Cloud-mediated radiative forcing of climate due to aerosols simulated by newly developed two-way coupled WRF-CMAQ during 2006 TexAQS/GoMACCS over the Gulf.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Cloud droplet activation schemes. Motivation Met Office: UM new microphysics (4a scheme), linked to aerosols via parameterisations. Also WRF uses similar.

Advertisements

Paolo Tuccella, Gabriele Curci, Suzanne Crumeyrolle, Guido Visconti

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division, NERL Overview and Evaluation of AQMEII Phase 2 Coupled Simulations over.

Comparison of the CAM and RRTMG Radiation Schemes in WRF and coupled WRF-CMAQ models Aijun Xiu, Zac Adelman, Frank Binkowski, Adel Hanna, Limei Ran Center.

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Overview of the Two-way Coupled WRF-CMAQ.

Limei Ran 1,2, Robert Gilliam 3, Jonathan Pleim 3, Adel Hanna 1, William Benjey 3 1 Center for Environmental Modeling for Policy Development, Institute.

By : Kerwyn Texeira. Outline Definitions Introduction Model Description Model Evaluation The effect of dust nuclei on cloud coverage Conclusion Questions.

Dynamical Downscaling of CCSM Using WRF Yang Gao 1, Joshua S. Fu 1, Yun-Fat Lam 1, John Drake 1, Kate Evans 2 1 University of Tennessee, USA 2 Oak Ridge.

Sensitivity of cloud droplet nucleation to kinetic effects and varying updraft velocity Ulrike Lohmann, Lisa Phinney and Yiran Peng Department of Physics.

The AIRPACT-3 Photochemical Air Quality Forecast System: Evaluation and Enhancements Jack Chen, Farren Thorpe, Jeremy Avis, Matt Porter, Joseph Vaughan,

The impact of the thermal power industries from the Beijing- Tianjin-Hebei regions on Beijing haze studied by the two-way coupled WRF-CMAQ model (Preliminary.

Limei Ran 1,2, Robert Gilliam 3, Frank Binkowski 2, Aijun Xiu 2, Larry Band 2, Jonathan Pleim 3 1 Ph.D. Candidate, Curriculum for the Environment and Ecology,

Improving Cloud Simulation in Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Through Assimilation of GOES Satellite Observations Andrew White Advisor: Dr. Arastoo.

CMAQ (Community Multiscale Air Quality) pollutant Concentration change horizontal advection vertical advection horizontal dispersion vertical diffusion.

Jerold Herwehe 1, Kiran Alapaty 1, Chris Nolte 1, Russ Bullock 1, Tanya Otte 1, Megan Mallard 1, Jimy Dudhia 2, and Jack Kain 3 1 Atmospheric Modeling.

A Modeling Investigation of the Climate Effects of Air Pollutants Aijun Xiu 1, Rohit Mathur 2, Adel Hanna 1, Uma Shankar 1, Frank Binkowski 1, Carlie Coats.

November 1, 2013 Bart Brashers, ENVIRON Jared Heath Bowden, UNC 3SAQS WRF Modeling Recommendations.

Comparison of three photochemical mechanisms (CB4, CB05, SAPRC99) for the Eta-CMAQ air quality forecast model for O 3 during the 2004 ICARTT study Shaocai.

1 Using Hemispheric-CMAQ to Provide Initial and Boundary Conditions for Regional Modeling Joshua S. Fu 1, Xinyi Dong 1, Kan Huang 1, and Carey Jang 2 1.

Meteorological Service of Canada Environment Canada Cloud Cover Changes and Their Impacts on Solar Energy Production in North America PERD Climate Change.

Non-hydrostatic Numerical Model Study on Tropical Mesoscale System During SCOUT DARWIN Campaign Wuhu Feng 1 and M.P. Chipperfield 1 IAS, School of Earth.

Preliminary Study: Direct and Emission-Induced Effects of Global Climate Change on Regional Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter K. Manomaiphiboon 1 *, A.

Air quality real-time forecast of PM 2.5 in Hangzhou metropolitan city with the WRF-CMAQ and WRF/Chem systems: model development and evaluation Shaocai.

