Articles | Volume 15, issue 13
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5337-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5337-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Model description paper
| 
13 Jul 2022
Model description paper |
| 13 Jul 2022
| 13 Jul 2022
Development and evaluation of the Aerosol Forecast Member in the National Center for Environment Prediction (NCEP)'s Global Ensemble Forecast System (GEFS-Aerosols v1)
CIRES, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA
Global Systems Laboratory, Earth System Research Laboratories, NOAA, Boulder, CO, USA
Raffaele Montuoro
CIRES, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA
Global Systems Laboratory, Earth System Research Laboratories, NOAA, Boulder, CO, USA
Environmental Modeling Center, National Weather Service, College Park, MD, USA
Stuart A. McKeen
CIRES, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA
Chemical Sciences Laboratory, Earth System Research Laboratories, NOAA, Boulder, CO, USA
Barry Baker
NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, College Park, MD, USA
Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA
Partha S. Bhattacharjee
I.M. Systems Group at NCEP/NWS/EMC, College Park, MD, USA
Georg A. Grell
Global Systems Laboratory, Earth System Research Laboratories, NOAA, Boulder, CO, USA
Judy Henderson
Global Systems Laboratory, Earth System Research Laboratories, NOAA, Boulder, CO, USA
I.M. Systems Group at NCEP/NWS/EMC, College Park, MD, USA
Gregory J. Frost
Chemical Sciences Laboratory, Earth System Research Laboratories, NOAA, Boulder, CO, USA
Jeff McQueen
Environmental Modeling Center, National Weather Service, College Park, MD, USA
Rick Saylor
NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, USA
Haiqin Li
CIRES, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA
Global Systems Laboratory, Earth System Research Laboratories, NOAA, Boulder, CO, USA
Ravan Ahmadov
CIRES, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA
Global Systems Laboratory, Earth System Research Laboratories, NOAA, Boulder, CO, USA
Jun Wang
Environmental Modeling Center, National Weather Service, College Park, MD, USA
Ivanka Stajner
Environmental Modeling Center, National Weather Service, College Park, MD, USA
Shobha Kondragunta
NOAA/NESDIS Center for Satellite Applications and Research, College Park, MD, USA
Xiaoyang Zhang
Geospatial Science Center of Excellence, Department of Geography & Geospatial Sciences, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA
Fangjun Li
Geospatial Science Center of Excellence, Department of Geography & Geospatial Sciences, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA
Related authors
Haiqin Li, Georg A. Grell, Ravan Ahmadov, Li Zhang, Shan Sun, Jordan Schnell, and Ning Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 607–619, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-607-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-607-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We developed a simple and realistic method to provide aerosol emissions for aerosol-aware microphysics in a numerical weather forecast model. The cloud-radiation differences between the experimental (EXP) and control (CTL) experiments responded to the aerosol differences. The strong positive precipitation biases over North America and Europe from the CTL run were significantly reduced in the EXP run. This study shows that a realistic representation of aerosol emissions should be considered.
Li Pan, Partha S. Bhattacharjee, Li Zhang, Raffaele Montuoro, Barry Baker, Jeff McQueen, Georg A. Grell, Stuart A. McKeen, Shobha Kondragunta, Xiaoyang Zhang, Gregory J. Frost, Fanglin Yang, and Ivanka Stajner
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 431–447, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-431-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-431-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
A GEFS-Aerosols simulation was conducted from 1 September 2019 to 30 September 2020 to evaluate the model performance of GEFS-Aerosols. The purpose of this study was to understand how aerosol chemical and physical processes affect ambient aerosol concentrations by placing aerosol wet deposition, dry deposition, reactions, gravitational deposition, and emissions into the aerosol mass balance equation.
Li Zhang, Georg A. Grell, Stuart A. McKeen, Ravan Ahmadov, Karl D. Froyd, and Daniel Murphy
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 467–491, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-467-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-467-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Applying the chemistry package from WRF-Chem into the Flow-following finite-volume Icosahedra Model, we essentially make it possible to explore the importance of different levels of complexity in gas and aerosol chemistry, as well as in physics parameterizations, for the interaction processes in global modeling systems. The model performance validated by the Atmospheric Tomography Mission aircraft measurements in summer 2016 shows good performance in capturing the aerosol and gas-phase tracers.
Christopher D. Holmes, Joshua P. Schwarz, Charles H. Fite, Anxhelo Agastra, Holly K. Nowell, Katherine Ball, T. Paul Bui, Johnathan Dean-Day, Zachary C. J. Decker, Joshua P. DiGagni, Glenn S. Diskin, Emily M. Gargulinski, Hannah Halliday, Shobha Kondragunta, John B. Nowak, David A. Peterson, Michael A. Robinson, Amber J. Soja, Rebecca A. Washenfelder, Chuanyu Xu, and Robert J. Yokelson
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-307, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-307, 2025
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
Smoke age is an important factor in the chemical and physical evolution of smoke. Two methods for determining the age of smoke are applied to the NASA-NOAA FIREX-AQ field campaign: one based on wind speed and distance, and another using an ensemble of modeled air parcel trajectories. Both methods are evaluated, with the trajectory method, which includes plume rise and uncertainty estimates, proving more accurate.
Chi-Tsan Wang, Patrick C. Campbell, Paul Makar, Siqi Ma, Irena Ivanova, Bok H. Baek, Wei-Ting Hung, Zachary Moon, Youhua Tang, Barry Baker, Rick Saylor, and Daniel Tong
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-485, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-485, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Forests influence air quality by altering ozone levels, but most air pollution models overlook canopy effects. Our study improves ozone predictions by incorporating forest canopy shading and turbulence into a widely used model. We found that tree cover reduces near-surface ozone by decreasing photolysis rates and diffusion inside canopy, resulting in lower ozone concentrations in densely forested areas. These findings enhance ozone surface prediction accuracy and improve air quality modeling.
Daniel L. Goldberg, M. Omar Nawaz, Congmeng Lyu, Jian He, Annmarie G. Carlton, Shobha Kondragunta, and Susan C. Anenberg
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1350, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1350, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This research investigates how air quality, specifically NO2 concentrations, is different under clear and cloudy skies. We find that in situ surface NO2 is, on average, +36 % larger during cloudy days versus clear sky days, with a wide distribution based on geographic region and roadway proximity: largest in the Northeast U.S. and smallest in the Southwest U.S. and near major roadways. This has implications for satellite data applications, which only use measurements in the absence of clouds.
