1. JRC- Brussels- PF JRC Brussels 1 TF HTAP, Washington DC, 29.01.2006 JRC Brussels1 ACCENT-PhotoCom http://www.accent-network.org/portal/integration-tasks/modelling Aim: CTMs and CCMs calculation of atmospheric chemistry changes 2000 and 2030. In support IPCC AR4 report. Synergy air quality and climate gas emission reduction. Focus on human health and vegetation exposure Simulations: 1. year 2000; 2. 2030 Current Legislation 3. 2030 Maximum Feasible Reduction 4. 2030 SRES A2 5. 2030 Current Legislation in a changed climate. Emissions: Global annual anthropogenic emission/scenarios IIASA, JRC, SRES, and RIVM on a 1°x1° grid. Fire emissions on monthly basis. NetCDF. Recommendations for natural emissions. Meteorology: ECMWF, NCEP, GEOS-DAO, several GCMs Participation: 25 models; 15 model families. Output : Model information (grid spacing, vertical information, surface pressure, surface area). Hourly ozone. Daily (10:30) NO2, CH2O and O3 vertical columns. Monthly deposition NOy, HNO3, NO3p, SO2, SO4, NH3, NH4, O3. Monthly mean O3, CO, CH4, NO, NO2, OH. CH4+OH destruction. 3D O3 chemical production and destruction. O3 flux through chemical tropopause.

2. JRC- Brussels- PF JRC Brussels 2 TF HTAP, Washington DC, 29.01.2006 JRC Brussels2 2.1 ACCENT-PhotoComp (II) Analysis: Output requested as NetCDF; NCO; Matlab, IDL. Data storage on SRB server, ca. 1 Tb. 5 analysis groups; Estimated analysis time 4 persons half a year. Main results: Estimates of changes in surface and free tropospheric ozone, air quality indices, model variability, some process understanding. Remarks: Despite stringent specification of output; still rather heterogeneous submissions. Several iterations were necessary. Publications: Stevenson et al. [2005] ; 4 manuscripts submitted

3. JRC- Brussels- PF JRC Brussels 3 TF HTAP, Washington DC, 29.01.2006 JRC Brussels3 Some IT Aspects: Used SRB server http://www.sdsc.edu/srb/ The SDSC Storage Resource Broker (SRB) is client-server middleware that provides a uniform interface for connecting to heterogeneous data resources over a network and accessing replicated data sets. In practice we used UNIX based access; there was not a good way for common access to all data from ‘other users’ Data were processed by ‘authors’; using own software. e.g. IDL regridding tools from Martin Schultz (not entirely bug-free). i.e. regridding: oldgrid = Obj_New('MGS_RGrid', gridname='GEOS') newgrid = Obj_New('MGS_RGrid', gridname='1x1a')

4. JRC- Brussels- PF JRC Brussels 4 TF HTAP, Washington DC, 29.01.2006 JRC Brussels4 2. Eurodelta http://rea.ei.jrc.it/netshare/thunis/eurodelta Aim: European scale regional atmospheric dispersion models. Chemical nonlinearities in response to emission changes (i.e. SR relationships). Evaluation of the performance of different regional models against set of observations Quantify their performance in terms of agreed quality criteria. Policy relevant input to the RAINS model and the Clean Air for Europe. Simulations: 26 simulations using 2 meteorological years 1999 and 2001. Scenarios for 2020 considered current legislation. Component reductions of anthropogenic emissions by 25 or 50 % for Italy, Germany France and North-Mediterranean Sea. Emissions: European emission/scenarios by EMEP-West (50kmx50km grid) Regridding by participant to desired grid. ASCII input files; Recommendation on hourly, daily and monthly patterns 11 sectors. Meteorology: MM5, ECMWF, HIRLAM Participation: 6 models. Output : One year, hourly surface concentrations of O3, NO2,HNO3, H2O2,NO,HCHO; Daily surface concentrations of PPM2.5, PPM10, PM2.5,PM10, NH4, SO4, NO3,OC,BC daily and monthly depositions of Sox, NOx, NHx (separated for forests).

5. JRC- Brussels- PF JRC Brussels 5 TF HTAP, Washington DC, 29.01.2006 JRC Brussels5 2. Eurodelta (II) Central pre-processing of data; and redistributed to participants of a selected set. Common visualization tool (IDL based) Analysis during workshops- and further analysis in small working groups, work load ). 4 persons ca. half a year. Main Results: Estimate of model variability and of sensitivity to emission reduction in 2020 (CLE/MFR). Remarks: More stringent harmonization of boundary conditions and of natural emissions would be desirable; better description/and knowledge of what is included in each model; source code + documentation. Publications: 3 manuscripts in preparation

6. JRC- Brussels- PF JRC Brussels 6 TF HTAP, Washington DC, 29.01.2006 JRC Brussels6 AEROCOM http://nansen.ipsl.jussieu.fr/AEROCOM/data.html http://nansen.ipsl.jussieu.fr/AEROCOM Aim: Improvement of aerosol modeling capacity. Emphasis on climate; quantitative process understanding of aerosol formation and removal processes. Systematic use of current satellite measurement programmes surface based network data. Participation from CTMs and GCMs meteorological data for 1996-1997-2000-2001. Simulations : 3 experiments: 1) AEROCOM-A models as they are, meteorology for 1996/1997/2000/2001; 2) AEROCOM-B using year 2000 prescribed sources 2000 meteorological fields or climatological mode 3) AEROCOM PRE using pre-industrial prescribed sources (y 1750) meteo year 2000 and/or in climatological mode Emissions : 1°x1° emission datasets from various groups: OC-BC (Tami Bond); SO2 (IIASA) (annual average); SO2 volcanoes (GEIA/update); Simplified SOA source function.Recommendations on height distributions; no temporal distribution, except biomass burning. Meteorology: ECMWF, GCMs (??)

