Suchergebnisse

Within the EU-project TRADEOFF, the impact of NO x (=NO+NO 2 ) emissions from subsonic aviation upon the chemical composition of the atmosphere has been calculated with focus on changes in reactive nitrogen and ozone. We apply a 3-D chemical transport model that includes comprehensive chemistry for both the troposphere and the stratosphere and uses various aircraft emission scenarios developed during TRADEOFF for the year 2000. The environmental effects of enhanced air traffic along polar routes and of possible changes in cruising altitude are investigated, taking into account effects of flight route changes on fuel consumption and emissions. In a reference case including both civil and military aircraft the model predicts aircraft-induced maximum increases of zonal-mean NO y (=total reactive nitrogen) between 156 pptv (August) and 322 pptv (May) in the tropopause region of the Northern Hemisphere. Resulting maximum increases in zonal-mean ozone vary between 3.1 ppbv in September and 7.7 ppbv in June. Enhanced use of polar routes implies substantially larger zonal-mean ozone increases in high Northern latitudes during summer, while the effect is negligible in winter. Lowering the flight altitude leads to smaller ozone increases in the lower stratosphere and upper troposphere, and to larger ozone increases at altitudes below. Regarding total ozone change, the degree of cancellation between these two effects depends on latitude and season, but annually and globally averaged the contribution from higher altitudes dominates, mainly due to washout of NO y in the troposphere, which weakens the tropospheric increase. Raising flight altitudes increases the ozone burden both in the troposphere and the lower stratosphere, primarily due to a more efficient accumulation of pollutants in the stratosphere.

Within the EU-project TRADEOFF, the impact of NOx (=NO+NO2) emissions from subsonic aviation upon the chemical composition of the atmosphere has been calculated with focus on changes in reactive nitrogen and ozone. We apply a 3-D chemical transport model that includes comprehensive chemistry for both the troposphere and the stratosphere and uses various aircraft emission scenarios developed during TRADEOFF for the year 2000. The environmental effects of enhanced air traffic along polar routes and of possible changes in cruising altitude are investigated, taking into account effects of flight route changes on fuel consumption and emissions. In a reference case including both civil and military aircraft the model predicts aircraft-induced maximum increases of zonal-mean NOy (=total reactive nitrogen) between 156 pptv (August) and 322 pptv (May) in the tropopause region of the Northern Hemisphere. Resulting maximum increases in zonal-mean ozone vary between 3.1 ppbv in September and 7.7 ppbv in June. Enhanced use of polar routes implies substantially larger zonal-mean ozone increases in high Northern latitudes during summer, while the effect is negligible in winter. Lowering the flight altitude leads to smaller ozone increases in the lower stratosphere and upper troposphere, and to larger ozone increases at altitudes below. Regarding total ozone change, the degree of cancellation between these two effects depends on latitude and season, but annually and globally averaged the contribution from higher altitudes dominates, mainly due to washout of NOy in the troposphere, which weakens the tropospheric increase. Raising flight altitudes increases the ozone burden both in the troposphere and the lower stratosphere, primarily due to a more efficient accumulation of pollutants in the stratosphere.

We summarise results from a workshop on "Model Benchmarking and Quality Assurance" of the EU-Network of Excellence ACCENT, including results from other activities (e.g. COST Action 732) and publications. A formalised evaluation protocol is presented, i.e. a generic formalism describing the procedure of how to perform a model evaluation. This includes eight steps and examples from global model applications which are given for illustration. The first and important step is concerning the purpose of the model application, i.e. the addressed underlying scientific or political question. We give examples to demonstrate that there is no model evaluation per se, i.e. without a focused purpose. Model evaluation is testing, whether a model is fit for its purpose. The following steps are deduced from the purpose and include model requirements, input data, key processes and quantities, benchmark data, quality indicators, sensitivities, as well as benchmarking and grading. We define "benchmarking" as the process of comparing the model output against either observational data or high fidelity model data, i.e. benchmark data. Special focus is given to the uncertainties, e.g. in observational data, which have the potential to lead to wrong conclusions in the model evaluation if not considered carefully.