Sina Voshtani, Dylan B. A. Jones, Debra Wunch, Drew C. Pendergrass, Paul O. Wennberg, David F. Pollard, Isamu Morino, Hirofumi Ohyama, Nicholas M. Deutscher, Frank Hase, Ralf Sussmann, Damien Weidmann, Rigel Kivi, Omaira García, Yao Té, Jack Chen, Kerry Anderson, Robin Stevens, Shobha Kondragunta, Aihua Zhu, Douglas Worthy, Senen Racki, Kathryn McKain, Maria V. Makarova, Nicholas Jones, Emmanuel Mahieu, Andrea Cadena-Caicedo, Paolo Cristofanelli, Casper Labuschagne, Elena Kozlova, Thomas Seitz, Martin Steinbacher, Reza Mahdi, and Isao Murata
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-858, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-858, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We assess the complementarity of the greater temporal coverage provided by ground-based remote sensing data with the spatial coverage of satellite observations when these data are used together to quantify CO emissions from extreme wildfires in 2023. Our results reveal that the commonly used biomass burning emission inventories significantly underestimate the fire emissions and emphasize the importance of the ground-based remote sensing data in reducing uncertainties in the estimated emissions.
Wei Li, Beiming Tang, Patrick C. Campbell, Youhua Tang, Barry Baker, Zachary Moon, Daniel Tong, Jianping Huang, Kai Wang, Ivanka Stajner, and Raffaele Montuoro
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1635–1660, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1635-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1635-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The study describes the updates of NOAA's current UFS-AQMv7 air quality forecast model by incorporating the latest scientific and structural changes in CMAQv5.4. An evaluation during the summer of 2023 shows that the updated model overall improves the simulation of MDA8 O3 by reducing the bias by 8%–12% in the contiguous US. PM2.5 predictions have mixed results due to wildfire, highlighting the need for future refinements.
Audrey Gaudel, Ilann Bourgeois, Meng Li, Kai-Lan Chang, Jerald Ziemke, Bastien Sauvage, Ryan M. Stauffer, Anne M. Thompson, Debra E. Kollonige, Nadia Smith, Daan Hubert, Arno Keppens, Juan Cuesta, Klaus-Peter Heue, Pepijn Veefkind, Kenneth Aikin, Jeff Peischl, Chelsea R. Thompson, Thomas B. Ryerson, Gregory J. Frost, Brian C. McDonald, and Owen R. Cooper
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 9975–10000, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-9975-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-9975-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The study examines tropical tropospheric ozone changes. In situ data from 1994–2019 display increased ozone, notably over India, Southeast Asia, and Malaysia and Indonesia. Sparse in situ data limit trend detection for the 15-year period. In situ and satellite data, with limited sampling, struggle to consistently detect trends. Continuous observations are vital over the tropical Pacific Ocean, Indian Ocean, western Africa, and South Asia for accurate ozone trend estimation in these regions.
Qindan Zhu, Rebecca H. Schwantes, Matthew Coggon, Colin Harkins, Jordan Schnell, Jian He, Havala O. T. Pye, Meng Li, Barry Baker, Zachary Moon, Ravan Ahmadov, Eva Y. Pfannerstill, Bryan Place, Paul Wooldridge, Benjamin C. Schulze, Caleb Arata, Anthony Bucholtz, John H. Seinfeld, Carsten Warneke, Chelsea E. Stockwell, Lu Xu, Kristen Zuraski, Michael A. Robinson, J. Andrew Neuman, Patrick R. Veres, Jeff Peischl, Steven S. Brown, Allen H. Goldstein, Ronald C. Cohen, and Brian C. McDonald
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 5265–5286, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-5265-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-5265-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) fuel the production of air pollutants like ozone and particulate matter. The representation of VOC chemistry remains challenging due to its complexity in speciation and reactions. Here, we develop a chemical mechanism, RACM2B-VCP, that better represents VOC chemistry in urban areas such as Los Angeles. We also discuss the contribution of VOCs emitted from volatile chemical products and other anthropogenic sources to total VOC reactivity and O3.
Haiqin Li, Georg A. Grell, Ravan Ahmadov, Li Zhang, Shan Sun, Jordan Schnell, and Ning Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 607–619, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-607-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-607-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We developed a simple and realistic method to provide aerosol emissions for aerosol-aware microphysics in a numerical weather forecast model. The cloud-radiation differences between the experimental (EXP) and control (CTL) experiments responded to the aerosol differences. The strong positive precipitation biases over North America and Europe from the CTL run were significantly reduced in the EXP run. This study shows that a realistic representation of aerosol emissions should be considered.
Li Pan, Partha S. Bhattacharjee, Li Zhang, Raffaele Montuoro, Barry Baker, Jeff McQueen, Georg A. Grell, Stuart A. McKeen, Shobha Kondragunta, Xiaoyang Zhang, Gregory J. Frost, Fanglin Yang, and Ivanka Stajner
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 431–447, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-431-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-431-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
A GEFS-Aerosols simulation was conducted from 1 September 2019 to 30 September 2020 to evaluate the model performance of GEFS-Aerosols. The purpose of this study was to understand how aerosol chemical and physical processes affect ambient aerosol concentrations by placing aerosol wet deposition, dry deposition, reactions, gravitational deposition, and emissions into the aerosol mass balance equation.
Yunyao Li, Daniel Tong, Siqi Ma, Saulo R. Freitas, Ravan Ahmadov, Mikhail Sofiev, Xiaoyang Zhang, Shobha Kondragunta, Ralph Kahn, Youhua Tang, Barry Baker, Patrick Campbell, Rick Saylor, Georg Grell, and Fangjun Li
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 3083–3101, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-3083-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-3083-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Plume height is important in wildfire smoke dispersion and affects air quality and human health. We assess the impact of plume height on wildfire smoke dispersion and the exceedances of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. A higher plume height predicts lower pollution near the source region, but higher pollution in downwind regions, due to the faster spread of the smoke once ejected, affects pollution exceedance forecasts and the early warning of extreme air pollution events.
Sebastien Garrigues, Samuel Remy, Julien Chimot, Melanie Ades, Antje Inness, Johannes Flemming, Zak Kipling, Istvan Laszlo, Angela Benedetti, Roberto Ribas, Soheila Jafariserajehlou, Bertrand Fougnie, Shobha Kondragunta, Richard Engelen, Vincent-Henri Peuch, Mark Parrington, Nicolas Bousserez, Margarita Vazquez Navarro, and Anna Agusti-Panareda
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 14657–14692, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-14657-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-14657-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (CAMS) provides global monitoring of aerosols using the ECMWF forecast model constrained by the assimilation of satellite aerosol optical depth (AOD). This work aims at evaluating two new satellite AODs to enhance the CAMS aerosol global forecast. It highlights the spatial and temporal differences between the satellite AOD products at the model spatial resolution, which is essential information to design multi-satellite AOD data assimilation schemes.
