Multi-model evaluation of short-lived pollutant distributions over East Asia during summer 2008

Boris Quennehen, Jean-Christophe Raut, Kathy S Law, Gérard Ancellet, Cathy Clerbaux, SW Kim, MT Lund, G Myhre, DJL Olivié, Sarah Safieddine, RB Skeie, Jennie L Thomas, S Tsyro, Ariane Bazureau, N Bellouin, Nikolaos Daskalakis, M Hu, M Kanakidou, Z Klimont, K Kupiainen, S Myriokefalitakis, J Quaas, ST Rumbold, M Schulz, R Cherian, A Shimizu, J Wang, SC Yoon, T Zhu
2015-04-01
Abstract:The ability of seven state-of-the-art chemistry–aerosol models to reproduce distributions of tropospheric ozone and its precursors, as well as aerosols over eastern Asia in summer 2008, is evaluated. The study focuses on the performance of models used to assess impacts of pollutants on climate and air quality as part of the EU ECLIPSE project. Models, run using the same ECLIPSE emissions, are compared over different spatial scales to in situ surface, vertical profiles and satellite data. Several rather clear biases are found between model results and observations, including overestimation of ozone at rural locations downwind of the main emission regions in China, as well as downwind over the Pacific. Several models produce too much ozone over polluted regions, which is then transported downwind. Analysis points to different factors related to the ability of models to simulate VOC-limited regimes over polluted regions and NO limited regimes downwind. This may also be linked to biases compared to satellite , indicating overestimation of over and to the north of the northern China Plain emission region. On the other hand, model is too low to the south and west of this region and over South Korea/Japan. Overestimation of ozone is linked to systematic underestimation of CO particularly at rural sites and downwind of the main Chinese emission regions. This is likely to be due to enhanced destruction of CO by OH. Overestimation of Asian ozone and its transport downwind implies that radiative forcing from this source may be overestimated. Model-observation discrepancies over Beijing do not appear to be due to emission controls linked …
What problem does this paper attempt to address?