DOCSLIB.ORG

Overview of Current Evaluations, Applications and Advances in Global Air Quality Models

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Overview of Current Evaluations, Applications and Advances in Global Air Quality Models Overview of current evaluations, applications and advances in global air quality models Daven K. Henze (CU Boulder) Arlene Fiore (Columbia University) and many others… Support from NASA HAQAST, HTAP Outline 1. Global and regional emissions estimates: past and future 2. Multi-model intercomparisons and evaluations 3. Applications to regional air quality 4. Advances in global modeling Uncertainty in U.S. air pollutant emissions and trends: 1980-2010 ACCMIP emissions: Lamarque et al., ACP, 2010 used in CMIP5 & ACCMIP BC CO NOx SO2 Granier et al., Climatic Change, 2011 Future air pollutant emissions – the role for AQ policies 160 180 8 SO2 NOx BC 140 160 7 140 120 6 120 100 5 100 80 4 80 Million tons Million tons Million Million tons 60 3 RCP 60 RCP RCP 40 2 40 GAINS CLE GAINS CLE GAINS CLE 20 GAINS NFC 20 GAINS NFC 1 GAINS NFC GAINS MTFR GAINS MTFR GAINS MTFR 0 0 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 Source: GAINS model; ECLIPSE V5 scenario c/o T. Keating AQAST10 Jan 2016 Latest global 21stC scenarios: “Shared Socioeconomic Pathways” (SSPs) AerChemMIP is using SSP3-7.0 (“regional rivalry without climate policy”) as reference scenario against which pollution controls are imposed Fig. 5 from Riahi et al., Global Environmental Change, 2017 AerChemMIP chemistry-climate simulations include pollution control policies Table 3 from Collins et al., GMD, 2017 (based on Rao et al., 2017 Table 2) 2. Global model intercomparison activities and evaluations Chemistry-climate models are typically evaluated with ozonesonde climatologies ACCMIP models [Young et al. ACP 2013] (ACCMIP goal is to quantify radiative forcing) Chemistry-climate models are typically evaluated with ozonesonde climatologies ACCMIP models: Normalized biases for ACCMIP against ozonsondes by region [Young et al. ACP 2013] (ACCMIP models also evaluated against satellite OMI/MLS tropospheric ozone product) AeroCom “is an international science initiative on aerosols and climate” -- coordinate simulations -- evaluate aerosol distributions with satellite and surface observations -- quantify radiative forcing and uncertainties in these estimates http://aerocom.met.no/aerocomhome.html http://aerocom.met.no/references.html Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative simulations now available 1980-2010 “hindcasts” use observed meteorology For more info: http://blogs.reading.ac.uk/ccmi/ Table 3 from Morgenstern et al., GMD, 2017 Evaluating PM2.5 trends in global models Observed vs. 7-model mean (“ECLIPSE” project) in PM2.5 (%/yr-1) over Europe, U.S.A. Models capture larger decline in U.S. surface PM2.5 in 2000s compared to full period (1989-2009) Table 2 of Myhre et al., ACP, 2017 AerChemMIP Simulations (2018) seek to answer 4 questions: (historical transient simulations + time slice historical to quantify effective radiative forcing) (SSP3-7.0 vs. SSP3-7.0-clean) (time slice historical to quantify effective radiative forcing) (time slice with doubled natural emissions relative to Pre-industrial control) Collins et al., Analysis of air quality is an AerChemMIP goal GMD, 2017 Hemispheric Transport of Atmospheric Pollution (HTAP) Phase 2 Terry Keating, RTP, April, 2017 www.htap.org HTAP model comparison: O3 metrics Max 6 month mean of 1 Annual mean of 8 hr daily max hr daily max (m6_MDA1) (a12_MDA8) Daven. K. Henze1, Christopher S. Malley2, Johan C.I. Kuylenstierna2, Harry W. Vallack2, Yanko Davila1, Susan C. Anenberg3, Michelle C. Turner4,5,6,7, Mike R. Ashmore1, Kengo Sudo7, Jan Eiof Jonson8 Model ranges • Largest model diversity related to natural sources (biomass burning, biogenics) • Range over anthro source regions is smaller, e.g. NE US ~10% HTAP2 model evaluation – PM2.5 2- Comparisons with IMPROVE surface SO4 concentration Mian Chin Huisheng Bian, Yanko Davilla, Louisa Emmons, Johannes Flemming, Daven Henze, Jan Eiof Jonson, Tom Kucsera, Marianne Lund, Bjorn Samset, Michael Schulz, Kengo Sudo, Toshihiko Takemura, Simone Tilme 3. Applications HTAP2 source attribution results – PM2.5 Mian Chin Huisheng Bian, Yanko Davilla, Louisa Emmons, Johannes Flemming, Daven Henze, Jan Eiof Jonson, Tom Kucsera, Marianne Lund, Bjorn Samset, Michael Schulz, Kengo Sudo, Toshihiko Takemura, Simone Tilme RERER