Youhua Tang, Patrick C. Campbell, Pius Lee, Rick Saylor, Fanglin Yang, Barry Baker, Daniel Tong, Ariel Stein, Jianping Huang, Ho-Chun Huang, Li Pan, Jeff McQueen, Ivanka Stajner, Jose Tirado-Delgado, Youngsun Jung, Melissa Yang, Ilann Bourgeois, Jeff Peischl, Tom Ryerson, Donald Blake, Joshua Schwarz, Jose-Luis Jimenez, James Crawford, Glenn Diskin, Richard Moore, Johnathan Hair, Greg Huey, Andrew Rollins, Jack Dibb, and Xiaoyang Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 7977–7999, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-7977-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-7977-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper compares two meteorological datasets for driving a regional air quality model: a regional meteorological model using WRF (WRF-CMAQ) and direct interpolation from an operational global model (GFS-CMAQ). In the comparison with surface measurements and aircraft data in summer 2019, these two methods show mixed performance depending on the corresponding meteorological settings. Direct interpolation is found to be a viable method to drive air quality models.
Aditya Kumar, R. Bradley Pierce, Ravan Ahmadov, Gabriel Pereira, Saulo Freitas, Georg Grell, Chris Schmidt, Allen Lenzen, Joshua P. Schwarz, Anne E. Perring, Joseph M. Katich, John Hair, Jose L. Jimenez, Pedro Campuzano-Jost, and Hongyu Guo
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 10195–10219, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-10195-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-10195-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We use the WRF-Chem model with new implementations of GOES-16 wildfire emissions and plume rise based on fire radiative power (FRP) to interpret aerosol observations during the 2019 NASA–NOAA FIREX-AQ field campaign and perform model evaluations. The model shows significant improvements in simulating the variety of aerosol loading environments sampled during FIREX-AQ. Our results also highlight the importance of accurate wildfire diurnal cycle and aerosol chemical mechanisms in models.
Patrick C. Campbell, Youhua Tang, Pius Lee, Barry Baker, Daniel Tong, Rick Saylor, Ariel Stein, Jianping Huang, Ho-Chun Huang, Edward Strobach, Jeff McQueen, Li Pan, Ivanka Stajner, Jamese Sims, Jose Tirado-Delgado, Youngsun Jung, Fanglin Yang, Tanya L. Spero, and Robert C. Gilliam
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 3281–3313, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3281-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3281-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
NOAA's National Air Quality Forecast Capability (NAQFC) continues to protect Americans from the harmful effects of air pollution, while saving billions of dollars per year. Here we describe and evaluate the development of the most advanced version of the NAQFC to date, which became operational at NOAA on 20 July 2021. The new NAQFC is based on a coupling of NOAA's operational Global Forecast System (GFS) version 16 with the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model version 5.3.1.
Li Zhang, Georg A. Grell, Stuart A. McKeen, Ravan Ahmadov, Karl D. Froyd, and Daniel Murphy
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 467–491, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-467-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-467-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Applying the chemistry package from WRF-Chem into the Flow-following finite-volume Icosahedra Model, we essentially make it possible to explore the importance of different levels of complexity in gas and aerosol chemistry, as well as in physics parameterizations, for the interaction processes in global modeling systems. The model performance validated by the Atmospheric Tomography Mission aircraft measurements in summer 2016 shows good performance in capturing the aerosol and gas-phase tracers.
Siqi Ma, Daniel Tong, Lok Lamsal, Julian Wang, Xuelei Zhang, Youhua Tang, Rick Saylor, Tianfeng Chai, Pius Lee, Patrick Campbell, Barry Baker, Shobha Kondragunta, Laura Judd, Timothy A. Berkoff, Scott J. Janz, and Ivanka Stajner
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 16531–16553, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-16531-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-16531-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Predicting high ozone gets more challenging as urban emissions decrease. How can different techniques be used to foretell the quality of air to better protect human health? We tested four techniques with the CMAQ model against observations during a field campaign over New York City. The new system proves to better predict the magnitude and timing of high ozone. These approaches can be extended to other regions to improve the predictability of high-O3 episodes in contemporary urban environments.
Xinxin Ye, Pargoal Arab, Ravan Ahmadov, Eric James, Georg A. Grell, Bradley Pierce, Aditya Kumar, Paul Makar, Jack Chen, Didier Davignon, Greg R. Carmichael, Gonzalo Ferrada, Jeff McQueen, Jianping Huang, Rajesh Kumar, Louisa Emmons, Farren L. Herron-Thorpe, Mark Parrington, Richard Engelen, Vincent-Henri Peuch, Arlindo da Silva, Amber Soja, Emily Gargulinski, Elizabeth Wiggins, Johnathan W. Hair, Marta Fenn, Taylor Shingler, Shobha Kondragunta, Alexei Lyapustin, Yujie Wang, Brent Holben, David M. Giles, and Pablo E. Saide
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 14427–14469, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-14427-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-14427-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Wildfire smoke has crucial impacts on air quality, while uncertainties in the numerical forecasts remain significant. We present an evaluation of 12 real-time forecasting systems. Comparison of predicted smoke emissions suggests a large spread in magnitudes, with temporal patterns deviating from satellite detections. The performance for AOD and surface PM2.5 and their discrepancies highlighted the role of accurately represented spatiotemporal emission profiles in improving smoke forecasts.
Haipeng Lin, Daniel J. Jacob, Elizabeth W. Lundgren, Melissa P. Sulprizio, Christoph A. Keller, Thibaud M. Fritz, Sebastian D. Eastham, Louisa K. Emmons, Patrick C. Campbell, Barry Baker, Rick D. Saylor, and Raffaele Montuoro
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5487–5506, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5487-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5487-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Emissions are a central component of atmospheric chemistry models. The Harmonized Emissions Component (HEMCO) is a software component for computing emissions from a user-selected ensemble of emission inventories and algorithms. It allows users to select, add, and scale emissions from different sources through a configuration file with no change to the model source code. We demonstrate the implementation of HEMCO in several models, all sharing the same HEMCO core code and database library.
Saulo R. Freitas, Georg A. Grell, and Haiqin Li
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5393–5411, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5393-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5393-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Convection parameterization (CP) is a component of atmospheric models aiming to represent the statistical effects of subgrid-scale convective clouds. Because the atmosphere contains circulations with a broad spectrum of scales, the truncation needed to run models in computers requires the introduction of parameterizations to account for processes that are not explicitly resolved. We detail recent developments in the Grell–Freitas CP, which has been applied in several regional and global models.
Hyun Cheol Kim, Soontae Kim, Mark Cohen, Changhan Bae, Dasom Lee, Rick Saylor, Minah Bae, Eunhye Kim, Byeong-Uk Kim, Jin-Ho Yoon, and Ariel Stein
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 10065–10080, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10065-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10065-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Global outbreaks of COVID-19 offer rare opportunities of natural experiments in emission control and corresponding responses of tropospheric chemistry. This study's novel approach investigates (1) isolating the pandemic's impact from natural and anthropogenic variations, (2) emission adjustment to reproduce real-time emissions, and (3) brute-force modeling to investigate Chinese economic activities. Results provide characteristics of the region's chemistry and emissions.
