Geoscientific Model Development www.geosci-model-dev.net 1991-959X 1991-9603 2 2 2009 10.5194/gmd-2-213-2009 http://www.geosci-model-dev.net/2/213/2009/ http://www.geosci-model-dev.net/2/213/2009/gmd-2-213-2009.html http://www.geosci-model-dev.net/2/213/2009/gmd-2-213-2009.pdf 213 229 2009-11-16 Simplified aerosol modeling for variational data assimilation N. Huneeus nicolas.huneeus@lsce.ipsl.fr O. Boucher F. Chevallier Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement, L'Orme de Merisier, Gif sur Yvette, France Met Office, Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK We have developed a simplified aerosol model together with its tangent linear and adjoint versions for the ultimate aim of optimizing global aerosol and aerosol precursor emission using variational data assimilation. The model was derived from the general circulation model LMDz; it groups together the 24 aerosol species simulated in LMDz into 4 species, namely gaseous precursors, fine mode aerosols, coarse mode desert dust and coarse mode sea salt. The emissions have been kept as in the original model. Modifications, however, were introduced in the computation of aerosol optical depth and in the processes of sedimentation, dry and wet deposition and sulphur chemistry to ensure consistency with the new set of species and their composition. <br><br> The simplified model successfully manages to reproduce the main features of the aerosol distribution in LMDz. The largest differences in aerosol load are observed for fine mode aerosols and gaseous precursors. Differences between the original and simplified models are mainly associated to the new deposition and sedimentation velocities consistent with the definition of species in the simplified model and the simplification of the sulphur chemistry. Furthermore, simulated aerosol optical depth remains within the variability of monthly AERONET observations for all aerosol types and all sites throughout most of the year. Largest differences are observed over sites with strong desert dust influence. In terms of the daily aerosol variability, the model is less able to reproduce the observed variability from the AERONET data with larger discrepancies in stations affected by industrial aerosols. The simplified model however, closely follows the daily simulation from LMDz. <br><br> Sensitivity analyses with the tangent linear version show that the simplified sulphur chemistry is the dominant process responsible for the strong non-linearity of the model. Benedetti, A., Morcrette, J.-J., Boucher, O., Dethof, A., Engelen, R. J., Fisher, M., Flentjes, H., Huneeus, N., Jones, L., Kaiser, J. W., Kinne, S., Mangold, A., Razinger, M., Simmons, A. J., and Suttie, M.: Aerosol analysis and forecast in the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Integrated Forecast System:~2: Data assimilation, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D13205, doi:10.1029/2008JD011115, 2009. Boucher, O. and Pham, M.: History of sulphate aerosol radiative forcings, Geophys. Res. Lett., 29(9), 1308, doi:10.1029/2001GL014048, 2002. Boucher, O., Pham, M., and Venkataram, C.: Simulation of the atmospheric sulphur cycle in the Laboratoire de Météorologie Dynamique general circulation model: Model description, model evaluation, and global and european budgets, Note Sci. IPSL 23, 27~pp., Inst. Pierre Simon Laplace, Paris, available at http://www.ipsl.jussieu.fr/poles/Modelisation/NotesSciences.htm, 2002. Chevallier, F., Fisher, M., Peylin, P., Serrar, S., Bousquet, P., Bréon, F.-M., Chédin, A., and Ciais, P.: Inferring CO₂ sources and sink from satellite observations: Methods and application to TOVS data, J. Geophys. Res., 110, D24309, doi:10.1029/2005JD006390, 2005. Chevallier, F., Fortems, A., Bousquet, P., Pison, I., Szopa, S., Devaux, M., and Hauglustaine, D. A.: African CO emissions between years 2000 and 2006 as estimated from MOPITT observations, Biogeosciences, 6, 103–111, 2009. Cooke, W. F. and Wilson, J. J. N.: A global black carbon aerosol model, J. Geophys. Res., 101, 19395–19409, 1996. Cooke, W. F., C., Liousse, H., Cachier, and J. Feichter, : Construction of a 1$^\circ\times1^\circ$ fossil fuel emission data set for carbonaceous aerosol and implementation and radiative impact in the ECHAM4 model, J. Geophys. Res., 104, 22137–22162, 1999. Deuzé, J.