Search

Accurate modelling of ash clouds from volcanic eruptions requires knowledge about the eruption source parameters including eruption onset, duration, mass eruption rates, particle size distribution, and vertical emission profiles. However, most of these parameters are unknown and must be estimated somehow. Some are estimated based on observed correlations and known volcano parameters. However, a more accurate estimate is often needed to bring the model into closer agreement to observations. This paper describes the inversion procedure implemented at the Norwegian Meteorological Institute for estimating ash emission rates from retrieved satellite ash column amounts and a priori knowledge. The overall procedure consists of five stages: (1) generate a priori emission estimates; (2) run forward simulations with a set of unit emission profiles; (3) collocate/match observations with emission simulations; (4) build system of linear equations; and (5) solve overdetermined system. We go through the mathematical foundations for the inversion procedure, performance for synthetic cases, and performance for real-world cases. The novelties of this paper includes a memory efficient formulation of the inversion problem, a detailed description and illustrations of the mathematical formulations, evaluation of the inversion method using synthetic known truth data as well as real data, and inclusion of observations of ash cloud-top height. The source code used in this work is freely available under an open source license, and is possible to use for other similar applications.

This study provides a comprehensive assessment of NO2 changes across the main European urban areas induced by COVID-19 lockdowns using satellite retrievals from the Tropospheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI) onboard the Sentinel-5p satellite, surface site measurements, and simulations from the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (CAMS) regional ensemble of air quality models. Some recent TROPOMI-based estimates of changes in atmospheric NO2 concentrations have neglected the influence of weather variability between the reference and lockdown periods. Here we provide weather-normalized estimates based on a machine learning method (gradient boosting) along with an assessment of the biases that can be expected from methods that omit the influence of weather. We also compare the weather-normalized satellite-estimated NO2 column changes with weather-normalized surface NO2 concentration changes and the CAMS regional ensemble, composed of 11 models, using recently published estimates of emission reductions induced by the lockdown. All estimates show similar NO2 reductions. Locations where the lockdown measures were stricter show stronger reductions, and, conversely, locations where softer measures were implemented show milder reductions in NO2 pollution levels. Average reduction estimates based on either satellite observations (−23 %), surface stations (−43 %), or models (−32 %) are presented, showing the importance of vertical sampling but also the horizontal representativeness. Surface station estimates are significantly changed when sampled to the TROPOMI overpasses (−37 %), pointing out the importance of the variability in time of such estimates. Observation-based machine learning estimates show a stronger temporal variability than model-based estimates.

The Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (CAMS) reanalysis is the latest global reanalysis dataset of atmospheric composition produced by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), consisting of three-dimensional time-consistent atmospheric composition fields, including aerosols and chemical species. The dataset currently covers the period 2003–2016 and will be extended in the future by adding 1 year each year. A reanalysis for greenhouse gases is being produced separately. The CAMS reanalysis builds on the experience gained during the production of the earlier Monitoring Atmospheric Composition and Climate (MACC) reanalysis and CAMS interim reanalysis. Satellite retrievals of total column CO; tropospheric column NO2; aerosol optical depth (AOD); and total column, partial column and profile ozone retrievals were assimilated for the CAMS reanalysis with ECMWF's Integrated Forecasting System. The new reanalysis has an increased horizontal resolution of about 80 km and provides more chemical species at a better temporal resolution (3-hourly analysis fields, 3-hourly forecast fields and hourly surface forecast fields) than the previously produced CAMS interim reanalysis. The CAMS reanalysis has smaller biases compared with most of the independent ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and aerosol optical depth observations used for validation in this paper than the previous two reanalyses and is much improved and more consistent in time, especially compared to the MACC reanalysis. The CAMS reanalysis is a dataset that can be used to compute climatologies, study trends, evaluate models, benchmark other reanalyses or serve as boundary conditions for regional models for past periods.