Xiaoyang Chen, Yang Zhang, Kai Wang, Daniel Tong, Pius Lee, Youhua Tang, Jianping Huang, Patrick C. Campbell, Jeff Mcqueen, Havala O. T. Pye, Benjamin N. Murphy, and Daiwen Kang
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3969–3993, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3969-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3969-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The continuously updated National Air Quality Forecast Capability (NAQFC) provides air quality forecasts. To support the development of the next-generation NAQFC, we evaluate a prototype of GFSv15-CMAQv5.0.2. The performance and the potential improvements for the system are discussed. This study can provide a scientific basis for further development of NAQFC and help it to provide more accurate air quality forecasts to the public over the contiguous United States.
Janaína P. Nascimento, Megan M. Bela, Bruno B. Meller, Alessandro L. Banducci, Luciana V. Rizzo, Angel Liduvino Vara-Vela, Henrique M. J. Barbosa, Helber Gomes, Sameh A. A. Rafee, Marco A. Franco, Samara Carbone, Glauber G. Cirino, Rodrigo A. F. Souza, Stuart A. McKeen, and Paulo Artaxo
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 6755–6779, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6755-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6755-2021, 2021
Youhua Tang, Huisheng Bian, Zhining Tao, Luke D. Oman, Daniel Tong, Pius Lee, Patrick C. Campbell, Barry Baker, Cheng-Hsuan Lu, Li Pan, Jun Wang, Jeffery McQueen, and Ivanka Stajner
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 2527–2550, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-2527-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-2527-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Chemical lateral boundary condition (CLBC) impact is essential for regional air quality prediction during intrusion events. We present a model mapping Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) to Community Multi-scale Air Quality (CMAQ) CB05–AERO6 (Carbon Bond 5; version 6 of the aerosol module) species. Influence depends on distance from the inflow boundary and species and their regional characteristics. We use aerosol optical thickness to derive CLBCs, achieving reasonable prediction.
Alexander Ukhov, Ravan Ahmadov, Georg Grell, and Georgiy Stenchikov
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 473–493, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-473-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-473-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We discuss and evaluate the effects of inconsistencies found in the WRF-Chem code when using the GOCART module. First, PM surface concentrations were miscalculated. Second, dust optical depth was underestimated by 25 %–30 %. Third, an inconsistency in the process of gravitational settling led to the overestimation of dust column loadings by 4 %–6 %, PM10 by 2 %–4 %, and the rate of gravitational dust settling by 5 %–10 %. We also presented diagnostics that can be used to estimate these effects.
Hai Zhang, Shobha Kondragunta, Istvan Laszlo, and Mi Zhou
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 5955–5975, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-5955-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-5955-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites (GOES) retrieve high temporal resolution aerosol optical depth, which is a measure of the aerosol quantity within the atmospheric column. This work introduces an algorithm that improves the accuracy of the aerosol optical depth retrievals from GOES. The resulting data product can be used in monitoring the air quality and climate change research.
Hyun Cheol Kim, Tianfeng Chai, Ariel Stein, and Shobha Kondragunta
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 10259–10277, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10259-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10259-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Smoke forecasts have been challenged by high uncertainty in fire emission estimates. We develop an inverse modeling system, the HYSPLIT-based Emissions Inverse Modeling System for wildfires, that estimates wildfire emissions from the transport and dispersion of smoke plumes as measured by satellite observations. Using NOAA HYSPLIT and GOES Aerosol/Smoke Product (GASP), the system resolves smoke source strength as a function of time and vertical level and outperforms current operational system.
Cited articles
Ahmadov, R., Grell, G., James, E., Csiszar, I., Tsidulko, M., Pierce, B., McKeen, S.,
Benjamin, S., Alexander, C., Pereira, G., Freitas, S., and Goldberg, M.: Using
VIIRS Fire Radiative Power data to simulate biomass burning emissions, plume
rise and smoke transport in a real-time air quality modeling system, 2017
Ieee International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), 2806–2808, https://doi.org/10.1109/IGARSS.2017.8127581, 2017.
Bauer, S. E., Im, U., Mezuman, K., and Gao, C. Y.: Desert dust,
industrialization, and agricultural fires: Health impacts of outdoor air
pollution in Africa, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124,
4104–4120, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD029336, 2019.
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.
Benedetti, A., Reid, J. S., and Colarco, P. R.: International cooperative for
aerosol prediction workshop on aerosol forecast verification, B.
Am. Meteorol. Soc., 92, ES48–ES53,
https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00105.1, 2011.
Bhattacharjee, P. S., Wang, J., Lu, C.-H., and Tallapragada, V.: The implementation of NEMS GFS Aerosol Component (NGAC) Version 2.0 for global multispecies forecasting at NOAA/NCEP – Part 2: Evaluation of aerosol optical thickness, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2333–2351, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2333-2018, 2018.
Bhattacharjee, P. S., Zhang, L., Baker, B., Pan, L., Montuoro, R., Grell, A.
G., and McQueen, J.: Evaluation of Aerosol Optical Depth forecast from NOAA's
Global Aerosol Forecast Model (GEFS-Aerosols),
Weather Forecast., submitted, 2022.
Black, T. L., Abeles, J. A., Blake, B. T., Jovic, D., Rogers, E., Zhang, X.,
Aligo, E. A., Dawson, L. C., Lin, Y., Strobach, E., Shafran, P. C.,
and Carley, J. R.: A limited area modeling capability for the Finite-Volume
Cubed-Sphere (FV3) dynamical core and comparison with a global two-way nest,
J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 13,
e2021MS002483, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002483, 2021.
Bloom, S., da Silva, A., and Dee, D.: Documentation and validation of the Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) data assimilation system-version 4, 1–187, https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20050175690 (last access: 5 July 2022), 2005.
Bourgeois, I., Peischl, J., Thompson, C. R., Aikin, K. C., Campos, T., Clark, H., Commane, R., Daube, B., Diskin, G. W., Elkins, J. W., Gao, R.-S., Gaudel, A., Hintsa, E. J., Johnson, B. J., Kivi, R., McKain, K., Moore, F. L., Parrish, D. D., Querel, R., Ray, E., Sánchez, R., Sweeney, C., Tarasick, D. W., Thompson, A. M., Thouret, V., Witte, J. C., Wofsy, S. C., and Ryerson, T. B.: Global-scale distribution of ozone in the remote troposphere from the ATom and HIPPO airborne field missions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 10611–10635, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10611-2020, 2020.
Bozzo, A., Benedetti, A., Flemming, J., Kipling, Z., and Rémy, S.: An aerosol climatology for global models based on the tropospheric aerosol scheme in the Integrated Forecasting System of ECMWF, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 1007–1034, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1007-2020, 2020.
