Articles | Volume 14, issue 11
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7021-2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7021-2021
Model evaluation paper
 | 
18 Nov 2021
Model evaluation paper |  | 18 Nov 2021

Evaluation of global EMEP MSC-W (rv4.34) WRF (v3.9.1.1) model surface concentrations and wet deposition of reactive N and S with measurements

Yao Ge, Mathew R. Heal, David S. Stevenson, Peter Wind, and Massimo Vieno

Related authors

Evaluation of modelled versus observed non-methane volatile organic compounds at European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme sites in Europe
Yao Ge, Sverre Solberg, Mathew R. Heal, Stefan Reimann, Willem van Caspel, Bryan Hellack, Thérèse Salameh, and David Simpson
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 7699–7729, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7699-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7699-2024, 2024
Short summary
Implementation and evaluation of updated photolysis rates in the EMEP MSC-W chemistry-transport model using Cloud-J v7.3e
Willem E. van Caspel, David Simpson, Jan Eiof Jonson, Anna M. K. Benedictow, Yao Ge, Alcide di Sarra, Giandomenico Pace, Massimo Vieno, Hannah L. Walker, and Mathew R. Heal
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 7433–7459, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7433-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7433-2023, 2023
Short summary
Global sensitivities of reactive N and S gas and particle concentrations and deposition to precursor emissions reductions
Yao Ge, Massimo Vieno, David S. Stevenson, Peter Wind, and Mathew R. Heal
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 6083–6112, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-6083-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-6083-2023, 2023
Short summary
A new assessment of global and regional budgets, fluxes, and lifetimes of atmospheric reactive N and S gases and aerosols
Yao Ge, Massimo Vieno, David S. Stevenson, Peter Wind, and Mathew R. Heal
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 8343–8368, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-8343-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-8343-2022, 2022
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
Exploring a high-level programming model for the NWP domain using ECMWF microphysics schemes
Stefano Ubbiali, Christian Kühnlein, Christoph Schär, Linda Schlemmer, Thomas C. Schulthess, Michael Staneker, and Heini Wernli
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 529–546, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-529-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-529-2025, 2025
Short summary
Quantifying uncertainties in satellite NO2 superobservations for data assimilation and model evaluation
Pieter Rijsdijk, Henk Eskes, Arlene Dingemans, K. Folkert Boersma, Takashi Sekiya, Kazuyuki Miyazaki, and Sander Houweling
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 483–509, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-483-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-483-2025, 2025
Short summary
ML-AMPSIT: Machine Learning-based Automated Multi-method Parameter Sensitivity and Importance analysis Tool
Dario Di Santo, Cenlin He, Fei Chen, and Lorenzo Giovannini
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 433–459, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-433-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-433-2025, 2025
Short summary
Coupling the urban canopy model TEB (SURFEXv9.0) with the radiation model SPARTACUS-Urbanv0.6.1 for more realistic urban radiative exchange calculation
Robert Schoetter, Robin James Hogan, Cyril Caliot, and Valéry Masson
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 405–431, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-405-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-405-2025, 2025
Short summary
Forecasting contrail climate forcing for flight planning and air traffic management applications: the CocipGrid model in pycontrails 0.51.0
Zebediah Engberg, Roger Teoh, Tristan Abbott, Thomas Dean, Marc E. J. Stettler, and Marc L. Shapiro
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 253–286, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-253-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-253-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Adams, P. J., Seinfeld, J. H., and Koch, D. M.: Global concentrations of tropospheric sulfate, nitrate, and ammonium aerosol simulated in a general circulation model, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 104, 13791–13823, https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD900083, 1999. 
Aleksankina, K., Reis, S., Vieno, M., and Heal, M. R.: Advanced methods for uncertainty assessment and global sensitivity analysis of an Eulerian atmospheric chemistry transport model, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 2881–2898, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-2881-2019, 2019. 
Bellouin, N., Rae, J., Jones, A., Johnson, C., Haywood, J., and Boucher, O.: Aerosol forcing in the Climate Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) simulations by HadGEM2-ES and the role of ammonium nitrate, J. Geophys. Res., 116, D20206, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016074, 2011. 
Bergström, R., Hallquist, M., Simpson, D., Wildt, J., and Mentel, T. F.: Biotic stress: a significant contributor to organic aerosol in Europe?, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 13643–13660, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-13643-2014, 2014. 
Bergström, R., Jenkin, M., Hayman, G., and Simpson, D.: Update and comparison of atmospheric chemistry mechanisms for the EMEP MSC-W model system – EmChem19a, EmChem19X, CRIv2R5Em, CB6r2Em, and MCMv3.3Em, in preparation, 2021. 
Download
Short summary
This study reports the first evaluation of the global EMEP MSC-W ACTM driven by WRF meteorology, with a focus on surface concentrations and wet deposition of reactive N and S species. The model–measurement comparison is conducted both spatially and temporally, covering 10 monitoring networks worldwide. The statistics from the comprehensive evaluations presented in this study support the application of this model framework for global analysis of the budgets and fluxes of reactive N and SIA.