Within the framework of the AeroCom (Aerosol Comparisons between Observations and Models) initiative, the state-of-the-art modelling of aerosol optical properties is assessed from 14 global models participating in the phase III control experiment (AP3). The models are similar to CMIP6/AerChemMIP Earth System Models (ESMs) and provide a robust multi-model ensemble. Inter-model spread of aerosol species lifetimes and emissions appears to be similar to that of mass extinction coefficients (MECs), suggesting that aerosol optical depth (AOD) uncertainties are associated with a broad spectrum of parameterised aerosol processes. Total AOD is approximately the same as in AeroCom phase I (AP1) simulations. However, we find a 50 % decrease in the optical depth (OD) of black carbon (BC), attributable to a combination of decreased emissions and lifetimes. Relative contributions from sea salt (SS) and dust (DU) have shifted from being approximately equal in AP1 to SS contributing about 2∕3 of the natural AOD in AP3. This shift is linked with a decrease in DU mass burden, a lower DU MEC, and a slight decrease in DU lifetime, suggesting coarser DU particle sizes in AP3 compared to AP1. Relative to observations, the AP3 ensemble median and most of the participating models underestimate all aerosol optical properties investigated, that is, total AOD as well as fine and coarse AOD (AODf, AODc), Ångström exponent (AE), dry surface scattering (SCdry), and absorption (ACdry) coefficients. Compared to AERONET, the models underestimate total AOD by ca. 21 % ± 20 % (as inferred from the ensemble median and interquartile range). Against satellite data, the ensemble AOD biases range from −37 % (MODIS-Terra) to −16 % (MERGED-FMI, a multi-satellite AOD product), which we explain by differences between individual satellites and AERONET measurements themselves. Correlation coefficients (R) between model and observation AOD records are generally high (R>0.75), suggesting that the models are capable of capturing spatio-temporal variations in AOD. We find a much larger underestimate in coarse AODc (∼ −45 % ± 25 %) than in fine AODf (∼ −15 % ± 25 %) with slightly increased inter-model spread compared to total AOD. These results indicate problems in the modelling of DU and SS. The AODc bias is likely due to missing DU over continental land masses (particularly over the United States, SE Asia, and S. America), while marine AERONET sites and the AATSR SU satellite data suggest more moderate oceanic biases in AODc. Column AEs are underestimated by about 10 % ± 16 %. For situations in which measurements show AE > 2, models underestimate AERONET AE by ca. 35 %. In contrast, all models (but one) exhibit large overestimates in AE when coarse aerosol dominates (bias ca. +140 % if observed AE < 0.5). Simulated AE does not span the observed AE variability. These results indicate that models overestimate particle size (or underestimate the fine-mode fraction) for fine-dominated aerosol and underestimate size (or overestimate the fine-mode fraction) for coarse-dominated aerosol. This must have implications for lifetime, water uptake, scattering enhancement, and the aerosol radiative effect, which we can not quantify at this moment. Comparison against Global Atmosphere Watch (GAW) in situ data results in mean bias and inter-model variations of −35 % ± 25 % and −20 % ± 18 % for SCdry and ACdry, respectively. The larger underestimate of SCdry than ACdry suggests the models will simulate an aerosol single scattering albedo that is too low. The larger underestimate of SCdry than ambient air AOD is consistent with recent findings that models overestimate scattering enhancement due to hygroscopic growth. The broadly consistent negative bias in AOD and surface scattering suggests an underestimate of aerosol radiative effects in current global aerosol models. Considerable inter-model diversity in the simulated optical properties is often found in regions that are, unfortunately, not or only sparsely covered by ground-based observations. This includes, for instance, the Sahara, Amazonia, central Australia, and the South Pacific. This highlights the need for a better site coverage in the observations, which would enable us to better assess the models, but also the performance of satellite products in these regions. Using fine-mode AOD as a proxy for present-day aerosol forcing estimates, our results suggest that models underestimate aerosol forcing by ca. −15 %, however, with a considerably large interquartile range, suggesting a spread between −35 % and +10 %.