Burnett, R., Chen, H., Szyszkowicz, M., Fann, N., Hubbell, B., Pope, C. A.,
Spte, J. S., Brauer, M., Cohen, A., Weichenthal, S., Coggins, J., Di, Q.,
Brunekreef, B., Frostad, F., Lim, S. S., Kan, H., Walker, K. D., Thurston,
G. D., Hayes, R. B., Lim, C. C., Turner, M. C., Jerrett, M., Krewski, D.,
Gapstur, S. M., Diver, W. R., Ostro, B., Goldberg, D., Crouse, D. L., Martin,
R. V., Peters, P., Pinault, L., Tjepkema, M., Donkelaar, A., Villeneuve,
P. J., Miller, A. B., Yin, P., Zhou, M., Wang, L., Janssen N. A. H., Marra, M.,
Atkinson, R. W., Tsang, H., Thach, T. Q., Cannon, J. B., Allen, R. T., Hart,
J. E., Laden, F., Cesaroni, G., Forastisere, F., Weinmayr, G., Jaensch, A.,
Nagel, G., Concin, H., and Spadaro, J. V.: Global estimates of mortality
associated with longterm exposure to outdoor fine particulate matter, P.
Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 115, 9592–9597, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1803222115,
2018.
Chappell, A. and Webb, N. P.: Using albedo to reform wind erosion
modelling, mapping and monitoring, Aeolian Res., 23, 63–78,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeolia.2016.09.006, 2016.
Chen, J. M., Li, C. L., Ristovski, Z., Milic, A., Gu, Y. T., Islam, M. S.,
Wang, S. X., Hao, J. M., Zhang, H. F., He, C. R., Guo, H., Fu, H. B.,
Miljevic, B., Morawska, L., Thai, P., Fat, L., Pereira, G., Ding, A. J.,
Huang, X., and Dumka, U. C.: A review of biomass burning: Emissions and
impacts on air quality, health and climate in China, Sci. Total Environ.,
579, 1000–1034, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.11.025, 2017.
Chen, Q., Yin, Y., Jin, L.-J., Xiao, H., Zhu, S.-Ch.: The effect of aerosol
layers on convective cloud microphysics and precipitation, Atmos. Res., 101, 327–340, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2011.03.007, 2011.
Chin, M., Rood, B. R., Lin, S.-J., Muller, F. J., and Thomspon, M. A.:
Atmospheric sulfur cycle in the global model GOCART: Model description and
global properties, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 24671–24687, 2000.
Chin, M., Ginoux, P., Kinne, S., Torres, O., Holben, B., Duncan, B., Martin,
R., Logan, J., Higurashi, A., and Nakajima, T.: Tropospheric aerosol optical
thickness from the GOCART model and comparisons with satellite and Sun
photometer measurements, J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 461–483, 2002.
Choi, Y., Kanaya, Y., Takigawa, M., Zhu, C., Park, S.-M., Matsuki, A., Sadanaga, Y., Kim, S.-W., Pan, X., and Pisso, I.: Investigation of the wet removal rate of black carbon in East Asia: validation of a below- and in-cloud wet removal scheme in FLEXible PARTicle (FLEXPART) model v10.4, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 13655–13670, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-13655-2020, 2020.
Colarco, P., da Silva, A., Chin, M., and Diehl, T.: Online simulations of
global aerosol distributions in the NASA GEOS-4 model and comparisons to
satellite and ground-based aerosol optical depth, J. Geophys. Res., 115,
D14207, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012820, 2010.
Colarco, P., Benedetti, A., Reid, J., and Tanaka, T.: Using EOS data to
improve aerosol forecasting: the International Cooperative for Aerosol
Research (ICAP), Earth Observ., 26, 14–19, 2014a.
Colarco, P. R., Kahn, R. A., Remer, L. A., and Levy, R. C.: Impact of satellite viewing-swath width on global and regional aerosol optical thickness statistics and trends, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 2313–2335, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-2313-2014, 2014b.
Darmenov, A. and da Silva, A.: The Quick Fire Emissions Dataset (QFED) –
Documentation of versions 2.1, 2.2 and 2.4, NASA Technical Report Series on
Global Modeling and Data Assimilation, NASA/TM-2015–104606, Vol. 38, 211
pp.,
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.406.7724&rep=rep1&type=pdf (last access: 5 July 2022), 2015.
Diehl, T., Heil, A., Chin, M., Pan, X., Streets, D., Schultz, M., and Kinne, S.: Anthropogenic, biomass burning, and volcanic emissions of black carbon, organic carbon, and SO2 from 1980 to 2010 for hindcast model experiments, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 12, 24895–24954, https://doi.org/10.5194/acpd-12-24895-2012, 2012.
Easter, R. C., Ghan, S. J., Zhang, Y., Saylor, R. D., Chapman, E. G.,
Laulainen, N. S., Abdul-Razzak, H., Leung, L. R., Bian, X., and Zaveri, R.
A.: MIRAGE: Model Description and Evaluation of Aerosols and Trace Gases, J.
Geophys. Res., 109, D20210, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004571, 2004.
Eck, T. F., Holben, B. N., Reid, J. S., Dubovik, O., Smirnov, A., O'Neill,
N. T., Slutsker, I., and Kinne, S.: The wavelength dependence of the optical
depth of biomass burning, urban and desert dust aerosols, J. Geophys. Res.,
104, 31333–31350, 1999.
Fast, J. D., Gustafson Jr., I. W., Easter, C. R., Zaveri, A. R., Barnard, C.
J., Chapman, G. E., Grell, A. G., and Peckham, E. S.: Evolution of ozone,
particulates, and aerosol direct radiative forcing in the vicinity of
Houston using a fully coupled meteorology-chemistry-aerosol model, J.
Geophys. Res., 111, D21305, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006721, 2006.
Fécan, F., Marticorena, B., and Bergametti, G.: Parametrization of the
increase of the aeolian erosion threshold wind friction velocity due to soil
moisture for arid and semi-arid areas, Ann. Geophys., 17, 149–157,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00585-999-0149-7, 1998.
Forkel, R., Werhahn, J., Buus Hansen, A., McKeen, S., Peckham, S., Grell,
G., and Suppan, P.: Effect of aerosol-radiation feedback on regional air
qualityeacase study with WFR/Chem, Atmos. Environ., 53,
202e211, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.10.009, 2012.
Freitas, S. R., Longo, K. M., Chatfield, R., Latham, D., Silva Dias, M. A. F., Andreae, M. O., Prins, E., Santos, J. C., Gielow, R., and Carvalho Jr., J. A.: Including the sub-grid scale plume rise of vegetation fires in low resolution atmospheric transport models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 3385–3398, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-3385-2007, 2007.
Freitas, S. R., Longo, K. M., Alonso, M. F., Pirre, M., Marecal, V., Grell, G., Stockler, R., Mello, R. F., and Sánchez Gácita, M.: PREP-CHEM-SRC – 1.0: a preprocessor of trace gas and aerosol emission fields for regional and global atmospheric chemistry models, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 419–433, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-419-2011, 2011.
