No abstract

The convectively driven transport of soluble trace gases from the lower to the upper troposphere can occur on timescales of less than an hour, and recent studies suggest that microphysical scavenging is the dominant removal process of tropospheric ozone precursors. We examine the processes responsible for vertical transport, entrainment, and scavenging of soluble ozone precursors (formaldehyde and peroxides) for midlatitude convective storms sampled on 2 September 2013 during the Studies of Emissions, Atmospheric Composition, Clouds and Climate Coupling by Regional Surveys (SEAC4RS) study. Cloud‐resolving simulations using the Weather Research and Forecasting with Chemistry model combined with aircraft measurements were performed to understand the effect of entrainment, scavenging efficiency (SE), and ice physics processes on these trace gases. Analysis of the observations revealed that the SEs of formaldehyde (43–53%) and hydrogen peroxide (~80–90%) were consistent between SEAC4RS storms and the severe convection observed during the Deep Convective Clouds and Chemistry Experiment (DC3) campaign. However, methyl hydrogen peroxide SE was generally smaller in the SEAC4RS storms (4%–27%) compared to DC3 convection. Predicted ice retention factors exhibit different values for some species compared to DC3, and we attribute these differences to variations in net precipitation production. The analyses show that much larger production of precipitation between condensation and freezing levels for DC3 severe convection compared to smaller SEAC4RS storms is largely responsible for the lower amount of soluble gases transported to colder temperatures, reducing the amount of soluble gases which eventually interact with cloud ice particles.

The role of the sea/bay breeze in the planetary boundary layer evolution and air quality during a high ozone event day in the Deriving Information on Surface Conditions from Column and Vertically Resolved Observations Relevant to Air Quality (DISCOVER‐AQ) Texas 2013 campaign was examined. Data from surface air quality monitoring network stations, airborne lidar data, and additional ground‐based lidar instrumentation deployed during the campaign allowed for a unique three‐dimensional spatial and temporal study of the progression of both meteorological and air quality conditions in the Houston‐Galveston regions on 25 September 2013. The Weather Research and Forecasting model coupled with Chemistry model was used to examine the relationship of the land and bay/sea breeze circulations and its influence on air quality during the case study. Comparisons between observations and simulations revealed the largest discrepancies near the Galveston Bay shore areas where the highly localized ozone concentrations were observed and were linked to the strength and timing of the bay/sea breeze progression. Additionally, results indicate vertical downmixing from the remnants of the nighttime residual layer during morning hours into the convective boundary layer and from the lofted offshore return flow into the subjacent bay breeze flow.

No abstract

No abstract

Abstract. Air quality forecasting requires atmospheric weather models to generate accurate meteorological conditions, one of which is the development of the planetary boundary layer (PBL). An important contributor to the development of the PBL is the land-air exchange captured in the energy budget as well as turbulence parameters. Standard and surface energy variables were modeled using the fifth-generation Penn State/National Center for Atmospheric Research mesoscale model (MM5), version 3.6.1, and the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model, version 3.5.1, and compared to measurements for a southeastern Texas coastal region. The study period was 28 August-1 September 2006. It also included a frontal passage.The results of the study are ambiguous. Although WRF does not perform as well as MM5 in predicting PBL heights, it better simulates energy budget and most of the general variables. Both models overestimate incoming solar radiation, which implies a surplus of energy that could be redistributed in either the partitioning of the surface energy variables or in some other aspect of the meteorological modeling not examined here. The MM5 model consistently had much drier conditions than the WRF model, which could lead to more energy available to other parts of the meteorological system. On the clearest day of the study period, MM5 had increased latent heat flux, which could lead to higher evaporation rates and lower moisture in the model. However, this latent heat disparity between the two models is not visible during any other part of the study. The observed frontal passage affected the performance of most of the variables, including the radiation, flux, and turbulence variables, at times creating dramatic differences in the r 2 values.

No abstract

No abstract