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
NAQPMS-PDAF v2.0: a novel hybrid nonlinear data assimilation system for improved simulation of PM2.5 chemical components
Hongyi Li, Ting Yang, Lars Nerger, Dawei Zhang, Di Zhang, Guigang Tang, Haibo Wang, Yele Sun, Pingqing Fu, Hang Su, and Zifa Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8495–8519, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8495-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8495-2024, 2024
Short summary
Source-specific bias correction of US background and anthropogenic ozone modeled in CMAQ
T. Nash Skipper, Christian Hogrefe, Barron H. Henderson, Rohit Mathur, Kristen M. Foley, and Armistead G. Russell
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8373–8397, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8373-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8373-2024, 2024
Short summary
Observational operator for fair model evaluation with ground NO2 measurements
Li Fang, Jianbing Jin, Arjo Segers, Ke Li, Ji Xia, Wei Han, Baojie Li, Hai Xiang Lin, Lei Zhu, Song Liu, and Hong Liao
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8267–8282, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8267-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8267-2024, 2024
Short summary
Valid time shifting ensemble Kalman filter (VTS-EnKF) for dust storm forecasting
Mijie Pang, Jianbing Jin, Arjo Segers, Huiya Jiang, Wei Han, Batjargal Buyantogtokh, Ji Xia, Li Fang, Jiandong Li, Hai Xiang Lin, and Hong Liao
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8223–8242, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8223-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8223-2024, 2024
Short summary
An updated parameterization of the unstable atmospheric surface layer in the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) modeling system
Prabhakar Namdev, Maithili Sharan, Piyush Srivastava, and Saroj Kanta Mishra
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8093–8114, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8093-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8093-2024, 2024
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.