Froyd, K. D., Murphy, D. M., Brock, C. A., Campuzano-Jost, P., Dibb, J. E., Jimenez, J.-L., Kupc, A., Middlebrook, A. M., Schill, G. P., Thornhill, K. L., Williamson, C. J., Wilson, J. C., and Ziemba, L. D.: A new method to quantify mineral dust and other aerosol species from aircraft platforms using single-particle mass spectrometry, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 6209–6239, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-6209-2019, 2019.
Gelaro, R., McCarty, W., Suárez, M. J., Todling, R., Molod, A., Takacs,
L., Randles, C. A., Darmenov, A., Bosilovich, M. G., Reichle, R., Wargan,
K., Coy, L., Cullather, R., Draper, C., Akella, S., Buchard, V., Conaty, A.,
da Silva, A. M., Gu, W., Kim, G., Koster, R., Lucchesi, D. Merkova, J. E.,
Nielsen, G., Partyka, G., Pawson, S., Putman, W., Rienecker, M., Schubert, S.
D., Sienkiewicz, M., and Zhao, B.: The Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for
Research and Applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2), J. Climate, 30, 5419–5454,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0758.1, 2017.
Gillette, D. A.: Threshold friction velocities for dust production for
agricultural soils, J. Geophys. Res., 93, 12645–12662,
https://doi.org/10.1029/jd093id10p12645, 1988.
Gillette, D. A., Adams, J., Endo, A., Smith, D., and Kihl, R.: Threshold
velocities for input of soil particles into the air by desert soils, J.
Geophys. Res., 85, 5621–5630, https://doi.org/10.1029/JC085iC10p05621, 1980.
Grell, G., Freitas, S. R., Stuefer, M., and Fast, J.: Inclusion of biomass burning in WRF-Chem: impact of wildfires on weather forecasts, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 5289–5303, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-5289-2011, 2011.
Grell, G. A., Peckham, E. S., Schmitz, R., McKeen, A. S., Frost, G.,
Skamarock, W., and Eder, B.: Fully-coupled online chemistry within the WRF
model, Atmos. Environ., 39, 6957–6975,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.027, 2005.
Hoesly, R. M., Smith, S. J., Feng, L., Klimont, Z., Janssens-Maenhout, G., Pitkanen, T., Seibert, J. J., Vu, L., Andres, R. J., Bolt, R. M., Bond, T. C., Dawidowski, L., Kholod, N., Kurokawa, J.-I., Li, M., Liu, L., Lu, Z., Moura, M. C. P., O'Rourke, P. R., and Zhang, Q.: Historical (1750–2014) anthropogenic emissions of reactive gases and aerosols from the Community Emissions Data System (CEDS), Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 369–408, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-369-2018, 2018.
Holben, B. N., Eck, T. F., Slutsker, I., Tanré, D., Buis, J. P., Setzer,
A., Vermote, E., Reagan, J. A., Kaufman, Y. J., Nakajima, T., Lavenu, F.,
Jankowiak, I., and Smirnov, A.: AERONET – A Federated instrument network
and data archive for aerosol characterization, Remote Sens. Environ., 66,
1–16, 1998.
Hollingsworth, A., Engelen, R. J., Textor, C., Benedetti, A., Boucher, O.,
Chevallier, F., Dethof, A., Elbern, H., Eskes, H., Flemming, J., Granier,
C., Kaiser, J. W., Morcrette, J.-J., Rayner, P., Peuch, V.-H., Rouil, L.,
Schultz, M. G., and Simmons, A. J.: Toward a Monitoring and Forecasting
System For Atmospheric Composition: The GEMS Project, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc.,
89, 1147–1164, 2008.
Hsu, N. C., Jeong, M.-J., Bettenhausen, C., Sayer, A. M., Hansell, R.,
Seftor, C. S., Huang, J., and Tsay, S.-C.: Enhanced Deep Blue aerosol
retrieval algorithm: The second generation, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118,
9296–9315, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50712, 2013.
Jackson, J., Liu, H., Laszlo, I., Kondragunta, S., Remer, L. A., Huang, J.,
and Huang, H.-C.: Suomi-NPP VIIRS Aerosol Algorithms and Data Products, J.
Geophys. Res., 118, 12673–12689, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013jd020449, 2013.
Janssens-Maenhout, G.: EDGARv4.1 Emission Time Series, European Commission,
Joint Research Centre (JRC) (Dataset) PID, a http://data.europa.eu/89h/jrc-edgar-emissiontimeseriesv41 (last access:
12 June 2018), 2010.
Janssens-Maenhout, G., Crippa, M., Guizzardi, D., Dentener, F., Muntean, M., Pouliot, G., Keating, T., Zhang, Q., Kurokawa, J., Wankmüller, R., Denier van der Gon, H., Kuenen, J. J. P., Klimont, Z., Frost, G., Darras, S., Koffi, B., and Li, M.: HTAP_v2.2: a mosaic of regional and global emission grid maps for 2008 and 2010 to study hemispheric transport of air pollution, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 11411–11432, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11411-2015, 2015.
Kok, J. F.: A scaling theory for the size distribution of emitted dust aerosols suggests climate models underestimate the size of the global dust cycle, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 108, 1016–1021, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1014798108, 2011.
Levy, R. C., Mattoo, S., Munchak, L. A., Remer, L. A., Sayer, A. M., Patadia, F., and Hsu, N. C.: The Collection 6 MODIS aerosol products over land and ocean, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 6, 2989–3034, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-2989-2013, 2013.
Liu, F., Zhang, Q., van der A, R. J., Zheng, B., Tong, D., Yan, L., Zheng,
Y., and He, K.: Recent reduction in NOx emissions over China: synthesis of
satellite observations and emission inventories, Environ. Res. Lett., 11,
114002, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/11/114002, 2016.
Liu, H., Remer, L. A., Huang, J., Huang, H.-C., Kondragunta, S., Laszlo, I.,
Oo, M., and Jackson, J. M.: Preliminary Evaluation of Suomi-NPP VIIRS
Aerosol Optical Thickness, J. Geophys. Res., 119, 3942–3962, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013jd020360, 2013.
Lu, C.-H., da Silva, A., Wang, J., Moorthi, S., Chin, M., Colarco, P., Tang, Y., Bhattacharjee, P. S., Chen, S.-P., Chuang, H.-Y., Juang, H.-M. H., McQueen, J., and Iredell, M.: The implementation of NEMS GFS Aerosol Component (NGAC) Version 1.0 for global dust forecasting at NOAA/NCEP, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1905–1919, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1905-2016, 2016.
Lu, S., Huang, H.-C., Hou, Y.-T., Tang, Y., McQueen, J., da Silva, A., Chin,
M., Joseph, E., and Stockwell, W.: Development of NCEP Global Aerosol
Forecasting System: an overview and its application for improving weather
and air quality forecasts, in: NATO Science for Peace and Security Series:
Air Pollution Modelling and Its Application XX, Springer Publications,
Dordrecht, the Netherlands, 451–454,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3812-8, 2010.