surface conc. RERER total deposition HTAP2 source attribution results – O3 Response of surface O3 to -20% EAS emissions: Huang et al., ACP, 2016 HTAP2 models as boundary conditions for CMAQ – BC diversity (Hogrefe et al., ACPD, 2017) See paper for comparison ozonesondes HTAP2 models as boundary conditions for CMAQ– evaluation w/obs (Hogrefe et al., ACPD, 2017) Regional vs CASTNET, monthly daytime O3 Global vs CASTNET, monthly daytime O3 Regional vs AQS, monthly daytime O3 Regional vs AQS, MDA8 HTAP2 models as boundary conditions for CMAQ– evaluation w/obs (Hogrefe et al., ACPD, 2017) See paper for analysis of NME, R US US FS US FS FS Health EPA orgs US Cities FS States Industry US FS US US FS FS 28 NASA Health and Air Quality Applied Sciences Team (HAQAST) •Tracey Holloway (Team Lead, UW-Madison) •Bryan Duncan (NASA GSFC) •Arlene Fiore (Columbia University) •Frank Freedman (San Jose State University) •Daven Henze (University of Colorado, Boulder) •Jeremy Hess (University of Washington, Seattle) •Yang Liu (Emory University) •Jessica Neu (NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory) •Susan O’Neill (USDA Forest Service) •Ted Russell (Georgia Tech) •Daniel Tong (George Mason University) •Jason West (UNC-Chapel Hill) •Mark Zondlo (Princeton University) haqast.org 4 New Tiger Teams from HAQAST • Led by Bryan Duncan & Jason West: Demonstration of the Efficacy of Environmental Regulations in the Eastern U.S. for Health and Air Quality • Led by Arlene Fiore: Supporting the use of satellite data in State Implementation Plans (SIPs) • Led by Pat Kinney: High Resolution Particulate Matter Data for Improved Satellite-Based Assessments of Community Health • Led by Brad Pierce & Daniel Tong: Improved NEI NOx emissions using OMI Tropospheric NO2 retrievals HAQAST TT: Supporting the use of satellite data in State Implementation Plans (SIPs) Satellite data may be used in the SIP process as: (1) Weight-of-evidence that a particular strategy is anticipated to succeed in attainment, or to show that transported pollution is confounding attainment efforts (2) Constraints on air pollution modeling included in SIPs. (3) Evidence supporting “exceptional events” demonstrations HAQAST “SIP” TT Objective: Identify at least three different applications of satellite data that we can showcase in a user-friendly, technical guidance document that includes frequently asked questions (FAQs). HAQAST “SIPs” TT activity: How can I incorporate satellite data into regional model boundary conditions? HAQAST member Jessica Neu (NASA JPL) is generating boundary conditions for use by SCAQMD in their SIP modeling image credit:: https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/aura/main/index.html image credit: https://www.epa.gov/cmaq/cmaq-models-0 image credit: http://acmg.seas.harvard.edu/geos/doc/man/ 4. Recent advances in global modeling Updates to global model chemistry (Mat Evan’s group) Updates to global model chemistry (Mat Evan’s group) The GFDL CM3/AM3 chemistry-climate model Donner et al., J. Climate, 2011; Golaz et al., J. Climate, 2011 Modular Ocean Model version 4 (MOM4) & GFDL-CM3 Sea Ice Model Forcing Atmospheric Dynamics & Physics Solar Radiation Radiation, Convection (includes wet Well-mixed Greenhouse deposition of tropospheric species), Clouds, Gas Concentrations Vertical diffusion, and Gravity wave Volcanic Emissions Atmospheric Chemistry Ozone–Depleting 86 km Substances (ODS) Chemistry of Ox, HOy, NOy, Cly, Bry, and Polar Clouds in the Stratosphere Chemistry of gaseous species (O3, CO, NOx, hydrocarbons) and aerosols (sulfate, carbonaceous, mineral dust, Pollutant Emissions sea salt, secondary organic) (anthropogenic, ships, biomass burning, natural, & Aerosol-Cloud Dry aircraft) Interactions Deposition 0 km Land Model version 3 Naik et al.,2013 (soil physics, canopy physics, vegetation dynamics, disturbance and land use) The GFDL CM3/AM3 chemistry-climate model Donner et al., J. Climate, 2011; Golaz et al., J. Climate, 2011 SSTs/SIC from observations or CM3 GFDL-AM3 CMIP5 Simulations cubed sphere grid ~2°x2°; 48 levels Forcing Atmospheric Dynamics & Physics Solar Radiation Radiation, Convection (includes wet Well-mixed Greenhouse deposition of tropospheric species), Clouds, Gas Concentrations Vertical diffusion, and Gravity wave Volcanic Emissions Atmospheric Chemistry Ozone–Depleting 86 km Substances (ODS) Chemistry of Ox, HOy, NOy, Cly, Bry, and Polar Clouds in the Stratosphere Chemistry of gaseous