Articles | Volume 17, issue 22
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8373-2024
© 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-17-8373-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Methods for assessment of models
| 
26 Nov 2024
Methods for assessment of models |
| 26 Nov 2024
| 26 Nov 2024
Source-specific bias correction of US background and anthropogenic ozone modeled in CMAQ
T. Nash Skipper
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA
now at: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA
Christian Hogrefe
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA
Barron H. Henderson
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA
Rohit Mathur
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA
Kristen M. Foley
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA
Related authors
No articles found.
Anam M. Khan, Olivia E. Clifton, Jesse O. Bash, Sam Bland, Nathan Booth, Philip Cheung, Lisa Emberson, Johannes Flemming, Erick Fredj, Stefano Galmarini, Laurens Ganzeveld, Orestis Gazetas, Ignacio Goded, Christian Hogrefe, Christopher D. Holmes, László Horváth, Vincent Huijnen, Qian Li, Paul A. Makar, Ivan Mammarella, Giovanni Manca, J. William Munger, Juan L. Pérez-Camanyo, Jonathan Pleim, Limei Ran, Roberto San Jose, Donna Schwede, Sam J. Silva, Ralf Staebler, Shihan Sun, Amos P. K. Tai, Eran Tas, Timo Vesala, Tamás Weidinger, Zhiyong Wu, Leiming Zhang, and Paul C. Stoy
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 8613–8635, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-8613-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-8613-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Vegetation removes tropospheric ozone through stomatal uptake, and accurately modeling the stomatal uptake of ozone is important for modeling dry deposition and air quality. We evaluated the stomatal component of ozone dry deposition modeled by atmospheric chemistry models at six sites. We find that models and observation-based estimates agree at times during the growing season at all sites, but some models overestimated the stomatal component during the dry summers at a seasonally dry site.
Ioannis Kioutsioukis, Christian Hogrefe, Paul A. Makar, Ummugulsun Alyuz, Jessy O. Bash, Roberto Bellasio, Roberto Bianconi, Tim Buttler, Olivia E. Clifton, Philippe Cheung, Alma Hodzic, Richard Kranenburg, Aurelia Lupascu, Kester Momoh, Juan Luis Perez-Camaño, John Pleim, Young-Hee Ryu, Robero San Jose, Donna Schwede, Ranjeet Sokhi, and Stefano Galmarini
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1091, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1091, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Deposition is a key in air quality modelling. An evaluation of the AQMEII4 models is performed prior to analysing the different deposition schemes in relation to the LULC used. Such analysis is unprecedented. Among the results, LULC masks have to be harmonised and up-to-date information used in place of outdated and too course masks. Alternatively LULC masks should be evaluated and intercom pared when multiple model results are analysed.
Paul A. Makar, Philip Cheung, Christian Hogrefe, Ayodeji Akingunola, Ummugulsum Alyuz, Jesse O. Bash, Michael D. Bell, Roberto Bellasio, Roberto Bianconi, Tim Butler, Hazel Cathcart, Olivia E. Clifton, Alma Hodzic, Ioannis Kioutsioukis, Richard Kranenburg, Aurelia Lupascu, Jason A. Lynch, Kester Momoh, Juan L. Perez-Camanyo, Jonathan Pleim, Young-Hee Ryu, Roberto San Jose, Donna Schwede, Thomas Scheuschner, Mark W. Shephard, Ranjeet S. Sokhi, and Stefano Galmarini
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 3049–3107, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-3049-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-3049-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The large range of sulfur and nitrogen deposition estimates from air quality models results in a large range of predicted impacts. We used models and deposition diagnostics to identify the processes controlling atmospheric sulfur and nitrogen deposition variability. Controlling factors included the uptake of gases and aerosols by hydrometeors, aerosol inorganic chemistry, particle dry deposition, ammonia bidirectional fluxes, gas deposition via plant cuticles and soil, and land use data.
Diego Guizzardi, Monica Crippa, Tim Butler, Terry Keating, Rosa Wu, Jacek W. Kamiński, Jeroen Kuenen, Junichi Kurokawa, Satoru Chatani, Tazuko Morikawa, George Pouliot, Jacinthe Racine, Michael D. Moran, Zbigniew Klimont, Patrick M. Manseau, Rabab Mashayekhi, Barron H. Henderson, Steven J. Smith, Rachel Hoesly, Marilena Muntean, Manjola Banja, Edwin Schaaf, Federico Pagani, Jung-Hun Woo, Jinseok Kim, Enrico Pisoni, Junhua Zhang, David Niemi, Mourad Sassi, Annie Duhamel, Tabish Ansari, Kristen Foley, Guannan Geng, Yifei Chen, and Qiang Zhang
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-601, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-601, 2025
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
The global air pollution emission mosaic HTAP_v3.1 is the state-of-the-art database for addressing the evolution of a set of policy-relevant air pollutants over the past 2 decades. The inventory is made by the harmonization and blending of seven regional inventories, gapfilled using the most recent release of EDGAR (EDGARv8). By incorporating the best available local information, the HTAP_v3.1 mosaic inventory can be used for policy-relevant studies at both regional and global levels.
Christian Hogrefe, Stefano Galmarini, Paul A. Makar, Ioannis Kioutsioukis, Olivia E. Clifton, Ummugulsum Alyuz, Jesse O. Bash, Roberto Bellasio, Roberto Bianconi, Tim Butler, Philip Cheung, Alma Hodzic, Richard Kranenburg, Aurelia Lupascu, Kester Momoh, Juan Luis Perez-Camanyo, Jonathan E. Pleim, Young-Hee Ryu, Roberto San Jose, Martijn Schaap, Donna B. Schwede, and Ranjeet Sokhi
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-225, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-225, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Performed under the umbrella of the fourth phase of the Air Quality Model Evaluation International Initiative (AQMEII4), this study applies AQMEII4 diagnostic tools to better characterize how dry deposition removes pollutants from the atmosphere in regional-scale models. The results also strongly suggest that improvement and harmonization of the representation of land use in these models would serve the community in their future development efforts.
