Articles | Volume 17, issue 1
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-431-2024
© Author(s) 2024. 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-17-431-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Model evaluation paper
| 
16 Jan 2024
Model evaluation paper |
| 16 Jan 2024
| 16 Jan 2024
Analysis of the GEFS-Aerosols annual budget to better understand aerosol predictions simulated in the model
Lynker, Environmental Modeling Center, National Centers for Environmental Prediction, National Weather Service, Leesburg, VA, USA
Partha S. Bhattacharjee
Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), Environmental Modeling Center, National Centers for Environmental Prediction, National Weather Service, Reston, VA, USA
Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES), University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA
Global Systems Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, CO, USA
Raffaele Montuoro
Environmental Modeling Center, National Centers for Environmental Prediction, National Weather Service, College Park, MD, USA
Barry Baker
NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, College Park, MD, USA
Jeff McQueen
Environmental Modeling Center, National Centers for Environmental Prediction, National Weather Service, College Park, MD, USA
Georg A. Grell
Global Systems Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, CO, USA
Stuart A. McKeen
Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES), University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA
Chemical Sciences Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, CO, USA
retired
Shobha Kondragunta
NOAA/NESDIS Center for Satellite Applications and Research, Greenbelt, MD, USA
Xiaoyang Zhang
Department of Geography, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA
Gregory J. Frost
Chemical Sciences Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, CO, USA
Fanglin Yang
Environmental Modeling Center, National Centers for Environmental Prediction, National Weather Service, College Park, MD, USA
Ivanka Stajner
Environmental Modeling Center, National Centers for Environmental Prediction, National Weather Service, College Park, MD, USA
Related authors
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.
Li Zhang, Raffaele Montuoro, Stuart A. McKeen, Barry Baker, Partha S. Bhattacharjee, Georg A. Grell, Judy Henderson, Li Pan, Gregory J. Frost, Jeff McQueen, Rick Saylor, Haiqin Li, Ravan Ahmadov, Jun Wang, Ivanka Stajner, Shobha Kondragunta, Xiaoyang Zhang, and Fangjun Li
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 5337–5369, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5337-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5337-2022, 2022
Short summary
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.
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.
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, Georgiy Stenchikov, Jordan Schnell, Ravan Ahmadov, Umberto Rizza, Georg Grell, and Ibrahim Hoteit
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4124, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4124, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
Volcanic eruptions are natural hazards impacting aviation, environment, and climate. Here, we improve the simulation of volcanic material transport using the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF-Chem) v4.8 model. Analysis of ash, sulfate, and SO2 mass budgets was performed. The direct radiative effect of volcanic aerosols was implemented. A preprocessor, PrepEmisSources, was developed to streamline the preparation of volcanic emissions.
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.
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.
Li Zhang, Raffaele Montuoro, Stuart A. McKeen, Barry Baker, Partha S. Bhattacharjee, Georg A. Grell, Judy Henderson, Li Pan, Gregory J. Frost, Jeff McQueen, Rick Saylor, Haiqin Li, Ravan Ahmadov, Jun Wang, Ivanka Stajner, Shobha Kondragunta, Xiaoyang Zhang, and Fangjun Li
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 5337–5369, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5337-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5337-2022, 2022
Short summary
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.
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.
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.
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
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., Grell, G., and McQueen, J.: Evaluation of aerosol optical depth forecast from NOAA's global aerosol forecast model (GEFS-Aerosols), Weather Forecast., 38, 225–249, https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF-D-22-0083.1, 2023.
Brock, C. A., Williamson, C., Kupc, A., Froyd, K. D., Erdesz, F., Wagner, N., Richardson, M., Schwarz, J. P., Gao, R.-S., Katich, J. M., Campuzano-Jost, P., Nault, B. A., Schroder, J. C., Jimenez, J. L., Weinzierl, B., Dollner, M., Bui, T., and Murphy, D. M.: Aerosol size distributions during the Atmospheric Tomography Mission (ATom): methods, uncertainties, and data products, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 3081–3099, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-3081-2019, 2019.
