Tropospheric ozone in CMIP6 simulations

Griffiths, Paul; Murray, Lee T.; Zeng, Guang; Shin, Youngsub Matthew; Abraham, N. L.; Archibald, Alexander T.; Deushi, Makoto; Emmons, L. K.; Galbally, Ian; Haßler, Birgit; Horowitz, Larry W.; Keeble, James; Liu, Jane; Moeini, Omid; Naik, Vaishali; O’Connor, Fiona M.; Oshima, Naga; Tarasick, D. W.; Tilmes, Simone; Turnock, Steven T.; Wild, Oliver; Young, Paul; Zanis, Prodromos

doi:10.5194/acp-21-4187-2021

Cited by 112 publications

(111 citation statements)

References 128 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The individual budget terms are all are consistent with the range of reported values from the Tropospheric Ozone Assessment Report (TOAR) multi-model assessment (see Fig. 3 of Young et al, 2018), the CMIP6 models that performed interactive tropospheric chemistry (Griffiths et al, 2021), as well as the last extensive tropospheric ozone budget evaluation within the standard GEOS-Chem model (Hu et al, 2017). The E2.1 simulations are on the high end of the previously reported values due to the higher tropopause height in those simulations; the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere regions contribute strongly to each O x budget term due to the rapidly increasing abundances of ozone with altitude there.…”

Section: Ozonesupporting

confidence: 78%

“…The E2.1 simulations are especially higher over the Amazon than either MERRA-2 or the observations. Comparisons of TCO to OMI/MLS are sensitive to uncertainties in the tropopause location in the satellite product versus the models (Griffiths et al, 2021). The E2.1 TCO are globally higher than the OMI/MLS product by 12 %, reflecting the lower tropopause pressures.…”

Section: Ozonementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

GCAP 2.0: A global 3-D chemical-transport model framework for past, present, and future climate scenarios

Murray¹,

Leibensperger²,

Orbe³

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This manuscript describes version 2.0 of the Global Change and Air Pollution (GCAP 2.0) model framework, a one-way offline coupling between version E2.1 of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) general circulation model (GCM) and the GEOS-Chem global 3-D chemical-transport model (CTM). Meteorology for driving GEOS-Chem has been archived from the E2.1 contributions to Phase 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) for the preindustrial and recent past. In addition, meteorology is available for the near future and end-of-the century for seven future scenarios ranging from extreme mitigation to extreme warming. Emissions and boundary conditions have been prepared for input to GEOS-Chem that are consistent with the CMIP6 experimental design. The model meteorology, emissions, transport and chemistry are evaluated in the recent past and found to be largely consistent with GEOS-Chem driven by the Modern-Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications Version 2 (MERRA-2) product and with observational constraints.

show abstract

Section: Ozonesupporting

confidence: 78%

Section: Ozonementioning

confidence: 99%

GCAP 2.0: A global 3-D chemical-transport model framework for past, present, and future climate scenarios

Murray¹,

Leibensperger²,

Orbe³

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3 had increased by ∼ 20 % from 1950 levels, and global model calculations (see discussion below) also find that NH ozone concentrations had increased significantly before the 1960s. Further, extremely elevated ozone concentrations (several 100 ppb) were observed in Los Angeles as early as the 1950s (Haagen-Smit, 1954). The emissions responsible for those urban ozone enhancements were primarily from on-road vehicles, which were common to all US urban areas.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigations on the anthropogenic reversal of the natural ozone gradient between northern and southern midlatitudes

