the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Rapid Increases of Ozone Concentrations over Tibetan Plateau Caused by Local and Non-Local Factors
Abstract. Changes in tropospheric ozone over the Tibetan Plateau (TP) profoundly affect the local ecosystems and human health. Yet previous studies on the TP ozone have focused on the background regions, with much less attention on the urban ozone. Here we quantify the ozone trends over the whole TP from 2015 to 2019 in the context of its long-term trends, with a focus on urban ozone. We use ozone measurements from 30 urban stations in 17 cities, the Waliguan baseline station, and four satellite products of tropospheric ozone. We further analyze the drivers of ozone trends through a combination of chemical transport model simulations, back-trajectory calculations, a bottom-up emission inventory, and a satellite-derived emission dataset of nitrogen oxides (NOx). We find a strong increase in deseasonalized urban ozone at the MEE stations from 2015 to 2019 (by 1.71 ppb yr-1). The urban ozone trend far exceeds the trend at Waliguan (by 0.26 ppb yr-1) and the TP average trend (by up to 0.08 ppb yr-1) derived from the four satellite products. Interannual variations in meteorology do not produce significant ozone trends over the TP. Non-local factors contribute positively to the urban ozone trends, due mainly to more frequent transport passing through the footprint layers (0–300 m above the ground) of non-local high-emission regions. Another important contributor to the urban ozone growth is the 26.5 % increase in local anthropogenic NOx emissions. Emission reductions in both the local and non-local source regions can help mitigate the rapid urban ozone growth over the plateau.
- Preprint
(2127 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(1030 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 06 Jan 2025)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-3471', Anonymous Referee #1, 05 Dec 2024
reply
This study employs ozone measurements from urban sites across 17 cities, a background site (Waliguan), four satellite products, and integrate two models (GEOS-Chem CTM and trajectory models) to analyze ozone variations over the TP region. The authors find a notable increase in ozone levels at urban stations, surpassing trends observed at Waliguan and those derived from satellite data. Analysis of model results and emission inventories suggests that this ozone rise is driven by increased local anthropogenic emissions and enhanced contributions from non-local sources. The study offers valuable new insights into understanding ozone changes in the region. The manuscript is well-written and structured. I recommend addressing the following points before publication:
Line 171: Please clarify the rationale behind selecting a 192-hour time frame for analysis.
Figure 2: Are all 30 sites consistently showing an increasing trend? If not, please elaborate on any variations.
Section 4.2: While generally reasonable, the discussions could be more informative. Why does the residence time show an increasing trend, and is it linked to changes in meteorological patterns? Could you present and discuss the non-local emission trends over TP, along with foreign source regions derived from the PHLET-OMI inventory? Additionally, since the PHLET-OMI only quantifies NOx emissions, and VOC emissions can differ significantly, do we have robust estimates of VOC emissions over TP and the surrounding source regions?
Line 341: The increase in NOx emissions is surprising, given that most regions in China have seen significant reductions in NOx emissions. Could the authors discuss possible reasons for this increase, possibly referencing relevant literature?
Lines 359-369: I am uncertain about the robustness of this method and its interpretation. First, it overlooks the non-linear interactions between meteorology, local, and non-local emissions. Second, Lines 364-367 assume that Waliguan and the 17 MEE cities share similar ozone formation mechanisms. Is this assumption reasonable? If the same method is applied individually to each of the 17 cities, would we obtain similar values for a and b for each city pair?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3471-RC1
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
144 | 32 | 9 | 185 | 18 | 1 | 1 |
- HTML: 144
- PDF: 32
- XML: 9
- Total: 185
- Supplement: 18
- BibTeX: 1
- EndNote: 1
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1