Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net 1680-7367 1680-7375 9 2 2009 10.5194/acpd-9-8587-2009 http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/9/8587/2009/ http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/9/8587/2009/acpd-9-8587-2009.html http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/9/8587/2009/acpd-9-8587-2009.pdf 8587 8618 2009-03-31 The impact of resolution on ship plume simulations with NO_x chemistry C. L. Charlton-Perez cristina.l.perez@gmail.com M. J. Evans J. H. Marsham J. G. Esler Institute for Atmospheric Science, The School of the Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK Department of Mathematics, University College London, London, UK A high resolution chemical transport model of the marine boundary layer is designed in order to investigate the detailed chemical evolution of a ship plume. To estimate systematic errors due to finite model resolution, otherwise identical simulations are run at a range of model resolutions. Notably, to obtain comparable plumes in the different simulations, it is found necessary to use an advection scheme consistent with the Large Eddy Model representation of sub-grid winds for those simulations with degraded resolution. Our simulations show that OH concentration, NO_x lifetime and ozone production efficiency of the model change by 8%, 32% and 31% respectively between the highest (200 mx200 mx40 m) and lowest resolution (9600 mx9600 mx1920 m) simulations. Interpolating to the resolution of a typical global composition transport model (CTM, 5°x5°), suggests that a CTM overestimates OH, NO_x lifetime and ozone production efficiency by approximately 15%, 55% and 59% respectively. For the first time, it is shown explicitly that the reduction in model skill is due to the coarse resolution of these CTMs and the non-linear nature of atmospheric chemistry. These results are significant for the assessment and forecasting of the climate impact of ship NO_x and indicate that for realistic representation of ship plume emissions in CTMs, some suitable parametrisation is necessary at current global model resolutions. Brown, A R.: The sensitivity of large-eddy simulations of shallow cumulus convection to resolution and subgrid model, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 125, 469–482, 1999. Brown, P N., Byrne, G D., and Hindmarsh, A C.: VODE: A variable coefficient ODE solver, SIAM J. Sci. Stat. Comp., 10, 1038–1051, 1989. Chatfield, R B. and Delaney, A C.: Convection links biomass burn- ing to increased tropical ozone: However, Models will tend to overpredict O₃, J. Geophys. Res., 95, 18 473–18 488, 1990. Chen, G., Huey, L G., Trainer, M., Nicks, D., Corbett, J., Ryerson, T., Parrish, D., Neuman, J A., Nowak, J., Tanner, D., Holloway, J., Brock, C., Crawford, J., Olson, J R., Sullivan, A., Weber, R., Schauffler, S., Donnelly, S., Atlas, E., Roberts, J., Flocke, F., Hubler, G., and Fehsenfeld, F.: An investigation of the chemistry of ship emission plumes during ITCT 2002, J. Geophys. Res., 110, D10S90, doi:10.1029/2004JD005236, 2005. Corbett, J J. and Fischbeck, P.: Commercial Marine Emissions Inventory for EPA Category 2 and 3 Compression ignition marine engines in United States continental and inland waterways, Tech. rep., US~Environmental Protection Agency, 58~pp., 1998. Corbett, J J. and Koehler, H W.: Updated emissions from ocean shipping, J. Geophys. Res., 108(D20), 4650, doi:10.1029/2003JD003751, 2003. Davis, D D., Grodzinsky, G., Kasibhatla, P., Crawford, J., Chen, G., Liu, S., Bandy, A., Thornton, D., Guan, H., and Sandholm, S.: Impact of ship emissions on marine boundary layer NO_x and \chemSO_2 distributions over the Pacific basin, Geophys. Res. Lett., 28, 235–238, 2001. Endersen, O., Sorgard, E., Sundet, J K., Dalsoren, S B., Isaksen, I. S A., Berglen, T F., and Gravir, G.: Emission from international sea transportation and environmental impact, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 5460, 2003. Entec UK Ltd.: Quantification of emissions from ships associated with ship movements between ports in the European Community, Tech. rep., European Commission, 48~pp., 2002. EPA: Analysis of commercial marine vessels emissions and fuel consumption data, Tech. Rep. EPA420-R-00-002, United States Environmental Protection Agency, 158~pp., 2000. Esler, J G.: An integrated approach to mixing sensitivities in tropospheric chemistry: A basis for the parameterization of subgrid-scale emissions for chemistry transport models, J. Geophys. Res., 108(D20), 4632, doi:10.1029/2003JD003627, 2003. Esler, J. G., Roelofs, G. J., Köhler, M. O., and O'Connor, F. M.: A quantitative analysis of grid-related systematic errors in oxidising capacity and ozone production rates in chemistry transport