Comparison between global chemistry transport model results and Measurement of Ozone and Water Vapor by Airbus In-Service Aircraft (MOZAIC) data
Ozone distributions from state‐of‐the‐art global three‐dimensional chemistry transport models are compared to O3 data collected on Airbus A340 passenger aircraft as part of the Measurement of Ozone and Water Vapor by Airbus In‐Service Aircraft (MOZAIC) project. The model results are compared to mont...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of Geophysical Research, Washington, DC Washington, DC, 2000-01, Vol.105 (D1), p.1503-1525 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1525 |
---|---|
container_issue | D1 |
container_start_page | 1503 |
container_title | Journal of Geophysical Research, Washington, DC |
container_volume | 105 |
creator | Law, K. S. Plantevin, P.‐H. Thouret, V. Marenco, A. Asman, W. A. H. Lawrence, M. Crutzen, P. J. Muller, J.‐F. Hauglustaine, D. A. Kanakidou, M. |
description | Ozone distributions from state‐of‐the‐art global three‐dimensional chemistry transport models are compared to O3 data collected on Airbus A340 passenger aircraft as part of the Measurement of Ozone and Water Vapor by Airbus In‐Service Aircraft (MOZAIC) project. The model results are compared to monthly averaged data at cruise altitudes in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere and monthly averaged vertical profiles collected over particular cities during takeoff and landing. The models generally show good agreement with the data in regions which have previously been well documented and where the meteorology is well understood/captured by meteorological models (e.g., over Europe). However, in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere, models often fail to capture sharp gradients across the tropopause and from the subtropics to the tropics. In some models, this is related to deficiencies in model transport schemes and upper boundary conditions. Also, regions of the globe where our understanding of meteorology is poorer and emissions are less well known (e.g., tropics, continental Africa, Asia, and South America) are not simulated as well by all models. At particular measurement locations, it is apparent that emission inventories used by some global models underestimate emissions in certain regions (e.g., over southern Asia) or have incorrect seasonal variations (e.g., biomass burning over South America). Deficiencies in chemical schemes may also explain differences between models and the data. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1029/1999JD900474 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_hal_p</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_03324307v1</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>18085865</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4464-419e238e7800058f4aa33e68ca7857c8c1c095c2404eec89b40b4c45860289913</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kctu1DAUhiMEEqO2Ox7AC4SoRMC3JPZylMLMVFNG4tJKbKwTzwkNeOLBTtoOT8Ejk5CqsMIbS8ff_0k-f5I8Y_Q1o1y_YVrr8zNNqSzko2TGWZannFP-OJlRJlVKOS-eJicxfqPDkVkuKZslv0q_20Noom9Jhd0tYku-Ol-BI_Yad03swoF0Adq496EjO79FRwLG3nWRQLslFwixD7jDtiO-JpufvsU_D1fQYSCXMORIdSDzJlR9JKs2_YjhprE4TmyAuiMvLzZf5qvylGyhg-PkSQ0u4sn9fZR8fvf2U7lM15vFqpyvUytlLlPJNHKhsFDDZzJVSwAhMFcWCpUVVllmqc4sl1QiWqUrSStpZaZyypXWTBwlp5P3GpzZh2YH4WA8NGY5X5txRoXgUtDiZmRfTOw--B89xs4Mi7HoHLTo-2iYomowZwP4agJt8DEGrB_MjJqxJfNvSwP-_N4L0YKrhzXbJv7N8JwLoQeMT9ht4_DwX6U5X3w4K6ge3ekUGirEu4cQhO8mL0SRmav3C7PUJWd5qcyl-A33Xq1i</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>18085865</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison between global chemistry transport model results and Measurement of Ozone and Water Vapor by Airbus In-Service Aircraft (MOZAIC) data</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Journals</source><source>Wiley-Blackwell AGU Digital Archive</source><source>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Law, K. S. ; Plantevin, P.‐H. ; Thouret, V. ; Marenco, A. ; Asman, W. A. H. ; Lawrence, M. ; Crutzen, P. J. ; Muller, J.‐F. ; Hauglustaine, D. A. ; Kanakidou, M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Law, K. S. ; Plantevin, P.‐H. ; Thouret, V. ; Marenco, A. ; Asman, W. A. H. ; Lawrence, M. ; Crutzen, P. J. ; Muller, J.‐F. ; Hauglustaine, D. A. ; Kanakidou, M.</creatorcontrib><description>Ozone distributions from state‐of‐the‐art global three‐dimensional chemistry transport models are compared to O3 data collected on Airbus A340 passenger aircraft as part of the Measurement of Ozone and Water Vapor by Airbus In‐Service Aircraft (MOZAIC) project. The model results are compared to monthly averaged data at cruise altitudes in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere and monthly averaged vertical profiles collected over particular cities during takeoff and landing. The models generally show good agreement with the data in regions which have previously been well documented and where the meteorology is well understood/captured by meteorological models (e.g., over Europe). However, in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere, models often fail to capture sharp gradients across the tropopause and from the subtropics to the tropics. In some models, this is related to deficiencies in model transport schemes and upper boundary conditions. Also, regions of the globe where our understanding of meteorology is poorer and emissions are less well known (e.g., tropics, continental Africa, Asia, and South America) are not simulated as well by all models. At particular measurement locations, it is apparent that emission inventories used by some global models underestimate emissions in certain regions (e.g., over southern Asia) or have incorrect seasonal variations (e.g., biomass burning over South America). Deficiencies in chemical schemes may also explain differences between models and the data.