Aerosols in WRF-CHEM Eric Stofferahn George Mason University _07:00:00 (UTC)

Seasonal Modeling (NOAA) Jian-Wen Bao Sara Michelson Jim Wilczak Curtis Fleming Emily Piencziak.

A detailed evaluation of the WRF-CMAQ forecast model performance for O 3, and PM 2.5 during the 2006 TexAQS/GoMACCS study Shaocai Yu $, Rohit Mathur +,

IACETH Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Sciences Indirect aerosol effects in EC earth Trude Storelvmo and Ulrike Lohmann, ETH-Zurich.

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory WRF-CMAQ 2-way coupled system: Part I David Wong,

Morrison/Gettelman/GhanAMWG January 2007 Two-moment Stratiform Cloud Microphysics & Cloud-aerosol Interactions in CAM H. Morrison, A. Gettelman (NCAR),

Prakash V. Bhave, Ph.D. Physical Scientist PM Model Performance Workshop February 10, 2004 Postprocessing Model Output for Comparison to Ambient Data.

Evaluation of sulfate simulations using CMAQ version 4.6: The role of cloud Chao Luo 1, Yuhang Wang 1, Stephen Mueller 2, and Eladio Knipping 3 1 Georgia.

Applications of Models-3 in Coastal Areas of Canada M. Lepage, J.W. Boulton, X. Qiu and M. Gauthier RWDI AIR Inc. C. di Cenzo Environment Canada, P&YR.

U.S. EPA and WIST Rob Gilliam *NOAA/**U.S. EPA

National Aeronautics and Space Administration Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Tropospheric Emission Spectrometer Studying.

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory Simple urban parameterization for.

Evaluation of Models-3 CMAQ I. Results from the 2003 Release II. Plans for the 2004 Release Model Evaluation Team Members Prakash Bhave, Robin Dennis,

Diagnostic Study on Fine Particulate Matter Predictions of CMAQ in the Southeastern U.S. Ping Liu and Yang Zhang North Carolina State University, Raleigh,

THE MODELS-3 COMMUNITY MULTI- SCALE AIR QUALITY (CMAQ) MODEL: 2002 RELEASE – NEW FEATURES Jonathan Pleim, Francis Binkowski, Robin Dennis, Brian Eder,

Extending Size-Dependent Composition to the Modal Approach: A Case Study with Sea Salt Aerosol Uma Shankar and Rohit Mathur The University of North Carolina.

Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division October 21, 2009 Evaluation of CMAQ.

AN EVALUATION OF THE ETA-CMAQ AIR QUALITY FORECAST MODEL AS PART OF NOAA’S NATIONAL PROGRAM CMAQ AIRNOW AIRNOW Brian Eder* Daiwen Kang * Ken Schere* Ken.

Assessment of aerosol direct effects on surface radiation in the northern hemisphere using two-way WRF-CMAQ model Jia Xing, Jonathan Pleim, Rohit Mathur,

Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division,

Investigation of Microphysical Parameterizations of Snow and Ice in Arctic Clouds During M-PACE through Model- Observation Comparisons Amy Solomon 12 In.

Update on the 2-moment stratiform cloud microphysics scheme in CAM Hugh Morrison and Andrew Gettelman National Center for Atmospheric Research CCSM Atmospheric.

Simulation of the indirect radiative forcing of climate due to aerosols by the two-way coupled WRF-CMAQ model over the continental United States: Preliminary.

Aerosol Indirect Effects in CAM and MIRAGE Steve Ghan Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Jean-Francois Lamarque, Peter Hess, and Francis Vitt, NCAR.

Application of Ice Microphysics to CAM Xiaohong Liu, S. J. Ghan (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory) M. Wang, J. E. Penner (University of Michigan)

Development and Initial Applications

Operational and diagnostic evaluations of ozone forecasts by the Eta-CMAQ model suite during the 2002 new England air quality study (NEAQS) Shaocai Yu.

Sensitivity of PM 2.5 Species to Emissions in the Southeast Sun-Kyoung Park and Armistead G. Russell Georgia Institute of Technology Sensitivity of PM.

Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Examining the impact of aerosol direct.

