Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Evaluation of the performance of different atmo...

Electronic data

  • model_inter-comparison_2015_07_21

    Rights statement: This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Atmospheric Environment. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Atmospheric Environment, 119, 2015 DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.08.008

    Accepted author manuscript, 1.33 MB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY-NC-ND: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Evaluation of the performance of different atmospheric chemical transport models and inter-comparison of nitrogen and sulphur deposition estimates for the UK

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Published

Standard

Evaluation of the performance of different atmospheric chemical transport models and inter-comparison of nitrogen and sulphur deposition estimates for the UK. / Dore, A. J. ; Carslaw, D. C.; Braban, C. F.; Cain, M.; Chemel, C.; Conolly, C. ; Derwent, R. G.; Griffiths, S. J.; Hall, Jane; Hayman, G.; Lawrence, S.; Metcalfe, S. E.; Redington, A.; Simpson, D.; Sutton, M. A.; Sutton, P. ; Tang, Y. S.; Vieno, M.; Werner, M.; Whyatt, Duncan.

In: Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 119, 10.2015, p. 131-143.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Harvard

Dore, AJ, Carslaw, DC, Braban, CF, Cain, M, Chemel, C, Conolly, C, Derwent, RG, Griffiths, SJ, Hall, J, Hayman, G, Lawrence, S, Metcalfe, SE, Redington, A, Simpson, D, Sutton, MA, Sutton, P, Tang, YS, Vieno, M, Werner, M & Whyatt, D 2015, 'Evaluation of the performance of different atmospheric chemical transport models and inter-comparison of nitrogen and sulphur deposition estimates for the UK', Atmospheric Environment, vol. 119, pp. 131-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.08.008

APA

Dore, A. J., Carslaw, D. C., Braban, C. F., Cain, M., Chemel, C., Conolly, C., Derwent, R. G., Griffiths, S. J., Hall, J., Hayman, G., Lawrence, S., Metcalfe, S. E., Redington, A., Simpson, D., Sutton, M. A., Sutton, P., Tang, Y. S., Vieno, M., Werner, M., & Whyatt, D. (2015). Evaluation of the performance of different atmospheric chemical transport models and inter-comparison of nitrogen and sulphur deposition estimates for the UK. Atmospheric Environment, 119, 131-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.08.008

Vancouver

Author

Dore, A. J. ; Carslaw, D. C. ; Braban, C. F. ; Cain, M. ; Chemel, C. ; Conolly, C. ; Derwent, R. G. ; Griffiths, S. J. ; Hall, Jane ; Hayman, G. ; Lawrence, S. ; Metcalfe, S. E. ; Redington, A. ; Simpson, D. ; Sutton, M. A. ; Sutton, P. ; Tang, Y. S. ; Vieno, M. ; Werner, M. ; Whyatt, Duncan. / Evaluation of the performance of different atmospheric chemical transport models and inter-comparison of nitrogen and sulphur deposition estimates for the UK. In: Atmospheric Environment. 2015 ; Vol. 119. pp. 131-143.

Bibtex

@article{b1a82cd08f5345e39e893e724c5a1b59,
title = "Evaluation of the performance of different atmospheric chemical transport models and inter-comparison of nitrogen and sulphur deposition estimates for the UK",
abstract = "An evaluation has been made of a number of contrasting atmospheric chemical transport models, of varying complexity, applied to estimate sulphur and nitrogen deposition in the UK. The models were evaluated by comparison with annually averaged measurements of gas, aerosol and precipitation concentrations from the national monitoring networks. The models were evaluated in relation to performance criteria. They were generally able to satisfy a criterion of {\textquoteleft}fitness for purpose{\textquoteright} that at least 50% of modelled concentrations should be within a factor of two of measured values. The second criterion, that the magnitude of the normalised mean bias should be less than 20%, was not always satisfied. Considering known uncertainties in measurement techniques, this criterion may be too strict. Overall, simpler models were able to give a good representation of measured gas concentrations whilst the use of dynamic meteorology, and complex photo-chemical reactions resulted in a generally better representation of measured aerosol and precipitation concentrations by more complex models. The models were compared graphically by plotting maps and cross-country transects of wet and dry deposition as well as calculating budgets of total wet and dry deposition to the UK for sulphur, oxidised nitrogen and reduced nitrogen. The total deposition to the UK varied by ±22e36% amongst the different models depending on the deposition component. At a local scale estimates of both dry and wet depositionfor individual 5 km 5 km model grid squares were found to vary between the different models by up to a factor of 4.",
keywords = "Nitrogen, Sulphur, Inter-comparison, Acid Deposition, Eutrophication, Atmospheric chemistry transport models, Model evaluation",
author = "Dore, {A. J.} and Carslaw, {D. C.} and Braban, {C. F.} and M. Cain and C. Chemel and C. Conolly and Derwent, {R. G.} and Griffiths, {S. J.} and Jane Hall and G. Hayman and S. Lawrence and Metcalfe, {S. E.} and A. Redington and D. Simpson and Sutton, {M. A.} and P. Sutton and Tang, {Y. S.} and M. Vieno and M. Werner and Duncan Whyatt",
note = "Date of Acceptance: 03/08/2015 This is the author{\textquoteright}s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Atmospheric Environment. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Atmospheric Environment, 119, 2015 DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.08.008 ",
year = "2015",
month = oct
doi = "10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.08.008",
language = "English",
volume = "119",
pages = "131--143",
journal = "Atmospheric Environment",
issn = "1352-2310",
publisher = "PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of the performance of different atmospheric chemical transport models and inter-comparison of nitrogen and sulphur deposition estimates for the UK

