View
217
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Max-Planck-Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, Ger
AeroCom
… in the context of GEMS
S. Kinne
2
Overview
what is AeroCom ? Goals
what does AeroCom do ? Activites
how does GEMS benefit from AeroCom? Initialization Evaluation
3
what is AeroCom ?
AeroCom “Comparisons of Aerosol simulations to DATA”
co-organized by LSCE and MPI-Met• not officially funded (major problem)• supported by global aerosol modeling worldwide
AeroCom Goals document module differences investigate sub-step and sub-processes assemble useful (quality!) data-sets intensify links between groups (model, data)
4
AeroCom - Activities (1)
organize regular workshops Paris 6/03, Ispra 3/04, N.York 12/04, Oslo 6/05
maintain a websitehttp://nansen.ipsl.jussieu.fr/AEROCOM
Information• conference summaries / papers
Protocol• data-format / data-request (Experiments) / input
Interactive diagnosis tool• Evaluations (Model vs Data)• Diversity / Outliers (Model vs Model)
5
http://nansen.ipsl.jussieu.fr/AEROCOM/DATA/surfobs.html
aot
SO4
time-series
local networkcomparisons
distribution-plots
scatter-plots
selectionmenu
6
AeroCom - Activities (2)
define common ‘Experiments’ A: ‘best as you can’ – simulation B: year 2000 with prescribed 2000 emissions* C: year 2000 with prescribed 1750 emissions*
B minus C: address anthropogenic ‘forcing’
INDI: sensitivity studies for indirect effects
* ftp://ftp.ei.jrc.it/pub/Aerocom/
prepare useful data-sets (for data-base) Evaluate – beyond downloading (satellite combo) Combine/ Process – for added value (AERONET)
7
aot – sat. retrievals vs. AERONET
…but canlocal data expandedin regionsas here ?
sat - AnetR = -------------- Anet
8
AeroCom - Questions
MODELING are component modules consistent ?
where is model diversity largest ? what do prescribed scenarios reveal?
DATA are there data to determine skill ?
are (operational, global) data available ? are data (sufficiently) accurate? can data correlations provide clues? are data applicable to scales in modeling?
9
AeroCom - Participants
LO LOA 3.8/2.5 yr 2000 Reddy / BoucherLS LSCE 3.8/2.5 yr 2000 Schulz / Balkanski UL ULAQ 22.5/10 yr 2000 Pitari / Montenaro SP SPRINTARS 1.1/1.1 yr 2000 TakemuraCT CANADA 2.8/2.8 yr 2000 Gong MI MIRAGE 2.5/2.0 1yr avg Ghan / EasterEH ECHAM5 HAM 1.8/1.8 3yr avg Stier / FeichterNF NCAR MATCH 1.9/1.9 yr 2000 Fillmore / CollinsOC OSLO-CTM 2.8/2.8 yr 1996 Myhre / Isaksen OG OSLO-GCM 2.8/2.8 3yr avg Iversen et al.IM IMPACT 2.5/2.0 yr 2000 Liu / PennerGM GFDL MOZART 2.5/2.0 yr 2000 Ginoux / HorowitzGO GOCART 2.0/2.5 yr 2000 Chin / DiehlGI GISS 4.0/5.0 yr 2000 Koch / BauerTM TM5 4.0/6.0 yr 2000 Krol / DentenerEM ECHAM4 MADE 3.8/3.8 10yr avg Lauer / HendricksGR GRANTOUR 5.0/5.0 1yr avg Herzog / PennerNM NCAR MOZART 1.9/1.9 1yr avg Tie / BrasseurNC NCAR CAM 2.8/2.8 1yr avg MahonwaldEL ECHAM4 3.8/3.8 3yr avg Lohmann / Feichter
all models separate by aerosol species (SU,BC,OC,DU,SS)
10
first results – model diversity
differences in mass-fields are dominated by differences in aerosol processing
year-to year variations are much smaller impact of ‘streamlined’ emissions is minor
differences among individual components (SU,BC,OC,DU,SS) are larger than for their sum
data constraint usually only for (sum-) totals comp-mix diversity means absorption diversity
large differences in aerosol water module (humidification) or GCM (envir) related?