A study of process contributions to PM 2.5 formation during the 2004 ICARTT period using the Eta-CMAQ forecast model over the eastern U.S. Shaocai Yu $,

Fine Scale Modeling of Ozone Exposure Estimates using a Source Sensitivity Approach Cesunica E. Ivey, Lucas Henneman, Cong Liu, Yongtao T. Hu, Armistead.

12 th annual CMAS conference Impact of Biomass Burning Aerosols on Regional Climate over Southeast US Peng Liu, Yongtao Hu, Armistead G. Russell, Athanasios.

Aerosol 1 st indirect forcing in the coupled CAM-IMPACT model: effects from primary-emitted particulate sulfate and boundary layer nucleation Minghuai.

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division, NERL AQMEII Phase 2: Overview and WRF/CMAQ Application over North America.

Aerosol Indirect Effects in CAM A. Gettelman (NCAR), F. Vitt (NCAR), P. Hess (Cornell) H. Morrison (NCAR), P. R. Field (Met Office), S.J. Ghan (PNNL)

Modal Aerosol Treatment in CAM: Evaluation and Indirect Effect X. Liu, S. J. Ghan, R. Easter (PNNL) J.-F. Lamarque, P. Hess, N. Mahowald, F. Vitt, H. Morrison,

Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling Division, National Exposure Research Laboratory WRF-CMAQ 2-way Coupled System: Part II Jonathan.

Wang Jiandong 1, Wang Shuxiao 1, Zhao Bin 1, Wang Long 1, David Wong 2, Jonathan Pleim 2, Hao Jiming 1 1. Tsinghua University, Beijing, China 2. U.S. EPA,

Preliminary Evaluation of the June 2002 Version of CMAQ Brian Eder Shaocai Yu Robin Dennis Jonathan Pleim Ken Schere Atmospheric Modeling Division* National.

A model of sea salt aerosol for Cape Grim Preliminary investigations

Simulation of primary and secondary (biogenic and anthropogenic) organic aerosols over the United States by US EPA Models-3/CMAQ: Evaluation and regional.

Shaocai Yu*, Brian Eder*++, Robin Dennis*++,

Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division,

Latest Development on Modal Aerosol Formulation and Indirect Effects

The Value of Nudging in the Meteorology Model for Retrospective CMAQ Simulations Tanya L. Otte NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, RTP, NC (In partnership with.

Good afternoon, everyone. I am Momei, a postdoc from Georgia Tech.

WRAP 2014 Regional Modeling

Presentation transcript:

Cloud-mediated radiative forcing of climate due to aerosols simulated by newly developed two-way coupled WRF-CMAQ during 2006 TexAQS/GoMACCS over the Gulf of Mexico and eastern U.S. Shaocai Yu, Rohit Mathur, Jonathan Pleim, David Wong, Steve Howard, and S.T. Rao Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division, National Exposure Research Lab, U.S. EPA, RTP, NC 27711

Meteorological Model WRF modeling System:  x=12 km, 4 km 34 layers Land-Surface: PX LSM PBL: ACM2 Cloud Physics: Lin, Morrison Cumulus: Kain-Fritsch Shortwave: RRTMg, or CAM Longwave: RRTMg, or CAM Coupler Chemical Transport Model CMAQ Modeling System: Photochemistry: CB05 59 organic and inorganic species, 156 chemical reactions Aerosol module: AE6 3 lognormal modes, organic and inorganic Emission: SMOKE In-line emissions for biogenic species AQPREP Prepares virtual CMAQ compatible input met. files CMAQ-mixactivate: cloud drop number conc. Direct forcing: Aerosol size, composition, conc. Two-way coupled WRF-CMAQ modeling System (Interaction and feedback)

Aerosols: number, size, chemical composition CCN activation  Cloud droplet number Cloud microphysics (Lin, Morrison): cloud vapor and water, rain, ice, snow, graupel Cloud effective radius (r e ), COD The 1 st and 2 nd IAF Coupled WRF-CMAQ aerosol simulation Aerosol activation scheme ( Abdul-Razzak and Ghan, 2000, 2002 ) Updraft velocity, liquid water content (WRF) Radiative transfer model: CAM: r e (4-20)  m; RRTMg: r e ( 2-60)  m Met fields (WRF) Sulfate, BC, dust Ice number Conc., IN Cloud microphysics (Morrison, Lin): cloud vapor and water, rain, ice, snow, graupel Ice effective radius (r ie ), IOD Glaciation IAF