models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 4, 1781–1795, 2004. Eyring, V., Kohler, H W., Lauer, A., and Lemper, B.: Emissions from international shipping: 2 Impact of future technologies on scenarios until 2050, J. Geophys. Res., 110, D17306, doi:10.1029/2004JD005620, 2005a. Eyring, V., Kohler, H W., van Aardenne, J., and Lauer, A.: Emissions from international shipping: 1 The last 50 years, J. Geophys. Res., 110, D17305, doi:10.1029/2004JD005619, 2005b. Eyring, V., Stevenson, D. S., Lauer, A., Dentener, F. J., Butler, T., Collins, W. J., Ellingsen, K., Gauss, M., Hauglustaine, D. A., Isaksen, I. S. A., Lawrence, M. G., Richter, A., Rodriguez, J. M., Sanderson, M., Strahan, S. E., Sudo, K., Szopa, S., van Noije, T. P. C., and Wild, O.: Multi-model simulations of the impact of international shipping on Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate in 2000 and 2030, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 757–780, 2007. Forster, P., Ramaswamy, V., Artaxo, P., Berntsen, T., Betts, R., Fahey, D W., Haywood, J., Lean, J., Lowe, D C., Myhre, G., Nganga, J., Prinn, R., Raga, G., Schulz, M., and Van~Doland, R.: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Cambridge University Press, 996~pp., 2007. Gray, M. E B., Petch, J., Derbyshire, S H., Brown, A R., Lock, A P., and Swann, H A.: Version~2.3 of the Met. Office large eddy model, Tech. rep., The Met. Office, Exeter, UK, 2001. Hewitt, C N.: The atmospheric chemistry of sulphur and nitrogen in power station plumes, Atmos. Environ., 35, 1155–1170, 2001. Hobbs, P V., Garrett, T J., Ferek, R J., Strader, S R., Hegg, D A., Frick, G M., Hoppel, W A., Gasparovic, R F., Russell, L M., Johnson, D W., O'Dowd, C., Durkee, P A., Nielsen, K E., and Innis, G.: Emissions from Ships with respect to Their Effects on Clouds, J. Atmos. Sci., 57, 2570–2590, 2000. Holland, J Z.: Comparative evaluation of some BOMEX measurements of sea surface evaporation, energy flux and stress, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 2, 476–486, 1972. Holland, P W. and Welsch, R E.: Robust regression using iteratively reweighted least-squares, Communications in Statistics: Theory and Methods, A6, 813–827, 1977. Kasibhatla, P., Levy II, H., Moxim, W J., Pandis, S N., Corbett, J J., Peterson, M C., Honrath, R E., Frost, G J., Knapp, K., Parrish, D D., and Ryerson, T B.: Do emissions from ships have a significant impact on the concentrations of nitrogen oxides in the marine boundary layer?, J. Geophys. Res., 27, 2229–2232, 2000. Lawrence, M G. and Crutzen, P J.: Influence of NOx emissions from ships on tropospheric photochemistry and climate, Nature, 402, 167–170, 1999. Lawrence, M. G., Jöckel, P., and von Kuhlmann, R.: What does the global mean OH concentration tell us?, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 1, 37–49, 2001. LeVeque, R J.: Finite Volume Methods for Hyperbolic Problems, Cambridge University Press, 578~pp., 2002. Liang, J. and Jacobson, M Z.: Effects of subgrid segregation on ozone production efficiency in a chemical model, Atmos. Environ., 34, 2975–2982, 2000. Lin, X., Trainer, M., and Liu, S C.: On the nonlinearity of the tropospheric ozone production, J. Geophys. Res., 93(D12), 15 879–15 888, 1988. Liu, Q., Kogan, Y., Lilly, D K., Johnson, D., Innis, G E., Durkee, P A., and Nielsen, K E.: Modeling of Ship Effluent Transport and Its Sensitivity to Boundary Layer Structure, J. Atmos. Sci., 57, 2779–2791, 2000. Liu, S C., Trainer, M., Fehsenfeld, F C., Parrish, D D., Williams, E J., Fahey, D W., Hübler, G., and Murphy, P C.: Ozone production in the rural troposphere and the implications for regional and global ozone distributions, J. Geophys. Res., 92(D4), 4191–4207, 1987. Logan, J A.: Tropospheric Ozone: seasonal behavior, trends and anthropogenic influence, J. Geophys. Res., 90, 10 463–10 482, 1985. Siebesma, A P. and Cuijpers, J. W M.: Evaluation of Parametric Assumptions for Shallow Cumulus Convection, J. Atmos. Sci., 52, 650–666, 1995. Sinha, P., Hobbs, P V., Yokelson, R J., Christian, T J., Kirchstetter, T W., and Bruintjes, R.: Emissions of trace gases and particles from two ships in the southern Atlantic Ocean, Atmos. Environ., 37, 2139–2148, 2003. Song, C H., Chen, G., Hanna, S R., Crawford, J., and Davis, D D.: Dispersion and chemical evolution of ship plumes in the marine boundary layer: Investigation of \chemO_3/NO_y/HO_x chemistry, J. Geophys. Res., 108(D4), 4143, doi:10.1029/2002JD002216, 2003. Stull, R.: An Introduction to Boundary Layer Meteorology, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 666~pp., 1988. von Glasow, R., Lawrence, M. G., Sander, R., and Crutzen, P. J.: Modeling the chemical effects of ship exhaust in the cloud-free marine boundary layer, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 233–250, 2003.