Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 1–87, 2012 www.atmos-chem-phys.net/12/1/2012/ Atmospheric doi:10.5194/acp-12-1-2012 Chemistry © Author(s) 2012. CC Attribution 3.0 License. and Physics A review of operational, regional-scale, chemical weather forecasting models in Europe J. Kukkonen1, T. Olsson1,2, D. M. Schultz1,2,3, A. Baklanov4, T. Klein5, A. I. Miranda6, A. Monteiro6, M. Hirtl7, V. Tarvainen1, M. Boy2, V.-H. Peuch8,9, A. Poupkou10, I. Kioutsioukis10, S. Finardi11, M. Sofiev1, R. Sokhi12, K. E. J. Lehtinen13,14, K. Karatzas15, R. San Jose´16, M. Astitha16, G. Kallos18, M. Schaap19, E. Reimer20, H. Jakobs21, and K. Eben22 1Finnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, Finland 2Division of Atmospheric Sciences, Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Finland 3Centre for Atmospheric Science, School of Earth, Atmospheric and Environmental Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK 4Danish Meteorological Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark 5Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute, Norrkoping,¨ Sweden 6CESAM & Department of Environment and Planning, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal 7Section of Environmental Meteorology, Central Institute for Meteorology and Geodynamics, Vienna, Austria 8Meteo-France, Toulouse Cedex, France 9ECMWF, Reading, UK 10Laboratory of Atmospheric Physics, Physics Department, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece 11ARIANET s.r.l., Milano, Italy 12University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK 13Finnish Meteorological Institute, Kuopio, Finland 14Dept. Applied Physics, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland 15Department of Mechanical Engineering, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece 16Technical University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain 17Energy, Environment and Water Research Center (EEWRC), The Cyprus Institute, Cyprus 18Faculty of Physics, University of Athens, Athens, Greece 19TNO Built Environment and Geosciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands 20Freie Universitat¨ Berlin, Berlin, Germany 21University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany 22Institute of Computer Science, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Prague, Czech Republic Correspondence to: J. Kukkonen (jaakko.kukkonen@fmi.fi) Received: 17 January 2011 – Published in Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss.: 21 February 2011 Revised: 15 November 2011 – Accepted: 7 December 2011 – Published: 2 January 2012 Abstract. Numerical models that combine weather forecast- dicted variables, and how air chemistry and aerosol processes ing and atmospheric chemistry are here referred to as chemi- are formulated. In addition, we discuss sensitivity analy- cal weather forecasting models. Eighteen operational chem- sis and evaluation of the models, user operational require- ical weather forecasting models on regional and continental ments, such as model availability and documentation, and scales in Europe are described and compared in this article. output availability and dissemination. In this manner, this Topics discussed in this article include how weather forecast- article allows for the evaluation of the relative strengths and ing and atmospheric chemistry models are integrated into weaknesses of the various modelling systems and modelling chemical weather forecasting systems, how physical pro- approaches. Finally, this article highlights the most promi- cesses are incorporated into the models through parameter- nent gaps of knowledge for chemical weather forecasting ization schemes, how the model architecture affects the pre- models and suggests potential priorities for future research Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. 2 J. Kukkonen et al.: A review of operational, regional-scale, chemical weather forecasting models in Europe directions, for the following selected focus areas: emission elling systems, although they did not compare the mathe- inventories, the integration of numerical weather prediction matical architecture of the various modelling systems. Bak- and atmospheric chemical transport models, boundary con- lanov (2010) also presented some gaps in our current under- ditions and nesting of models, data assimilation of the vari- standing and recommended directions of future research for ous chemical species, improved understanding and parame- integrated CWF systems, although a valuable addition would terization of physical processes, better evaluation of models be a more comprehensive set of recommendations summariz- against data and the construction of model ensembles. ing the most urgent gaps of knowledge and research needs. There are currently tens, possibly more than a hundred, CWFISs on a local, regional and continental scale in Europe and worldwide. Although abundant literature