T. Nash Skipper, Emma L. D'Ambro, Forwood C. Wiser, V. Faye McNeill, Rebecca H. Schwantes, Barron H. Henderson, Ivan R. Piletic, Colleen B. Baublitz, Jesse O. Bash, Andrew R. Whitehill, Lukas C. Valin, Asher P. Mouat, Jennifer Kaiser, Glenn M. Wolfe, Jason M. St. Clair, Thomas F. Hanisco, Alan Fried, Bryan K. Place, and Havala O.T. Pye
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 12903–12924, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-12903-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-12903-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We develop the Community Regional Atmospheric Chemistry Multiphase Mechanism (CRACMM) version 2 to improve predictions of formaldehyde in ambient air compared to satellite-, aircraft-, and ground-based observations. With the updated chemistry, we estimate the cancer risk from inhalation exposure to ambient formaldehyde across the contiguous USA and predict that 40 % of this risk is controllable through reductions in anthropogenic emissions of nitrogen oxides and reactive organic carbon.
David C. Wong, Jeff Willison, Jonathan E. Pleim, Golam Sarwar, James Beidler, Russ Bullock, Jerold A. Herwehe, Rob Gilliam, Daiwen Kang, Christian Hogrefe, George Pouliot, and Hosein Foroutan
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7855–7866, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7855-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7855-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This work describe how we linked the meteorological Model for Prediction Across Scales – Atmosphere (MPAS-A) with the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) air quality model to form a coupled modelling system. This could be used to study air quality or climate and air quality interaction at a global scale. This new model scales well in high-performance computing environments and performs well with respect to ground surface networks in terms of ozone and PM2.5.
Christos I. Efstathiou, Elizabeth Adams, Carlie J. Coats, Robert Zelt, Mark Reed, John McGee, Kristen M. Foley, Fahim I. Sidi, David C. Wong, Steven Fine, and Saravanan Arunachalam
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7001–7027, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7001-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7001-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We present a summary of enabling high-performance computing of the Community Multiscale Air Quality Model (CMAQ) – a state-of-the-science community multiscale air quality model – on two cloud computing platforms through documenting the technologies, model performance, scaling and relative merits. This may be a new paradigm for computationally intense future model applications. We initiated this work due to a need to leverage cloud computing advances and to ease the learning curve for new users.
Matthew J. Rowlinson, Mat J. Evans, Lucy J. Carpenter, Katie A. Read, Shalini Punjabi, Adedayo Adedeji, Luke Fakes, Ally Lewis, Ben Richmond, Neil Passant, Tim Murrells, Barron Henderson, Kelvin H. Bates, and Detlev Helmig
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 8317–8342, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-8317-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-8317-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Ethane and propane are volatile organic compounds emitted from human activities which help to form ozone, a pollutant and greenhouse gas, and also affect the chemistry of the lower atmosphere. Atmospheric models tend to do a poor job of reproducing the abundance of these compounds in the atmosphere. By using regional estimates of their emissions, rather than globally consistent estimates, we can significantly improve the simulation of ethane in the model and make some improvement for propane.
Cassandra J. Gaston, Joseph M. Prospero, Kristen Foley, Havala O. T. Pye, Lillian Custals, Edmund Blades, Peter Sealy, and James A. Christie
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 8049–8066, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-8049-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-8049-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
To understand how changing emissions have impacted aerosols in remote regions, we measured nitrate and sulfate in Barbados and compared them to model predictions from EPA’s Air QUAlity TimE Series (EQUATES). Nitrate was stable, except for spikes in 2008 and 2010 due to transported smoke. Sulfate decreased in the 1990s due to reductions in sulfur dioxide (SO2) in the US and Europe; then it increased in the 2000s, likely due to anthropogenic emissions from Africa.
Kelvin H. Bates, Mathew J. Evans, Barron H. Henderson, and Daniel J. Jacob
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1511–1524, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1511-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1511-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Accurate representation of rates and products of chemical reactions in atmospheric models is crucial for simulating concentrations of pollutants and climate forcers. We update the widely used GEOS-Chem atmospheric chemistry model with reaction parameters from recent compilations of experimental data and demonstrate the implications for key atmospheric chemical species. The updates decrease tropospheric CO mixing ratios and increase stratospheric nitrogen oxide mixing ratios, among other changes.
Heather Simon, Christian Hogrefe, Andrew Whitehill, Kristen M. Foley, Jennifer Liljegren, Norm Possiel, Benjamin Wells, Barron H. Henderson, Lukas C. Valin, Gail Tonnesen, K. Wyat Appel, and Shannon Koplitz
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 1855–1871, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-1855-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-1855-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We assess observed and modeled ozone weekend–weekday differences in the USA from 2002–2019. A subset of urban areas that were NOx-saturated at the beginning of the period transitioned to NOx-limited conditions. Multiple rural areas of California were NOx-limited for the entire period but become less influenced by local day-of-week emission patterns in more recent years. The model produces more NOx-saturated conditions than the observations but captures trends in weekend–weekday ozone patterns.
Olivia E. Clifton, Donna Schwede, Christian Hogrefe, Jesse O. Bash, Sam Bland, Philip Cheung, Mhairi Coyle, Lisa Emberson, Johannes Flemming, Erick Fredj, Stefano Galmarini, Laurens Ganzeveld, Orestis Gazetas, Ignacio Goded, Christopher D. Holmes, László Horváth, Vincent Huijnen, Qian Li, Paul A. Makar, Ivan Mammarella, Giovanni Manca, J. William Munger, Juan L. Pérez-Camanyo, Jonathan Pleim, Limei Ran, Roberto San Jose, Sam J. Silva, Ralf Staebler, Shihan Sun, Amos P. K. Tai, Eran Tas, Timo Vesala, Tamás Weidinger, Zhiyong Wu, and Leiming Zhang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 9911–9961, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-9911-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-9911-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
A primary sink of air pollutants is dry deposition. Dry deposition estimates differ across the models used to simulate atmospheric chemistry. Here, we introduce an effort to examine dry deposition schemes from atmospheric chemistry models. We provide our approach’s rationale, document the schemes, and describe datasets used to drive and evaluate the schemes. We also launch the analysis of results by evaluating against observations and identifying the processes leading to model–model differences.
