Search for: All records

Abstract. We present in this technical note the research protocol for phase 4 of theAir Quality Model Evaluation International Initiative (AQMEII4). Thisresearch initiative is divided into two activities, collectively having threegoals: (i) to define the current state of the science with respect torepresentations of wet and especially dry deposition in regional models,(ii) to quantify the extent to which different dry depositionparameterizations influence retrospective air pollutant concentration andflux predictions, and (iii) to identify, through the use of a common set ofdetailed diagnostics, sensitivity simulations, model evaluation, andreduction of input uncertainty, the specific causes for the current range ofthese predictions. Activity 1 is dedicated to the diagnostic evaluation ofwet and dry deposition processes in regional air quality models (describedin this paper), and Activity 2 to the evaluation of dry deposition pointmodels against ozone flux measurements at multiple towers with multiyearobservations (to be described in future submissions as part of the specialissue on AQMEII4). The scope of this paper is to present the scientificprotocols for Activity 1, as well as to summarize the technical informationassociated with the different dry deposition approaches used by theparticipating research groups of AQMEII4. In addition to describing allcommon aspects and data used for this multi-model evaluation activity, mostimportantly, we present the strategy devised to allow a common process-levelcomparison of dry deposition obtained from models using sometimes verydifferent dry deposition schemes. The strategy is based on adding detaileddiagnostics to the algorithms used in the dry deposition modules of existingregional air quality models, in particular archiving diagnostics specific to land use–land cover(LULC) and creating standardized LULC categories tofacilitate cross-comparison of LULC-specific dry deposition parameters andprocesses, as well as archiving effective conductance and effective flux asmeans for comparing the relative influence of different pathways towards thenet or total dry deposition. This new approach, along with an analysis ofprecipitation and wet deposition fields, will provide an unprecedentedprocess-oriented comparison of deposition in regional air quality models.Examples of how specific dry deposition schemes used in participating modelshave been reduced to the common set of comparable diagnostics defined forAQMEII4 are also presented. 

Abstract. Smoke from wildfires is a significant source of air pollution, which can adversely impact air quality and ecosystems downwind. With the recently increasing intensity and severity of wildfires, the threat to air quality is expected to increase. Satellite-derived biomass burning emissions can fill in gaps in the absence of aircraft or ground-based measurement campaigns and can help improve the online calculation of biomass burning emissions as well as the biomass burning emissions inventories that feed air quality models. This study focuses on satellite-derived NOx emissions using the high-spatial-resolution TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI) NO2 dataset. Advancements and improvements to the satellite-based determination of forest fire NOx emissions are discussed, including information on plume height and effects of aerosol scattering and absorption on the satellite-retrieved vertical column densities. Two common top-down emission estimation methods, (1) an exponentially modified Gaussian (EMG) and (2) a flux method, are applied to synthetic data to determine the accuracy and the sensitivity to different parameters, including wind fields, satellite sampling, noise, lifetime, and plume spread. These tests show that emissions can be accurately estimated from single TROPOMI overpasses.The effect of smoke aerosols on TROPOMI NO2 columns (via air mass factors, AMFs) is estimated, and these satellite columns and emission estimates are compared to aircraft observations from four different aircraft campaigns measuring biomass burning plumes in 2018 and 2019 in North America. Our results indicate that applying an explicit aerosol correction to the TROPOMI NO2 columns improves the agreement with the aircraft observations (by about 10 %–25 %). The aircraft- and satellite-derived emissions are in good agreement within the uncertainties. Both top-down emissions methods work well; however, the EMG method seems to output more consistent results and has better agreement with the aircraft-derived emissions. Assuming a Gaussian plume shape for various biomass burning plumes, we estimate an average NOx e-folding time of 2 ±1 h from TROPOMI observations. Based on chemistry transport model simulations and aircraft observations, the net emissions of NOx are 1.3 to 1.5 times greater than the satellite-derived NO2 emissions. A correction factor of 1.3 to 1.5 should thus be used to infer net NOx emissions from the satellite retrievals of NO2. 

Abstract. Wildfire smoke is one of the most significant concerns ofhuman and environmental health, associated with its substantial impacts onair quality, weather, and climate. However, biomass burning emissions andsmoke remain among the largest sources of uncertainties in air qualityforecasts. In this study, we evaluate the smoke emissions and plumeforecasts from 12 state-of-the-art air quality forecasting systemsduring the Williams Flats fire in Washington State, US, August 2019, whichwas intensively observed during the Fire Influence on Regional to GlobalEnvironments and Air Quality (FIREX-AQ) field campaign. Model forecasts withlead times within 1 d are intercompared under the same framework basedon observations from multiple platforms to reveal their performanceregarding fire emissions, aerosol optical depth (AOD), surface PM2.5,plume injection, and surface PM2.5 to AOD ratio. The comparison ofsmoke organic carbon (OC) emissions suggests a large range of daily totalsamong the models, with a factor of 20 to 50. Limited representations of thediurnal patterns and day-to-day variations of emissions highlight the needto incorporate new methodologies to predict the temporal evolution andreduce uncertainty of smoke emission estimates. The evaluation of smoke AOD(sAOD) forecasts suggests overall underpredictions in both the magnitude andsmoke plume area for nearly all models, although the high-resolution modelshave a better representation of the fine-scale structures of smoke plumes.The models driven by fire radiativepower (FRP)-based fire emissions or assimilating satellite AODdata generally outperform the others. Additionally, limitations of thepersistence assumption used when predicting smoke emissions are revealed bysubstantial underpredictions of sAOD on 8 August 2019, mainly over thetransported smoke plumes, owing to the underestimated emissions on7 August. In contrast, the surface smoke PM2.5 (sPM2.5) forecastsshow both positive and negative overall biases for these models, with mostmembers presenting more considerable diurnal variations of sPM2.5.Overpredictions of sPM2.5 are found for the models driven by FRP-basedemissions during nighttime, suggesting the necessity to improve verticalemission allocation within and above the planetary boundary layer (PBL).Smoke injection heights are further evaluated using the NASA LangleyResearch Center's Differential Absorption High Spectral Resolution Lidar(DIAL-HSRL) data collected during the flight observations. As the firebecame stronger over 3–8 August, the plume height became deeper, with aday-to-day range of about 2–9 km a.g.l. However, narrower ranges arefound for all models, with a tendency of overpredicting the plume heights forthe shallower injection transects and underpredicting for the days showingdeeper injections. The misrepresented plume injection heights lead toinaccurate vertical plume allocations along the transects corresponding totransported smoke that is 1 d old. Discrepancies in model performance forsurface PM2.5 and AOD are further suggested by the evaluation of theirratio, which cannot be compensated for by solely adjusting the smoke emissionsbut are more attributable to model representations of plume injections,besides other possible factors including the evolution of PBL depths andaerosol optical property assumptions. By consolidating multiple forecastsystems, these results provide strategic insight on pathways to improvesmoke forecasts.