MacKinnon, D. J., Clow, G. D., Tigges, R. K., Reynolds, R. L., and Chaves
Jr., P. S.: Comparison of aerodynamically and model-derived roughness lengths
(z0) over diverse surfaces, central Mojave Desert, California, USA,
Geomorphology, 63, 103–113, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2004.03.009, 2004
Marticorena, B. and Bergametti, G.: Modeling the atmospheric dust cycle:
1-Design of a soil derived dust production scheme, J. Geophys. Res., 100,
16415–16430, 1995.
Molod, A., Takacs, L., Suarez, M., and Bacmeister, J.: Development of the GEOS-5 atmospheric general circulation model: evolution from MERRA to MERRA2, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 1339–1356, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1339-2015, 2015.
Morcrette, J.-J., Boucher, O., Jones, L., Salmond, D., Bechtold, P., Beljaars, A., Benedetti, A., Bonet, A., Kaiser, J. W., Razinger, M., Schulz, M., Serrar, S., Simmons, A. J., Sofiev, M., Suttie, M., Tompkins, A. M., and Untch, A.: Aerosol analysis and forecast in the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Integrated Forecast System: forward modelling, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D06206, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD011235, 2009.
Muhlbauer, A., Grabowski, W. W., Malinowski, P. S., Ackerman, P. T., Bryan,
H. G., Lebo, J. Z., Milbrandt, A. J., Morrison, H., Ovchinnikov, M.,
Tessendorf, S., and Thériault, G. J. M.: Thompson Reexamination of the state
of the art of cloud modelling shows real improvements, B. Am. Meteorol.
Soc., 94, ES45–ES48, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00188.1, 2013.
Mulcahy, J. P., Walters, D. N., Bellouin, N., and Milton, S. F.: Impacts of increasing the aerosol complexity in the Met Office global numerical weather prediction model, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 4749–4778, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-4749-2014, 2014.
Murphy, D., Froyd, K., Apel, E.,Blake, R. D., Blake, J. N., Evangeliou, N.,
Hornbrook, S. R., Peischl, J., Ray, E., Ryerson,B. T., Thompson, C., and
Stohl, A.: An aerosol particle containing enriched uranium encountered in
the remote T upper troposphere, J. Environ. Radioactiv., 184–185, 95-100,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvrad.2018.01.006, 2018.
Murphy, D. M., Froyd, K. D., Bian, H., Brock, C. A., Dibb, J. E., DiGangi, J. P., Diskin, G., Dollner, M., Kupc, A., Scheuer, E. M., Schill, G. P., Weinzierl, B., Williamson, C. J., and Yu, P.: The distribution of sea-salt aerosol in the global troposphere, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 4093–4104, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-4093-2019, 2019.
Owen, P. R.: Saltation of uniform grains in air, J. Fluid Mech.,
20, 225–242, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112064001173, 1964.
Powers, J. G., Klemp, J. B., Skamarock, W. C., Davis, C. A., Dudhia, J.,
Gill, D. O., Coen, J. L., Gochis, D. J., Ahmadov, R., Peckham, S. E., Grell,
G. A., Michalakes, J., Trahan, S., Benjamin, S. G., Alexander, C. R.,
Dimego, G. J., Wang, W., Schwartz, C. S., Romine, G. S., Liu, Z., Snyder,
C., Chen, F., Barlage, M. J., Yu, W., and Duda, M. G.: The Weather
Research and Forecasting Model: Overview, System Efforts, and Future
Directions, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 98,
1717–1737, 2017.
Prigent, C., Jiménez, C., and Catherinot, J.: Comparison of satellite
microwave backscattering (ASCAT) and visible/near-infrared reflectances
(PARASOL) for the estimation of aeolian aerodynamic roughness length in arid
and semi-arid regions, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 5, 2703–2712,
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-5-2703-2012, 2012.
Raupach, M. R.: Drag and drag partition on rough surfaces. Bound.-Lay.
Meteorol., 60, 374–396, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00155203, 1992.
Reale, O., Lau, K. M., and da Silva, A.: Impact of interactive aerosol on the African easterly jet in the NASA GEOS-5 Global Forecasting System, Weather
Forecast., 26, 504–519, 2011.
Reid, J., Benedetti, A., Colarco, P. R., and Hansen, J. A.: International
operational aerosol observability work-shop, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 92,
ES21–ES24, https://doi.org/10.1175/2010BAMS3183.1, 2011.
Rienecker, M. M., Suarez, M. J., Todling, R., Bacmeister, J., Takacs, L., Liu,
H.-C., Gu, W., Sienkiewicz, M., Koster, R. D., Gelaro, R., Stajner, I., and
Nielsen, J. E.: The GEOS-5 data assimilation system: documentation of
versions 5.0.1, 5.1.0, and 5.2.0., NASA Tech. Memo.
2008-104606, 2008.
Rodwell, M. J. and Jung, T.: Understanding the local and global impacts of
model physics changes: an aerosol example, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 134,
1479–1497, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.298, 2008.
Sayer, A. M., Hsu, N. C., Bettenhausen, C., and Jeong, M.-J.: Validation and
uncertainty estimates for MODIS Collection 6 “Deep Blue” aerosol data,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 7864–7872,
https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50600, 2013.
Sayer, A. M., Munchak, L. A., Hsu, N. C., Levy, R. C., Bettenhausen, C., and
Jeong M.-J.: MODIS Collection 6 aerosol products: Comparison between Aqua's
e-Deep blue, dark target and “merged” data sets and usage recommendations,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 13965–989, 2014.
Schill, G. P., Froyd, K. D., Bian, H., Kupc, A., Williamson, C., Brock, C. A.,
Ray, E., Hornbrook, R. S., Hills, A. J., Apel, E. C., Chin, M., Colarco, P.
R., and Murphy, D. M.: Widespread biomass burning smoke throughout the remote
troposphere, Nat. Geosci., 13, 422–424,
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-020-0586-1, 2020.
Sessions, W. R., Reid, J. S., Benedetti, A., Colarco, P. R., da Silva, A., Lu, S., Sekiyama, T., Tanaka, T. Y., Baldasano, J. M., Basart, S., Brooks, M. E., Eck, T. F., Iredell, M., Hansen, J. A., Jorba, O. C., Juang, H.-M. H., Lynch, P., Morcrette, J.-J., Moorthi, S., Mulcahy, J., Pradhan, Y., Razinger, M., Sampson, C. B., Wang, J., and Westphal, D. L.: Development towards a global operational aerosol consensus: basic climatological characteristics of the International Cooperative for Aerosol Prediction Multi-Model Ensemble (ICAP-MME), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 335–362, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-335-2015, 2015.
