Characteristics of STILT footprints driven by KIM model simulated meteorological fields: implication for developing near real-time footprints.

This study presents an analysis of the atmospheric footprint sensitivities and CO₂ enhancements measured at three in situ stations in South Korea (Anmyeondo (AMY), Gosan (JGS), Ulleungdo (ULD)) using the KIM-STILT and WRF-STILT atmospheric transport models. Monthly aggregated footprints for each station were compared between the models for July and December 2020. The footprints revealed major source regions and the sensitivity of atmospheric mole fractions at the receptor to upstream surface fluxes. In July, both models showed similar major source regions for the AMY station, including Korea, the Yellow Sea, and Japan. However, a discrepancy was observed in the Eastern Pacific Ocean, with KIM-STILT showing larger sensitivity compared to WRF-STILT. In December, both models indicated strong sensitivity over Northeast and Eastern China, but KIM-STILT exhibited smaller sensitivities towards Northwestern China and Mongolia compared to WRF-STILT. At station ULD in July, both models exhibited comparable source regions, but a notable difference was found in Southeast China, where KIM-STILT showed stronger sensitivity. For the JGS station, both models agreed on major sources, but WRF-STILT demonstrated stronger sensitivity over North and Northeastern China. Regarding CO₂ enhancements, both models generally underestimated the amplitude of CO₂ enhancements, especially in July. However, in December, there was better agreement with observed data. The models were able to reproduce the phase of measured ΔCO₂ reasonably well despite the underestimation of CO₂ amplitudes. The contribution of biospheric CO₂ to the observed enhancements, along with fossil-fuel emissions, was highlighted. In specific cases with significant CO₂ enhancements, the models provided varying estimates of CO₂ff values, particularly in the source regions of Eastern China. The differences in sensitivity estimations emphasize the need for further investigation to understand the underlying factors causing disparities. Overall, this study provides valuable insights into the potential advantages of each model in capturing dispersion patterns in specific regions, highlighting the importance of understanding these differences to improve the accuracy of atmospheric transport models. Further work is necessary to address the observed disparities and enhance our understanding of the transport models in the studied regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]