species (O , CO, 3 AM3 option to NOx, hydrocarbons) and aerosols (sulfate, carbonaceous, mineral dust, Pollutant Emissions nudge to “real winds” sea salt, secondary organic) (anthropogenic, ships, biomass burning, natural, & Aerosol-Cloud Dry High-res. ~0.5°x0.5° aircraft) Interactions Deposition 0 km e.g., applied to CalNex, SENEX Land Model version 3 Naik et al.,2013 (soil physics, canopy physics, vegetation dynamics, disturbance and land use) High resolution GEOS-Chem global simulations GCHP: Here shown at 0.5°, can go to 0.125°. GEOS-FP met Cube-sphere MPI-enabled Seb Eastam, Mike Long Global-multi-regional Two-way Coupled Modeling Based on GEOS-Chem Slides from Jintai Lin • High-res regional nested simulations ‘correct’ global model • Global and multiple regional models interact simultaneously • High computation efficiency and low model complexity Global model : ~ 200km
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arlene Fiore & US
    AQAST Spotlight: Arlene Fiore & U.S. EPA U.S. Air Pollution: Domestic or Imported? By Ben Kaldunski & Tracey Holloway The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charged with keeping air healthy across the U.S., but what happens when air pollution flows in across our borders? Identifying the sources of pollution is a critical step in designing strategies to ensure that our air stays clean. Of course, airborne chemicals do not pass through customs, or carry import/export labels. Instead, scientists must use advanced computer models of air pollution chemistry and transport combined with detective work to piece together the evidence from the available measurements to determine how other countries are affecting domestic air quality in the U.S. Although our lungs can’t distinguish local from foreign air pollution, it is essential that policy makers know the difference. Otherwise, air quality managers risk setting unattainable limits, or regulating the wrong sources of emissions. This issue is particularly significant for ground-level ozone, because the EPA is currently developing a tighter national standard and “background” sources play a major role in the U.S. ground-level ozone Dr. Fiore’s research has helped EPA budget. Background ozone is defined by EPA as pollution that is formed improve modeling capabilities to produce more accurate estimates of background from sources beyond the control of U.S. air quality managers. Major ozone (Image from Columbia University). sources of background ozone include global methane emissions, transport from foreign countries and natural sources like wildfires and lightning. Arlene Fiore, Associate Professor at Columbia University and a member of NASA’s Air Quality Applied Sciences Team (AQAST), is one of the leading experts on the attribution of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Prep Publi Catio on Cop Py
    Attribution of Extreme Weather Events in the Context of Climate Change PREPUBLICATION COPY Committee on Extreme Weather Events and Climate Change Attribution Board on Atmospheric Sciencees and Climate Division on Earth and Life Studies This prepublication version of Attribution of Extreme Weather Events in the Context of Climate Change has been provided to the public to facilitate timely access to the report. Although the substance of the report is final, editorial changes may be made throughout the text and citations will be checked prior to publication. The final report will be available through the National Academies Press in spring 2016. Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Attribution of Extreme Weather Events in the Context of Climate Change THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 This study was supported by the David and Lucile Packard Foundation under contract number 2015- 63077, the Heising-Simons Foundation under contract number 2015-095, the Litterman Family Foundation, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration under contract number NNX15AW55G, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under contract number EE- 133E-15-SE-1748, and the U.S. Department of Energy under contract number DE-SC0014256, with additional support from the National Academy of Sciences’ Arthur L. Day Fund. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number-13: International Standard Book Number-10: Digital Object Identifier: 10.17226/21852 Additional copies of this report are available for sale from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.