Shao, Y., Raupach, M. R., and Findlater, P. A.: Effect of saltation
bombardment on the entrainment of dust by wind, J. Geophys.
Res., 98, 12719–12726, https://doi.org/10.1029/93jd00396, 1993.
Shao, Y., Ishizuka, M., Mikami, M., and Leys, J. F.: Parameterization of
size-resolved dust emission and validation with measurements, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 116, D08203,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014527, 2011.
Shi, X. and Brasseur, G. P.: The response in air quality to the reduction
of Chinese economic activities during the COVID-19 outbreak, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL088070, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL088070,
2020.
Slinn, W. G. N.: Precipitation scavenging, in: Atmospheric Science and Power
Production, edited by: Randerson, D., U.S. Dept. of Energy, Washington D. C.,
472–477, 1984.
Theurich, G., DeLuca, C., Campbell, T., Liu, F., Saint, K., Vertenstein, M.,
Chen, J., Oehmke, R., Doyle, J., Whitcomb, T., Wallcraft, A., Iredell, M.,
Black, T., da Silva, A. M., Clune, T., Ferraro, R., Li, P., Kelley, M.,
Aleinov, I., Balaji, V., Zadeh, N., Jacob, R., Kirtman, B., Giraldo, F.,
McCarren, D., Sandgathe, S., Peckham, S., and Dunlap IV, R.: The Earth
System Prediction Suite: Toward a coordinated U.S. modeling
capability, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 97, 1229–1247,
https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00164.1, 2016.
Tong, D. Q., Wang, J. X. L., Gill, T. E., Lei, H., and Wang, B.: Intensified
dust storm activity and Valley fever infection in the southwestern United
States, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 4304–4312, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL073524,
2017.
Wang, H., Rasch, J. P., Easter, C. R., Singh, B., Zhang, R., Ma, P.-L.,
Qian, Y., Ghan, J. S., and Beagley, N.: Using an explicit emission tagging
method in global modeling of source receptor relationships for black carbon
in the Arctic: Variations, sources, and transport pathways, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 12888–12909, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022297, 2014.
Wang, J., Bhattacharjee, P. S., Tallapragada, V., Lu, C.-H., Kondragunta, S., da Silva, A., Zhang, X., Chen, S.-P., Wei, S.-W., Darmenov, A. S., McQueen, J., Lee, P., Koner, P., and Harris, A.: The implementation of NEMS GFS Aerosol Component (NGAC) Version 2.0 for global multispecies forecasting at NOAA/NCEP – Part 1: Model descriptions, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2315–2332, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2315-2018, 2018.
Wang, Q. and Su, M.: A preliminary assessment of the impact of COVID-19 on
environment–a case study of China, Sci. Total Environ., 728, 138915, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138915, 2020.
Wang, Q., Jacob, J. D., Spackman, R. J., Perring, E. A., Schwarz, P. J.,
Moteki, N., Marais, A. E., Ge, C., Wang, J., and Barrett, R. H. S.: Global
budget and radiative forcing of black carbon aerosol: Constraints from
pole-to-pole (HIPPO) observations across the Pacific, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 195–206, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020824, 2014.
Xian, P., Reid, J. S., Hyer, E. J., Sampson, C. R., Rubin, J. I., Ades, M.,
Asencio, N., Basart, S., Benedetti, A., Bhattacharjee, P. S., Brooks, M. E.,
Colarco, P. R., da Silva, A. M., Eck, T. F., Guth, J., Jorba, O.l.,
Kouznetsov, R., Kipling, Z., Sofiev, M., Garcia-Pando, C. P., Pradhan, Y.,
Tanaka, T., Wang, J., Westphal, D. L., Yumimoto, K., and Zhang J.: Current state
of the global operational aerosol multi-model ensemble: An update from the
International Cooperative for Aerosol Prediction (ICAP), Q. J. Roy. Meteor.
Soc., 145, 176–209, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3497, 2019.
Xie, S. P., Lu, B., and Xiang, Q. B.: Similar spatial patterns of climate
responses to aerosol and greenhouse gas changes, Nat. Geosci., 6, 828–832,
https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1931, 2013.
Xing, J., Li, S., Jiang, Y., Wang, S., Ding, D., Dong, Z., Zhu, Y., and Hao, J.: Quantifying the emission changes and associated air quality impacts during the COVID-19 pandemic on the North China Plain: a response modeling study, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 14347–14359, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-14347-2020, 2020.
Yang, Q., Bitz, C. M., and Doherty, S. J.: Offsetting effects of aerosols on Arctic and global climate in the late 20th century, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 3969–3975, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-3969-2014, 2014.
Zhang, L., Montuoro, R., McKeen, S., Baker, B., Bhattacharjee, P., Grell,
G., Henderson, J., Pan, L., Frost, G., McQueen, J., Saylor, R., Li, H.,
Ahmadov, R., Wang, J., Stajner, I., Kondragunta, S., Zhang, X., and Li, F.:
Development and Evaluation of the Aerosol Forecast Member in NCEP's Global
Ensemble Forecast System (GEFS-Aerosols v1), Zenodo [data set],
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5655290, 2021.
Zhang, L., Grell, G. A., McKeen, S. A., Ahmadov, R., Froyd, K. D., and Murphy, D.: Inline coupling of simple and complex chemistry modules within the global weather forecast model FIM (FIM-Chem v1), Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 467–491, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-467-2022, 2022.
Zhang, Q., He, K., and Huo, H.: Cleaning China's air, Nature, 484, 161–162,
https://doi.org/10.1038/484161a, 2012.
Zhang, X., Kondragunta, S., Ram, J., Schmidt, C., and Huang, H.-C.:
Near-real-time global biomass burning emissions product from geostationary
satellite constellation, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D14201,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017459, 2012.
Zhang, X., Kondragunta, S., da Silva, A., Lu, S., Ding, H., Li, F., and Zhu,
Y.: The blended global biomass burning emissions product from MODIS and
geostationary satellites (GBBEPx), http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/Products/land/gbbepx/docs/GBBEPx_ATBD.pdf (last access: 1 June 2018), 2014.
Zhao, T. X., Stowe, L. L., Smirnov, A., Crosby, D., Sapper, J., and McClain,
C. R.: Development of a global validation package for satellite oceanic
aerosol optical thickness retrieval based on AERONET observations and its
application to NOAA/NESDIS operational aerosol retrievals, J. Atmos. Sci.,
59, 294–312, 2002.
Short summary
The NOAA’s air quality predictions contribute to protecting lives and health in the US, which requires sustainable development and improvement of forecast systems. GEFS-Aerosols v1 has been developed in a collaboration between the NOAA research laboratories for operational forecast since September 2020 in the NCEP. The predictions demonstrate substantial improvements for both composition and variability of aerosol distributions over those from the former operational system.
The NOAA’s air quality predictions contribute to protecting lives and health in the US, which...
