the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
On the formation of biogenic secondary organic aerosol in chemical transport models: an evaluation of the WRF-CHIMERE (v2020r2) model with a focus over the Finnish boreal forest
Giancarlo Ciarelli
Sara Tahvonen
Arineh Cholakian
Bruno Vitali
Tuukka Petäjä
Federico Bianchi
Abstract. We present an evaluation of the regional chemical transport model (CTM) WRF-CHIMERE (v2020r2) for the formation of biogenic secondary organic aerosol (BSOA) with a focus over the Finnish boreal forest. Formation processes of biogenic aerosols are still affected by different sources of uncertainties, and model’s predictions largely varies depending on the levels of details of the adopted chemical and emissions schemes. In this study, air quality simulations were conducted for the astronomical summer of the year 2019 using different organic aerosol (OA) schemes (as currently available in literature) to treat the formation of BSOA. First, we performed a set of simulations in the framework of the volatility basis set (VBS) scheme carrying different assumptions for the treatment of the aging processes of BSOA. The model results were compared against high-resolution (i.e., 1-hour) organic aerosol mass and size distribution measurements performed at the Station for Measuring Ecosystem–Atmosphere Relations (SMEAR-II) site located in Hyytiälä, in addition to other gas-phases species such as ozone (O3), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and BVOCs measurements of isoprene (C5H10) and monoterpenes. We show that WRF-CHIMERE could well reproduce the diurnal variation of the measured OA concentrations for all the investigated scenarios (along with standard meteorological parameters) as well as the increase in concentrations during specific heat waves episodes. However, the modeled OA concentrations largely varied between the schemes use to describe the aging processes of BSOA. Additionally, comparisons with isoprene and monoterpenes air concentrations revealed that the model captured the observed monoterpenes concentrations, but isoprene was largely overestimated, a feature that was mainly attributed to the overstated biogenic emissions of isoprene. We investigated the potential consequences of such an overestimation by inhibiting isoprene emissions from the modeling system. Results indicated that the modeled BSOA concentrations generally increased compared to the base-case simulation with enabled isoprene emissions. We attributed the latest to a shift in the reactions of monoterpenes compounds against available radicals, as further suggested by the reduction in α-pinene modeled air concentrations. Finally, we briefly analyze the differences in the modeled Cloud Liquid Water Content (clwc) among the simulations carrying different chemical scheme for the treatment of the aging processes of BSOA. Model’s results indicated an increase in clwc values at the SMEAR-II site, for simulation with higher biogenic organic aerosol loads, likely as a results of the increased numbered of biogenic aerosol particles capable of activating cloud droplets.
- Preprint
(2968 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(287 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Giancarlo Ciarelli et al.
Status: closed
-
CEC1: 'Comment on gmd-2023-64', Juan Antonio Añel, 19 Jun 2023
Dear authors,
After checking your manuscript, it has come to our attention that it does not comply with our Code and Data Policy.
https://www.geoscientific-model-development.net/policies/code_and_data_policy.htmlYou have archived your code and data in repositories that do not comply with our trustable permanent archival policy. Actually, your manuscript should not have been accepted in Discussions, given this lack of compliance with our policy. Therefore, the current situation with your manuscript is irregular, and you must publish your code in one of the appropriate repositories according to our policy.
Please, reply to this comment with the relevant information about the new repositories (link and DOI) as soon as possible, as it should be available for the Discussions stage.
Also, you must include in a potentially reviewed version of your manuscript the modified Code and Data Availability sections, containing this new information.
Note that if you do not fix this problem, we will have to reject your manuscript for publication in our journal.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Exec. EditorCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-64-CEC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Giancarlo Ciarelli, 19 Jun 2023
Dear Dr. Juan A. Añel,
We would like to thank you for your comments and additional remarks on our manuscript. We fully agree with them, and we have now provided the datasets associated with the manuscript gmd-2023-64 on a permanent repository, i.e., Zenodo, as well as the associated Digital Object Identifier (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8055256).
A README.txt file has been included in the repository to describe the format, type, and usage of the data in the paper.
The structure of the folder is organized as below:
--biogenic_emissions: The folder contains model input biogenic emissions at hourly resolution. Specifically, this data is used for the analysis as reported in Figure 5,6 and 7.
--boundary_conditions: The folder contains model boundary condition data as used in all the simulations (and sensitivity tests).
--Model_output: The folder contains the model output data for all the simulation and sensitivity test. The file name convention follows the one as in Table 1 of the paper.
--Observational_data: This folder contains all the observational data used for the model evaluation section (i.e., meteorological parameters, gas-phase compounds, organic aerosol data from ACSM, and PM2.5 data).