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0148-0227</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 2169-897X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2156-2202</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2169-8996</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1029/1999JD900474</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington, DC: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Chemical composition and interactions. Ionic interactions and processes ; Continental interfaces, environment ; Earth, ocean, space ; Exact sciences and technology ; External geophysics ; Meteorology ; Ocean, Atmosphere ; Sciences of the Universe</subject><ispartof>Journal of Geophysical Research, Washington, DC, 2000-01, Vol.105 (D1), p.1503-1525</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2000 by the American Geophysical Union.</rights><rights>2000 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4464-419e238e7800058f4aa33e68ca7857c8c1c095c2404eec89b40b4c45860289913</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4464-419e238e7800058f4aa33e68ca7857c8c1c095c2404eec89b40b4c45860289913</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4479-903X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029%2F1999JD900474$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029%2F1999JD900474$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,781,785,886,1418,1434,11519,27929,27930,45579,45580,46414,46473,46838,46897</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=1262339$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.science/hal-03324307$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Law, K. S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Plantevin, P.‐H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thouret, V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marenco, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Asman, W. A. H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lawrence, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Crutzen, P. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Muller, J.‐F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hauglustaine, D. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kanakidou, M.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison between global chemistry transport model results and Measurement of Ozone and Water Vapor by Airbus In-Service Aircraft (MOZAIC) data</title><title>Journal of Geophysical Research, Washington, DC</title><addtitle>J. Geophys. Res</addtitle><description>Ozone distributions from state‐of‐the‐art global three‐dimensional chemistry transport models are compared to O3 data collected on Airbus A340 passenger aircraft as part of the Measurement of Ozone and Water Vapor by Airbus In‐Service Aircraft (MOZAIC) project. The model results are compared to monthly averaged data at cruise altitudes in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere and monthly averaged vertical profiles collected over particular cities during takeoff and landing. The models generally show good agreement with the data in regions which have previously been well documented and where the meteorology is well understood/captured by meteorological models (e.g., over Europe). However, in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere, models often fail to capture sharp gradients across the tropopause and from the subtropics to the tropics. In some models, this is related to deficiencies in model transport schemes and upper boundary conditions. Also, regions of the globe where our understanding of meteorology is poorer and emissions are less well known (e.g., tropics, continental Africa, Asia, and South America) are not simulated as well by all models. At particular measurement locations, it is apparent that emission inventories used by some global models underestimate emissions in certain regions (e.g., over southern Asia) or have incorrect seasonal variations (e.g., biomass burning over South America). Deficiencies in chemical schemes may also explain differences between models and the data.</description><subject>Chemical composition and interactions. Ionic interactions and processes</subject><subject>Continental interfaces, environment</subject><subject>Earth, ocean, space</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>External geophysics</subject><subject>Meteorology</subject><subject>Ocean, Atmosphere</subject><subject>Sciences of the Universe</subject><issn>0148-0227</issn><issn>2169-897X</issn><issn>2156-2202</issn><issn>2169-8996</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kctu1DAUhiMEEqO2Ox7AC4SoRMC3JPZylMLMVFNG4tJKbKwTzwkNeOLBTtoOT8Ejk5CqsMIbS8ff_0k-f5I8Y_Q1o1y_YVrr8zNNqSzko2TGWZannFP-OJlRJlVKOS-eJicxfqPDkVkuKZslv0q_20Noom9Jhd0tYku-Ol-BI_Yad03swoF0Adq496EjO79FRwLG3nWRQLslFwixD7jDtiO-JpufvsU_D1fQYSCXMORIdSDzJlR9JKs2_YjhprE4TmyAuiMvLzZf5qvylGyhg-PkSQ0u4sn9fZR8fvf2U7lM15vFqpyvUytlLlPJNHKhsFDDZzJVSwAhMFcWCpUVVllmqc4sl1QiWqUrSStpZaZyypXWTBwlp5P3GpzZh2YH4WA8NGY5X5txRoXgUtDiZmRfTOw--B89xs4Mi7HoHLTo-2iYomowZwP4agJt8DEGrB_MjJqxJfNvSwP-_N4L0YKrhzXbJv7N8JwLoQeMT9ht4_DwX6U5X3w4K6ge3ekUGirEu4cQhO8mL0SRmav3C7PUJWd5qcyl-A33Xq1i</recordid><startdate>20000120</startdate><enddate>20000120</enddate><creator>Law, K. S.</creator><creator>Plantevin, P.‐H.</creator><creator>Thouret, V.</creator><creator>Marenco, A.</creator><creator>Asman, W. A. H.</creator><creator>Lawrence, M.</creator><creator>Crutzen, P. J.</creator><creator>Muller, J.‐F.</creator><creator>Hauglustaine, D. A.</creator><creator>Kanakidou, M.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>American Geophysical Union</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>1XC</scope><scope>VOOES</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4479-903X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20000120</creationdate><title>Comparison between global chemistry transport model results and Measurement of Ozone and Water Vapor by Airbus In-Service Aircraft (MOZAIC) data</title><author>Law, K. S. ; Plantevin, P.