Articles | Volume 17, issue 2
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-685-2024
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-685-2024
Model evaluation paper
 | 
26 Jan 2024
Model evaluation paper |  | 26 Jan 2024

Modeling below-cloud scavenging of size-resolved particles in GEM-MACHv3.1

Roya Ghahreman, Wanmin Gong, Paul A. Makar, Alexandru Lupu, Amanda Cole, Kulbir Banwait, Colin Lee, and Ayodeji Akingunola

Related authors

HETerogeneous vectorized or Parallel (HETPv1.0): an updated inorganic heterogeneous chemistry solver for the metastable-state NH4+–Na+–Ca2+–K+–Mg2+–SO42−–NO3–Cl–H2O system based on ISORROPIA II
Stefan J. Miller, Paul A. Makar, and Colin J. Lee
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2197–2219, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2197-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2197-2024, 2024
Short summary
The Global Forest Fire Emissions Prediction System version 1.0
Kerry Anderson, Jack Chen, Peter Englefield, Debora Griffin, Paul Makar, and Dan Thompson
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-31,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-31, 2024
Revised manuscript under review for GMD
Short summary
Evaluating modelled tropospheric columns of CH4, CO, and O3 in the Arctic using ground-based Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) measurements
Victoria A. Flood, Kimberly Strong, Cynthia H. Whaley, Kaley A. Walker, Thomas Blumenstock, James W. Hannigan, Johan Mellqvist, Justus Notholt, Mathias Palm, Amelie N. Röhling, Stephen Arnold, Stephen Beagley, Rong-You Chien, Jesper Christensen, Makoto Deushi, Srdjan Dobricic, Xinyi Dong, Joshua S. Fu, Michael Gauss, Wanmin Gong, Joakim Langner, Kathy S. Law, Louis Marelle, Tatsuo Onishi, Naga Oshima, David A. Plummer, Luca Pozzoli, Jean-Christophe Raut, Manu A. Thomas, Svetlana Tsyro, and Steven Turnock
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 1079–1118, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-1079-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-1079-2024, 2024
Short summary
Clustering analysis of very large measurement and model datasets on high performance computing platforms
Colin J. Lee, Paul A. Makar, and Joana Soares
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-185,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-185, 2023
Revised manuscript has not been submitted
Short summary
Ozone in the boreal forest in the Alberta Oil Sands Region
Xuanyi Zhang, Mark Gordon, Paul A. Makar, Timothy Jiang, Jonathan Davies, and David Tarasick
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 13647–13664, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13647-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-13647-2023, 2023
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
Can TROPOMI NO2 satellite data be used to track the drop in and resurgence of NOx emissions in Germany between 2019–2021 using the multi-source plume method (MSPM)?
Enrico Dammers, Janot Tokaya, Christian Mielke, Kevin Hausmann, Debora Griffin, Chris McLinden, Henk Eskes, and Renske Timmermans
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4983–5007, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4983-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4983-2024, 2024
Short summary
A spatiotemporally separated framework for reconstructing the sources of atmospheric radionuclide releases
Yuhan Xu, Sheng Fang, Xinwen Dong, and Shuhan Zhuang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4961–4982, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4961-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4961-2024, 2024
Short summary
A parameterization scheme for the floating wind farm in a coupled atmosphere–wave model (COAWST v3.7)
Shaokun Deng, Shengmu Yang, Shengli Chen, Daoyi Chen, Xuefeng Yang, and Shanshan Cui
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4891–4909, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4891-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4891-2024, 2024
Short summary
RoadSurf 1.1: open-source road weather model library
Virve Eveliina Karsisto
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4837–4853, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4837-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4837-2024, 2024
Short summary
Calibrating and validating the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST) urban cooling model: case studies in France and the United States
Perrine Hamel, Martí Bosch, Léa Tardieu, Aude Lemonsu, Cécile de Munck, Chris Nootenboom, Vincent Viguié, Eric Lonsdorf, James A. Douglass, and Richard P. Sharp
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4755–4771, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4755-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4755-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

AAF: Alberta Agriculture and Forestry, Alberta Climate Information Service (ACIS), https://agriculture.alberta.ca/acis (last access: 25 January 2024), 2022. 
Abdul-Razzak, H. and Ghan, S. J.: A parameterization of aerosol activation, 3, Sectional representation, J. Geophys. Res., 107, 4026, https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000483, 2022. 
Andronache, C.: Estimates of sulphate aerosol wet scavenging coefficient for locations in the Eastern United States, Atmos. Environ., 38, 795–804, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2003.10.035, 2004. 
Andronache, C., Grönholm, T., Laakso, L., Phillips, V., and Venäläinen, A.: Scavenging of ultrafine particles by rainfall at a boreal site: observations and model estimations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 4739–4754, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-4739-2006, 2006. 
Berthet, S., Leriche, M., Pinty, J.-P., Cuesta, J., and Pigeon, G.: Scavenging of aerosol particles by rain in a cloud resolving model, Atmos. Res., 96, 325–336, 2010. 
Download
Short summary
The article explores the impact of different representations of below-cloud scavenging on model biases. A new scavenging scheme and precipitation-phase partitioning improve the model's performance, with better SO42- scavenging and wet deposition of NO3- and NH4+.