    [Show full text]
  • March 2010 OAR Women Scienti Sts: the Rewards and Benefi Ts of Mentoring Programs March Is Women’S History Month and the Theme Is Writi Ng Women Back Into History
    Volume 1, Issue 8 EEO/Diversity Newsletter for NOAA Research March 2010 OAR Women Scienti sts: The Rewards and Benefi ts of Mentoring Programs March is Women’s History Month and the theme is Writi ng Women Back into History. Three OAR women scienti sts share how mentoring and support groups have played an important part in their careers in the science fi eld. Dr. Arlene Fiore, Research Physical Scienti st, GFDL At an American Geophysical Union (AGU) meeti ng in spring of 2002, Dr. Fiore was one of six women who met informally and recognized the benefi ts of a peer network group. Eight years later, Earth Science Women’s Network (ESWN), now includes 900 members spanning large research universiti es, small liberal-arts colleges, government agencies, and research organizati ons in From left to right: ESWN Board members at OAR sponsored workshop: Kim Popendorf, Tracey Holloway, Christi ne Wiedinmyer, Allison Steiner, Arlene Fiore, Meredith Hasti ngs, Galen McKinley, the U.S. and abroad. MPOWIR representati ve, Victoria Coles, and NOAA OAR representati ves, Cassandra Barnes and Sandra Knight. “Women scienti sts oft en express a additi onal areas for building skills of connectedness to other women sense of isolati on at their insti tuti ons among members, which will be scienti sts at similar points in their – while this is certainly improving, supported by an NSF grant. careers and the enthusiasm that there are far fewer women senior new members oft en express for the scienti sts to serve as role models. I’d continued on page 2 existence of ESWN.” like to emphasize the value of peer mentoring, the niche that ESWN Annual networking events are held seeks to fi ll,” said Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • HAQAST 2019 Review
    HAQAST 2019 Review Prepared by Tracey Holloway | HAQAST Team Lead | [email protected] Daegan Miller | HAQAST Communications Lead | [email protected] Page Bazan | HAQAST Communications Specialist | [email protected] September 11, 2019 haqast.org Connecting NASA Data and Tools With Health and Air Quality Stakeholders WWW.HAQAST.ORG TWITTER.COM/NASA_HAQAST What is “hay-kast”? • Health and Air Quality Applied Sciences Team • NASA-funded Applied Sciences Team • 3 4-year funded project (thru summer ’19 ‘20) • 13 Members and 70+ co-investigators • Mission: Connect NASA science with air quality and health applications • ~ $15 Million Total Cost • Three types of work: HAQAST Investigator Susan Anenberg (left), NASA HQ Program Manager John Haynes (middle), and HAQAST 1. Outreach & engagement Communications Lead Daegan Miller (right) at HAQAST4 in Madison, WI 2. Tiger team projects (collaborative) 3. Member projects HAQAST: Who We Are Tracey Holloway Team Lead, UW-Madison Bryan Duncan NASA GSFC Arlene Fiore Columbia University Minghui Diao San Jose State University Daven Henze University of Colorado, Boulder Jeremy Hess University of Washington, Seattle Yang Liu Emory University Jessica Neu NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Susan O’Neill USDA Forest Service Ted Russell Georgia Tech Daniel Tong George Mason University Jason West UNC-Chapel Hill Mark Zondlo Princeton University HAQAST: Who We Are HAQAST Leadership Team Tracey Holloway Daegan Miller Page Bazan HQAST Team Lead HQAST Communications Lead HQAST Communications Specialist HAQAST Meetings Photos
    [Show full text]
  • Intercontinental Transport of Air Pollution
    Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37, 4535-4542 mechanism to manage this air pollution transport between Intercontinental Transport of Air countries. If such a treaty were used to regulate non-carbon Pollution: Will Emerging Science dioxide (CO2) greenhouse gases and black carbon along with other species of interest for health and agriculture, it could Lead to a New Hemispheric Treaty? pave the way for future CO2 regulations. Research on ICT is an ongoing example of feedbacks between scientific knowledge and policy awareness in which TRACEY HOLLOWAY* the science and policy communities influence one another. Earth Institute, Columbia University, 2910 Broadway, Atmospheric chemistry and climate researchers have con- New York, New York 10027 vened in workshops to address the scientific questions of hemispheric air pollution transport and evaluate the growing ARLENE FIORE evidence for ICT from both measurement and modeling Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard studies. These workshops, outlined in Tables 1 and 2, are University, 20 Oxford Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138 influencing the policy community, raising awareness of the issues, and increasing the priority of research funding for MEREDITH GALANTER HASTINGS global scale air pollution research. To improve this process, Department of Geosciences, Princeton University, both the science and the policy communities should create B-78 Guyot Hall, Princeton, New Jersey 08544 opportunities to foster the interaction needed for both communities to make progress in this area. In March 2000, the International Global Atmospheric Chemistry Program (IGAC) launched the Intercontinental We examine the emergence of InterContinental Transport Transport and Chemical Transformation (ICTC) research (ICT) of air pollution on the agendas of the air quality activity, bringing together international measurement cam- and climate communities and consider the potential for a paigns and modeling efforts contributing to ICT under- new treaty on hemispheric air pollution.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 11 IPCC WGI Fifth Assessment Report