Campbell, P. C., Tang, Y., Lee, P., Baker, B., Tong, D., Saylor, R., Stein, A., Huang, J., Huang, H.-C., Strobach, E., McQueen, J., Pan, L., Stajner, I., Sims, J., Tirado-Delgado, J., Jung, Y., Yang, F., Spero, T. L., and Gilliam, R. C.: Development and evaluation of an advanced National Air Quality Forecasting Capability using the NOAA Global Forecast System version 16, Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 3281–3313, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3281-2022, 2022.
Chin, M., Rood, R. B., Lin, S. J., Muller, J. F., and Thompson, A. M.: Atmospheric sulfur cycle simulated in the global model GOCART: Model description and global properties, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 24671–24687, Doi10.1029/2000jd900384, 2000.
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.-Atmos., 115, D14207, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012820, 2010.
Dong, X., Fu, J. S., Huang, K., Tong, D., and Zhuang, G.: Model development of dust emission and heterogeneous chemistry within the Community Multiscale Air Quality modeling system and its application over East Asia, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 8157–8180, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-8157-2016, 2016.
Farmer, D. K., Boedicker, E. K., and DeBolt, H. M.: Dry deposition of atmospheric aerosols: Approaches, observations, and mechanisms, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem., 72, 375–397, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-physchem-090519-034936, 2021.
Gillette, D. A.: Threshold Friction Velocities for Dust Production for Agricultural Soils, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 93, 12645–12662, https://doi.org/10.1029/JD093iD10p12645, 1988.
Ginoux, P., Chin, M., Tegen, I., Prospero, J. M., Holben, B., Dubovik, O., and Lin, S. J.: Sources and distributions of dust aerosols simulated with the GOCART model, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 106, 20255–20273, https://doi.org/10.1029/2000jd000053, 2001.
Global Modeling and Assimilation Office (GMAO): MERRA-2 inst3_3d_aer_Nv: 3d,3-Hourly,Instantaneous,Model-Level,Assimilation,Aerosol Mixing Ratio V5.12.4, Greenbelt, MD, USA, Goddard Earth Sciences Data and Information Services Center (GES DISC) [data set], https://doi.org/10.5067/LTVB4GPCOTK2, 2015.
Gong, S. L.: A parameterization of sea-salt aerosol source function for sub-and super-micron particles, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 17, 1097, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GB002079, 2003.
Hamill, T. M., Bates, G. T., Whitaker, J. S., Murray, D. R., Fiorino, M., Galarneau, T. J., Zhu, Y. J., and Lapenta, W.: Noaa's Second-Generation Global Medium-Range Ensemble Reforecast Dataset, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 94, 1553–1565, https://doi.org/10.1175/Bams-D-12-00014.1, 2013.
Haywood, J. and Boucher, O.: Estimates of the direct and indirect radiative forcing due to tropospheric aerosols: A review, Rev. Geophys., 38, 513–543, https://doi.org/10.1029/1999rg000078, 2000.
Hodzic, A., Kasibhatla, P. S., Jo, D. S., Cappa, C. D., Jimenez, J. L., Madronich, S., and Park, R. J.: Rethinking the global secondary organic aerosol (SOA) budget: stronger production, faster removal, shorter lifetime, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 7917–7941, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-7917-2016, 2016.
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.
Kaufman, Y. J., Koren, I., Remer, L. A., Rosenfeld, D., and Rudich, Y.: The effect of smoke, dust, and pollution aerosol on shallow cloud development over the Atlantic Ocean, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 102, 11207–11212, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0505191102, 2005.
Kleist, D. T., Parrish, D. F., Derber, J. C., Treadon, R., Wu, W. S., and Lord, S.: Introduction of the GSI into the NCEP Global Data Assimilation System, Weather Forecast., 24, 1691–1705, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009waf2222201.1, 2009.