-L., Goloub, P., Herman, M., Marchand, A., Perry, G., Tanré, D., and Susana, S.: Estimate of the aerosols properties over the ocean with POLDER, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 15329–15346, 2000. Deuzé, J.-L., Bréon, F.-M., Devaux, C., Goloub, P., Herman, M., Lafrance, B., Maignan, F., Marchand, A., Nadaf, L., Perry, G., and Tanré, D.: Remote sensing of aerosols over land surfaces from POLDER-ADEOS 1 Polarized measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 4913–4926, 2001. Dubovik, O., Lapyonok, T., Kaufman, Y. J., Chin, M., Ginoux, P., Kahn, R. A., and Sinyuk, A.: Retrieving global aerosol sources from satellites using inverse modeling, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 209–250, 2008. Elbern, H., Strunk, A., Schmidt, H., and Talagrand, O.: Emission rate and chemical state estimation by 4-dimensional variational inversion, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 3749–3769, 2007. Forster, P., Ramaswamy, V., Artaxo, P., Bernsten, T., Betts, R., Fahey, D. W., Haywood, J., Lean, J., Lowe, D. C., Myhre, G., Nganga, J., Prinn, R., Raga, G., Schulz, M., and van Dorland, R.: Changes in Atmmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing, in: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovenmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, M., Chen, Z., Marquis, M., Averyt, K. B., Tignor, M., and Miller, H. L., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA, 2007. Guelle, W., Balkanski, Y. J., Schulz, M., Marticorena, B., Bergametti, H., Moulin, C., Arimoto, R., and Perry, K. D.: Modeling the atmospheric distribution of mineral aerosol: Comparisons with ground measurements and satellite observations for yearly and synoptic timescales over the North Atlantic, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 1997–2012, 2000. Hakami, A., D. K., Henze, J. H., Seinfeld, T., Chai, Y., Tang, G. R., Carmichael, and A. Sandu, : Adjoint inverse modeling of black carbon during Asian Pacific Regional Aerosol Characterization experiment, \textitJ. Geophys. Res., $110$, D14301, doi:10.1029/2004JD005671, 2005. Hasco\"et, L. and Pascual, V.: TAPENADE 2.1 user's guide, Rapport Technique Nr 3000, Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique (INRIA), 78~pp., 2004. Hasco\"et, L.: TAPENADE: A tool for automatic differentiation for programs, European congress on computational methods in applied sciences and engineering, ECCOMAS, 14~pp., 2004. Henze, D. K., Seinfeld, J. H., Liao, W., Sandu, A., and Carmichael, G. R.: Inverse modelling of aerosol dynamics: Condensation growth, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 109, D14201, doi:10.1029/2004JD004593, 2004. Henze, D. K., Seinfeld, J. H., and Shindell, D. T.: Inverse modeling and mapping US air quality influences of inorganic PM$_2.5$ precursor emissions using the adjoint of GEOS-Chem, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 5877–5903, 2009. Holben, B. N., Eck, T. F., Slutsker, I., Tanré, D., Buis, J.-P., Setzer, A., Vermote, E., Reagan, J. A., Kaufman, Y. J., Nakajima, T., Lavenu, F., Jankowiak, I., and Smirnov, A.: AERONET – A federated instrument network and data archive for aerosol characterization, Remote Sens. Environ., 66, 1–13, 1998. Ide, K., Courtier, P., Ghil, M., and Lorenc, A. C.: Unified notation for data assimilation~: Operational, sequential and variational, J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn., 75(1B), 181–189, 1997. Kopacz, M., Jacob, D. J., Henze, D. K., Heald, C. L., Streets, D. G., and Zhang, Q.: A comparison of analytical and adjoint Bayesian inversion methods for constraining Asian sources of CO using satellite (MOPITT) measurements of CO columns, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D04305, doi:0.1029/2007JD009264, 2009. Ma, X., von Salzen, K., and Li, J.: Modelling sea salt aerosol and its direct and indirect effects on climate, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 1311–1327, 2008. Meirink, J. F., Bergamaschi, P., Frankenberg, C., et al.: Four-dimensional variational data assimilation for inverse modelling of atmospheric methane emissions: Analysis of SCIAMACHY observations, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D17301, doi:10.1029/2007JD009740, 2008. Monahan, E. C., Spliel, D. E., and Davidson, K. L.: A models of marine aerosol generation via whitecaps and wave disruption, in oceanic whitecaps, edited by: Monahan, E. C. and Mac Niocail, G., Springer, New York, 167–174, 1986. Morcrette, J.