    First Order Draft Chapter 11 IPCC WGI Fifth Assessment Report 1 2 Chapter 11: Near-term Climate Change: Projections and Predictability 3 4 Coordinating Lead Authors: Ben Kirtman (USA), Scott Power (Australia) 5 6 Lead Authors: Akintayo John Adedoyin (Botswana), George Boer (Canada), Roxana Bojariu (Romania), 7 Ines Camilloni (Argentina), Francisco Doblas-Reyes (Spain), Arlene Fiore (USA), Masahide Kimoto 8 (Japan), Gerald Meehl (USA), Michael Prather (USA), Abdoulaye Sarr (Senegal), Christoph Schaer 9 (Switzerland), Rowan Sutton (UK), Geert Jan van Oldenborgh (Netherlands), Gabriel Vecchi (USA), Hui- 10 Jun Wang (China) 11 12 Contributing Authors: Nathan Bindoff, Yoshimitsu Chikamoto, Javier García-Serrano, Paul Ginoux, 13 Lesley Gray, Ed Hawkins, Marika Holland, Christopher Holmes, Masayoshi Ishii, Thomas Knutson, David 14 Lawrence, Jian Lu, Vaishali Naik, Lorenzo Polvani, Alan Robock, Luis Rodrigues, Doug Smith, Steve 15 Vavrus, Apostolos Voulgarakis, Oliver Wild, Tim Woollings 16 17 Review Editors: Pascale Delecluse (France), Tim Palmer (UK), Theodore Shepherd (Canada), Francis 18 Zwiers (Canada) 19 20 Date of Draft: 16 December 2011 21 22 Notes: TSU Compiled Version 23 24 25 Table of Contents 26 27 Executive Summary..........................................................................................................................................2 28 11.1 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................7 29 Box 11.1: Climate
    [Show full text]
  • Global Atmospheric Chemistry – Which Air Matters
    Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 9081–9102, 2017 https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-9081-2017 © Author(s) 2017. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Global atmospheric chemistry – which air matters Michael J. Prather1, Xin Zhu1, Clare M. Flynn1, Sarah A. Strode2,3, Jose M. Rodriguez2, Stephen D. Steenrod2,3, Junhua Liu2,3, Jean-Francois Lamarque4, Arlene M. Fiore5, Larry W. Horowitz6, Jingqiu Mao7, Lee T. Murray8, Drew T. Shindell9, and Steven C. Wofsy10 1Department of Earth System Science, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-3100, USA 2NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, USA 3Universities Space Research Association (USRA), GESTAR, Columbia, MD, USA 4Atmospheric Chemistry, Observations and Modeling Laboratory, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO 80301, USA 5Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences and Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, Palisades, NY, USA 6Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Princeton, NJ, USA 7Geophysical Institute and Department of Chemistry, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK, USA 8Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627-0221, USA 9Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA 10School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA Correspondence to: Michael J. Prather ([email protected]) Received: 7 December 2016 – Discussion started: 16 January 2017 Revised:
    [Show full text]
  • Earth Intern Program for Columbia, Barnard and Sustech Students
    Earth Intern Program for Columbia, Barnard and SUSTech Students Sponsored by the Earth Institute, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Barnard College and the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia University. Program Dates: June 2nd-August 8th, 2020 The Earth Intern Program offers the chance to experience scientific research as an undergraduate. The program is open to all Columbia College, Columbia Engineering, Columbia General Studies, and Barnard students, as well as SUSTech undergraduate students fully supported by their university who have completed their junior or sophomore year in college with majors (or anticipated majors) in earth science, environmental science, sustainable development, chemistry, biology, physics, mathematics, engineering or political science. Graduating seniors are not eligible. Minorities and women are encouraged to apply. Applicants should have an interest in conducting research in the Earth, atmospheric, or ocean sciences. Completion of at least two courses in Earth, atmospheric or ocean sciences is desirable. All students are required to have at least one year of calculus. Students undertaking research in geochemistry and chemical oceanography are required to have at least two semesters of college- level chemistry. Students undertaking research in marine biology are required to have at least two semesters of college-level biology. Students undertaking research in geophysics should have at least three semesters of college-level physics. STIPEND: Students will receive a stipend of $5000 for this 10-week program. HOUSING and TRAVEL BENEFITS: The student will receive free, air-conditioned housing as one of two students in a double room. Students will also receive free bus transportation between the Columbia campus and Lamont.