Within the framework of the AeroCom (Aerosol Comparisons between Observations and Models) initiative, the present day modelling of aerosol optical properties has been assessed using simulated data representative for the year 2010, from 14 global aerosol models participating in the Phase III Control experiment. The model versions are close or equal to those used for CMIP6 and AerChemMIP and inform also on bias in state of the art ESMs. Modelled column optical depths (total, fine and coarse mode AOD) and Angstrom Exponents (AE) were compared both with ground based observations from the Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET, version 3) as well as space based observations from AATSR-SU instruments. In addition, the modelled AODs were compared with MODIS (Aqua and Terra) data and a satellite AOD data-set (MERGED-FMI) merged from 12 different individual AOD products. Furthermore, for the first time, the modelled near surface scattering (under dry conditions) and absorption coefficients were evaluated against measurements made at low relative humidity at surface in-situ GAW sites. Statistics are based mainly on normalised mean biases and Pearson correlation coefficients from colocated model and observation data in monthly resolution. Hence, the results are mostly representative for the regions covered by each of the observation networks. Model biases established against satellite data yield insights into remote continental areas and oceans, where ground-based networks lack site coverage. The satellite data themselves are evaluated against AERONET observations, to test our aggregation and re-gridding routines, suggesting relative AOD biases of −5 %, −6 %, +9 % and +18 % for AATSR-SU, MERGED-FMI, MODIS-aqua and MODIS-terra, respectively, with high correlations exceeding 0.8. Biases of fine and coarse AOD and AE in AATSR are found to be +2 %, −16 % and +14.7 % respectively, at AERONET sites, with correlations of the order of 0.8. The AeroCom MEDIAN and most of the participating models underestimate the optical properties investigated, relative to remote sensing observations. AERONET AOD is underestimated by 21 % ± 17 %. Against satellite data, the model AOD biases range from −38 % (MODIS-terra) to −17 % (MERGED-FMI). Correlation coefficients of model AODs with AERONET, MERGED-FMI and AATSR-SU are high (0.8–0.9) and slightly lower against the two MODIS data-sets (0.6–0.8). Investigation of fine and coarse AODs from the MEDIAN model reveals biases of −10% ± 20 % and −41 % ± 29 % against AERONET and −13 % and −24 % against AATSR-SU, respectively. The differences in bias against AERONET and AATSR-SU are in agreement with the established satellite bias against AERONET. These results indicate that most of the AOD bias is due to missing coarse AOD in the regions covered by these observations. Underestimates are also found when comparing the models against the surface GAW observations, showing AeroCom MEDIAN mean bias and inter-model variation of −44 % ± 22 % and −32 % ± 34 % for scattering and absorption coefficients, respectively. Dry scattering shows higher underestimation than AOD at ambient relative humidity and is in agreement with recent findings that suggest that models tend to overestimate scattering enhancement due to hygroscopic growth. Broadly consistent negative bias in AOD and scattering suggest a general underestimate in aerosol effects in current global aerosol models. The large diversity in the surface absorption results suggests differences in the model treatment of light absorption by black carbon (BC), dust (DU) and to a minor degree, organic aerosol (OA). Considerable diversity is found among the models in the simulated near surface absorption coefficients, particularly in regions associated with dust (e.g. Sahara, Tibet), biomass burning (e.g. Amazonia, Central Australia) and biogenic emissions (e.g. Amazonia). Regions associated with high anthropogenic BC emissions such as China and India exhibit comparatively good agreement for all models. Evaluation of modelled column AEs shows an underestimation of 9 % ± 24 % against AERONET and −21 % against AATSR-SU. This suggests that overall, models tend to overestimate particle size, with implications for lifetime and radiative transfer calculations. An investigation of modelled emissions, burdens and lifetimes, mass-specific-extinction coefficients (MECs) and optical depths (ODs) for each species and model reveals considerable diversity in most of these parameters. These are discussed in detail for each model individually. Inter-model spread of aerosol species lifetime appears to be similar to that of mass extinction coefficients, suggesting that AOD uncertainties are still associated to a broad spectrum of parameterised aerosol processes.

