Articles | Volume 15, issue 12
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4657-2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4657-2022
Model evaluation paper
 | 
17 Jun 2022
Model evaluation paper |  | 17 Jun 2022

Regional evaluation of the performance of the global CAMS chemical modeling system over the United States (IFS cycle 47r1)

Jason E.​​​​​​​ Williams, Vincent Huijnen, Idir Bouarar, Mehdi Meziane, Timo Schreurs, Sophie Pelletier, Virginie Marécal, Beatrice Josse, and Johannes Flemming

Related authors

Modelling stratospheric composition for the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service: multi-species evaluation of IFS-COMPO Cy49R1
Simon Chabrillat, Samuel Rémy, Quentin Errera, Vincent Huijnen, Christine Bingen, Jonas Debosscher, François Hendrick, Swen Metzger, Adrien Mora, Daniele Minganti, Marc Op de beek, Léa Reisenfeld, Jason E. Williams, Henk Eskes, and Johannes Flemming
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1327,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1327, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
SO2 emissions derived from TROPOMI observations over India using a flux-divergence method with variable lifetimes
Yutao Chen, Ronald J. van der A, Jieying Ding, Henk Eskes, Jason E. Williams, Nicolas Theys, Athanasios Tsikerdekis, and Pieternel F. Levelt
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 1851–1868, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1851-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1851-2025, 2025
Short summary
An evaluation of the regional distribution and wet deposition of secondary inorganic aerosols and their gaseous precursors in IFS-COMPO cycle 49R1
Jason Williams, Swen Metzer, Samuel Remy, Vincent Huijnen, and Johannes Flemming
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-188,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-188, 2024
Revised manuscript under review for GMD
Short summary
An improved representation of aerosol in the ECMWF IFS-COMPO 49R1 through the integration of EQSAM4Climv12 – a first attempt at simulating aerosol acidity
Samuel Rémy, Swen Metzger, Vincent Huijnen, Jason E. Williams, and Johannes Flemming
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7539–7567, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7539-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7539-2024, 2024
Short summary
A computationally efficient parameterization of aerosol, cloud and precipitation pH for application at global and regional scale (EQSAM4Clim-v12)
Swen Metzger, Samuel Rémy, Jason E. Williams, Vincent Huijnen, and Johannes Flemming
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 5009–5021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5009-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5009-2024, 2024
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
Knowledge-inspired fusion strategies for the inference of PM2.5 values with a neural network
Matthieu Dabrowski, José Mennesson, Jérôme Riedi, Chaabane Djeraba, and Pierre Nabat
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3707–3733, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3707-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3707-2025, 2025
Short summary
Tuning the ICON-A 2.6.4 climate model with machine-learning-based emulators and history matching
Pauline Bonnet, Lorenzo Pastori, Mierk Schwabe, Marco Giorgetta, Fernando Iglesias-Suarez, and Veronika Eyring
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3681–3706, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3681-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3681-2025, 2025
Short summary
A novel method for quantifying the contribution of regional transport to PM2.5 in Beijing (2013–2020): combining machine learning with concentration-weighted trajectory analysis
Kang Hu, Hong Liao, Dantong Liu, Jianbing Jin, Lei Chen, Siyuan Li, Yangzhou Wu, Changhao Wu, Shitong Zhao, Xiaotong Jiang, Ping Tian, Kai Bi, Ye Wang, and Delong Zhao
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3623–3634, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3623-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3623-2025, 2025
Short summary
Quantification of CO2 hotspot emissions from OCO-3 SAM CO2 satellite images using deep learning methods
Joffrey Dumont Le Brazidec, Pierre Vanderbecken, Alban Farchi, Grégoire Broquet, Gerrit Kuhlmann, and Marc Bocquet
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3607–3622, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3607-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3607-2025, 2025
Short summary
Diagnosis of winter precipitation types using the spectral bin model (version 1DSBM-19M): comparison of five methods using ICE-POP 2018 field experiment data
Wonbae Bang, Jacob T. Carlin, Kwonil Kim, Alexander V. Ryzhkov, Guosheng Liu, and GyuWon Lee
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3559–3581, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3559-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3559-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Atkinson, R., Baulch, D. L., Cox, R. A., Crowley, J. N., Hampson, R. F., Hynes, R. G., Jenkin, M. E., Rossi, M. J., and Troe, J.: Evaluated kinetic and photochemical data for atmospheric chemistry: Volume I – gas phase reactions of Ox, HOx, NOx and SOx species, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 4, 1461–1738, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-4-1461-2004, 2004. 
Atkinson, R., Baulch, D. L., Cox, R. A., Crowley, J. N., Hampson, R. F., Hynes, R. G., Jenkin, M. E., Rossi, M. J., Troe, J., and IUPAC Subcommittee: Evaluated kinetic and photochemical data for atmospheric chemistry: Volume II – gas phase reactions of organic species, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 3625–4055, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-3625-2006, 2006. 
Benedetti, A., Morcrette, J.-J., Boucher, O., Dethof, A., Engelen, R. J., Fisher, M., Flentje, H., Huneeus, N., Jones, L., Kaiser, J. W., Kinne, S., Mangold, A., Razinger, M., Simmons, A. J., and Suttie, M.: Aerosol analysis and forecast in the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Integrated Forecast System: 2. Data assimilation, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D13205, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD011115, 2009. 
Blunden, J. and Arndt, D. S. (Eds.): State of the Climate in 2014, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 96, S1–S267, 2015. 
Brown, S. S., Dube, W. P., Fuchs, H., Ryerson, T. B., Wollny, A. G., Brock, C. A, Bahreini, R. Middlebrook, A. M., Neuman, J. A., Atlas, E., Roberts, J. M., Osthoff, H. D., Trainer, M., Fehsenfeld, F. C., and Ravishankara, A. R.: Reactive uptake coefficients for N2O5 determined from aircraft measurements during the Second Texas Air Quality Study: Comparison to current model parameterizations, J. Geophys. Res, 114, D00F10, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD011679, 2009. 
Download
Short summary
The global CAMS air quality model is used for providing tropospheric ozone information to end users. This paper updates the chemical mechanism employed (CBA) and compares it against two other mechanisms (MOCAGE, MOZART) and a multi-decadal dataset based on a previous version of CBA. We perform extensive validation for the US using multiple surface and aircraft datasets, providing an assessment of biases and the extent of correlation across different seasons during 2014.
Share