Christian Hogrefe, Jesse O. Bash, Jonathan E. Pleim, Donna B. Schwede, Robert C. Gilliam, Kristen M. Foley, K. Wyat Appel, and Rohit Mathur
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 8119–8147, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8119-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8119-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Under the umbrella of the fourth phase of the Air Quality Model Evaluation International Initiative (AQMEII4), this study applies AQMEII4 diagnostic tools to better characterize how dry deposition removes pollutants from the atmosphere in the widely used CMAQ model. The results illustrate how these tools can provide insights into similarities and differences between the two CMAQ dry deposition options that affect simulated pollutant budgets and ecosystem impacts from atmospheric pollution.
Monica Crippa, Diego Guizzardi, Tim Butler, Terry Keating, Rosa Wu, Jacek Kaminski, Jeroen Kuenen, Junichi Kurokawa, Satoru Chatani, Tazuko Morikawa, George Pouliot, Jacinthe Racine, Michael D. Moran, Zbigniew Klimont, Patrick M. Manseau, Rabab Mashayekhi, Barron H. Henderson, Steven J. Smith, Harrison Suchyta, Marilena Muntean, Efisio Solazzo, Manjola Banja, Edwin Schaaf, Federico Pagani, Jung-Hun Woo, Jinseok Kim, Fabio Monforti-Ferrario, Enrico Pisoni, Junhua Zhang, David Niemi, Mourad Sassi, Tabish Ansari, and Kristen Foley
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 2667–2694, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-2667-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-2667-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This study responds to the global and regional atmospheric modelling community's need for a mosaic of air pollutant emissions with global coverage, long time series, spatially distributed data at a high time resolution, and a high sectoral resolution in order to enhance the understanding of transboundary air pollution. The mosaic approach to integrating official regional emission inventories with a global inventory based on a consistent methodology ensures policy-relevant results.
Havala O. T. Pye, Bryan K. Place, Benjamin N. Murphy, Karl M. Seltzer, Emma L. D'Ambro, Christine Allen, Ivan R. Piletic, Sara Farrell, Rebecca H. Schwantes, Matthew M. Coggon, Emily Saunders, Lu Xu, Golam Sarwar, William T. Hutzell, Kristen M. Foley, George Pouliot, Jesse Bash, and William R. Stockwell
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 5043–5099, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-5043-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-5043-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Chemical mechanisms describe how emissions from vehicles, vegetation, and other sources are chemically transformed in the atmosphere to secondary products including criteria and hazardous air pollutants. The Community Regional Atmospheric Chemistry Multiphase Mechanism integrates gas-phase radical chemistry with pathways to fine-particle mass. New species were implemented, resulting in a bottom-up representation of organic aerosol, which is required for accurate source attribution of pollutants.
Qian Shu, Sergey L. Napelenok, William T. Hutzell, Kirk R. Baker, Barron H. Henderson, Benjamin N. Murphy, and Christian Hogrefe
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 2303–2322, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2303-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2303-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Source attribution methods are generally used to determine culpability of precursor emission sources to ambient pollutant concentrations. However, source attribution of secondarily formed pollutants such as ozone and its precursors cannot be explicitly measured, making evaluation of source apportionment methods challenging. In this study, multiple apportionment approach comparisons show common features but still reveal wide variations in predicted sector contribution and species dependency.
James D. East, Barron H. Henderson, Sergey L. Napelenok, Shannon N. Koplitz, Golam Sarwar, Robert Gilliam, Allen Lenzen, Daniel Q. Tong, R. Bradley Pierce, and Fernando Garcia-Menendez
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 15981–16001, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-15981-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-15981-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We present a framework that uses a computer model of air quality, along with air pollution data from satellite instruments, to estimate emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) across the Northern Hemisphere. The framework, which advances current methods to infer emissions from satellite observations, provides observationally constrained NOx estimates, including in regions of the world where emissions are highly uncertain, and can improve simulations of air pollutants relevant for health and policy.
Ziqi Gao, Yifeng Wang, Petros Vasilakos, Cesunica E. Ivey, Khanh Do, and Armistead G. Russell
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 9015–9029, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-9015-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-9015-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
While the national ambient air quality standard of ozone is based on the 3-year average of the fourth highest 8 h maximum (MDA8) ozone concentrations, these predicted extreme values using numerical methods are always biased low. We built four computational models (GAM, MARS, random forest and SVR) to predict the fourth highest MDA8 ozone in Southern California using precursor emissions, meteorology and climatological patterns. All models presented acceptable performance, with GAM being the best.
Sarah E. Benish, Jesse O. Bash, Kristen M. Foley, K. Wyat Appel, Christian Hogrefe, Robert Gilliam, and George Pouliot
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 12749–12767, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12749-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12749-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We assess Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model simulations of nitrogen and sulfur deposition over US climate regions to evaluate the model ability to reproduce long-term deposition trends and total deposition budgets. A measurement–model fusion technique is found to improve estimates of wet deposition. Emission controls set by the Clean Air Act successfully decreased oxidized nitrogen deposition across the US; we find increasing amounts of reduced nitrogen to the total nitrogen budget.