    [Show full text]
  • April 2009 U.S
    Please forward to interested colleagues. If you do not wish to receive further newsgrams, please send a message to Cathy Stephens in the US CLIVAR Office ([email protected]) April 2009 U.S. CLIVAR News-gram Table of Contents i – Calendar of Upcoming Events Research Opportunities 1. Announcement of Opportunity - Decision Making Under Uncertainty Collaborative Groups (DMUU) National Science Foundation 2. Department of Energy Opportunity Announcement 3. Call for Nominations for 2009 William T. Pecora Award Position Announcements 4. Associate Program Director positions at NSF 5. California Institute of Technology – Postdoctoral position in Ocean Circulation and Sea Level Rise 6. Postdoctoral Position at Florida State University 7. NOAA Postdoctoral position on Impact of Climate on Air Quality 8. University of Texas Postdoctoral position 9. Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI) Assistant Director 10. New Visiting Scientist Program at UCAR Meetings and Workshops 11. NASA's Earth Science Division 3 day symposium 12. 2010 Ocean Sciences Meeting - Call for Sessions 13. GEWEX Conference – Abstract Deadline 14. National Center for Atmospheric Research Third Biannual Workshop on Climate and Health 15. RAPID ANNUAL MEETING 2009 ANNOUNCEMENTS • NSF Recovery Funds Notice • International Arctic Science Committee (ISAC) Draft Science Plan Now Available • VAMOS newsletter No. 5 is available ========================================================== CALENDAR of UPCOMING EVENTS (for more information-www.usclivar.org/calendar.html) May 2009 4-6: AMOC Open Science Meeting (Annapolis, MD) 19-22: CLIVAR SSG Meeting (Madrid, Spain) June 2009 2-5: CLIVAR VAMOS Meeting (Puerto Rico) 15-19: CLIVAR Global Synthesis and Observations Panel Meeting 15-18: CCSM Annual Meeting (Breckinridge, CO) 22-24: NASA Earth System Science at 20 Symposium (Washington, DC) Research Opportunities 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Dry Deposition of Ozone Over Land: Processes, Measurement, and Modeling Olivia E
    Dry Deposition of Ozone over Land: Processes, Measurement, and Modeling Olivia E. Clifton1, Arlene M. Fiore2, William J. Massman3, Colleen B. Baublitz2, Mhairi Coyle4, Lisa Emberson5, Silvano Fares6, Delphine K. Farmer7, Pierre Gentine8, Giacomo Gerosa9, Alex B. Guenther10, Detlev Helmig11, Danica L. Lombardozzi1, J. William Munger12, Edward G. Patton1, Sally E. Pusede13, Donna B. Schwede14, Sam J. Silva15, Matthias Sörgel16, Allison L. Steiner17, Amos P. K. Tai18 1National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA. 2Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Columbia University, and Lamont- Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, Palisades, NY, USA. 3USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO, USA. 4Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Edinburgh, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian, UK and The James Hutton Institute, Craigibuckler, Aberdeen, UK. 5Stockholm Environment Institute, Environment Department, University of York, York, UK. 6Council of Agricultural Research and Economics, Research Centre for Forestry and Wood, and National Research Council, Institute of Bioeconomy, Rome, Italy. 7Department of Chemistry, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA. 8Department of Earth and Environmental Engineering, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. 9Dipartimento di Matematica e Fisica, Università Cattolica del S. C., Brescia, Italy. 10Department of Earth System Science, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA. 11Institute of Alpine and Arctic Research, University of Colorado at Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA. 12School of Engineering and Applied Sciences and Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA. 13Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA. 14U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA. 15Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