Tracks of ship Tracks of P-3 flights

 Model domain (12 km and 4 km), 8/1 to 8/31/2006 CONUS “5x” Domain 1.WRF-CMAQ 2.WRF-CMAQ-PM 12 km domain 4 km nested domain over Gulf of Mexico

 Results (preliminary): Evaluation for PM 2.5 at AIRNOW sites  Both underpredicted obs PM 2.5 by -17% (Lin) and -14% (Morrison) Obs14.2±8.0 CAMlin ±7.1 CAMmor ±7.4

 Results (preliminary): at IMPROVE sites  Both underpredicted obs PM 2.5 by -28% (Lin) and -25% (Morrison) mainly because of underestimation of SO 4 2- and OC NMB (%) meanObsLinMorrisonLinMorrison SO NO PM OC EC

 Results: (8/4/2006, 3:00 PM EST), ground-level PM 2.5 and CCN1 (S=0.02%), CCN2 (S=0.05%), CCN3 (S=0.1%)  CAM-Lin:  CAM-Morrison:

 Results: (8/4/2006, 12 UTC), Ground-level PM 2.5, Cloud drop #, Cloud LWC, Droplet effective radius  CAM-Lin:  CAM-Morrison: w4wrfout_d01_ _00.ncf Effective radius (  m)

 Results ( Shortwave cloud forcing ) Monthly means of modeled SWCF to compare with CERES obs (preliminary results)  Modeled SWCF close to Obs over GA area  Model underestimated the Obs SWCF over central and NE areas ( underestimated cloud ) 12 km (CAM-Lin) ~250 km (2.5 degree) 12 km (CAM-Mor)

 Results (Shortwave cloud forcing) Monthly means of modeled SWCF: Interpolate to 12 km resolution for model 12 km (CAM-Lin) ~12 km (CERES) 12 km (CAM-Mor)

 Results (Shortwave cloud forcing) Monthly means of modeled SWCF: Interpolate to 4 km resolution for model 4 km (CERES) 4 km (CAM-Lin) 4 km (CAM-Mor)

 Results (Shortwave cloud forcing) Comparison of Monthly means SWCF:  12-km simulations underpredicted obs SWCF by more than -23%.  Mean: (watts m -2 ) Obs ±20.7NMB (%) CAMlin ± CAMmor ± Obs ±9.2 CAMlin ± CAMmor ±  4-km simulations are better than 12-km, especially for Morrison scheme.

 Results (Longwave cloud forcing) Monthly means of modeled LWCF: Interpolate to 12 km resolution for CERES 12 km (CAM-Lin) ~12 km (CERES) 12 km (CAM-Mor)

 Results (Longwave cloud forcing) Monthly means of modeled LWCF: Interpolate to 4 km resolution for CERES 4 km (CAM-Lin) ~4 km (CERES) 4 km (CAM-Mor)

 Results (Longwave cloud forcing) Comparison of Monthly means LWCF:  Mean: (watts m -2 ) Obs ±4.5 CAMlin ± CAMmor ± Obs-425.3±4.2 CAMlin-424.1± CAMmor-432.5±  12-km simulations underpredicted obs LWCF by more than -5.6%.  4-km simulations are better than 12-km, especially for Lin scheme; Morrison scheme overestimated LWCF NMB (%)

Contacts: Brian K. Eder

 Results (preliminary) : Meteorology: Radiation Models have slightly higher radiation than Obs with better results for 4 km run Missing observed cloud cover caused overestimation during the daytime  Mean (at Alabama-Coushatta, TX) Alabama-Coushatta, TX Obs270±333 CAMlin-12299±359 CAMmor-12289±350 CAMlin-4296±360 CAMmor-4289±352

 Results ( Longwave cloud forcing ) Monthly means of modeled LWCF to compare with CERES obs (preliminary results)  Modeled LWCF  Model underestimated the Obs LWCF over central and NE areas ( underestimated cloud ) 12 km (CAM-Lin) ~250 km (2.5 degree) 12 km (CAM-Mor)