7. JRC- Brussels- PF JRC Brussels 7 TF HTAP, Washington DC, 29.01.2006 JRC Brussels7 AEROCOM (II) Meteorology: ECMWF, GCMs (??) Participation: 14 global GLOBAL CTMs and GCMs AND CLIMATOLOGICAL MEAN MODELS Output: Components Dust, seasalt, BC, POM, SO4, Aerosol mass and number. Daily and monthly output of wet and dry deposition (turbulent+sedimentation); emission flux, size segregrated mass (e.g. <0.5 μm and 1.25 μm), aerosol water, RH, cloud fraction, monthly statistics of meteorology, AOD. Analysis: Centralized analysis team; NCO scripts, and IDL software; continuous update of model results on public web address Several updates of models during the intercomparison. Full time 4 person for 1.5 year. Remarks: Large variations in models’ removal processes were established; still relatively good agreement with various remote sensed products (e.g. AERONET, MISR, MODIS) of the ‘average’ model. Publications: [Kinne et al., 2005; Textor et al., 2005]

8. JRC- Brussels- PF JRC Brussels 8 TF HTAP, Washington DC, 29.01.2006 JRC Brussels8 4. MICS-Asia http://www.adorc.gr.jp/adorc/mics.html Aim: The MICS-Asia model intercomparison Phase II understanding transport and deposition of sulfur, nitrogen compounds, ozone and aerosols in East Asia Simulations: Four specified months in 2001 representative different chemical/meteorological conditions. Emissions: Provided on request (no details given) Meteorology: ?? Participation: 15 groups (?) Output: monthly averaged concentrationss of SO2, NO, NO2, HNO3, PAN, NH3, O3 sulfate, nitrate, and ammonium (air,precipitation). Dry and wet deposition and rain fluxes. Daily average SO2, NO, NO2, HNO3, O3 sulfate, nitrate + some vertical profiles. ASCII format. Analysis: Remarks: Publications:

9. JRC- Brussels- PF JRC Brussels 9 TF HTAP, Washington DC, 29.01.2006 JRC Brussels9 “Intercomparison Study of Numerical Models for Long-Range Atmospheric Transport of Mercury” http://www.msceast.org/intercomparison/hm/intercomp_hm.html Aim: EMEPs MSC-E intercomparison study of atmospheric long-range transport models for heavy metals. Evaluation of parameterizations of the main physical-chemical processes of mercury transformations in the gaseous and the liquid phase; main features of long-range transport of different mercury forms Comparison of modelling results with measurements obtained from short- term campaigns and from the EMEP monitoring network Simulations: one Emissions: Single emission data set provided by EMEP-E. Meteorology: Participation: 7 models of atmospheric mercury transport and deposition of regional and global levels. Output: Gaseous Elemental Mercury in air, Hg concentration in precipitation, precipitation amount, Hg wet, dry and total deposition (per grid and per country). Mostly as Excel spreadsheet Analysis: One person, xx years. Remarks: The main purpose was to demonstrate that the EMEP operational model did not differ significantly from the most advanced scientific model and can be used for the tasks of the CLTAP Publications:[Ryaboshapko et al., 2005; Ryaboshapko et al., 2003]

10. JRC- Brussels- PF JRC Brussels 10 TF HTAP, Washington DC, 29.01.2006 JRC Brussels10 Experiment2006200720082009 Experiment 1: Delta Emission experiment 1.1 Define experiment, prepare input/output 1.2 Run experiments 1.3 Analyse experiment for Interim report in 2007 INTERIM REPORT Experiment 2: Artificial Tracer experiment 2.1 Define experiment, prepare input/output 2.2 Run experiments 2.3 Analyse experiment for publication together with exp. 1 Experiment 3: Parallel detailed experiments for Mercury, Ozone, Aerosols, linkage to campaigns asdaf 3.1 Define experiment, prepare input/output 3.2 Run experiments 3.3 Analyse experiment for publication Experiment 4: Further assessment of uncertainties in source receptor relationships asdaf 4.1 Define experiment, prepare input/output 4.2 Run experiments 4.3 Analyse experiment for Assessment report 4.4 Publish scientific results TF HTAP ASSESSMENT REPORT

11. JRC- Brussels- PF JRC Brussels 11 TF HTAP, Washington DC, 29.01.2006 JRC Brussels11 Program: 09:00 Start meeting (building 28) 09:00-09:15 Welcome/Background Dentener 09:15-10:00 Thunis/Cuvelier City Delta/Euro Delta 10:00-10:45 Michael Schulz/Stefan Kinne Aerocom 10:45-11:00 Coffee 11:00-11:45 Charles Doutrioux (Ocean modelling) 11:45-12:30 Rudolf Husar American Aerosol intercomparisons 12:30-14:00 Lunch + discussion 14:00-14:30 Christiane Textor (GEMS) 14:30-15:15 Stefano Galmarini Radioactivity Alert system 15:15-15:30 Tea 15:30-17:00 Discussion+ summarizing recommendations 17:15 adjourn

12. JRC- Brussels- PF JRC Brussels 12 TF HTAP, Washington DC, 29.01.2006 JRC Brussels12