-J., Boucher, O., Jones, L., Salmond, D., Bechtold, P., Beljaars, A., Benedetti, A., Bonet, A., Kaiser, J. W., Razinger, M., Schulz, M., Serrar, S. Simmons, A. J., Sofiev, M., Suttie, M., Tompkins, A. M., and Untch, A.: Aerosol analysis and forecast in the ECMWF Integrated Forecast System: Forward modelling, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D06206, doi:10.1029/2008JD011235, 2009. Olivier, J. G. J. and Berdowski, J. J. M.: Global emissions sources and sinks, in: The Climate System , edited by: Berdowski, J., Guicherit, R., and Heij, B. J., A.A. Balkerna, Brookfield, Vt, 33–78, 2001. Prospero, J. M.: The atmospheric transport of particles to the ocean, in: Particle Flux in the Ocean, edited by: Ittekott, V., Schaeffer, P., Honjo, S., and Depetris, P. J., Wiley, New York, 1996. Reddy, M. S. and Boucher, O.: A study of the global cycle of carbonaceous aerosols in the LMDZT general circulation model, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D14202, doi:10.1029/2003JD004048, 2004. Reddy, M. S., Boucher, O., Bellouin, N., Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., Dufresne, J.-L., and Pham, M.: Estimates of global multicomponent aerosol optical depth and direct radiative perturbation in the Laboratoire de Météorologie Dynamique general circulation model, J. Geophys. Res., 110, D10216, doi:10.1029/2004JD004757, 2005. Remer, L. A., Kaufman, Y. J., Tanré, D., Mattoo, S., Chu, D. A., Martins, J. V., Li, R.-R., Ichoku, C., Levy, R. C., Kleidman, R. G., Eck, T. F., Vermote, E., and Holben, B. N.: The MODIS aerosol algorithm, products and validation, J. Atmos. Sci., 62, 947–973, 2005. Robertson, L. and Langner, J.: Source function estimate by means of variational data assimilation applied to the ETEX-I tracer experiment, Atmos. Environ., 32, 4219–4225, 1998. Sandu, A., Liao, W., Carmichael, G. R., Henze, D. K., and Seinfeld, J. H.: Inverse modeling of aerosol dynamics using adjoints: theoretical and numerical considerations, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 39, 677–694, 2005. Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., Dulac, F., and Guelle, W.: Role of aerosol size distribution and source location in a three-dimensional simulation of a Saharan dust episode tested against satellite-derived optical thickness, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 10579–10592, 1998. Stavrakou, T. and Müller, J.-F.: Grid-based versus big region approach for inverting CO emissions using Measurement of Pollution in the Troposphere (MOPITT) data, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D15304, doi:10.1029/2005JD006896, 2006. Tanaka, T. Y. and Chiba, M.: A numerical Study of the contributions of dust source regions to the global budget, Global Planet. Change, 52, 88–104, 2006. Tegen, I.: Modeling the mineral dust aerosol cycle in the climate system, Quaternary Sci. Rev., 22, 1821–1834, 2003. Textor, C., Schulz, M., Guilbert, S., et al.: Analysis and quantification of the diversities of aerosol life cycles within AeroCom, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 1777–1813, 2006. Trémolet, Y.: Diagnostics of linear and incremental approximation in 4D-Var, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 130, 2233–2251, 2004. Yumimoto, K., Uno, I., Sugimoto, N., Shimizu, A., and Satake, S.: Adjoint inverse modeling of dust emission and transport over East Asia, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L08806, doi:10.1029/2006GL028551, 2007. Yumimoto, K., Uno, I., Sugimoto, N., Shimizu, A., Liu, Z., and Winker, D. M.: Adjoint inversion modeling of Asian dust emission using lidar observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 2869–2884, 2008. Zhang, J., Reid, J. S., Westphal, D. L., Baker, N. L., and Hyer, E. J.: A system for operational aerosol optical depth data assimilation over global oceans, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D10208, doi:10.1029/2007JD009065, 2008.