Koffi, B., Schulz, M., Breon, F. M., Griesfeller, J., Winker, D., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S., Berntsen, T., Chin, M. A., Collins, W. D., Dentener, F., Diehl, T., Easter, R., Ghan, S., Ginoux, P., Gong, S. L., Horowitz, L. W., Iversen, T., Kirkevag, A., Koch, D., Krol, M., Myhre, G., Stier, P., and Takemura, T.: Application of the CALIOP layer product to evaluate the vertical distribution of aerosols estimated by global models: AeroCom phase I results, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, D10201, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016858, 2012.
Lin, S. J. and Rood, R. B.: Multidimensional flux-form semi-Lagrangian transport schemes, Mon. Weather Rev., 124, 2046–2070, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1996)124<2046:MFFSLT>2.0.CO;2, 1996.
Lin, S. J., Chao, W. C., Sud, Y. C., and Walker, G. K.: A Class of the van Leer-type Transport Schemes and Its Application to the Moisture Transport in a General Circulation Model, Mon. Weather Rev., 122, 1575–1593, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1994)122<1575:ACOTVL>2.0.CO;2, 1994.
Lin, Y.-L., Farley, R. D., and Orville, H. D.: Bulk Parameterization of the snow field in a cloud model, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 22, 1065–1092, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1983)022<1065:BPOTSF>2.0.CO;2, 1983.
Maria, S. F., Russell, L. M., Gilles, M. K., and Myneni, S. C.: Organic aerosol growth mechanisms and their climate-forcing implications, Science, 306, 1921–1924, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1103491, 2004.
Marticorena, B. and Bergametti, G.: Modeling the Atmospheric Dust Cycle .1. Design of a Soil-Derived Dust Emission Scheme, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 100, 16415–16430, https://doi.org/10.1029/95jd00690, 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.
Naik, V., Horowitz, L. W., Fiore, A. M., Ginoux, P., Mao, J. Q., Aghedo, A. M., and Levy, H.: Impact of preindustrial to present-day changes in short-lived pollutant emissions on atmospheric composition and climate forcing, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 8086–8110, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50608, 2013.
NCEP Central Operations (NCO): NOAA operational Model Archive and Distribution System (NOMADS), https://nomads.ncep.noaa.gov/pub/data/nccf/com/gens/prod, last access: December 2023.
Pan, H. L. and Wu, W. S.: Implementing a mass flux convective parameterization package for the NMC medium-range forecast model, Numerical Weather Prediction 10th Conference (Nwp), Portland, OR, 18–22 July 1994, WOS:A1994BE07C0003896–98, 1994.
Putman, W. M. and Lin, S. H.: Finite-volume transport on various cubed-sphere grids, J. Comput. Phys., 227, 55–78, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2007.07.022, 2007.
Ramanathan, V., Crutzen, P. J., Lelieveld, J., Mitra, A. P., Althausen, D., Anderson, J., Andreae, M. O., Cantrell, W., Cass, G. R., Chung, C. E., Clarke, A. D., Coakley, J. A., Collins, W. D., Conant, W. C., Dulac, F., Heintzenberg, J., Heymsfield, A. J., Holben, B., Howell, S., Hudson, J., Jayaraman, A., Kiehl, J. T., Krishnamurti, T. N., Lubin, D., McFarquhar, G., Novakov, T., Ogren, J. A., Podgorny, I. A., Prather, K., Priestley, K., Prospero, J. M., Quinn, P. K., Rajeev, K., Rasch, P., Rupert, S., Sadourny, R., Satheesh, S. K., Shaw, G. E., Sheridan, P., and Valero, F. P. J.: Indian Ocean Experiment: An integrated analysis of the climate forcing and effects of the great Indo-Asian haze, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 106, 28371–28398, https://doi.org/10.1029/2001jd900133, 2001.
Randles, C. A., Da Silva, A. M., Buchard, V., Colarco, P. R., Darmenov, A., Govindaraju, R., Smirnov, A., Holben, B., Ferrare, R., Hair, J., Shinozuka, Y., and Flynn, C. J.: The MERRA-2 Aerosol Reanalysis, 1980 Onward. Part 1: System Description and Data Assimilation Evaluation, J. Climate, 30, 6823–6850, https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-16-0609.1, 2017.
