ACCENT intercomparison (Expt. 2)

Nitrogen deposition on regional and global scales:

a multi-model evaluation F.J. Dentener1, J. Drevet2, D.S. Stevenson3, K. Ellingsen4, T.P.C. van Noije5, M.G. Schultz6, C.S. Atherton7, N. Bell8, T. Butler9, B. Eickhout10, A.M. Fiore11,

J. Galloway12, C. Galy-Lacaux13, U.C. Kulshresta14, J.-F. Lamarque15, V. Montanaro16, J.-F. Müller17, J.M. Rodriguez18, M.G. Sanderson19, N.H. Savage20, S. Szopa21,

K. Sudo22, O. Wild22, G. Zeng20

1. JRC, Ispra, Italy. 2. EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland. 3. University of Edinburgh, UK 4. University of Oslo, Norway. 5. KNMI, De Bilt, The Netherlands. 6. MPI-Met, Hamburg, Germany. 7. LLNL, Livermore, USA.

8. NASA-GISS, New York, USA. 9. MPI-Chem, Mainz, Germany. 10. RIVM, Bilthoven, The Netherlands 11. NOAA GFDL, Princeton, USA. 12. University of Virginia, USA. 13. Observatoire Midi-Pyrénées, France.

14. Indian Institute of Chemical Technology, Hyderabad, India. 15. NCAR, Boulder, USA. 16. Università L'Aquila, Italy. 17. IASB, Brussels, Belgium. 18. GEST, Washington, DC, USA. 19. Met Office, UK.

20. University of Cambridge, UK. 21. LSCE, Gif-sur-Yvette, France. 22. FRSGC JAMSTEC, Yokohama, Japan.

ACCENT intercomparison (Expt. 2)

• Focus on 2030 – of direct interest to policymakers• Go beyond radiative forcing: also consider ozone AQ, N-

and S-deposition, and the use of satellite data to evaluate models

• Present-day base case for evaluation:– S1: 2000

• Consider three 2030 emissions scenarios:– S2: 2030 IIASA CLE (‘likely’)– S3: 2030 IIASA MFR (‘optimistic’)– S4: 2030 SRES A2 (‘pessimistic’)

• Also consider the effect of climate change:– S5: 2030 CLE + imposed 2030 climate

Future changes in composition related to emissions1 year runsFuture changes in composition related to climate change5-10 year runs

Global NOx emission scenarios

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

Europe North AmericaAsia + Oceania Latin America

Africa + Middle East Maximum Feasible Reduction (MFR)

SRES A2 - World Total SRES B2 - World Total

Figure 1. Projected development of IIASA anthropogenic NOx emissions by SRES world region (Tg NO2 yr-1).

SRES A2

2000 2030

Other emissions categories

• EDGAR3.2 ship emissions, and assumed 1.5%/yr growth in all scenarios

• Biomass burning emissions from van der Werf et al. (2003) – assumed these remained fixed to 2030 in all scenarios

• Aircraft emissions from IPCC(1999)• Modellers used their own natural emissions

• Specified fixed global CH4 for each case (from earlier transient runs)

Requested model diagnostics

• Monthly mean, full 3-D – O3, NO, NO2, CO, OH, …

– O3 budget terms

– CH4 + OH

– NOy, NHx and SOx deposition fluxes

– T, Q, etc. for climate change runs

• Daily NO2 column (GOME comparison)

• Hourly surface O3 (for AQ analysis)

• NETCDF files submitted to central database

26 Participating Models• CHASER_CTM• CHASER_GCM• FRSGC/UCI• GEOS-CHEM• GISS• GMI/CCM3• GMI/DAO• GMI/GISS• IASB• LLNL-IMPACT• LMDz/INCA-CTM• LMDz/INCA-GCM• MATCH-MPIC/ECMWF

• MATCH-MPIC/NCEP • MOZ2-GFDL• MOZART4• MOZECH• MOZECH2• p-TOMCAT• STOCHEM-HadAM3• STOCHEM-HadGEM• TM4• TM5• UIO_CTM2• ULAQ• UM_CAM

CTMs driven by analyses

CTMs driven by GCM outputCTMs coupled to GCMs

Mean model NOy wet dep (obs. overlain circles)

Mean model v Obs. HNO3 Wet dep.

EUROPE N. AMERICA

E. ASIAAFRICA

Taylor plots, HNO3 wet dep

Mean model NHx wet dep (obs. overlain circles)

Mean model v Obs. NH4 Wet dep.

EUROPE N. AMERICA

E. ASIAAFRICA

Taylor plots, NH4 wet dep

Different model resolutions

1°x1° 3°x3°

5°x5°Meanmodel

0.0000

0.1000

0.2000

0.3000

0.4000

0.5000

0.6000

0.7000

0.8000

Ratio of wet to total NOy deposition

0.30.4

0.60.7

Ratio of HNO3/NO3 to NOy deposition

Ratio wet to total deposition

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8

Ratio wet:total NHx deposition

Changes in NOy dep 2000-2030,

under 3 scenarios

IIASA CLE

IIASA MFR

SRES A2

Changes in NHx dep 2000-2030,

under 2 scenarios

IIASA CLE

SRES A2

NO Em ission and NOy deposition per region

Emission

Deposition

Annual NO emission & NOy deposition (per unit area) by region(mean model)

NH3 Em iss ion and NHxdeposition per region

Emission

Deposition

Annual NH3 emission & NHx deposition (per unit area) by region(mean model)

Fractional NOy deposition

Nat. Vegetation

Agriculture/urban

Soil/desert

Water/ice

Fraction of NOy deposition to natural vegetation, agriculture/urban, soil/desert, and water/ice

Fractional NHx deposition

Nat. Vegetation

Agriculture/urban

Soil/desert

Water/ice

Fraction of NHx deposition to natural vegetation, agriculture/urban, soil/desert, and water/ice

% of natural vegetation with Nr dep > 1 g N/m2/yr

Fraction Nr deposition in excess of 1 g/m2/yearon natural ecosystems

ACCENT intercomparison (Expt. 2)

Documents

Transcript of ACCENT intercomparison (Expt. 2)

Transformation-Griffith’s Expt

EXPT Pumping Station - California Institute of Technologymmrc.caltech.edu/Vacuum/Edwards/EXPT Pumping... · B723-00-860 Issue B Original Quick Start Guide EXPT Pumping Station Description

Feedback Expt #2

Engg as Expt

MSDS expt 1

Solution Aluminum Hydroxide during Carbonation of ...Expt 4 Expt 5 Expt 6 Expt 7 Expt 8 Expt 9 Initial crystalline product 15 15 15 15 15 15 30 30 15 Sampling time, min Final product

Interferometer Expt Manual

Expt 8-Titration Curves

Expt 6 Presentation

Rectifiers Expt.

Expt 9-Chemical Equilibrium

A2/ Expt /Thermal/ Ellie

A2/ Expt/ Thermal /Pansy

SFI Expt A

Measurement Expt Techniques

Refrigeration Expt 3

CHADALAWADA RAMANAMMA ENGINEERING COLLEGE LAB...PART- A : ELECTRICAL LAB Expt. 1 Verification of Superposition Theorem. Expt. 2 Verification of Thevenin’s Theorem. Expt. 3 Determination

Expt 1 - Matlab

Atomic Atomic pncpncpnctheory: theory: current stAtus And ......Expt. SD SD 0.894 Expt. “best values” SD 0.892 Expt. SD scaled SD scaled 0.899 Expt. “best values” SD scaled

127.1 Expt 4