Mengying Li, Shaocai Yu, Xue Chen, Zhen Li, Yibo Zhang, Zhe Song, Weiping Liu, Pengfei Li, Xiaoye Zhang, Meigen Zhang, Yele Sun, Zirui Liu, Caiping Sun, Jingkun Jiang, Shuxiao Wang, Benjamin N. Murphy, Kiran Alapaty, Rohit Mathur, Daniel Rosenfeld, and John H. Seinfeld
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 11845–11866, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11845-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11845-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This study constructed an emission inventory of condensable particulate matter (CPM) in China with a focus on organic aerosols (OAs), based on collected CPM emission information. The results show that OA emissions are enhanced twofold for the years 2014 and 2017 after the inclusion of CPM in the new inventory. Sensitivity cases demonstrated the significant contributions of CPM emissions from stationary combustion and mobile sources to primary, secondary, and total OA concentrations.
Jiandong Wang, Jia Xing, Shuxiao Wang, Rohit Mathur, Jiaping Wang, Yuqiang Zhang, Chao Liu, Jonathan Pleim, Dian Ding, Xing Chang, Jingkun Jiang, Peng Zhao, Shovan Kumar Sahu, Yuzhi Jin, David C. Wong, and Jiming Hao
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 5147–5156, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5147-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5147-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Aerosols reduce surface solar radiation and change the photolysis rate and planetary boundary layer stability. In this study, the online coupled meteorological and chemistry model was used to explore the detailed pathway of how aerosol direct effects affect secondary inorganic aerosol. The effects through the dynamics pathway act as an equally or even more important route compared with the photolysis pathway in affecting secondary aerosol concentration in both summer and winter.
Kai Wang, Yang Zhang, Shaocai Yu, David C. Wong, Jonathan Pleim, Rohit Mathur, James T. Kelly, and Michelle Bell
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 7189–7221, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7189-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7189-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The two-way coupled WRF-CMAQ model accounting for complex chemistry–meteorology feedbacks has been applied to the long-term predictions of regional meteorology and air quality over the US. The model results show superior performance and importance of chemistry–meteorology feedbacks when compared to the offline coupled WRF and CMAQ simulations, which suggests that feedbacks should be considered along with other factors in developing future model applications to inform policy making.
Stefano Galmarini, Paul Makar, Olivia E. Clifton, Christian Hogrefe, Jesse O. Bash, Roberto Bellasio, Roberto Bianconi, Johannes Bieser, Tim Butler, Jason Ducker, Johannes Flemming, Alma Hodzic, Christopher D. Holmes, Ioannis Kioutsioukis, Richard Kranenburg, Aurelia Lupascu, Juan Luis Perez-Camanyo, Jonathan Pleim, Young-Hee Ryu, Roberto San Jose, Donna Schwede, Sam Silva, and Ralf Wolke
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 15663–15697, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-15663-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-15663-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This technical note presents the research protocols for phase 4 of the Air Quality Model Evaluation International Initiative (AQMEII4). This initiative has three goals: (i) to define the state of wet and dry deposition in regional models, (ii) to evaluate how dry deposition influences air concentration and flux predictions, and (iii) to identify the causes for prediction differences. The evaluation compares LULC-specific dry deposition and effective conductances and fluxes.
Syuichi Itahashi, Rohit Mathur, Christian Hogrefe, Sergey L. Napelenok, and Yang Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5751–5768, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5751-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5751-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system extended for hemispheric-scale applications (H-CMAQ) incorporated the satellite-constrained degassing SO2 emissions from 50 volcanos across the Northern Hemisphere. The impact on tropospheric sulfate aerosol (SO42−) is assessed for 2010. Although the considered volcanic emissions occurred at or below the middle of free troposphere (500 hPa), SO42− enhancements of more than 10 % were detected up to the top of free troposphere (250 hPa).
Benjamin N. Murphy, Christopher G. Nolte, Fahim Sidi, Jesse O. Bash, K. Wyat Appel, Carey Jang, Daiwen Kang, James Kelly, Rohit Mathur, Sergey Napelenok, George Pouliot, and Havala O. T. Pye
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3407–3420, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3407-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3407-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The algorithms for applying air pollution emission rates in the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model have been improved to better support users and developers. The new features accommodate emissions perturbation studies that are typical in atmospheric research and output a wealth of metadata for each model run so assumptions can be verified and documented. The new approach dramatically enhances the transparency and functionality of this critical aspect of atmospheric modeling.
Bingqing Zhang, Huizhong Shen, Pengfei Liu, Hongyu Guo, Yongtao Hu, Yilin Chen, Shaodong Xie, Ziyan Xi, T. Nash Skipper, and Armistead G. Russell
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 8341–8356, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-8341-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-8341-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Extended ground-level measurements are coupled with model simulations to comprehensively compare the aerosol acidity in China and the United States. Aerosols in China are significantly less acidic than those in the United States, with pH values 1–2 units higher. Higher aerosol mass concentrations and the abundance of ammonia and ammonium in China, compared to the United States, are leading causes of the pH difference between these two countries.
K. Wyat Appel, Jesse O. Bash, Kathleen M. Fahey, Kristen M. Foley, Robert C. Gilliam, Christian Hogrefe, William T. Hutzell, Daiwen Kang, Rohit Mathur, Benjamin N. Murphy, Sergey L. Napelenok, Christopher G. Nolte, Jonathan E. Pleim, George A. Pouliot, Havala O. T. Pye, Limei Ran, Shawn J. Roselle, Golam Sarwar, Donna B. Schwede, Fahim I. Sidi, Tanya L. Spero, and David C. Wong
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2867–2897, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2867-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2867-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper details the scientific updates in the recently released CMAQ version 5.3 (and v5.3.1) and also includes operational and diagnostic evaluations of CMAQv5.3.1 against observations and the previous version of the CMAQ (v5.2.1). This work was done to improve the underlying science in CMAQ. This article is used to inform the CMAQ modeling community of the updates to the modeling system and the expected change in model performance from these updates (versus the previous model version).
