Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorDE MEIJ A.en_GB
dc.contributor.authorGZELLA A.en_GB
dc.contributor.authorCUVELIER Cornelisen_GB
dc.contributor.authorTHUNIS Philippeen_GB
dc.contributor.authorBESSAGNET B.en_GB
dc.contributor.authorVINUESA Jean Francoisen_GB
dc.contributor.authorMENUT Laurenten_GB
dc.contributor.authorKELDER H. M.en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2010-02-25T16:23:58Z-
dc.date.available2009-12-01en_GB
dc.date.available2010-02-25T16:23:58Z-
dc.date.created2009-11-27en_GB
dc.date.issued2009en_GB
dc.date.submitted2009-11-03en_GB
dc.identifier.citationATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS vol. 9 no. 17 p. 6611-6632en_GB
dc.identifier.issn1680-7316en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/9/6611/2009/en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC55228-
dc.description.abstractThe objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of meteorological input data on calculated gas and aerosol concentrations. We use two different meteorological models (MM5 and WRF) together with the chemistry transport model CHIMERE.We focus on the Po valley area (Italy) for January and June 2005. Firstly we evaluate the meteorological parameters with observations. The analysis shows that the performance of both models in calculating surface parameters is similar, however differences are still observed. Secondly, we analyze the impact of using MM5 and WRF on calculated PM10 and O3 concentrations. In general CHIMERE/MM5 and CHIMERE/WRF underestimate the PM10 concentrations for January. The difference in PM10 concentrations for January between CHIMERE/MM5 and CHIMERE/WRF is around a factor 1.6 (PM10 higher for CHIMERE/MM5). This difference and the larger underestimation in PM10 concentrations by CHIMERE/WRF are related to the differences in heat fluxes and the resulting PBL heights calculated by WRF. In general the PBL height by WRF meteorology is a factor 2.8 higher at noon in January than calculated by MM5. This study showed that the difference in microphysics scheme has an impact on the profile of cloud liquid water (CLW) calculated by the meteorological driver and therefore on the production of SO4 aerosol. A sensitivity analysis shows that changing the Noah Land Surface Model (LSM) in our WRF pre-processing for the 5-layer soil temperature model, calculated monthly mean Correspondence to: A. de Meij (a.demeij@cyi.ac.cy) PM10 concentrations increase by 30%, due to the change in the heat fluxes and the resulting PBL heights. For June, PM10 calculated concentrations by CHIMERE/MM5 and CHIMERE/WRF are similar and agree with the observations. Calculated O3 values for June are in general overestimated by a factor 1.3 by CHIMERE/MM5 and CHIMERE/WRF. High temporal correlations are found between modeled and observed O3 concentrations.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipJRC.H.4-Transport and air qualityen_GB
dc.format.mediumPrinteden_GB
dc.languageENGen_GB
dc.publisherCOPERNICUS PUBLICATIONSen_GB
dc.relation.ispartofseriesJRC55228en_GB
dc.titleThe Impact of MM5 and WRF Meteorology over Complex Terrain on CHIMERE Model Calculationsen_GB
dc.typeArticles in periodicals and booksen_GB
JRC Directorate:Sustainable Resources

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.