AU - Dore, A. J.

AU - Carslaw, D. C.

AU - Braban, C. F.

AU - Cain, M.

AU - Chemel, C.

AU - Conolly, C.

AU - Derwent, R. G.

AU - Griffiths, S. J.

AU - Hall, Jane

AU - Hayman, G.

AU - Lawrence, S.

AU - Metcalfe, S. E.

AU - Redington, A.

AU - Simpson, D.

AU - Sutton, M. A.

AU - Sutton, P.

AU - Tang, Y. S.

AU - Vieno, M.

AU - Werner, M.

AU - Whyatt, Duncan

N1 - Date of Acceptance: 03/08/2015 This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Atmospheric Environment. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Atmospheric Environment, 119, 2015 DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.08.008

PY - 2015/10

Y1 - 2015/10

N2 - An evaluation has been made of a number of contrasting atmospheric chemical transport models, of varying complexity, applied to estimate sulphur and nitrogen deposition in the UK. The models were evaluated by comparison with annually averaged measurements of gas, aerosol and precipitation concentrations from the national monitoring networks. The models were evaluated in relation to performance criteria. They were generally able to satisfy a criterion of ‘fitness for purpose’ that at least 50% of modelled concentrations should be within a factor of two of measured values. The second criterion, that the magnitude of the normalised mean bias should be less than 20%, was not always satisfied. Considering known uncertainties in measurement techniques, this criterion may be too strict. Overall, simpler models were able to give a good representation of measured gas concentrations whilst the use of dynamic meteorology, and complex photo-chemical reactions resulted in a generally better representation of measured aerosol and precipitation concentrations by more complex models. The models were compared graphically by plotting maps and cross-country transects of wet and dry deposition as well as calculating budgets of total wet and dry deposition to the UK for sulphur, oxidised nitrogen and reduced nitrogen. The total deposition to the UK varied by ±22e36% amongst the different models depending on the deposition component. At a local scale estimates of both dry and wet depositionfor individual 5 km 5 km model grid squares were found to vary between the different models by up to a factor of 4.

AB - An evaluation has been made of a number of contrasting atmospheric chemical transport models, of varying complexity, applied to estimate sulphur and nitrogen deposition in the UK. The models were evaluated by comparison with annually averaged measurements of gas, aerosol and precipitation concentrations from the national monitoring networks. The models were evaluated in relation to performance criteria. They were generally able to satisfy a criterion of ‘fitness for purpose’ that at least 50% of modelled concentrations should be within a factor of two of measured values. The second criterion, that the magnitude of the normalised mean bias should be less than 20%, was not always satisfied. Considering known uncertainties in measurement techniques, this criterion may be too strict. Overall, simpler models were able to give a good representation of measured gas concentrations whilst the use of dynamic meteorology, and complex photo-chemical reactions resulted in a generally better representation of measured aerosol and precipitation concentrations by more complex models. The models were compared graphically by plotting maps and cross-country transects of wet and dry deposition as well as calculating budgets of total wet and dry deposition to the UK for sulphur, oxidised nitrogen and reduced nitrogen. The total deposition to the UK varied by ±22e36% amongst the different models depending on the deposition component. At a local scale estimates of both dry and wet depositionfor individual 5 km 5 km model grid squares were found to vary between the different models by up to a factor of 4.

KW - Nitrogen

KW - Sulphur

KW - Inter-comparison

KW - Acid Deposition

KW - Eutrophication

KW - Atmospheric chemistry transport models

KW - Model evaluation

U2 - 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.08.008

DO - 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.08.008

M3 - Journal article

VL - 119

SP - 131

EP - 143

JO - Atmospheric Environment

JF - Atmospheric Environment

SN - 1352-2310

ER -