Qian Shu, Benjamin Murphy, Jonathan E. Pleim, Donna Schwede, Barron H. Henderson, Havala O.T. Pye, Keith Wyat Appel, Tanvir R. Khan, and Judith A. Perlinger
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2021-129, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2021-129, 2021
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
We have bridged the gap between dry deposition measurement and modeling by rigorous use of box and regional transport models and field measurements, but more efforts are needed. This study highlights that deviation among deposition schemes is most pronounced for small and large particles. This study better links model predictions to available real-world observations and incrementally reduces uncertainties in the magnitude of loss processes important for the lifecycle of air pollutants.
Athanasios Nenes, Spyros N. Pandis, Maria Kanakidou, Armistead G. Russell, Shaojie Song, Petros Vasilakos, and Rodney J. Weber
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 6023–6033, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6023-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6023-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Ecosystems and air quality are affected by the dry deposition of inorganic reactive nitrogen (Nr, the sum of ammonium and nitrate). Its large variability is driven by the large difference in deposition velocity of N when in the gas or particle phase. Here we show that aerosol liquid water and acidity, by affecting gas–particle partitioning, modulate the dry deposition velocity of NH3, HNO3, and Nr worldwide. These effects explain the rapid accumulation of nitrate aerosol during haze events.
Yilin Chen, Huizhong Shen, Jennifer Kaiser, Yongtao Hu, Shannon L. Capps, Shunliu Zhao, Amir Hakami, Jhih-Shyang Shih, Gertrude K. Pavur, Matthew D. Turner, Daven K. Henze, Jaroslav Resler, Athanasios Nenes, Sergey L. Napelenok, Jesse O. Bash, Kathleen M. Fahey, Gregory R. Carmichael, Tianfeng Chai, Lieven Clarisse, Pierre-François Coheur, Martin Van Damme, and Armistead G. Russell
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 2067–2082, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-2067-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-2067-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Ammonia (NH3) emissions can exert adverse impacts on air quality and ecosystem well-being. NH3 emission inventories are viewed as highly uncertain. Here we optimize the NH3 emission estimates in the US using an air quality model and NH3 measurements from the IASI satellite instruments. The optimized NH3 emissions are much higher than the National Emissions Inventory estimates in April. The optimized NH3 emissions improved model performance when evaluated against independent observation.
Huiying Luo, Marina Astitha, Christian Hogrefe, Rohit Mathur, and S. Trivikrama Rao
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 13801–13815, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-13801-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-13801-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
A new method is introduced to evaluate nonlinear, nonstationary modeled PM2.5 time series by decomposing decadal PM2.5 concentrations and its species onto various timescales. It does not require preselection of temporal scales and assumptions of linearity and stationarity. It provides a unique opportunity to assess the influence of each species on total PM2.5. The results reveal a phase shift in modeled EC/OC concentrations, indicating the need for improved model treatment of organic aerosols.
Amy E. Christiansen, Annmarie G. Carlton, and Barron H. Henderson
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 11607–11624, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11607-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11607-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We quantify differences in surface-level fine particle mass (PM2.5) chemical composition in relation to satellite-derived cloud flags and find significant differences between clear-sky and cloud days. The work suggests that future analysis in this area is warranted.
Cited articles
Appel, K. W., Bash, J. O., Fahey, K. M., Foley, K. M., Gilliam, R. C., Hogrefe, C., Hutzell, W. T., Kang, D., Mathur, R., Murphy, B. N., Napelenok, S. L., Nolte, C. G., Pleim, J. E., Pouliot, G. A., Pye, H. O. T., Ran, L., Roselle, S. J., Sarwar, G., Schwede, D. B., Sidi, F. I., Spero, T. L., and Wong, D. C.: The Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model versions 5.3 and 5.3.1: system updates and evaluation, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2867–2897, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2867-2021, 2021.
Bash, J. O., Baker, K. R., and Beaver, M. R.: Evaluation of improved land use and canopy representation in BEIS v3.61 with biogenic VOC measurements in California, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2191–2207, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2191-2016, 2016.
CAMS: Soil N emissions for 2000–present, D81.3.6.1, CAMS. https://atmosphere.copernicus.eu/sites/default/files/2019-11/25_CAMS81_2017SC1_D81.3.6.1-201810_APPROVED_Ver1.pdf (last access: 16 June 2024), 2018.
Dentener, F., Keating, T., and Akimoto, H. (Eds.): Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution 2010, Part A: Ozone and Particulate Matter. Task Force on Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution, Air Pollution Studies, No. 17, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, Geneva, https://doi.org/10.18356/2c908168-en, 2010.
Dolwick, P., Akhtar, F., Baker, K. R., Possiel, N., Simon, H., and Tonnesen, G.: Comparison of background ozone estimates over the western United States based on two separate model methodologies, Atmos. Environ., 109, 282–296, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.01.005, 2015.
Fiore, A., Jacob, D. J., Liu, H., Yantosca, R. M., Fairlie, T. D., and Li, Q.: Variability in surface ozone background over the United States: Implications for air quality policy, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, D244787, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003jd003855, 2003.
Fiore, A. M., Oberman, J. T., Lin, M. Y., Zhang, L., Clifton, O. E., Jacob, D. J., Naik, V., Horowitz, L. W., Pinto, J. P., and Milly, G. P.: Estimating North American background ozone in U.S. surface air with two independent global models: Variability, uncertainties, and recommendations, Atmos. Environ., 96, 284–300, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.07.045, 2014.
Foley, K., Pouliot, G., Eyth, A., Possiel, N., Aldridge, M., Allen, C., Appel, W., Bash, J., Beardsley, M., Beidler, J., Choi, D., Eder, B., Farkas, C., Gilliam, R., Godfrey, J., Henderson, B., Hogrefe, C., Koplitz, S., Mason, R., Mathur, R., Misenis, C., Pye, H., Reynolds, L., Roark, M., Roberts, S., Schwede, D., Seltzer, K., Sonntag, D., Talgo, K., Toro, C., and Vukovich, J.: EQUATES: EPA's Air QUAlity TimE Series Project, 19th Annual CMAS Conference 2020, virtual, 26–30 October 2020, https://www.cmascenter.org/conference/2020/slides/KFoley_EQUATES_CMAS_2020.pdf (last access: 16 November 2024), 2020.