Parrish¹,

Derwent²,

Turnock

et al. 2021

Atmos. Chem. Phys.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Our quantitative understanding of natural tropospheric ozone concentrations is limited by the paucity of reliable measurements before the 1980s. We utilize the existing measurements to compare the long-term ozone changes that occurred within the marine boundary layer at northern and southern midlatitudes. Since 1950 ozone concentrations have increased by a factor of 2.1 ± 0.2 in the Northern Hemisphere (NH) and are presently larger than in the Southern Hemisphere (SH), where only a much smaller increase has occurred. These changes are attributed to increased ozone production driven by anthropogenic emissions of photochemical ozone precursors that increased with industrial development. The greater ozone concentrations and increases in the NH are consistent with the predominant location of anthropogenic emission sources in that hemisphere. The available measurements indicate that this interhemispheric gradient was much smaller and was likely reversed in the pre-industrial troposphere with higher concentrations in the SH. Six Earth system model (ESM) simulations indicate similar total NH increases (1.9 with a standard deviation of 0.3), but they occurred more slowly over a longer time period, and the ESMs do not find higher pre-industrial ozone in the SH. Several uncertainties in the ESMs may cause these model–measurement disagreements: the assumed natural nitrogen oxide emissions may be too large, the relatively greater fraction of ozone injected by stratosphere–troposphere exchange to the NH may be overestimated, ozone surface deposition to ocean and land surfaces may not be accurately simulated, and model treatment of emissions of biogenic hydrocarbons and their photochemistry may not be adequate.

show abstract

“…In summary, we are suggesting that the NOx emissions largely control the timing of seasonal maximum in ozone, while the VOC emissions control the seasonal cycle amplitude. If this hypothesis is correct, consideration of the role of biogenic VOCs could help to explain some of the diversity in the seasonal cycles and shifts seen among the model simulations; as can be seen in Figure 1 of Griffiths et al (2021) the temporal variation of the biogenic VOCs emissions are significantly different across the models.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even though the six ESMs used the same prescribed anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions, Figure 1 of Griffiths et al (2021) shows that subtle differences remain in NOx emissions and even greater differences in CO and biogenic VOC emissions between models. Differences in the VOC emissions arise because the speciated VOC emissions that were provided had to be mapped onto the chemical mechanisms in the individual models, and this mapping may not fully account for the total VOC emissions prescribed.…”

Section: Precursor Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes of Anthropogenic Precursor Emissions Drive Shifts of Ozone Seasonal Cycle throughout Northern Midlatitude Troposphere

Bowman

Turnock

Bauer

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Simulations by six CMIP6 Earth System Models indicate that the seasonal cycle of baseline tropospheric ozone at northern midlatitudes has been shifting since the mid-20th Century. Beginning in ~ 1940 the seasonal cycle increased in amplitude by ~ 10 ppb (measured from seasonal minimum to maximum), and the seasonal maximum shifted to later in the year by about 3 weeks. This shift maximized in the mid-1980s, followed by a reversal – the seasonal cycle decreased in amplitude and the maximum shifted back to earlier in the year. Similar changes are seen in measurements collected from the 1970s to the present. The timing of the seasonal cycle changes is generally concurrent with the rise and fall of anthropogenic emissions that followed industrialization and subsequent implementation of air quality emission controls. We quantitatively compare the temporal changes of the ozone seasonal cycle at sites in both Europe and North America with the temporal changes of ozone precursor emissions across the northern midlatitudes and find a high degree of similarity between these two temporal patterns. We hypothesize that changing precursor emissions are responsible for the shift in the ozone seasonal cycle, and suggest the mechanism by which changing emissions drive the changing seasonal cycle: increasing emissions of NOX allow summertime photochemical production of ozone to become more important than ozone transported from the stratosphere and increasing VOCs lead to progressively greater photochemical ozone production in the summer months, thereby increasing the amplitude of the seasonal ozone cycle. Decreasing emissions of both precursor classes then reverse these changes. The quantitative parameter values that characterize the seasonal shifts provide useful benchmarks for evaluating model simulations, both against observations and between models.

show abstract

Tropospheric ozone in CMIP6 simulations

Cited by 112 publications

References 128 publications

GCAP 2.0: A global 3-D chemical-transport model framework for past, present, and future climate scenarios

GCAP 2.0: A global 3-D chemical-transport model framework for past, present, and future climate scenarios

Investigations on the anthropogenic reversal of the natural ozone gradient between northern and southern midlatitudes

Changes of Anthropogenic Precursor Emissions Drive Shifts of Ozone Seasonal Cycle throughout Northern Midlatitude Troposphere

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About