--source_code: This folder contains the source code of the WRF-CHIMERE model (as used in all the simulations and sensitivity tests).
Additionally, we agree with your comment and we will revisit the 'Code and Data Availability' section of the manuscript by adding the DOIs provided here (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8055256) in the revisited version of the manuscript.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-64-AC1
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Giancarlo Ciarelli, 19 Jun 2023
-
RC1: 'Comment on gmd-2023-64', Anonymous Referee #1, 27 Jul 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://gmd.copernicus.org/preprints/gmd-2023-64/gmd-2023-64-RC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Giancarlo Ciarelli, 12 Sep 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://gmd.copernicus.org/preprints/gmd-2023-64/gmd-2023-64-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Giancarlo Ciarelli, 12 Sep 2023
-
RC2: 'Comment on gmd-2023-64', Anonymous Referee #2, 28 Jul 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://gmd.copernicus.org/preprints/gmd-2023-64/gmd-2023-64-RC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Giancarlo Ciarelli, 12 Sep 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://gmd.copernicus.org/preprints/gmd-2023-64/gmd-2023-64-AC3-supplement.pdf
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Giancarlo Ciarelli, 12 Sep 2023
Status: closed
-
CEC1: 'Comment on gmd-2023-64', Juan Antonio Añel, 19 Jun 2023
Dear authors,
After checking your manuscript, it has come to our attention that it does not comply with our Code and Data Policy.
https://www.geoscientific-model-development.net/policies/code_and_data_policy.htmlYou have archived your code and data in repositories that do not comply with our trustable permanent archival policy. Actually, your manuscript should not have been accepted in Discussions, given this lack of compliance with our policy. Therefore, the current situation with your manuscript is irregular, and you must publish your code in one of the appropriate repositories according to our policy.
Please, reply to this comment with the relevant information about the new repositories (link and DOI) as soon as possible, as it should be available for the Discussions stage.
Also, you must include in a potentially reviewed version of your manuscript the modified Code and Data Availability sections, containing this new information.
Note that if you do not fix this problem, we will have to reject your manuscript for publication in our journal.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Exec. EditorCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-64-CEC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Giancarlo Ciarelli, 19 Jun 2023
Dear Dr. Juan A. Añel,
We would like to thank you for your comments and additional remarks on our manuscript. We fully agree with them, and we have now provided the datasets associated with the manuscript gmd-2023-64 on a permanent repository, i.e., Zenodo, as well as the associated Digital Object Identifier (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8055256).
A README.txt file has been included in the repository to describe the format, type, and usage of the data in the paper.
The structure of the folder is organized as below:
--biogenic_emissions: The folder contains model input biogenic emissions at hourly resolution. Specifically, this data is used for the analysis as reported in Figure 5,6 and 7.
--boundary_conditions: The folder contains model boundary condition data as used in all the simulations (and sensitivity tests).
--Model_output: The folder contains the model output data for all the simulation and sensitivity test. The file name convention follows the one as in Table 1 of the paper.
--Observational_data: This folder contains all the observational data used for the model evaluation section (i.e., meteorological parameters, gas-phase compounds, organic aerosol data from ACSM, and PM2.5 data).
--source_code: This folder contains the source code of the WRF-CHIMERE model (as used in all the simulations and sensitivity tests).
Additionally, we agree with your comment and we will revisit the 'Code and Data Availability' section of the manuscript by adding the DOIs provided here (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8055256) in the revisited version of the manuscript.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-64-AC1
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Giancarlo Ciarelli, 19 Jun 2023
-
RC1: 'Comment on gmd-2023-64', Anonymous Referee #1, 27 Jul 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://gmd.copernicus.org/preprints/gmd-2023-64/gmd-2023-64-RC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Giancarlo Ciarelli, 12 Sep 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://gmd.copernicus.org/preprints/gmd-2023-64/gmd-2023-64-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Giancarlo Ciarelli, 12 Sep 2023
-
RC2: 'Comment on gmd-2023-64', Anonymous Referee #2, 28 Jul 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://gmd.copernicus.org/preprints/gmd-2023-64/gmd-2023-64-RC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Giancarlo Ciarelli, 12 Sep 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://gmd.copernicus.org/preprints/gmd-2023-64/gmd-2023-64-AC3-supplement.pdf
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Giancarlo Ciarelli, 12 Sep 2023
Giancarlo Ciarelli et al.
Giancarlo Ciarelli et al.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
476 | 140 | 19 | 635 | 67 | 5 | 5 |
- HTML: 476
- PDF: 140
- XML: 19
- Total: 635
- Supplement: 67
- BibTeX: 5
- EndNote: 5
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1