ACPD Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions ACPD 1680-7375 Copernicus GmbH Göttingen, Germany 10.5194/acpd-8-19957-2008 Comparison of tropospheric chemistry schemes for use within global models Emmerson K. M. 1 Evans M. J. 1 School of Earth & Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK 28 11 2008 8 6 19957 19987 This is an open-access article ditributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. This article is available from http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/8/19957/2008/acpd-8-19957-2008.html The full text article is available as a PDF file from http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/8/19957/2008/acpd-8-19957-2008.pdf

Methane and ozone are two important climate gases with significant tropospheric chemistry. Within chemistry-climate and transport models this chemistry is simplified for computational expediency. We compare the state of the art Master Chemical Mechanism (MCM) with six tropospheric chemistry schemes (CRI-reduced, GEOS-CHEM and a GEOS-CHEM adduct, MOZART, TOMCAT and CBM-IV) that could be used within composition transport models. We test the schemes within a box model framework under conditions derived from a composition transport model and from field observations from a regional scale pollution event. We find that CRI-reduced provides much skill in simulating the full chemistry, yet with greatly reduced complexity. We find significant variations between the other chemical schemes, and reach the following conclusions. 1) The inclusion of a gas phase N<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub>+H<sub>2</sub>O reaction in some schemes and not others is a large source of uncertainty in the inorganic chemistry. 2) There are significant variations in the calculated concentration of PAN between the schemes, which will affect the long range transport of reactive nitrogen in global models. 3) The representation of isoprene chemistry differs hugely between the schemes, leading to significant uncertainties on the impact of isoprene on composition. 4) Night-time chemistry is badly represented with significant disagreements in the ratio of NO<sub>3</sub> to NO<sub>x</sub>. Resolving these four issues through further investigative laboratory studies will reduce the uncertainties within the chemical schemes of global tropospheric models.

 References Aumont, B., Szopa, S., and Madronich, S.: Modelling the evolution of organic carbon during its gas-phase tropospheric oxidation: development of an explicit model based on a self generating approach, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 2497–2517, 2005. Bey, I., Jacob, D. J., Yantosca, R. M., et al.: Global modelling of tropospheric chemistry with assimilated meteorology: model description and evaluation, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 23 073–23 095, 2001. Bloss, C., Wagner, V., Jenkin, M. E., Volkamer, R., Bloss, W. J., Lee, J. D., Heard, D. E., Wirtz, K., Martin-Reviejo, M., Rea, G., Wenger, J. C., and Pilling, M. J.: Development of a detailed chemical mechanism (MCMv3.1) for the atmospheric oxidation of aromatic hydrocarbons, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 641–664, 2005. Brown, S. S., Ryerson, T. B., Wollny, A. G., Brock, A. G., Peltier, R., Sullivan, A. P., Weber, R. J., Dube, W. P., Trainer, M., Meagher, J. F., Fehsenfeld, F. C., and Ravishankara, A. R: Variability in nocturnal nitrogen oxide processing and its role in regional air quality, Science, 311, 67–70, 2006. Carslaw, N., Creasey, D. J., Heard, D. E., Lewis, A. C., McQuaid, J. B., Pilling, M. J., Monks, P. S., Bandy, B. J., and Penkett, S. A.: Modelling OH, HO<sub>2</sub> and RO<sub>2</sub> radicals in the marine boundary layer. 1. Model construction and comparison with field measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 104, 30 241–30 255, 1999. Carslaw N., Creasey, D. J., Harrison, D., Heard, D. E., Hunter, M. C., Jacobs, P. J., Jenkin, M. E., Lee, J. D., Lewis, A. C., Pilling, M. J., Saunders, S. M., and Seakins, P. W.: Modelling OH and HO<sub>2</sub> radicals in a forested region of north-western Greece, Atmos. Environ., 35, 4725–4737, 2001. Chipperfield, M. P., Cariolle, D., Simon, P., Ramaroson, R., and Lary, D. J.: a three dimensional modelling study of trace species in the Arctic lower stratosphere during winter 1989–1990, J. Geosphys. Res., 98, 7199–7218, 1993. Derwent, R. G.: Evaluation of a number of chemical mechanisms for their application in models describing the formation of photochemical ozone in Europe, Atmos. Environ., 24A, 2615–2624, 1990. Emmerson, K. M., Carslaw, N., Carpenter, L. J., Heard, D. E., Lee, J. D., and Pilling, M. J.: Urban Atmospheric Chemistry during the PUMA Campaign, 1: Comparison of Modelled OH and HO<sub>2</sub> Concentrations with Measurements, J. Atmos. Chem., 52, 2, 143–164, 2005. Emmerson, K. M., Carslaw, N., Carslaw, D. C., Lee, J. D., McFiggans, G., Bloss, W. J., Gravestock, T., Heard, D. E., Hopkins, J., Ingham, T., Pilling, M. J., Smith, S. C., Jacob, M., and Monks, P. S.: Free radical modelling studies during the UK TORCH Campaign in Summer 2003, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 167–181, 2007. Evans, M. J and Jacob, D. J.: Impact of new laboratory studies of N<sub>2</sub>O$_5$ hydrolysis on global model budgets of tropospheric nitrogen oxides, ozone and OH, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, L09813, doi:10.1029/2005GL022469, 2005. Fiore, A. M., Horowitz, L. W., Purves, D. W., et al.: Evaluating the contribution of changes in isoprene emissions to surface ozone trends over the eastern United States, J. Geosphys. Res., 110, D12303, doi:10.1029/2004JD005485, 2005. Gery, M. W., Whitten, G. Z., Killus, J. P., and Dodge, M. C.: A Photochemical Kinetics Mechanism for Urban and Regional Scale Computer Modeling, J. Geophys. Res., 94, 925–956, 1989. Hairer, E. and Wanner, G.: Solving Ordinary Differential Equations II Stiff and Differential-Algebraic Problems, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991. Horowitz, L. W., Walters, S., Mauzerall, D. L., et al.: A global simulation of tropospheric ozone and related tracers: description and evaluation of MOZART version 2, J. Geophys. Res., 108(D24), 4784, doi:10.1029/2002JD002853, 2003. Houweling, S., Dentener, F., and Lelieveld, J.: The impact of nonmethane hydrocarbon compounds on tropospheric photochemistry, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 10 673–10 696, 1998. Ito, A., Sillman, S., and Penner, J. E.: Effects of additional nonmethane volatile organic compounds, organic nitrates, and direct emissions of oxygenated organic species on global tropospheric chemistry, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D06309, doi:10.1029/2005JD006556.2007. IPCC: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental 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, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 996~pp., 2007. IUPAC: Summary of evaluated kinetic and photochemical data for atmospheric chemistry, IUPAC subcommittee for Gas Kinetic Data Evaluation, 2001. Jenkin M. E., Saunders S. M., Derwent R. G., and Pilling M. J.: Development of a reduced speciated VOC degradation mechanism for use in ozone models, Atmos. Environ., 36, 4725–4734, 2002. Jenkin, M. E., Saunders, S. M., Wagner, V., and Pilling, M. J.: Protocol for the development of the Master Chemical Mechanism, MCM v3 (Part~B): tropospheric degradation of aromatic volatile organic compounds, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 181–193, 2003. Jenkin, M. E and Hayman, G. D.: Photochemical ozone creation potentials for oxygenated volatile organic compounds: sensitivity to variations in kinetic and mechanistic parameters, Atmos. Environ., 33(8), 1275–1293, 1999. Jenkin, M. E., Watson, L. A., Utembe, S. R., and Shallcross, D. E.: A Common Representative Intermediates (CRI) mechanism for VOC degradation – Part 1: Gas phase mechanism development, Atmos. Environ., 42, 7185–7195, doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv2008.07.028, 2008. JPL: Chemical kinetics and photochemical data for use in atmospheric studies, Evaluation number 15, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, 2006. Law, K. S., Plantevin, P.-H., Shallcross, D. E., Rogers, H. L., Pyle, J. A., Grouhel, C., Thouret, V., and Marenco, A.: Evaluation of modeled O3 using Measurements of Ozone by Airbus In-Service Aircraft (MOZAIC) data, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 25 721-25 737, 1998. Lee, J. D., Lewis, A. C., Monks, P. S., et al.: Ozone photochemistry and elevated isoprene during the UK heatwave of August 2003, Atmos. Environ., 40, 7598–7613, 2006. Logan, J. A., Prather, M. J., Wofsy, S. C., and McElroy, M. B.: Tropospheric Chemistry: A Global Perspective, J. Geophys. Res., 86(C8), 7210–7254, 1981. O'Connor, F. M., Law, K. S., Pyle, J. A., Barjat, H., Brough, N., Dewey, K., Green, T., Kent, J., and Phillips, G.: Tropospheric ozone budget: regional and global calculations, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 4, 991–1036, 2004. Olsen, J., Prather, M., Berntsen, T., et al.: Results from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climatic Change Photochemical Model Intercomparison (Photocomp), J. Geophys. Res., 102, 5979–5991, 1997. Poschl, U., von Kuhlmann, R., Poisson, N., and Crutzen, P. J.: Development and intercomparison of condensed isoprene oxidation mechanisms for global atmospheric modelling, J. Atmos. Chem., 37, 29–52, 2000. Sandu, A. and Sander, R.: Technical note: Simulating chemical systems in Fortran90 and Matlab with the Kinetic PreProcessor KPP-2.1, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 187–195, 2006. Saunders, S. M., Jenkin, M. E., Derwent, R. G., and Pilling, M. J.: Protocol for the development of the Master Chemical Mechanism, MCM v3 (Part~A): tropospheric degradation of non-aromatic volatile organic compounds, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 161–180, 2003. Shindell, D. T., Faluvegi, G., and Bell, N.: Preindustrial-to-present-day radiative forcing by tropospheric ozone from improved simulations with the GISS chemistry-climate GCM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 1675–1702, 2003. Sommariva, R., Haggerstone, A.-L., Carpenter, L. J., Carslaw, N., Creasey, D. J., Heard, D. E., Lee, J. D., Lewis, A. C., Pilling, M. J., and Zádor, J.: OH and HO2 chemistry in clean marine air during SOAPEX-2, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 4, 839–856, 2004. Stockwell, D. Z. and M. J. Chipperfield.: A tropospheric chemical transport model: development and validation of the model transport schemes, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 125, 1747–1783, 1999. Szopa, S., Aumont, B., and Madronich, S.: Assessment of the reduction methods used to develop chemical schemes: building of a new chemical scheme for VOC oxidation suited to three-dimensional multiscale HO<sub>x</sub>-NO<sub>x</sub>-VOC chemistry simulations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 2519–2538, 2005. von Kuhlmann, R., Lawrence, M. G., Pöschl, U., and Crutzen, P. J.: Sensitivities in global scale modeling of isoprene, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 4, 1–17, 2004. Watson, L. A., Shallcross, D. E., Utembe, S. R., and Jenkin, M. E.: A Common Representative Intermediates (CRI) mechanism for VOC degradation – Part 2: Gas phase mechanism reduction, Atmos. Environ., 42, 7196–7204, doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.07.034, 2008. Wu, S., Mickley, L. J., Jacob, D. J., et al.: Why are there large differences between models in global budgets of tropospheric ozone?, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D05302, doi:10.1029/2006JD007801, 2007.