Modeling Elevated Upper Tropospheric Ozone Due To Deep Convection During the 2006 AEROSE II Cruise Jonathan W. Smith 1,2, Gregory S. Jenkins 1, Kenneth E. Pickering 2, Mary C. Barth 3 1.Howard University (HU) 2. NASA/GSFC 3. NCAR/ACD 1st DC-AMS Joint Meeting with HU, UMD-CP, and UMBC Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Outline Overview of enhanced upper tropospheric ozone sources Convective transport of biomass burning (BB) constituents Convection and nitrogen oxide production from lightning (LNOx) BB, convection, and LNOx Ideal study location WRF-Chem Methodology Proposed LNOx sensitivity tests in WRF-Chem Hypotheses

Overview of enhanced upper tropospheric ozone sources Aghedo et al Table 1

CONVECTIVE TRANSPORT OF BB CONSTITUENTS

MODIS Rapid Response – Global Fire Map 31 May – 09 June 2006

MODIS Aura 30 MAY 2006 Angola Democrati c Republic of Congo Zambia Congo Convection

Positive Carbon Monoxide (CO) Anomaly Max Ozone Production (longer lifetime) N S Fire s Convective Transport of BB Constituents Fire Constituents Outflow Region 1000 hPa 200 hPa Easterly Background Wind (Out of screen)

Ascension Island (7 S 14 W) 1430 Z 14 June 2006 SHADOZ Data 90 ppbv around 250 – 300 hPa

CONVECTION AND LNOx

Lightning flashes per square km over an 11 – year period Credit: NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center's Lightning Imaging Sensor Science Team, NASA's Optical Transient Detector and TRMM's Lightning Imaging Sensor

WWLLN detected 203,416 cloud to ground (CG) strikes In this region during June 2006

Ozone Production W E LNOx Outflow Region 1000 hPa 200 hPa 250 Moles of NO per Flash (Schumann and Huntrieser [2007]) NO + HO 2 radical NO 2 photolysis NOx has longer lifetime Easterly Backgrou nd Wind CG Strikes IC Strikes

AEROSE II Cruise Ozonesonde Launch Position Along 23 W (Morris et al. 2007) 4.16 S – 1430 UTC – 15 June 0.51 S – 0133 UTC – 14 June 3.50 N – 1346 UTC – 11 June 2.76 S – 1426 UTC – 26 June 2.36 N – 0234 UTC – 29 June 3.56 N – 1454 UTC – 29 June 1st Leg 2 nd Leg

BB CONVECTION AND LNOx

Fire and Lightning

Jenkins et al. 1997, JGR

Jenkins et al. 2008, GRL, Figures 1 b

Ideal Study Location and WRF-Chem Model Domain Fire emissions Deep Convection Significant CG Lightning Strikes Tool: WRF-Chem - dx, dy = 25 km

WRF-Chem Model Methodology WRF-CHEM MODEL PARAMETERS BB RUN SCHEMES Start and End Time00 Z 25 May 2006 to 00 Z 01 July 2006 Meteorology Initial/ Boundary Conditions GFS Final Analysis (1.0° x 1.0°) Chemistry Initial/ Boundary ConditionsMOZART (Global Model) Chemical MechanismCBM-Z/MOSAIC MicrophysicsThompson graupel scheme CumulusNew Grell PBL SchemeMYJ Surface PhysicsNoah Land Surface Model PhotolysisMadronich F-TUV # of Eta Levels50 Top of Model10 hPa Model Output Interval3 hours

Proposed LNOx Sensitivity Tests in WRF-Chem Calculate anomalous quantities of NOx and ozone in the upper troposphere generated from placing CG strikes into each model grid cell using 250 moles NO/flash (Schumann and Huntreiser, 2007) Investigate whether methods employed by Amanda Hansen et al. can be used to parameterize lightning flash rates with the New Grell convective scheme Calculate differences in LNOx production when lightning is placed in grid cells vs parameterization

Hypotheses Deep convection overlaps with fires in the Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, and northern Angola 2 – 4 days for anomalous CO plumes ejected by deep convection to reach 1000 km into the Central Atlantic Ocean (Pickering et al. 1996) BB is a significant producer of ozone in the upper troposphere - > should increase ozone by ppbv over the background (Dickerson et al. 1987, Pickering et al. 1996) The easterly flow of LNOx at 300 hPa is transported to 23 W hence leading to a coupled BB constituents and LNOx enhancement of ozone (Jenkins and Ryu 2005, and Savauge et al. 2007) Positive CO and Ozone anomalies will exist simultaneously but the ozone anomaly will be downwind of CO anomaly and convective cell (Dickerson et al. 1987) Results could provide a rough quantitative figure on how much LNOx contribution to enhanced Ozone and the global NOx budget in general Results could provide guidance on the percentage of ozone enhanced by LNOx (natural source) vs BB (anthropogenic source)

Acknowledgements Gabi Pfister – ACD/NCAR Christine Wiendenmeyer - ACD/NCAR Jeff Lee – ACD/NCAR Steve Peckham – NOAA Robjhon Miliaritania – Howard University Everette Joseph – Howard University Nick Nalli - NOAA NSF ATM Grant

QUESTIONS