Satheesh, S. K. and Moorthy, K. K.: Radiative effects of natural aerosols: A review, Atmos. Environ., 39, 2089–2110, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.12.029, 2005.
Takemura, T., Nozawa, T., Emori, S., Nakajima, T. Y., and Nakajima, T.: Simulation of climate response to aerosol direct and indirect effects with aerosol transport-radiation model, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 110, D02202, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD005029, 2005.
Textor, C., Schulz, M., Guibert, S., Kinne, S., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S., Berntsen, T., Berglen, T., Boucher, O., Chin, M., Dentener, F., Diehl, T., Easter, R., Feichter, H., Fillmore, D., Ghan, S., Ginoux, P., Gong, S., Grini, A., Hendricks, J., Horowitz, L., Huang, P., Isaksen, I., Iversen, I., Kloster, S., Koch, D., Kirkevåg, A., Kristjansson, J. E., Krol, M., Lauer, A., Lamarque, J. F., Liu, X., Montanaro, V., Myhre, G., Penner, J., Pitari, G., Reddy, S., Seland, Ø., Stier, P., Takemura, T., and Tie, X.: Analysis and quantification of the diversities of aerosol life cycles within AeroCom, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 1777–1813, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-1777-2006, 2006.
Tsigaridis, K., Krol, M., Dentener, F. J., Balkanski, Y., Lathière, J., Metzger, S., Hauglustaine, D. A., and Kanakidou, M.: Change in global aerosol composition since preindustrial times, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 5143–5162, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-5143-2006, 2006.
Ukhov, A., Ahmadov, R., Grell, G., and Stenchikov, G.: Improving dust simulations in WRF-Chem v4.1.3 coupled with the GOCART aerosol module, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 473–493, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-473-2021, 2021.
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. Q., Jacob, D. J., Spackman, J. R., Perring, A. E., Schwarz, J. P., Moteki, N., Marais, E. A., Ge, C., Wang, J., and Barrett, S. R. H.: 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.
Winker, D. M., Tackett, J. L., Getzewich, B. J., Liu, Z., Vaughan, M. A., and Rogers, R. R.: The global 3-D distribution of tropospheric aerosols as characterized by CALIOP, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 3345–3361, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-3345-2013, 2013.
Xue, X., Kolczynski, W., Hou, D., Fu, B., Alves, J.-H., WenMeng-NOAA, XiaqiongZhou-NOAA, BoCui-NOAA, WeiLi-NOAA, and lipan-NOAA: lipan-NOAA/GEFS: GMD-2023-61 (gefs.v12.0.1-nco), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7930284, 2023.
Yang, Y., Fu, Y., Lin, Q., Jiang, F., Lian, X., Li, L., and Wang, Z.: Recent advances in quantifying wet scavenging efficiency of black carbon aerosol, Atmosphere, 10, 175, https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos10040175, 2019.
Yukimoto, S., Adachi, Y., Hosaka, M., Sakami, T., Yoshimura, H., Hirabara, M., Tanaka, T. Y., Shindo, E., Tsujino, H., Deushi, M., Mizuta, R., Yabu, S., Obata, A., Nakano, H., Koshiro, T., Ose, T., and Kitoh, A.: A New Global Climate Model of the Meteorological Research Institute: MRI-CGCM3-Model Description and Basic Performance, J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn., 90, 23–64, https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.2012-A02, 2012.
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, 2022a.
Zhang, L., Montuoro, R., McKeen, S. A., Baker, B., Bhattacharjee, P. S., Grell, G. A., Henderson, J., Pan, L., Frost, G. J., 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 the National Center for Environment Prediction (NCEP)'s Global Ensemble Forecast System (GEFS-Aerosols v1), Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 5337–5369, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5337-2022, 2022b.
Zhang, X. Y., Kondragunta, S., and Quayle, B.: Estimation of Biomass Burned Areas Using Multiple-Satellite-Observed Active Fires, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 49, 4469–4482, https://doi.org/10.1109/Tgrs.2011.2149535, 2011.
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.
A GEFS-Aerosols simulation was conducted from 1 September 2019 to 30 September 2020 to evaluate...
