WRF-chem Simulation of a Saharan dust Outbreak over the Mediterranean Regions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X20249Keywords:
Sahara Dust. WRF-Chem simulations. Dispersion of aerosols. GOCART aerosol model.Abstract
A fully coupled meteorology-chemistry-aerosol model (WRF-Chem) is applied to simulate the Saharan dust outbreak over the Mediterranean regions. Two dust emission schemes, namely, those of Jones et al., (2010), and Shao (2001) are evaluated using the the GOCART aerosol model. To investigate the performance of each dust emission scheme, a case study was carried out for a Mediterranean dust event that took place between 21 and 23 May 2014. Considering the time average Aerosol Optical Depth, simulation results reproduced satisfactorily the outbreak and transport pattern of dust plumes. However, the estimated dust emission amounts in each scheme differ greatly due to the presence of several tuning parameters, that must be adjusted considering satellite and ground based experimental data.
Downloads
References
Alpert, P., Kaufman, Y.J., Shay-El, Y., Tanre, D., da Silva, A., Schubert, S., Joseph, J.H. (1998). Quantification of dust-forced heating of the lower troposphere. Nature 395, 367–370.
Bohren C. F., and D. R. Huffman (1983). Absorption and scattering of light by small particles[M]. John Wiley & Sons.
Chin, M., Rood, R.B., Lin, S.-J., Muller, J. F., Thomspon, A. M. (2000). Atmospheric sulfur cycle in the global model GOCART: Model description and global properties, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 24,671-24,687.
Choobari, O. A., Zawar-Reza, P., Sturman, A. (2014). The global distribution of mineral dust and its impacts on the climate system: a review, Atmos. Res., 138, 152–165, doi:10.1016/j.atmosres.2013.11.007.
Freitas, S. R., Longo, K. M., Alonso, M. F., Pirre, M., Marecal, V., Grell, G., Stockler, R., Mello, R. F., Sanchez Gacita, M. (2011). PREP-CHEM-SRC 1.0: a preprocessor of trace gas and aerosol emission fields for regional and global atmospheric chemistry models. Geoscientific Model Development, v. 4, p. 419-433.
Grell, G. A., Peckham, S. E., Schmitz, R., McKeen, S. A., Frost, G., Skamarock, W. C., Eder, B. (2005). Fully coupled “online” chemistry within the WRF model, Atmos. Environ., 39, 6957– 6976.
Goudie, A. S., Middleton, N. J. (2001). Saharan dust storms: nature and consequences, Earth.-Sci. Rev., 56, 179–204, doi:10.1016/S0012-8252(01)00067-8.
Griffin, D. W., Kellogg, C.A. (2004). Dust storms and their impact on ocean and human health: dust in Earth’s atmosphere. EcoHealth 1.3,284-295.
Huneeus, N., Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., Griesfeller, J., Prospero, J., Kinne, S., ... & Zender, C. S. (2011). Global dust model intercomparison in AeroCom phase I. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 11(15).
Liu, C. M., Young, C.Y., Lee Y.C. (2006). Influence of Asian dust storms on air quality in Taiwan, Sci. Total Environ., 368, 884–897, doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2006.03.039.
Jones, S. L., et al. (2010). Adapting WRF-CHEM GOCART for Fine-Scale Dust Forecasting. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts. Vol. 1.
Kaufman, Y. J., Tanre, D., Remer, L. A., Vermote, E. F., Chu, A., Holben, B. N., (1997). Operational remote sensing of tropospheric aerosol over land from EOS moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer, J. Geophys. Res., 102, 17051–17067.
Klose, M., Shao, Y. (2012). Stochastic parameterization of dust emission and application to convective atmospheric conditions." Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 12.16: 7309-7320.
Mallone, S., Stafoggia, M., Faustini, A., Gobbi, G.P., Marconi, A., Forastiere, F. (2011). Saharan dust and associations between particulate matter and daily mortality in Rome, Italy. Environmental health perspectives, 119(10), 1409.
Marticorena, B., Bergametti, G. (1995). Modeling the atmospheric dust cycle: 1. Design of a soil-derived dust emission scheme, J. Geo- phys. Res., 100, 16415–16430.
Mlawer, E. J., Taubman, S.J., Brown, P.D., Iacono, M.J., Clough, S.A. (1997). Radiative transfer for inhomogeneous atmospheres: RRTM, a validated correlated-k model for the longwave, J Geophys Res-Atmos, 102(D14), 16663-16682.
Kang, J. Y., Yoon, S. C., Shao, Y., Kim, S. W. (2011). Comparison of vertical dust flux by implementing three dust emission schemes in WRF/Chem, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres (1984–2012), 116(D9), Chicago.
Shao, Y. (2001). A model for mineral dust emission, J. Geophys. Res., 106(D17), 20,239–20,254, doi:10.1029/2001JD900171.
Shao, Y. (2004). Simplification of a dust emission scheme and comparison with data, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D10202, doi:10.1029/2003JD004372.
Tegen, I., Lacis, A. A., Fung, I. (1996). The influence on climate forcing of mineral aerosols from disturbed soils, Nature, 380, 419–422, doi:10.1038/380419a0.
Uno, I., Wang, Z., Chiba, M., Chun, Y. S., Gong, S. L., Hara, Y., ... & Westphal, D. L. (2006). Dust model intercomparison (DMIP) study over Asia: Overview. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres (1984–2012), 111(D12).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
