the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
An Unusual Winter Ozone Event in Colorado
Abstract. Surface ozone (O3) mixing ratios exceeding the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) were measured at rural monitors along the Colorado Front Range on 17 April 2020 during the COVID-19 lockdown. This unusual episode followed back-to-back upslope snowstorms and coincided with the presence of a deep stratospheric intrusion, but ground-based lidar and ozonesonde measurements show that little, if any, of the O3-rich lower stratospheric air reached the surface. Instead, the statically stable lower stratospheric air suppressed the growth of the convective boundary layer and trapped nitrogen oxides (NOx = NO + NO2) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted by motor vehicles and oil and natural gas (O&NG) operations near the ground where the clear skies and extensive snow cover triggered a short-lived photochemical episode similar to those observed in the O&NG producing basins of northeastern Utah and southwestern Wyoming. In this study, we use a combination of lidar, ozonesonde, and surface measurements, together with the WRF-Chem and GEOS-CF models, to describe the stratospheric intrusion and characterize the boundary layer structure, HYSPLIT back trajectories to show the low-level transport of O3 and its precursors to the exceedance sites, and surface measurements of NOx and VOCs together with a 0-D box model to investigate the roles of urban and O&NG emissions and the COVID-19 quarantine in the O3 production. The box model showed the O3 production to be NOx saturated, such that the NOx reductions associated with COVID-19 exacerbated the event rather than mitigating it. Such O3 winter O3 exceedances may become more common in Denver with expected, future NOx reductions.
- Preprint
(12305 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(273 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 18 Oct 2024)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-1938', Anonymous Referee #1, 16 Sep 2024
reply
The analysis of the ozone exceedance event on April 17, 2020, in the Boulder-Fort Collins region contains several intriguing elements. While the individual aspects of the analysis appear sound, the combination of them appears to be problematic. I suggest the authors focus on the most compelling aspect and conduct a more in-depth analysis. This focused approach would likely yield more robust and meaningful conclusions.
This April event differs significantly from previously reported winter ozone episodes. While winter events have recorded ozone levels up to 150 ppb, this springtime occurrence peaked below 80 ppbv. A key factor in winter high ozone episodes is a shallow boundary layer. It would be beneficial to compare its boundary layer height (BLH) with those of winter episodes. This comparison could help explain whether the typically higher springtime BLH contributes to the lower observed ozone levels. A more appropriate paper title would be “An Unusual Winter-like Ozone Event in Colorado.”
The assertion that "statically stable lower stratospheric air suppressed the growth of the convective boundary layer" requires further substantiation. Figure 8 indicates a BLH of 200m, which is inconsistent with a convective boundary layer. If stratospheric air indeed descended to such a low altitude (200 m), one would expect significantly higher ozone concentrations than those shown in Figure 7. A more obvious explanation for the shallow BLH could be the low surface temperature shown in Figure 2. Introducing a complex mechanism involving stratospheric air seems unnecessary without stronger supporting evidence. The authors should either provide more robust data to support this claim or consider alternative explanations that align more closely with the observed conditions.
Please include “baseline” ozone concentrations at the NWR site in Figure 17. It appears that model simulated ozone concentrations at the DSRC are not much higher than NWR on April 17 and 18. Is this modeling result appropriate for diagnosing the high ozone event shown in Figure 4?
Several additional questions arise from the F0AM model analysis:
- How does the significantly lower VOC concentration at DSRC compared to LUR and BOUR (Figure 12) impact the model's sensitivity to VOCs, especially given that NOx levels are comparable across sites (Figure 11)?
- Would F0AM simulations using NOx and VOC concentrations from LUR and BOUR reproduce the observed ozone concentrations at those sites?
- Can the variations in NOx and VOC concentrations explain the lower ozone levels at LUR and higher levels at BOUR relative to DSRC?
- If these concentration differences do not fully account for the observed ozone variations, what is the justification for using the model results to predict an increased frequency of high ozone events in the future?
The attribution of VOCs to oil and natural gas (O&NG) sources and NOx to motor vehicles in this event raises an important question: Why aren't similar ozone exceedance events observed more frequently in nearby regions with comparable source combinations? The co-location of O&NG fields and major highways like I-25/I-70 is not unique to this area. This scenario suggests that additional factors beyond the presence of these emission sources must be at play.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1938-RC1
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
163 | 39 | 23 | 225 | 10 | 2 | 3 |
- HTML: 163
- PDF: 39
- XML: 23
- Total: 225
- Supplement: 10
- BibTeX: 2
- EndNote: 3
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1