This study is based on model results from TF HTAP (Task Force on Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution) phase II, in which a set of source receptor model experiments have been defined, reducing global (and regional) anthropogenic emissions by 20 % in different source regions throughout the globe, with the main focus on the year 2010. All the participating models use the same set of anthropogenic emissions. Comparisons of model results to measurements are shown for selected European surface sites and for ozone sondes, but the main focus here is on the contributions to European ozone levels from different world regions, and how and why these contributions differ depending on the model. We investigate the origins by use of a novel stepwise approach, combining simple tracer calculations and calculations of CO and O3. To highlight the differences, we analyse the vertical transects of the midlatitude effects from the 20 % emission reductions.The spread in the model results increases from the simple CO tracer to CO and then to ozone as the complexity of the physical and chemical processes involved increase. As a result of non-linear ozone chemistry, the contributions from non-European relative to European sources are larger for ozone compared to the CO and the CO tracer. For annually averaged ozone the contributions from the rest of the world is larger than the effects from European emissions alone, with the largest contributions from North America and eastern Asia. There are also considerable contributions from other nearby regions to the east and from international shipping. The calculated contributions to European annual average ozone from other major source regions relative to all contributions from all major sources (RAIR – Relative Annual Intercontinental Response) have increased from 43 % in HTAP1 to 82 % in HTAP2. This increase is mainly caused by a better definition of Europe, with increased emissions outside of Europe relative to those in Europe, and by including a nearby non-European source for external-to-Europe regions. European contributions to ozone metrics reflecting human health and ecosystem damage, which mostly accumulated in the summer months, are larger than for annual ozone. Whereas ozone from European sources peaks in the summer months, the largest contributions from non-European sources are mostly calculated for the spring months, when ozone production over the polluted continents starts to increase, while at the same time the lifetime of ozone in the free troposphere is relatively long. At the surface, contributions from non-European sources are of similar magnitude for all European subregions considered, defined as TF HTAP receptor regions (north-western, south-western, eastern and south-eastern Europe).

We present an overview of the coordinated global numerical modelling experiments performed during 2012–2016 by the Task Force on Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution (TF HTAP), the regional experiments by the Air Quality Model Evaluation International Initiative (AQMEII) over Europe and North America, and the Model Intercomparison Study for Asia (MICS-Asia). To improve model estimates of the impacts of intercontinental transport of air pollution on climate, ecosystems, and human health and to answer a set of policy-relevant questions, these three initiatives performed emission perturbation modelling experiments consistent across the global, hemispheric, and continental/regional scales. In all three initiatives, model results are extensively compared against monitoring data for a range of variables (meteorological, trace gas concentrations, and aerosol mass and composition) from different measurement platforms (ground measurements, vertical profiles, airborne measurements) collected from a number of sources. Approximately 10 to 25 modelling groups have contributed to each initiative, and model results have been managed centrally through three data hubs maintained by each initiative. Given the organizational complexity of bringing together these three initiatives to address a common set of policy-relevant questions, this publication provides the motivation for the modelling activity, the rationale for specific choices made in the model experiments, and an overview of the organizational structures for both the modelling and the measurements used and analysed in a number of modelling studies in this special issue.

This study is based on model results from TF HTAP (Task Force on Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution) phase II where a set of source receptor model experiments have been defined, reducing global (and regional) anthropogenic emissions by 20 % in different source regions throughout the globe, with main focus on year 2010. All the participating models use the same set of emissions. Comparisons of model results to measurements are shown for selected European surface sites and for ozone sondes, but the main focus here is on the contributions to European ozone levels from different world regions, and how and why these contributions differ depending on model. We investigate the origins by use of a novel stepwise approach combining simple tracer calculations and calculations of CO and O3. To highlight differences, we analyse the vertical transects of the mid latitude effects from the 20 % emission reductions. Based on the relative emission changes from different world regions the models agree that for ozone the contributions from the rest of the world is larger than the effects from European emissions alone, with the largest contributions from North America and East Asia. The contribution will however depend on the choice of ozone metric. There are also considerable contributions from other nearby regions to the east and from international shipping, Whereas ozone from European sources peaks in the summer months, the largest contributions from non European sources are mostly calculated for the spring months when ozone production over the polluted continents starts to increase, while at the same time the lifetime of ozone in the free troposphere is relatively long. At the surface contributions from non European sources are of similar magnitude for all European sub regions considered, defined as TF HTAP receptor regions (north west, south west, east and south east Europe).

