Development of Alternative Methods For Estimating Dry Deposition Velocity In CMAQ
Kiran Alapaty University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Dev Niyogi North Carolina State University Sarav Arunachalam Andrew Holland Kimberly Hanisak University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Marvin Wesely (Posthumous) Argonne National Laboratory
Dry Deposition Velocity estimation INTRODUCTION
Time Series of Dom Avg Resistances Log Scale
Rc sum of several resistance for the Soil-vegetation Continuum. One of them is the Stomatal Resistance for a gas (R sg ) R sg is proportional to R sw R sw Plays an important role in Land surface Modeling. Relation of Rc to Stomatal Resistance
Stomatal Resistance: A key Parameter in Land surface Modeling Why ? Stomata Controls Water Vapor Exchange
Stoma (pore) through which CO 2 enters for use in Photosynthesis; releases O 2 & H 2 O Depending on the applications, Rs is modeled using a variety of forcings. For environmental Applications: - Wesely scheme - Jarvis scheme - Ball–Berry scheme
JARVIS method is used in many LSMs (traditional in Met Models) WESELY method is used many AQMs Micro-Met and GCMs use Photosynthesis/CO 2 assimilation
Stomatal Resistance Formulations WESELY JARVIS Ball-Berry (GEM)
JARVIS & WESELY methods Based on Minimum Stom. Resist. Ball – Berry method Based on Photosynthesis approach (e.g., Farquhar, Collatz, Niyogi et al., Wu et al.)
WESELY
JARVIS
GEM
OBJECTIVES Introduce and evaluate a Photosynthesis-based Vegetation Model for estimating stomatal resistance in MM5 and deposition velocity in CMAQ Intercompare results from Jarvis-, Wesely-, GEM (photosynthesis) – type methods
Methodology Photosynthesis Model Development: Testing in 1D mode Integrate GEM, Wesely, and Jarvis within a LSM Couple Unified LSM (with three schemes) to MM5 Develop 3D model simulations using MM5 Use V d estimates from the three schemes in CMAQ
GEM development results 1-D Model Results
MM5 Simulation Details Simulation Domain – 36 km grids for Texas Air Quality Study 28 Layers MRF ABL Noah LSM Grell RRTM FDDA 5.5 days 23 Aug 2000 TDL hourly Data
Discussion of MM5 / Unified Noah (with three R s schemes) model Results –Model performance statistics with surface observations –Model diagnostics for the 3 schemes (surface parameters – energy fluxes, temperature, and estimated Rs values,….) Will Present:
Surface Observations used in STATS
Time Series for Temp1.5
Temperature Bias (Model – Obs)
Mod. Lowest Vs Obs. Surface Level Qv
Diagnostic & Other Parameters
Land Domain Avg. ABL Depths (m)
Land Domain Avg. TRF (cm/h)
Canopy Conductance Sfc. Latent Heat Flux
Sfc. Sensible Heat Flux
Agriculture Land (26%)
RANGE Land (34%)
Land Use Patterns
Coniferous (14%)
URBAN Land (0.13%)
ABL Depths at 20 UTC WES JAR GEM (Acquire Lidar & other ABL obs)
TRF per hour WES JAR GEM (Acquire Stage IV Radar)
Cloud Fraction WES JAR GEM (Acquire GOES)
MCIP was modified to generate Dep Vel fields using M3-DryDep for CMAQ
WES JAR GEM Dep. Vel. for Ozone at 22 UTC
WES JAR GEM Dep. Vel. for NO 2 at 22 UTC
Domain Averaged V d for O 3
We are still doing analysis of MET fields Once completed, we will perform CMAQ simulations by keeping all MET fields identical except Dep Vel
These Schemes are also being tested in WRF model WRF-CMAQ driver is also Under construction