Aerosol simulation with coupled meteorology-radiation-chemistry model WRF/Chem over Europe

1. Aerosol simulation with coupled meteorology-radiation-chemistry model WRF/Chem over Europe Paolo Tuccella, Gabriele Curci and Guido Visconti Dept. Physics – CETEMPS Università degli Studi dell’Aquila

2. OUTLINE • Implementation of an invetory of anthropogenic emissions over Europe. • Validation of results against ground observations of meteo, gas and aerosol • Preliminary test of WRF/Chem direct and indirect aerosol effects

3. ANTHROPOGENIC EMISSIONS VOC1 VOC2  VOC … VOC350 • Total annual emissions from EMEP: • CO, NH3, SO2, NOx,  VOC, PM • 2. Correspondence among emitted and model species • CO  CO • NOx  NOx • … • PM  20% Aitken, 80% Accumlation • 3. Speciation of  VOCs [Passant, 2002] AGGREGATION IN 17 WRF/CHEM MODEL SPECIES WITH REACTIVITY WEIGHTING FACTOR PRINCIPLE [Middleton et al., Atmo. Env. 1990]

4. EMISSIONS IN A SUMMER WEEKDAY NOx VOCs PM25 RURAL URBAN

5. BASELINE SIMULATIONS SETUP • Period: Jan-Feb and Jul-Aug 2007. • Resolution: 30 Km, 28 vertical levels (p_top = 50 hPa, 15-16 Km). • Initial and boundary meteorological conditions: ECMWF analysis (every 6 hours). • Initial and boundary chemical conditions: climatological profiles. • Dust, sea-salt and biogenic emissions are included. GAS CHEMISTRY: RADM2 AEROSOL: MADE/SORGAM

6. WRF/Chem vs NOAA: HOURLY TEMPERATURE WINTER Overestimation of minima R2=0.80 Underestimation of maxima SUMMER R2=0.88

7. WRF/Chem vs NOAA: HOURLY RH WINTER The daily cycle is anticipated R2=0.73 SUMMER The minima are overestimated R2=0.66

8. WRF/Chem vs NOAA: HOURLY WIND SPEED WINTER R2=0.78 The maxima are overestimated SUMMER R2=0.88

9. WRF/Chem vs AIRBASE: HOURLY OZONE WINTER Underestimation of minima and maxima R2=0.68 The full observed range is not well reproduced Underestimation of maxima and overstimation of minima SUMMER R2=0.85

10. WRF/Chem vs AIRBASE: HOURLY NO2 WINTER Dailycycle and high extremevalues are underpredicted R2=0.60 Nighttimemaxima are overestimated Daily minima are underestimated SUMMER R2=0.51

11. WRF/Chem vs EMEP: DAILY PM2.5 WINTER Underestimation by 30% R2=0.70 SUMMER Extreme values are underestimated by a factor 3 R2=0.29

12. WRF/Chem vs EMEP: Aerosol Inorganic Speciation WINTER SUMMER The total sum is underpredicted by 25% and sulphate has a negative bias of about 40% Nitrate is overestimated by 40% and sulphate is underestimated by a factor 3

13. PRELIMINARY RESULTS WITH DIRECT AND INDIRECT AEROSOL EFFECTS Consistencyof simulated aerosol field with aerosol optical depth and cloud condensation nuclei

14. EFFECT OF DIRECT AND INDIRECT FORCING BASELINE Δ DIRECT Δ DIRECT+ INDIRECT CLOUD OPTICAL DEPTH Up to ±50% IMPCAT ON SHORTWAWE RADIATION FLUX Up to ±15%

15. EFFECT OF DIRECT AND INDIRECT FORCING Δ DIRECT Δ DIRECT+ INDIRECT BASELINE TEMPERATURE AT 2m Up to ±3% PBL HEIGTH Up to ±15%

16. CONCLUSIONS • An anthropogenic emission inventory for Europe has been implemented into WRF/Chem • The validation against ground observations reveal that: • Meteorology is well simulated. We have a negative tempereture bias in summer and a positive wind bias in winter • Ozone mean daily cycle is well simulated, but full variability is not reproduced • PM2.5 has a good correlation in winter and is underestimated by about 30% • Preliminary tests on aerosol radiation-cloud feedback reveal a significant sensitivity of the model to indirect effects.

17. THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION!!

18. AGGREGATION OF VOC EMISSIONS: FROM 350 TO 17 VOC EMISSION CLASSES (32) MODEL VOCs IN RADM2 (17) VOC1 VOC2 VOC3 VOC4 … VOC100 … VOC350 CAT1 CAT2 CAT3 … … … … CAT32 RWF1 RWF1 MOD1 MOD2 MOD3 … MOD17 RWF2 RWF’1 RWF2 RWF3 RWF3 RWF4 RWF’3 RWF100 RWF350 [Middleton et al., Atmo. Env. 1990]

19. AEROSOL-RADIATION-MICROPHYSICS INTERACTION Mie Theory in WRF/Chem: Aerosol OpticalPropertiesover 4 wawelengths DIRECT FORCING [Fast et al. 2006]: Calculated Aerosol NumberDistribution ShortWaweRadiationScheme INDIRECT FORCING [Chapmanet al. 2009]: Cloudopticaldepth CloudDropletNumberfromActivated Aerosol (prognostic treatment) Resuspension

20. MM5/Chem vs WRF/Chem O3: r MM5/Chem O3: r WRF/Chem Improved in ozone forecast [Grell et al., Atmo. Env., 2005]

21. INTERACTION BETEWEEN THE COMPONENTS OF THE EARTH SYSTEM THAT AFFECT CLIMATE

22. THE NEED OF A COUPLED MODEL: METEOROLOGY AND CHEMISTRY INTERACT! • Same transport scheme, same grid and same physical schemes for the “sub-grid” processes. • Same time-step. • Not requires any spatial and temporal interpolation. • There are the equations that describe the radiation-aerosols-clouds interaction.

23. ALGORITHM DEVELOPED FOR ANTROPOGENIC EMISSIONS OF WRF/Chem • E’ necessario anche: • inserire modulazione temporale (mensile e oraria) • interpolazione spaziale sul dominio di simulazione • Conversione da formato netCDF a binario

24. VERTICAL PROFILE OF EMISSIONS • Energy production • Industrial combustion • Energy production • Industrial combustion • Waste treatment 1. Industrial processes 2. Lavorazione petrolio 3. Solvents 4. Trasports Central Italy, Spain Nord Europe Nord Italy