‐H. ; Thouret, V. ; Marenco, A. ; Asman, W. A. H. ; Lawrence, M. ; Crutzen, P. J. ; Muller, J.‐F. ; Hauglustaine, D. A. ; Kanakidou, M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4464-419e238e7800058f4aa33e68ca7857c8c1c095c2404eec89b40b4c45860289913</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Chemical composition and interactions. Ionic interactions and processes</topic><topic>Continental interfaces, environment</topic><topic>Earth, ocean, space</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>External geophysics</topic><topic>Meteorology</topic><topic>Ocean, Atmosphere</topic><topic>Sciences of the Universe</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Law, K. S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Plantevin, P.‐H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thouret, V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marenco, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Asman, W. A. H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lawrence, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Crutzen, P. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Muller, J.‐F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hauglustaine, D. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kanakidou, M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL) (Open Access)</collection><jtitle>Journal of Geophysical Research, Washington, DC</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Law, K. S.</au><au>Plantevin, P.‐H.</au><au>Thouret, V.</au><au>Marenco, A.</au><au>Asman, W. A. H.</au><au>Lawrence, M.</au><au>Crutzen, P. J.</au><au>Muller, J.‐F.</au><au>Hauglustaine, D. A.</au><au>Kanakidou, M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison between global chemistry transport model results and Measurement of Ozone and Water Vapor by Airbus In-Service Aircraft (MOZAIC) data</atitle><jtitle>Journal of Geophysical Research, Washington, DC</jtitle><addtitle>J. Geophys. Res</addtitle><date>2000-01-20</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>105</volume><issue>D1</issue><spage>1503</spage><epage>1525</epage><pages>1503-1525</pages><issn>0148-0227</issn><issn>2169-897X</issn><eissn>2156-2202</eissn><eissn>2169-8996</eissn><abstract>Ozone distributions from state‐of‐the‐art global three‐dimensional chemistry transport models are compared to O3 data collected on Airbus A340 passenger aircraft as part of the Measurement of Ozone and Water Vapor by Airbus In‐Service Aircraft (MOZAIC) project. The model results are compared to monthly averaged data at cruise altitudes in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere and monthly averaged vertical profiles collected over particular cities during takeoff and landing. The models generally show good agreement with the data in regions which have previously been well documented and where the meteorology is well understood/captured by meteorological models (e.g., over Europe). However, in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere, models often fail to capture sharp gradients across the tropopause and from the subtropics to the tropics. In some models, this is related to deficiencies in model transport schemes and upper boundary conditions. Also, regions of the globe where our understanding of meteorology is poorer and emissions are less well known (e.g., tropics, continental Africa, Asia, and South America) are not simulated as well by all models. At particular measurement locations, it is apparent that emission inventories used by some global models underestimate emissions in certain regions (e.g., over southern Asia) or have incorrect seasonal variations (e.g., biomass burning over South America). Deficiencies in chemical schemes may also explain differences between models and the data.</abstract><cop>Washington, DC</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1029/1999JD900474</doi><tpages>23</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4479-903X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0148-0227 |
ispartof | Journal of Geophysical Research, Washington, DC, 2000-01, Vol.105 (D1), p.1503-1525 |
issn | 0148-0227 2169-897X 2156-2202 2169-8996 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_03324307v1 |
source | Wiley-Blackwell Journals; Wiley-Blackwell AGU Digital Archive; Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection); Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Chemical composition and interactions. Ionic interactions and processes Continental interfaces, environment Earth, ocean, space Exact sciences and technology External geophysics Meteorology Ocean, Atmosphere Sciences of the Universe |
title | Comparison between global chemistry transport model results and Measurement of Ozone and Water Vapor by Airbus In-Service Aircraft (MOZAIC) data |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T17%3A15%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_hal_p&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20between%20global%20chemistry%20transport%20model%20results%20and%20Measurement%20of%20Ozone%20and%20Water%20Vapor%20by%20Airbus%20In-Service%20Aircraft%20(MOZAIC)%20data&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20Geophysical%20Research,%20Washington,%20DC&rft.au=Law,%20K.%20S.&rft.date=2000-01-20&rft.volume=105&rft.issue=D1&rft.spage=1503&rft.epage=1525&rft.pages=1503-1525&rft.issn=0148-0227&rft.eissn=2156-2202&rft_id=info:doi/10.1029/1999JD900474&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_hal_p%3E18085865%3C/proquest_hal_p%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=18085865&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |