Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 9, 7927-7969, 2009
www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/9/7927/2009/
doi:10.5194/acpd-9-7927-2009
© Author(s) 2009. This work is distributed
under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
Review Status
This discussion paper has been under review for the journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP). Please refer to the corresponding final paper in ACP.
The influence of foreign vs. North American emissions on surface ozone in the US
D. R. Reidmiller1,2, A. M. Fiore3, D. A. Jaffe2, D. Bergmann4, C. Cuvelier5, F. J. Dentener5, B. N. Duncan6,*, G. Folberth7, M. Gauss8, S. Gong9, P. Hess10,**, J. E. Jonson11, T. Keating12, A. Lupu13, E. Marmer5, R. Park14,***, M. G. Schultz15, D. T. Shindell16, S. Szopa17, M. G. Vivanco18, O. Wild19, and A. Zuber20
1University of Washington, Department of Atmospheric Sciences, Seattle, WA, USA
2University of Washington – Bothell, Department of Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences, Bothell, WA, USA
3NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, Princeton, NJ, USA
4Atmospheric Earth and Energy Division, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA
5European Commission, Joint Research Centre JRC, Institute for Environment and Sustainability, Ispra, Italy
6Goddard Earth Sciences {&} Technology Center, UMBC, MD, USA
7Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
8Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
9Science and Technology Branch, Environment Canada, Toronto, Canada
10National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA
11Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway
12Office of Policy Analysis and Review, EPA, Washington, DC, USA
13Center for Research in Earth and Space Science, York University, Canada
14Atmospheric Chemistry Modeling Group, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA
15Institut für Chemie und Dynamik der Geosphäre ICG-2, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany
16NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
17Laboratoire des Sciences du Clima et de l'Environnement, CEA/CNRS/UVSQ/IPSL, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
18Centro de Investigaciones Energéticas, Medioambientales y Tecnológicas (CIEMAT), Madrid, Spain
19Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, UK
20Environment Directorate General, European Commission, Brussels, Belgium
*now at: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, USA
**also at: Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA
***now at: Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea

Abstract. As part of the Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution (HTAP; http://www.htap.org/) project, we analyze results from 16 global and hemispheric chemical transport models and compare these to Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNet) observations in the United States (US) for 2001. Using the policy-relevant maximum daily 8-h ozone (MDA8 O3) statistic, the multi-model ensemble represents the observations well (mean r2=0.57, ensemble bias=+4.1 ppbv for all regions and all seasons) despite a wide range in the individual model results. Correlations are strongest in the NorthEastern US during spring and fall (r2=0.68); and weakest in the Midwestern US in summer (r2=0.46). However, large positive mean biases exist during summer for all Eastern US regions, ranging from 10–20 ppbv, and a smaller negative bias is present in the Western US during spring (~3 ppbv). In most all other regions and seasons, the biases of the model ensemble simulations are ≤5 ppbv. Sensitivity simulations in which anthropogenic O3-precursor emissions (NOx+NMVOC+CO+aerosols) were decreased by 20% in each of four source regions: East Asia (EA), South Asia (SA), Europe (EU) and North America (NA) show that the greatest response of MDA8 O3 to the summed foreign emissions reductions occurs during spring in the West (0.9 ppbv reduction due to 20% reductions from EA+SA+EU). East Asia is the largest contributor to MDA8 O3 at all ranges of the O3 distribution for most regions (typically ~0.45 ppbv). The exception is in the NorthEastern US where European emissions reductions had the greatest impact on MDA8 O3, particularly in the middle of the MDA8 O3 distribution (response of ~0.35 ppbv between 35–55 ppbv). In all regions and seasons, however, O3-precursor emissions reductions of 20% in the NA source region decrease MDA8 O3 the most – by a factor of 2 to nearly 10 relative to foreign emissions reductions. The O3 response to anthropogenic NA emissions is greatest in the Eastern US during summer at the high end of the O3 distribution (5–6 ppbv for 20% reductions). While the impact of foreign emissions on surface O3 in the US is not negligible – and is of increasing concern given the growth in emissions upwind of the US – domestic emissions reductions remain a far more effective means of decreasing MDA8 O3 values, particularly those above 75 ppb (the current US standard).

Citation: Reidmiller, D. R., Fiore, A. M., Jaffe, D. A., Bergmann, D., Cuvelier, C., Dentener, F. J., Duncan, B. N., Folberth, G., Gauss, M., Gong, S., Hess, P., Jonson, J. E., Keating, T., Lupu, A., Marmer, E., Park, R., Schultz, M. G., Shindell, D. T., Szopa, S., Vivanco, M. G., Wild, O., and Zuber, A.: The influence of foreign vs. North American emissions on surface ozone in the US, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 9, 7927-7969, doi:10.5194/acpd-9-7927-2009, 2009.
 
Search ACPD
Discussion Paper
XML
Citation
Final Revised Paper
Share