We present an overview of the coordinated global numerical modelling experiments performed during 2012–2016 by the Task Force on Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution (TF HTAP), the regional experiments by the Air Quality Model Evaluation International Initiative (AQMEII) over Europe and North America, and the Modelling Intercomparison Study- Asia (MICS-Asia). To improve model estimates of the impacts of intercontinental transport of air pollution on climate, ecosystems and human health and to answer a set of policy relevant questions, these three initiatives performed emission perturbation modelling experiments consistent across the global, hemispheric and continental/regional scales. In all three initiatives, model results are extensively compared against monitoring data for a range of variables (meteorological, trace gas concentrations, and aerosol mass and composition) from different measurement platforms (ground measurements, vertical profiles, airborne measurements) collected from a number of sources. Approximately 10 to 20 modelling groups have contributed to each initiative, and model results have been managed centrally through three data hubs maintained by each initiative. Given the organizational complexity of bringing together these three initiatives to address a common set of policy relevant questions, this publication provides the motivation for the modelling activity, the rationale for specific choices made in the model experiments, and an overview of the organizational structures for both the modelling and the measurements used and analysed in a number of modelling studies in this special issue.

The European MACC (Monitoring Atmospheric Composition and Climate) project is preparing the operational Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (CAMS), one of the services of the European Copernicus Programme on Earth observation and environmental services. MACC uses data assimilation to combine in situ and remote sensing observations with global and regional models of atmospheric reactive gases, aerosols, and greenhouse gases, and is based on the Integrated Forecasting System of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF). The global component of the MACC service has a dedicated validation activity to document the quality of the atmospheric composition products. In this paper we discuss the approach to validation that has been developed over the past 3 years. Topics discussed are the validation requirements, the operational aspects, the measurement data sets used, the structure of the validation reports, the models and assimilation systems validated, the procedure to introduce new upgrades, and the scoring methods. One specific target of the MACC system concerns forecasting special events with high-pollution concentrations. Such events receive extra attention in the validation process. Finally, a summary is provided of the results from the validation of the latest set of daily global analysis and forecast products from the MACC system reported in November 2014.

This paper describes the pre-operational analysis and forecasting system developed during MACC (Monitoring Atmospheric Composition and Climate) and continued in the MACC-II (Monitoring Atmospheric Composition and Climate: Interim Implementation) European projects to provide air quality services for the European continent. This system is based on seven state-of-the art models developed and run in Europe (CHIMERE, EMEP, EURAD-IM, LOTOS-EUROS, MATCH, MOCAGE and SILAM). These models are used to calculate multi-model ensemble products. The paper gives an overall picture of its status at the end of MACC-II (summer 2014) and analyses the performance of the multi-model ensemble. The MACC-II system provides daily 96 h forecasts with hourly outputs of 10 chemical species/aerosols (O3, NO2, SO2, CO, PM10, PM2.5, NO, NH3, total NMVOCs (non-methane volatile organic compounds) and PAN+PAN precursors) over eight vertical levels from the surface to 5 km height. The hourly analysis at the surface is done a posteriori for the past day using a selection of representative air quality data from European monitoring stations. The performance of the system is assessed daily, weekly and every 3 months (seasonally) through statistical indicators calculated using the available representative air quality data from European monitoring stations. Results for a case study show the ability of the ensemble median to forecast regional ozone pollution events. The seasonal performances of the individual models and of the multi-model ensemble have been monitored since September 2009 for ozone, NO2 and PM10. The statistical indicators for ozone in summer 2014 show that the ensemble median gives on average the best performances compared to the seven models. There is very little degradation of the scores with the forecast day but there is a marked diurnal cycle, similarly to the individual models, that can be related partly to the prescribed diurnal variations of anthropogenic emissions in the models. During summer 2014, the diurnal ozone maximum is underestimated by the ensemble median by about 4 μg m−3 on average. Locally, during the studied ozone episodes, the maxima from the ensemble median are often lower than observations by 30–50 μg m−3. Overall, ozone scores are generally good with average values for the normalised indicators of 0.14 for the modified normalised mean bias and of 0.30 for the fractional gross error. Tests have also shown that the ensemble median is robust to reduction of ensemble size by one, that is, if predictions are unavailable from one model. Scores are also discussed for PM10 for winter 2013–1014. There is an underestimation of most models leading the ensemble median to a mean bias of −4.5 μg m−3. The ensemble median fractional gross error is larger for PM10 (~ 0.52) than for ozone and the correlation is lower (~ 0.35 for PM10 and ~ 0.54 for ozone). This is related to a larger spread of the seven model scores for PM10 than for ozone linked to different levels of complexity of aerosol representation in the individual models. In parallel, a scientific analysis of the results of the seven models and of the ensemble is also done over the Mediterranean area because of the specificity of its meteorology and emissions. The system is robust in terms of the production availability. Major efforts have been done in MACC-II towards the operationalisation of all its components. Foreseen developments and research for improving its performances are discussed in the conclusion.