Foley, K. M., Pouliot, G. A., Eyth, A., Aldridge, M. F., Allen, C., Appel, K. W., Bash, J. O., Beardsley, M., Beidler, J., Choi, D., Farkas, C., Gilliam, R. C., Godfrey, J., Henderson, B. H., Hogrefe, C., Koplitz, S. N., Mason, R., Mathur, R., Misenis, C., Possiel, N., Pye, H. O. T., Reynolds, L., Roark, M., Roberts, S., Schwede, D. B., Seltzer, K. M., Sonntag, D., Talgo, K., Toro, C., Vukovich, J., Xing, J., and Adams, E.: 2002–2017 anthropogenic emissions data for air quality modeling over the United States, Data in Brief, 47, 109022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2023.109022, 2023.
Guenther, A. B., Jiang, X., Heald, C. L., Sakulyanontvittaya, T., Duhl, T., Emmons, L. K., and Wang, X.: The Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature version 2.1 (MEGAN2.1): an extended and updated framework for modeling biogenic emissions, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 1471–1492, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-1471-2012, 2012.
Guo, J. J., Fiore, A. M., Murray, L. T., Jaffe, D. A., Schnell, J. L., Moore, C. T., and Milly, G. P.: Average versus high surface ozone levels over the continental USA: model bias, background influences, and interannual variability, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 12123–12140, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-12123-2018, 2018.
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.
Hogrefe, C., Liu, P., Pouliot, G., Mathur, R., Roselle, S., Flemming, J., Lin, M., and Park, R. J.: Impacts of different characterizations of large-scale background on simulated regional-scale ozone over the continental United States, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 3839–3864, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-3839-2018, 2018.
Hosseinpour, F., Kumar, N., Tran, T., and Knipping, E.: Using machine learning to improve the estimate of U.S. background ozone, Atmos. Environ., 316, 120145, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2023.120145, 2024.
Huang, M., Bowman, K. W., Carmichael, G. R., Lee, M., Chai, T., Spak, S. N., Henze, D. K., Darmenov, A. S., and da Silva, A. M.: Improved western U.S. background ozone estimates via constraining nonlocal and local source contributions using Aura TES and OMI observations, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 120, 3572–3592, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014jd022993, 2015.
Itahashi, S., Mathur, R., Hogrefe, C., and Zhang, Y.: Modeling stratospheric intrusion and trans-Pacific transport on tropospheric ozone using hemispheric CMAQ during April 2010 – Part 1: Model evaluation and air mass characterization for stratosphere–troposphere transport, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 3373–3396, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-3373-2020, 2020.
Jaffe, D. A., Wigder, N., Downey, N., Pfister, G., Boynard, A., and Reid, S. B.: Impact of Wildfires on Ozone Exceptional Events in the Western U.S, Environ. Sci. Technol., 47, 11065–11072, https://doi.org/10.1021/es402164f, 2013.
Jaffe, D. A., Cooper, O. R., Fiore, A. M., Henderson, B. H., Tonnesen, G. S., Russell, A. G., Henze, D. K., Langford, A. O., Lin, M. Y., and Moore, T.: Scientific assessment of background ozone over the US: Implications for air quality management, Elem. Sci. Anth., 6, 30, https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.309, 2018.
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.
Kang, D., Pickering, K. E., Allen, D. J., Foley, K. M., Wong, D. C., Mathur, R., and Roselle, S. J.: Simulating lightning NO production in CMAQv5.2: evolution of scientific updates, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 3071–3083, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3071-2019, 2019.
Langford, A. O., Senff, C. J., Alvarez, R. J., Brioude, J., Cooper, O. R., Holloway, J. S., Lin, M. Y., Marchbanks, R. D., Pierce, R. B., Sandberg, S. P., Weickmann, A. M., and Williams, E. J.: An overview of the 2013 Las Vegas Ozone Study (LVOS): Impact of stratospheric intrusions and long-range transport on surface air quality, Atmos. Environ., 109, 305–322, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.08.040, 2015.
Langford, A. O., Senff, C. J., Alvarez II, R. J., Aikin, K. C., Ahmadov, R., Angevine, W. M., Baidar, S., Brewer, W. A., Brown, S. S., James, E. P., McCarty, B. J., Sandberg, S. P., and Zucker, M. L.: Were Wildfires Responsible for the Unusually High Surface Ozone in Colorado During 2021?, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 128, e2022JD037700, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JD037700, 2023.
Lin, M., Fiore, A. M., Cooper, O. R., Horowitz, L. W., Langford, A. O., Levy II, H., Johnson, B. J., Naik, V., Oltmans, S. J., and Senff, C. J.: Springtime high surface ozone events over the western United States: Quantifying the role of stratospheric intrusions, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, D00V22, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012jd018151, 2012a.
Lin, M., Fiore, A. M., Horowitz, L. W., Cooper, O. R., Naik, V., Holloway, J., Johnson, B. J., Middlebrook, A. M., Oltmans, S. J., Pollack, I. B., Ryerson, T. B., Warner, J. X., Wiedinmyer, C., Wilson, J., and Wyman, B.: Transport of Asian ozone pollution into surface air over the western United States in spring, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, D00V07, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011jd016961, 2012b.
Lin, M., Fiore, A. M., Horowitz, L. W., Langford, A. O., Oltmans, S. J., Tarasick, D., and Rieder, H. E.: Climate variability modulates western US ozone air quality in spring via deep stratospheric intrusions, Nat. Commun., 6, 7105, https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8105, 2015.