11
model diversity of emission and massmodel diversity of emission and mass
Exp B
Exp A
Exp B
Exp A
emission
mass
emission
mass
12
diversity – in aot simulations
total aot diversity < aot sub-component diversity !
totalaot
SUaot
BCaot
DUaot
SSaot
OCaot
13
first results - data
BAD data: an assimilator’s / evaluator’s nightmare
do not trust given error estimates compare with quality references
data of global data-sets are not globally of equal accuracy
focus on regional strength, establish composites a local samples can differ from its regional value
correlation can provide clues with the immediate need for absolute accuracy
aerosol and other atmospheric properties
14
a case for S* (the retrieval composite)
composite
still noglobalcover!
15
AeroCom – and GEMS
INITIALIZATION
provide datasets on aerosol data from ground-based networks
• AERONET, EARLINET, EMEP, IMPROVE data derived from space sensors
• satellite data and retrieval composites
provide reference from modeling global and complete data-sets from the
AeroCom model median collaborate on aerosol emissions
16
climatology - aot / 0 / Angstrom
17
AeroCom – and GEMS
EVALUATION
build on AeroCom evaluation web tools diganostics and scores (e.g Taylor plots)
provide a reference from global modeling statistics on simulated fields (average, diversity)
provide (independent) data for evaluation quality data not used in assimilations
18
AeroCom and GEMS
both activities are complementary !
AeroCom dignostic tools will provide immediate feedback on simulation performance (score ?)
GEMS can build on AeroCom efforts to establish global quality data on aerosol
GEMS can build on the AeroCom effort to harmonize and update aerosol emissions
GEMS is expected to accelerate access to new quality data-sets for AeroCom model evalutions
19
AeroCom - current ‘data’ base
Remote sensing – space satellites (Modis, Misr, Toms, Avhrr, Polder …)
• aot (individual + composite best), Angstrom
• aot associated atmos properties (clouds)
Remote sensing – ground AERONET (sun/sky-photometers)
• aot, size-dist., (ssa), Angstrom EARLINET (lidar)
• vertical profile, extinction
In-situ ground data IMPROVE
• SU, OC, BC, extinction EMEP
• SU, PM (?)
data priorityfor year 2000
20
General Questions to GEMS
what are the priorities / GEMS needs ?…relating to AeroCom activities I can think of
data aquization data assessment data integration comparisons to other modeling efforts evaluating and scoring
who is going to do it / what ? extra techn. (wo)man-power for AeroCom? many GEMS participants are ready to contribute
with little pieces of the puzzles. Who integrates?
21
extras
22
up-scaling - of local ‘aot’
50% larger than the regional value level
50% smaller than the regional value level
at GSFC:local aots are ca. 20% aboveregional mean
with satellite data !
23
data
correlations
aerosol - cloud
do higher cloud tops offset solar albedo losses?
what process: aerosol cloud? or cloud aerosol?
keya – aotA – aot (<1m)
t – cld top T L – lwc (T> 260K)
x(y) – x function of y
24
model-diversity
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
total aot [at 550nm]
ECHAMGOCARTMIRAGEGISSSprintarsGrantourULAQNCAR
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
total (component combined) aot [at 550nm]
ECHAMGOCARTMIRAGEGISSSprintarsGrantourULAQNCARLOALSCECanadaNCAR-mozOSLO-ctmOSLO-gcmIMPACT
June 2004
June 2002
despite betteragreement forannual global aot …large diversity inmodeling remains
a- aot -S sulfate ab absorption aotm- dry mass -O part.o matter w0 ss-albedo r- mee (=a/m) -B black carbon cr bc/oc ratio -N seasalt -f frac of sizes <1 m -D dust An Angstrom param.
max / min factors of central 66% of aer.modules
25
clima-tology
model satellite
aot
ssaaot
with medians
26
AERONET Cape Verde aot 3/5/2004
Recommended