exists on the 1 Introduction properties of individual models, scientific articles presenting compilations or synthesis of this information are scarce. Fur- Chemical weather is defined here as the short-term (less than thermore, the scientific evaluation of models against data – two weeks) variability of the atmospheric chemical composi- defined to include also the detailed analysis and evaluation of tion. This definition is complementary to the traditional me- the mathematical structure of such models or modelling sys- teorological definition of weather, which is commonly char- tems in terms of the underlying physics and chemistry – are acterized only by physical variables (e.g. temperature, wind, more limited. No scientific evaluations have been presented mass, radiation, humidity). Methods that include a com- of a larger number of CWF models, although the Air-Quality bination of weather forecasting and atmospheric chemistry Model Evaluation International Initiative (AQMEII) model simulations are here referred to as chemical weather forecast- intercomparison study is expected to be able to provide such ing (CWF). CWF can therefore be seen as a specific category information (Rao et al., 2011). of air-quality forecasting, where air-quality forecasting mod- Despite a plethora of modelling options, it is far from ob- els using numerical weather prediction (NWP) models are vious, which are the optimal ones in most cases. Thus, a sys- CWF models, but air-quality forecasting models using sta- tematic review of these options could substantially assist in tistical methods are not (Kukkonen et al., 2009c). Similarly, evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the various meth- for accuracy and consistency in replacing the traditional term ods, and thus contribute to the development of better and air-quality forecasting and information system, we introduce more robust modelling methods in the future. Consequently, a new term chemical weather forecasting and information this present article aims to bring the field up to date with a system (CWFIS) to represent the integrated system responsi- comprehensive summary and assessment of the state of CWF ble for the prediction and dissemination of chemical weather in Europe. forecasts. In the literature, numerous other terms are also used to re- 1.1 European-wide projects on chemical weather fer to chemical weather and air-quality forecasting systems, modelling and forecasting such as, for instance, “chemical weather and air-quality fore- casting models”, “regional, continental or global air-quality This study is part of the European Cooperation in Sci- models”, “dispersion models”, “atmospheric chemistry mod- ence and Technology (COST) ES0602 action, which pro- els”, “chemical transport models”, “air-chemistry models” vides a forum for benchmarking approaches and practices and “atmospheric chemistry transport models”. In this ar- in data exchange and multi-model capabilities for CWF ticle, we also use some of these terms; however, “chemical and near real-time information services in Europe (http: transport models” is used specifically to refer to the atmo- //www.chemicalweather.eu). The action was initiated by spheric chemistry simulations. the Network of European Meteorological services (EUMET- Sometimes the term biological weather forecasting is used NET, http://www.eumetnet.eu) and the European Environ- to refer to forecasting of biological constituents in the air, ment Agency (EEA). The content of this COST action, its such as various pollen species and airborne allergens. This main objectives and organisation have been reviewed by paper does not specifically address biological weather fore- Kukkonen et al. (2009a, b), and the main results by Kukko- casting, although some of the considered models include nen et al. (2009c). The COST action includes participants treatments for airborne pollen species. from 20 countries, and its duration is from 2007 to 2011. All the acronyms used in this article have been listed at the The COST ES0602 action has constructed a European end of this article. open-access CWF portal (ECWFP) that includes access to Lawrence et al. (2005) have previously reviewed the a substantial number (more than 20) of available chemical then-current state of CWF and emerging research chal- weather forecasting systems (CWFS) and their numerical lenges. Baklanov et al. (2008a, 2010b) and Schluenzen forecasts; these cover in total 31 areas in Europe (Balk et al., and Sokhi (2008) summarized existing mesoscale modelling 2011; http://www.chemicalweather.eu/Domains). This por- systems and capabilities as an initial step to formulate rec- tal can be used to find out, which CWF services are avail- ommendations for a unified integrated framework for mod- able for a specific domain, for specific source categories or Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 1–87, 2012 www.atmos-chem-phys.net/12/1/2012/