Lin, M., Horowitz, L. W., Payton, R., Fiore, A. M., and Tonnesen, G.: US surface ozone trends and extremes from 1980 to 2014: quantifying the roles of rising Asian emissions, domestic controls, wildfires, and climate, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 2943–2970, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-2943-2017, 2017.
Lin, M., Horowitz, L. W., Zhao, M., Harris, L., Ginoux, P., Dunne, J., Malyshev, S., Shevliakova, E., Ahsan, H., Garner, S., Paulot, F., Pouyaei, A., Smith, S. J., Xie, Y., Zadeh, N., and Zhou, L.: The GFDL Variable-Resolution Global Chemistry-Climate Model for Research at the Nexus of US Climate and Air Quality Extremes, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 16, e2023MS003984, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023MS003984, 2024.
Liu, S. C., Trainer, M., Fehsenfeld, F. C., Parrish, D. D., Williams, E. J., Fahey, D. W., Hübler, G., and Murphy, P. C.: Ozone production in the rural troposphere and the implications for regional and global ozone distributions, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 92, 4191–4207, https://doi.org/10.1029/JD092iD04p04191, 1987.
Mathur, R., Xing, J., Gilliam, R., Sarwar, G., Hogrefe, C., Pleim, J., Pouliot, G., Roselle, S., Spero, T. L., Wong, D. C., and Young, J.: Extending the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system to hemispheric scales: overview of process considerations and initial applications, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 12449–12474, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-12449-2017, 2017.
Mathur, R., Kang, D., Napelenok, S. L., Xing, J., Hogrefe, C., Sarwar, G., Itahashi, S., and Henderson, B. H.: How Have Divergent Global Emission Trends Influenced Long-Range Transported Ozone to North America?, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 127, e2022JD036926, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JD036926, 2022.
McDonald-Buller, E. C., Allen, D. T., Brown, N., Jacob, D. J., Jaffe, D., Kolb, C. E., Lefohn, A. S., Oltmans, S., Parrish, D. D., Yarwood, G., and Zhang, L.: Establishing Policy Relevant Background (PRB) Ozone Concentrations in the United States, Environ. Sci. Technol., 45, 9484–9497, https://doi.org/10.1021/es2022818, 2011.
Murphy, B. N., Woody, M. C., Jimenez, J. L., Carlton, A. M. G., Hayes, P. L., Liu, S., Ng, N. L., Russell, L. M., Setyan, A., Xu, L., Young, J., Zaveri, R. A., Zhang, Q., and Pye, H. O. T.: Semivolatile POA and parameterized total combustion SOA in CMAQv5.2: impacts on source strength and partitioning, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 11107–11133, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-11107-2017, 2017.
Price, C., Penner, J., and Prather, M.: NOx from lightning: 1. Global distribution based on lightning physics, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 102, 5929–5941, https://doi.org/10.1029/96JD03504, 1997.
Pye, H. O. T., D'Ambro, E. L., Lee, B. H., Schobesberger, S., Takeuchi, M., Zhao, Y., Lopez-Hilfiker, F., Liu, J., Shilling, J. E., Xing, J., Mathur, R., Middlebrook, A. M., Liao, J., Welti, A., Graus, M., Warneke, C., de Gouw, J. A., Holloway, J. S., Ryerson, T. B., Pollack, I. B., and Thornton, J. A.: Anthropogenic enhancements to production of highly oxygenated molecules from autoxidation, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 116, 6641–6646, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1810774116, 2019.
Qin, M., Murphy, B. N., Isaacs, K. K., McDonald, B. C., Lu, Q., McKeen, S. A., Koval, L., Robinson, A. L., Efstathiou, C., Allen, C., and Pye, H. O. T.: Criteria pollutant impacts of volatile chemical products informed by near-field modelling, Nature Sustainability, 4, 129–137, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-00614-1, 2021.
Rickly, P. S., Coggon, M. M., Aikin, K. C., Alvarez II, R. J., Baidar, S., Gilman, J. B., Gkatzelis, G. I., Harkins, C., He, J., Lamplugh, A., Langford, A. O., McDonald, B. C., Peischl, J., Robinson, M. A., Rollins, A. W., Schwantes, R. H., Senff, C. J., Warneke, C., and Brown, S. S.: Influence of Wildfire on Urban Ozone: An Observationally Constrained Box Modeling Study at a Site in the Colorado Front Range, Environ. Sci. Technol., 57, 1257–1267, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.2c06157, 2023.
Sarwar, G., Gantt, B., Foley, K., Fahey, K., Spero, T. L., Kang, D., Mathur, R., Foroutan, H., Xing, J., Sherwen, T., and Saiz-Lopez, A.: Influence of bromine and iodine chemistry on annual, seasonal, diurnal, and background ozone: CMAQ simulations over the Northern Hemisphere, Atmos. Environ., 213, 395–404, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2019.06.020, 2019.
Sarwar, G., Hogrefe, C., Henderson, B. H., Mathur, R., Gilliam, R., Callaghan, A. B., Lee, J., and Carpenter, L. J.: Impact of particulate nitrate photolysis on air quality over the Northern Hemisphere, Sci. Total Environ., 917, 170406, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.170406, 2024.
Schwantes, R. H., Lacey, F. G., Tilmes, S., Emmons, L. K., Lauritzen, P. H., Walters, S., Callaghan, P., Zarzycki, C. M., Barth, M. C., Jo, D. S., Bacmeister, J. T., Neale, R. B., Vitt, F., Kluzek, E., Roozitalab, B., Hall, S. R., Ullmann, K., Warneke, C., Peischl, J., Pollack, I. B., Flocke, F., Wolfe, G. M., Hanisco, T. F., Keutsch, F. N., Kaiser, J., Bui, T. P. V., Jimenez, J. L., Campuzano-Jost, P., Apel, E. C., Hornbrook, R. S., Hills, A. J., Yuan, B., and Wisthaler, A.: Evaluating the Impact of Chemical Complexity and Horizontal Resolution on Tropospheric Ozone Over the Conterminous US With a Global Variable Resolution Chemistry Model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, e2021MS002889, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002889, 2022.
