Literature DB >> 29619045

Why do Models Overestimate Surface Ozone in the Southeastern United States?

Katherine R Travis1, Daniel J Jacob1,2, Jenny A Fisher3,4, Patrick S Kim2, Eloise A Marais1, Lei Zhu1, Karen Yu1, Christopher C Miller1, Robert M Yantosca1, Melissa P Sulprizio1, Anne M Thompson5, Paul O Wennberg6,7, John D Crounse6, Jason M St Clair6, Ronald C Cohen8, Joshua L Laughner8, Jack E Dibb9, Samuel R Hall10, Kirk Ullmann10, Glenn M Wolfe11,12, Illana B Pollack13, Jeff Peischl14,15, Jonathan A Neuman14,15, Xianliang Zhou16,17.   

Abstract

Ozone pollution in the Southeast US involves complex chemistry driven by emissions of anthropogenic nitrogen oxide radicals (NOx ≡ NO + NO2) and biogenic isoprene. Model estimates of surface ozone concentrations tend to be biased high in the region and this is of concern for designing effective emission control strategies to meet air quality standards. We use detailed chemical observations from the SEAC4RS aircraft campaign in August and September 2013, interpreted with the GEOS-Chem chemical transport model at 0.25°×0.3125° horizontal resolution, to better understand the factors controlling surface ozone in the Southeast US. We find that the National Emission Inventory (NEI) for NOx from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is too high. This finding is based on SEAC4RS observations of NOx and its oxidation products, surface network observations of nitrate wet deposition fluxes, and OMI satellite observations of tropospheric NO2 columns. Our results indicate that NEI NOx emissions from mobile and industrial sources must be reduced by 30-60%, dependent on the assumption of the contribution by soil NOx emissions. Upper tropospheric NO2 from lightning makes a large contribution to satellite observations of tropospheric NO2 that must be accounted for when using these data to estimate surface NOx emissions. We find that only half of isoprene oxidation proceeds by the high-NOx pathway to produce ozone; this fraction is only moderately sensitive to changes in NOx emissions because isoprene and NOx emissions are spatially segregated. GEOS-Chem with reduced NOx emissions provides an unbiased simulation of ozone observations from the aircraft, and reproduces the observed ozone production efficiency in the boundary layer as derived from a regression of ozone and NOx oxidation products. However, the model is still biased high by 8±13 ppb relative to observed surface ozone in the Southeast US. Ozonesondes launched during midday hours show a 7 ppb ozone decrease from 1.5 km to the surface that GEOS-Chem does not capture. This bias may reflect a combination of excessive vertical mixing and net ozone production in the model boundary layer.

Entities:  

Year:  2016        PMID: 29619045      PMCID: PMC5880041          DOI: 10.5194/acp-16-13561-2016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atmos Chem Phys        ISSN: 1680-7316            Impact factor:   6.133


  15 in total

Review 1.  Establishing policy relevant background (PRB) ozone concentrations in the United States.

Authors:  Elena C McDonald-Buller; David T Allen; Nancy Brown; Daniel J Jacob; Daniel Jaffe; Charles E Kolb; Allen S Lefohn; Samuel Oltmans; David D Parrish; Greg Yarwood; Lin Zhang
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2011-10-21       Impact factor: 9.028

2.  Direct measurements of the convective recycling of the upper troposphere.

Authors:  Timothy H Bertram; Anne E Perring; Paul J Wooldridge; John D Crounse; Alan J Kwan; Paul O Wennberg; Eric Scheuer; Jack Dibb; Melody Avery; Glen Sachse; Stephanie A Vay; James H Crawford; Cameron S McNaughton; Antony Clarke; Kenneth E Pickering; Henry Fuelberg; Greg Huey; Donald R Blake; Hanwant B Singh; Samuel R Hall; Richard E Shetter; Alan Fried; Brian G Heikes; Ronald C Cohen
Journal:  Science       Date:  2007-01-04       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  Measurement of gas-phase hydroperoxides by chemical ionization mass spectrometry.

Authors:  John D Crounse; Karena A McKinney; Alan J Kwan; Paul O Wennberg
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2006-10-01       Impact factor: 6.986

4.  Peroxy radical isomerization in the oxidation of isoprene.

Authors:  John D Crounse; Fabien Paulot; Henrik G Kjaergaard; Paul O Wennberg
Journal:  Phys Chem Chem Phys       Date:  2011-06-24       Impact factor: 3.676

5.  HO(x) radical regeneration in isoprene oxidation via peroxy radical isomerisations. II: experimental evidence and global impact.

Authors:  Jozef Peeters; Jean-François Müller
Journal:  Phys Chem Chem Phys       Date:  2010-09-29       Impact factor: 3.676

6.  Chemical ionization tandem mass spectrometer for the in situ measurement of methyl hydrogen peroxide.

Authors:  Jason M St Clair; David C McCabe; John D Crounse; Urs Steiner; Paul O Wennberg
Journal:  Rev Sci Instrum       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 1.523

7.  Rapid deposition of oxidized biogenic compounds to a temperate forest.

Authors:  Tran B Nguyen; John D Crounse; Alex P Teng; Jason M St Clair; Fabien Paulot; Glenn M Wolfe; Paul O Wennberg
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-01-20       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Missing gas-phase source of HONO inferred from Zeppelin measurements in the troposphere.