We summarise results from a workshop on "Model Benchmarking and Quality Assurance" of the EU-Network of Excellence ACCENT, including results from other activities (e.g. COST Action 732) and publications. A formalised evaluation protocol is presented, i.e. a generic formalism describing the procedure of how to perform a model evaluation. This includes eight steps and examples from global model applications which are given for illustration. The first and important step is concerning the purpose of the model application, i.e. the addressed underlying scientific or political question. We give examples to demonstrate that there is no model evaluation per se, i.e. without a focused purpose. Model evaluation is testing, whether a model is fit for its purpose. The following steps are deduced from the purpose and include model requirements, input data, key processes and quantities, benchmark data, quality indicators, sensitivities, as well as benchmarking and grading. We define "benchmarking" as the process of comparing the model output against either observational data or high fidelity model data, i.e. benchmark data. Special focus is given to the uncertainties, e.g. in observational data, which have the potential to lead to wrong conclusions in the model evaluation if not considered carefully.

We summarise results from a workshop on "Model Benchmarking and Quality Assurance" of the EU-Network of Excellence ACCENT, including results from other activities (e.g. COST Action 732) and publications. A formalised evaluation protocol is presented, i.e. a generic formalism describing the procedure of how to perform a model evaluation. This includes eight steps and examples from global model applications which are given for illustration. The first and important step is concerning the purpose of the model application, i.e. the addressed underlying scientific or political question. We give examples to demonstrate that there is no model evaluation per se, i.e. without a focused purpose. Model evaluation is testing, whether a model is fit for its purpose. The following steps are deduced from the purpose and include model requirements, input data, key processes and quantities, benchmark data, quality indicators, sensitivities, as well as benchmarking and grading. We define "benchmarking" as the process of comparing the model output against either observational data or high fidelity model data, i.e. benchmark data. Special focus is given to the uncertainties, e.g. in observational data, which have the potential to lead to wrong conclusions in the model evaluation if not considered carefully. ; published

Within ACCENT, a European Network of Excellence, eighteen atmospheric models from the U.S., Europe, and Japan calculated present (2000) and future (2030) concentrations of ozone at the Earth's surface with hourly temporal resolution. Comparison of model results with surface ozone measurements in 14 world regions indicates that levels and seasonality of surface ozone in North America and Europe are characterized well by global models, with annual average biases typically within 5–10 nmol/mol. However, comparison with rather sparse observations over some regions suggest that most models overestimate annual ozone by 15–20 nmol/mol in some locations. Two scenarios from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) and one from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (IPCC SRES) have been implemented in the models. This study focuses on changes in near-surface ozone and their effects on human health and vegetation. Different indices and air quality standards are used to characterise air quality. We show that often the calculated changes in the different indices are closely inter-related. Indices using lower thresholds are more consistent between the models, and are recommended for global model analysis. Our analysis indicates that currently about two-thirds of the regions considered do not meet health air quality standards, whereas only 2–4 regions remain below the threshold. Calculated air quality exceedances show moderate deterioration by 2030 if current emissions legislation is followed and slight improvements if current emissions reduction technology is used optimally. For the "business as usual" scenario severe air quality problems are predicted. We show that model simulations of air quality indices are particularly sensitive to how well ozone is represented, and improved accuracy is needed for future projections. Additional measurements are needed to allow a more quantitative assessment of the risks to human health and vegetation from changing levels of surface ozone.

Within ACCENT, a European Network of Excellence, eighteen atmospheric models from the U.S., Europe, and Japan calculated present (2000) and future (2030) concentrations of ozone at the Earth's surface with hourly temporal resolution. Comparison of model results with surface ozone measurements in 14 world regions indicates that levels and seasonality of surface ozone in North America and Europe are characterized well by global models, with annual average biases typically within 5–10 nmol/mol. However, comparison with rather sparse observations over some regions suggest that most models overestimate annual ozone by 15–20 nmol/mol in some locations. Two scenarios from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) and one from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (IPCC SRES) have been implemented in the models. This study focuses on changes in near-surface ozone and their effects on human health and vegetation. Different indices and air quality standards are used to characterise air quality. We show that often the calculated changes in the different indices are closely inter-related. Indices using lower thresholds are more consistent between the models, and are recommended for global model analysis. Our analysis indicates that currently about two-thirds of the regions considered do not meet health air quality standards, whereas only 2–4 regions remain below the threshold. Calculated air quality exceedances show moderate deterioration by 2030 if current emissions legislation is followed and slight improvements if current emissions reduction technology is used optimally. For the "business as usual" scenario severe air quality problems are predicted. We show that model simulations of air quality indices are particularly sensitive to how well ozone is represented, and improved accuracy is needed for future projections. Additional measurements are needed to allow a more quantitative assessment of the risks to human health and vegetation from changing ...