Shah, V., Jacob, D. J., Dang, R., Lamsal, L. N., Strode, S. A., Steenrod, S. D., Boersma, K. F., Eastham, S. D., Fritz, T. M., Thompson, C., Peischl, J., Bourgeois, I., Pollack, I. B., Nault, B. A., Cohen, R. C., Campuzano-Jost, P., Jimenez, J. L., Andersen, S. T., Carpenter, L. J., Sherwen, T., and Evans, M. J.: Nitrogen oxides in the free troposphere: implications for tropospheric oxidants and the interpretation of satellite NO2 measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 1227–1257, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-1227-2023, 2023.
Sindelarova, K., Granier, C., Bouarar, I., Guenther, A., Tilmes, S., Stavrakou, T., Müller, J.-F., Kuhn, U., Stefani, P., and Knorr, W.: Global data set of biogenic VOC emissions calculated by the MEGAN model over the last 30 years, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 9317–9341, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-9317-2014, 2014.
Skipper, T. N., Hu, Y., Odman, M. T., Henderson, B. H., Hogrefe, C., Mathur, R., and Russell, A. G.: Estimating US Background Ozone Using Data Fusion, Environ. Sci. Technol., 55, 4504–4512, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c08625, 2021.
US EPA: Integrated Science Assessment (ISA) of Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants, Final Report, Feb 2013, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-10/076F, 2013.
US EPA: Policy Assessment for the Review of the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA-452/R-14/006, 2014.
US EPA: Technical Support Document (TSD) Preparation of Emissions Inventories for the Version 7.1 2016 Hemispheric Emissions Modeling Platform, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-12/documents/2016fe_hemispheric_tsd.pdf (last access: 16 November 2024), 2019a.
US EPA: Technical Support Document (TSD) Preparation of Emissions Inventories for the Version 7.1 2016 North American Emissions Modeling Platform, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-08/documents/2016v7.1_northamerican_emismod_tsd.pdf (last access: 16 November 2024), 2019b.
US EPA: Policy Assessment for the Review of the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA-452/R-20-001, 2020a.
US EPA: Integrated Science Assessment (ISA) for Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants (Final Report), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-20/012, 2020b.
US EPA: AQS Pre-Generated Data Files, US EPA [data set], https://aqs.epa.gov/aqsweb/airdata/download_files.html, last access: 11 February 2024.
US EPA Office of Research and Development: CMAQ, Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1079878, 2024.
Wang, H., Jacob, D. J., Le Sager, P., Streets, D. G., Park, R. J., Gilliland, A. B., and van Donkelaar, A.: Surface ozone background in the United States: Canadian and Mexican pollution influences, Atmos. Environ., 43, 1310–1319, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.11.036, 2009.
Wiedinmyer, C., Akagi, S. K., Yokelson, R. J., Emmons, L. K., Al-Saadi, J. A., Orlando, J. J., and Soja, A. J.: The Fire INventory from NCAR (FINN): a high resolution global model to estimate the emissions from open burning, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 625–641, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-625-2011, 2011.
Wilkins, J. L., Pouliot, G., Pierce, T., Soja, A., Choi, H., Gargulinski, E., Gilliam, R., Vukovich, J., and Landis, M. S.: An evaluation of empirical and statistically based smoke plume injection height parametrisations used within air quality models, Int. J. Wildland Fire, 31, 193–211, https://doi.org/10.1071/WF20140, 2022.
Wu, S., Duncan, B. N., Jacob, D. J., Fiore, A. M., and Wild, O.: Chemical nonlinearities in relating intercontinental ozone pollution to anthropogenic emissions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L05806, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL036607, 2009.
Xing, J., Mathur, R., Pleim, J., Hogrefe, C., Wang, J., Gan, C.-M., Sarwar, G., Wong, D. C., and McKeen, S.: Representing the effects of stratosphere–troposphere exchange on 3-D O3 distributions in chemistry transport models using a potential vorticity-based parameterization, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 10865–10877, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-10865-2016, 2016.
Yienger, J. J. and Levy, H.: Empirical model of global soil-biogenic NOx emissions, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 100, 11447–11464, https://doi.org/10.1029/95JD00370, 1995.
Zhang, L., Jacob, D. J., Downey, N. V., Wood, D. A., Blewitt, D., Carouge, C. C., van Donkelaar, A., Jones, D. B. A., Murray, L. T., and Wang, Y. X.: Improved estimate of the policy-relevant background ozone in the United States using the GEOS-Chem global model with 1/2 degrees x 2/3 degrees horizontal resolution over North America, Atmos. Environ., 45, 6769–6776, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.07.054, 2011.
Zhang, L., Jacob, D. J., Yue, X., Downey, N. V., Wood, D. A., and Blewitt, D.: Sources contributing to background surface ozone in the US Intermountain West, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 5295–5309, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-5295-2014, 2014.
Zhao, B., Zheng, H., Wang, S., Smith, K. R., Lu, X., Aunan, K., Gu, Y., Wang, Y., Ding, D., Xing, J., Fu, X., Yang, X., Liou, K.-N., and Hao, J.: Change in household fuels dominates the decrease in PM2.5 exposure and premature mortality in China in 2005–2015, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 115, 12401–12406, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1812955115, 2018.
Short summary
Chemical transport model simulations are combined with ozone observations to estimate the bias in ozone attributable to US anthropogenic sources and individual sources of US background ozone: natural sources, non-US anthropogenic sources, and stratospheric ozone. Results indicate a positive bias correlated with US anthropogenic emissions during summer in the eastern US and a negative bias correlated with stratospheric ozone during spring.
Chemical transport model simulations are combined with ozone observations to estimate the bias...