Authors:  Xin Li; Franz Rohrer; Andreas Hofzumahaus; Theo Brauers; Rolf Häseler; Birger Bohn; Sebastian Broch; Hendrik Fuchs; Sebastian Gomm; Frank Holland; Julia Jäger; Jennifer Kaiser; Frank N Keutsch; Insa Lohse; Keding Lu; Ralf Tillmann; Robert Wegener; Glenn M Wolfe; Thomas F Mentel; Astrid Kiendler-Scharr; Andreas Wahner
Journal:  Science       Date:  2014-04-18       Impact factor: 47.728

9.  Hydroxyl radical recycling in isoprene oxidation driven by hydrogen bonding and hydrogen tunneling: the upgraded LIM1 mechanism.

Authors:  Jozef Peeters; Jean-François Müller; Trissevgeni Stavrakou; Vinh Son Nguyen
Journal:  J Phys Chem A       Date:  2014-07-23       Impact factor: 2.781

10.  Gas phase production and loss of isoprene epoxydiols.

Authors:  Kelvin H Bates; John D Crounse; Jason M St Clair; Nathan B Bennett; Tran B Nguyen; John H Seinfeld; Brian M Stoltz; Paul O Wennberg
Journal:  J Phys Chem A       Date:  2014-02-06       Impact factor: 2.781

View more
  41 in total

Review 1.  Reflecting on progress since the 2005 NARSTO emissions inventory report.

Authors:  Melissa Day; George Pouliot; Sherri Hunt; Kirk R Baker; Megan Beardsley; Gregory Frost; David Mobley; Heather Simon; Barron B Henderson; Tiffany Yelverton; Venkatesh Rao
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 2.235

2.  Improving Surface PM2.5 Forecasts in the United States Using an Ensemble of Chemical Transport Model Outputs: 1. Bias Correction With Surface Observations in Nonrural Areas.

Authors:  Huanxin Zhang; Jun Wang; Lorena Castro García; Cui Ge; Todd Plessel; James Szykman; Benjamin Murphy; Tanya L Spero
Journal:  J Geophys Res Atmos       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 4.261

3.  Simulation of airborne trace metals in fine particulate matter over North America.

Authors:  Jun-Wei Xu; Randall V Martin; Barron H Henderson; Jun Meng; Burak Oztaner; Jenny L Hand; Amir Hakami; Madeleine Strum; Sharon B Phillips
Journal:  Atmos Environ (1994)       Date:  2019-10-01       Impact factor: 4.798

4.  Seasonal prediction of US summertime ozone using statistical analysis of large scale climate patterns.

Authors:  Lu Shen; Loretta J Mickley
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Scientific assessment of background ozone over the U.S.: Implications for air quality management.

Authors:  Daniel A Jaff; Owen R Cooper; Arlene M Fiore; Barron H Henderson; Gail S Tonnesen; Armistead G Russell; Daven K Henze; Andrew O Langford; Meiyun Lin; Tom Moore
Journal:  Elementa (Wash D C)       Date:  2018       Impact factor: 6.053

6.  Ozone Variability and Anomalies Observed during SENEX and SEAC4RS Campaigns in 2013.

Authors:  Shi Kuang; Michael J Newchurch; Anne M Thompson; Ryan M Stauffer; Bryan J Johnson; Lihua Wang
Journal:  J Geophys Res Atmos       Date:  2017-10-12       Impact factor: 4.261

7.  Impacts of different characterizations of large-scale background on simulated regional-scale ozone over the continental United States.

Authors:  Christian Hogrefe; Peng Liu; George Pouliot; Rohit Mathur; Shawn Roselle; Johannes Flemming; Meiyun Lin; Rokjin J Park
Journal:  Atmos Chem Phys       Date:  2018       Impact factor: 6.133

8.  Advanced error diagnostics of the CMAQ and Chimere modelling systems within the AQMEII3 model evaluation framework.

Authors:  Efisio Solazzo; Christian Hogrefe; Augustin Colette; Marta Garcia-Vivanco; Stefano Galmarini
Journal:  Atmos Chem Phys       Date:  2017       Impact factor: 6.133

9.  Chemical feedbacks weaken the wintertime response of particulate sulfate and nitrate to emissions reductions over the eastern United States.

Authors:  Viral Shah; Lyatt Jaeglé; Joel A Thornton; Felipe D Lopez-Hilfiker; Ben H Lee; Jason C Schroder; Pedro Campuzano-Jost; Jose L Jimenez; Hongyu Guo; Amy P Sullivan; Rodney J Weber; Jaime R Green; Marc N Fiddler; Solomon Bililign; Teresa L Campos; Meghan Stell; Andrew J Weinheimer; Denise D Montzka; Steven S Brown
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-07-23       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Nitrate radicals and biogenic volatile organic compounds: oxidation, mechanisms, and organic aerosol.

Authors:  Nga Lee Ng; Steven S Brown; Alexander T Archibald; Elliot Atlas; Ronald C Cohen; John N Crowley; Douglas A Day; Neil M Donahue; Juliane L Fry; Hendrik Fuchs; Robert J Griffin; Marcelo I Guzman; Hartmut Herrmann; Alma Hodzic; Yoshiteru Iinuma; José L Jimenez; Astrid Kiendler-Scharr; Ben H Lee; Deborah J Luecken; Jingqiu Mao; Robert McLaren; Anke Mutzel; Hans D Osthoff; Bin Ouyang; Benedicte Picquet-Varrault; Ulrich Platt; Havala O T Pye; Yinon Rudich; Rebecca H Schwantes; Manabu Shiraiwa; Jochen Stutz; Joel A Thornton; Andreas Tilgner; Brent J Williams; Rahul A Zaveri
Journal:  Atmos Chem Phys       Date:  2017       Impact factor: 6.133

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.