Team meeting
Impact of lightning-NO emissions on eastern United States photochemistry during the summer of 2004 as determined using the CMAQ model Dale Allen – University.
WEST AFRICAN MONSOON EXPERIMENT (WAM)
Nonlinear modulation of O3 and CO induced by mountain waves in the UTLS region during TREX Mohamed Moustaoui(1), Alex Mahalov(1), Hector Teitelbaum(2)
Diurnal Variation of Nitrogen Dioxide
American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting
INTEX-B flight tracks (April-May 2006)
Presentation transcript:

WRF-Chem Modeling of Enhanced Upper Tropospheric Ozone due to Deep Convection and Lightning During the 2006 AEROSE II Cruise Jo nathan W. Smith 1,2, Kenneth E. Pickering 2, Gregory S. Jenkins 1 1 Howard University Washington, DC and 2 Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), Greenbelt, Maryland Figure 1 - Ship track for the south and northbound legs of the AEROSE II Cruise along 23 W. (Nalli et al. 2006; Morris et al. 2006; Jenkins et al. 2008) WRF-CHEM MODEL PARAMETERSSPECIFICATIONS Start and End Time00 Z 20 May 2006 to 00 Z 01 July 2006 Resolution20 km Meteorology Initial/ Boundary Conditions6 hour interval GFS Final Analysis (1.0° x 1.0°) Chemistry Initial/Lateral Boundary Conditions6 hour interval MOZART-4 (Global Chemistry Model) Domain Top50 hPa # of Eta Levels28 Chemical MechanismCBM-Z MicrophysicsLin et al. (1983) CumulusNew Grell PhotolysisFast - J Wet-scavengingOn MODEL RUN AnthropogenicBiogenicFireAerosolLightning EMISSIONS SPECIFICATIONS RETRO/EDGAR – SO 2 MEGANGFED v2 – 8 Julian – day averages MOSAIC (4-bins)WWLLN Primarily CG Flashes corrected for total detection efficiency (DE) CONTROLYES NOYESNO BIOMASS BURNING YES NO LNOx + BIOMASS BURNING YES Obtain estimates of O 3 precursors (i.e. NO x and CO) resulting from biomass burning (bb) in Angola and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) as they propagate northward and are lofted to the upper troposphere (UT) by convection. Examine estimates of the transport of O 3 and its precursors from Central Africa to 23 W. Attain 1 st order estimates of changes in O 3 production when NO x emissions from lightning flashes are added to the system. Goals For bb source region of Africa: O 3 enhancement of 5 – 25 ppbv in both the LT and UT during June 2006 For 23 W: O 3 enhancement is primarily confined to the UT and indicates convective transport and subsequent westward transport of O 3 and its precursors. Percentage increases in UT O 3 are greater here than over source region b/c of photochemical production of ozone from NO x and CO during transport Percentage increases in CO in all tropospheric layers doubled between Leg I and Leg II of AEROSE II due to its long lifetime long-range horizontal transport and convective transport. Percentage increases in NO x and O 3 tripled in the LT between Leg I and Leg II of AEROSE II due to long-range horizontal transport. The observed UT O 3 enhancement is not accounted for with just bb. For LNO x : NO x parcel takes 1 – 6 days to travel to 23 W from lightning locations in Central West Africa at 200 hPa Its likely that LNO x emissions are a more abundant source of ozone at 23 W. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS Run WRF-Chem with: LNOx computed from adjusted WWLLN flashes on 20 km grid to examine how much NOx and subsequent UT O 3 is added to the system WWLLN flashes scaled up using a detection efficiency based on TRMM/LIS flashes specifically for June 2006 FUTURE WORK ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors thank Stacy Walters, Gabi Pfister, and Jeff Lee in Atmospheric Chemistry Division at the National Centers for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and Steve Peckham and Georg Grell of NOAA for help with WRF- Chem modeling. We are grateful to Zhining Tao of GSFC for his assistance with modeling procedures. Nick Nalli of NOAA provided the AEROSE II Cruise data. The WWLLN data is provided by the University of Washington. This study was funded by NSF ATM # and the GSFC Co-op Program. LIGHTNING AEROSE II – 11 June 2006 AEROSE II – 29 June 2006 CO (ppbv)NO x (pptv) O 3 (ppbv) BBControl% IncreaseBBControl% IncreaseBBControl% Increase UT % % % MT % % % LT % % % CO (ppbv)NO x (pptv)O 3 (ppbv) BBControl% IncreaseBBControl% IncreaseBBControl% Increase UT % % % MT % % % LT % % % CO (ppbv)NO x (pptv)O 3 (ppbv) BBControl% IncreaseBBControl% IncreaseBBControl% Increase UT % % % MT % % % LT % % % CO (ppbv)NO x (pptv)O 3 (ppbv) BBControl% IncreaseBBControl% IncreaseBBControl% Increase UT % % % MT % % % LT % % % Figure 17 - # of WWLLN Flashes and LNO x Emissions (mol hr -1 ) for 12.5 – 13.5 km height (~ 190 hPa) at 20 Z 8 June 2006 Figure 18 – Same as Fig. 17 but for 26 June 2006 Figure 3 – a) MODIS Aqua image from 1310 UTC 30 May 2006 over Angola, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Zambia. The red dots indicate fire locations b) WWLLN lightning flashes for 1 – 15 June2006 from 30 W to 30 E and 15 S to 15 N and c) is same as b but for 16 – 30 June. Table 3 - CO, NO x, O 3 mixing ratios at the source region for the biomass burning (bb) run, control run, and their percent increases averaged over 20.5 E – 25.5 E and 3 S to 2 N. Figure 2 – Ozonesonde mixing ratio (ppbv) vertical profiles from the AEROSE II Cruise where a) is taken at 11 June 2006 at 1346 UTC and b) is taken on 29 June 2006 at 0234 UTC. Table 2 – WRF-Chem model emission specifications and types of runs. Figure 4 – WRF-Chem model domain – 30 W to 30 E and 15 S to 15 N Table 1 – WRF-Chem model specifications Table 5 – Same as Table 3 but percent increases are averaged over 20.5 W – 25.5 W and the Equator to 5 N. This region is considered the source region. Table 4 – Same as Table 3 but percent increases averaged over 20.5 – 25.5 W and the Equator to 5 N. This region is considered the 23 W ozonesonde region. Table 6 – Same as Table 4 but averages are over 23 – 29 June Figure 10 – Ozonesonde mixing ratio vertical profiles from the AEROSE II Cruise where the solid line is the observation for 11 June 2006 at 1346 UTC. The dashed line is the WRF- Chem control run vertical profile and the dotted line is the WRF-Chem bb run profile. Figure 16 – Same as Fig. 10 but for 11 June 2006 at 1346 UTC. Figure 5 – Huvmoller diagram of difference in WRF- Chem bb and control run O 3 (ppbv). The black contours overlayed are NO x (pptv). Both are average values for 5 – 11 June Figure 6 - Same as Fig. 5 but black contours overlayed are CO (ppbv). Figure 12 - Same as Fig. 5 but black contours overlayed are CO (ppbv). Figure 7 – WRF-Chem bb and control difference in CO (ppbv) and European Center for Medium Range Weather Forecasting (ECMWF) Streamlines at 200 hPa. Figure 8 – Same as Fig. 7 but for O 3 (ppbv). Figure 11 - Same as Fig. 5 but for averages are for 23 – 29 June Figure 9 – Same as Fig. 7 but for NO x (pptv). Figure 15 – Same as Fig. 7 but for NO x (pptv) for June Figure 14 – Same as Fig. 7 but for O 3 (ppbv) for 23 – 29 June Figure 13 – Same as Fig. 7 but for CO (ppbv) for 23 – 29 June MOTIVATION WRF-Chem Modeling