The Meteorological Synthesizing Centre-West (MSC-W) of the European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme (EMEP) has been performing model calculations in support of the Convention on Long Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP) for more than 30 yr. The EMEP MSC-W chemical transport model is still one of the key tools within European air pollution policy assessments. Traditionally, the EMEP model has covered all of Europe with a resolution of about 50 × 50 km2, and extending vertically from ground level to the tropopause (100 hPa). The model has undergone substantial development in recent years, and is now applied on scales ranging from local (ca. 5 km grid size) to global (with 1 degree resolution). The model is used to simulate photo-oxidants and both inorganic and organic aerosols. In 2008 the EMEP model was released for the first time as public domain code, along with all required input data for model runs for one year. Since then, many changes have been made to the model physics, and input data. The second release of the EMEP MSC-W model became available in mid 2011, and a new release is targeted for early 2012. This publication is intended to document this third release of the EMEP MSC-W model. The model formulations are given, along with details of input data-sets which are used, and brief background on some of the choices made in the formulation are presented. The model code itself is available at www.emep.int, along with the data required to run for a full year over Europe.

The Meteorological Synthesizing Centre-West (MSC-W) of the European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme (EMEP) has been performing model calculations in support of the Convention on Long Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP) for more than 30 years. The EMEP MSC-W chemical transport model is still one of the key tools within European air pollution policy assessments. Traditionally, the model has covered all of Europe with a resolution of about 50 km × 50 km, and extending vertically from ground level to the tropopause (100 hPa). The model has changed extensively over the last ten years, however, with flexible processing of chemical schemes, meteorological inputs, and with nesting capability: the code is now applied on scales ranging from local (ca. 5 km grid size) to global (with 1 degree resolution). The model is used to simulate photo-oxidants and both inorganic and organic aerosols. In 2008 the EMEP model was released for the first time as public domain code, along with all required input data for model runs for one year. The second release of the EMEP MSC-W model became available in mid 2011, and a new release is targeted for summer 2012. This publication is intended to document this third release of the EMEP MSC-W model. The model formulations are given, along with details of input data-sets which are used, and a brief background on some of the choices made in the formulation is presented. The model code itself is available at www.emep.int, along with the data required to run for a full year over Europe.

This study provides a comprehensive assessment of NO2 changes across the main European urban areas induced by the COVID-19 lockdown using satellite retrievals from the Tropospheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI), surface site measurements and simulations from the Copernicus Atmospheric Monitoring Service (CAMS) regional ensemble of air quality models. Some recent TROPOMI-based estimates of NO2 changes have neglected the influence of weather variability between the reference and lockdown periods. Here we provide weather-normalized estimates based on a machine learning method (gradient boosting) along with an assessment of the biases that can be expected from methods that omit the influence of weather. We also compare the weather-normalized satellite NO2 column changes with both weather-normalized surface NO2 concentration changes and simulated changes by the CAMS regional ensemble, composed of 11 models, using recently published emission reductions induced by the lockdown. We show that all estimates show the same tendency on NO2 reductions. Locations where the lockdown was stricter show stronger reductions and, conversely, locations where softer measures were implemented show milder reductions in NO2 pollution levels. Regarding average reductions, estimates based on either satellite observations (−23 %) surface stations (−43 %) or models (−32 %) are presented, showing the importance of vertical sampling but also the horizontal representativeness. Surface station estimates are significantly changed when sampled to the TROPOMI overpasses (−37 %) pointing out the importance of the variability in time of such estimates. Observation based machine learning estimates show a stronger temporal variability than the model-based estimates.