    [Show full text]
  • HAQAST3 Agenda November 28-29, 2017 Day 1 Intro I. Energy And
    HAQAST3 Agenda November 28-29, 2017 Day 1 Intro 9:00 5 minutes: Arlene Fiore, LDEO/Columbia, Welcome 9:05 5 minutes: Ellen Burkhard, NYSERDA, NYSERDA's Air Quality and Health Effects Research Plan 9:10 15 minutes: John Haynes, Program Manager 9:25 5 minutes: Felix Seidel, NASA HQ, How To Engage with Upcoming NASA Missions for Air Quality and Health 9:30 15 minutes: Tracey Holloway, Daegan Miller & Rhianna Miles, UW-Madison, HAQAST Team Report 9:45 15 minute Meeting Overview + Q&A I. Energy and Emissions 10:00 15 minutes: Brad Pierce/NOAA and Daniel Tong/George Mason Univ., HAQAST TT: Improved National Emissions Inventory NOx emissions using OMI tropospheric NO2 retrievals and potential impacts on air quality strategy development 10:15 5 minutes: Terry Keating, EPA, The value of improving emission inventories 10:20 5 minutes: Dan Goldberg, Argonne National Laboratory, Using satellite information to aid in the development of high spatial resolution estimates of NO2 and PM2.5 10:25 5 minutes: Daven Henze, University of Colorado Boulder/NASA HAQAST, Top- down trends in NOx - recent changes and impacts on O3 10:30 15 minute Q&A with speakers 10:45-11:00 Coffee Break 11:00 15 minutes: Bryan Duncan/NASA Goddard and Jason West/ Univ. of North Carolina, HAQAST TT: Demonstration of the Efficacy of Environmental Regulations in the Eastern U.S. 11:15 5 minutes: Brian McDonald, NOAA/CIRES, Emerging Sources of Air Pollution 11:20 5 minutes: Mark Zondlo, Princeton University, Satellite measurements of spatiotemporal variability and comparison to emission inventories 11:25 5 minutes: Matt Alvarado, AER, Constraining NH3 emissions over the southeast US using CrIS observations 11:30 15 minute Q&A with speakers II.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterizing the Tropospheric Ozone Response to Methane Emission Controls and the Benefits to Climate and Air Quality Arlene M
    JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 113, D08307, doi:10.1029/2007JD009162, 2008 Click Here for Full Article Characterizing the tropospheric ozone response to methane emission controls and the benefits to climate and air quality Arlene M. Fiore,1 J. Jason West,2,3,4 Larry W. Horowitz,1 Vaishali Naik,3 and M. Daniel Schwarzkopf1 Received 12 July 2007; revised 2 November 2007; accepted 12 December 2007; published 30 April 2008. [1] Reducing methane (CH4) emissions is an attractive option for jointly addressing climate and ozone (O3) air quality goals. With multidecadal full-chemistry transient simulations in the MOZART-2 tropospheric chemistry model, we show that tropospheric O3 responds approximately linearly to changes in CH4 emissions over a range of À1 anthropogenic emissions from 0–430 Tg CH4 a (0.11–0.16 Tg tropospheric O3 or À1 11–15 ppt global mean surface O3 decrease per Tg a CH4 reduced). We find that neither the air quality nor climate benefits depend strongly on the location of the CH4 emission reductions, implying that the lowest cost emission controls can be targeted. With a series of future (2005–2030) transient simulations, we demonstrate that cost-effective CH4 controls would offset the positive climate forcing from CH4 and O3 that would otherwise occur (from increases in NOx and CH4 emissions in the baseline scenario) and À2 improve O3 air quality. We estimate that anthropogenic CH4 contributes 0.7 Wm to climate forcing and 4 ppb to surface O3 in 2030 under the baseline scenario. Although the response of surface O3 to CH4 is relatively uniform spatially compared to that from other O3 precursors, it is strongest in regions where surface air mixes frequently with the free troposphere and where the local O3 formation regime is NOx-saturated.
    [Show full text]