Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1091
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1091
19 Mar 2025
 | 19 Mar 2025
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).

Operational and Probabilistic Evaluation of AQMEII-4 Regional Scale Ozone Dry Deposition. Time to Harmonise Our LULC Masks

Ioannis Kioutsioukis, Christian Hogrefe, Paul A. Makar, Ummugulsun Alyuz, Jessy O. Bash, Roberto Bellasio, Roberto Bianconi, Tim Buttler, Olivia E. Clifton, Philippe Cheung, Alma Hodzic, Richard Kranenburg, Aurelia Lupascu, Kester Momoh, Juan Luis Perez-Camaño, John Pleim, Young-Hee Ryu, Robero San Jose, Donna Schwede, Ranjeet Sokhi, and Stefano Galmarini

Abstract. We present the collective evaluation of the regional scale models that took part in the fourth edition of the Air Quality Model Evaluation International Initiative (AQMEII). The activity consists of the evaluation and intercomparison of regional scale air quality models run over North American (NA) and European (EU) domains in 2016 (NA) and 2010 (EU). The focus of the paper is ozone deposition. The collective consists in an operational evaluation (Dennis et al., 2010, namely a direct comparison of model-simulated predictions with monitoring data aiming at assessing model performance. Following the AQMEII protocol and Dennis et al. (2010), we also perform a probabilistic evaluation in the form of ensemble analyses and an introductory diagnostic evaluation. The latter, analyses the role of dry deposition in comparison with dynamic and radiative processes and land-use/land-cover types (LULC), in determining surface ozone variability. Important differences are found across deposition results when the same LULC is considered. Models use very different LULC masks, thus introducing an additional level of diversity in the model results. The study stresses that, as for other kinds of prior and problem-defining information (emissions, topography or land-water masks), the choice of a LULC mask should not be at modeller’s discretion. Furthermore, LULC should be considered as variable to be evaluated in any future model intercomparison, unless set as common input information. The differences in LULC selection can have a substantial impact on model results, making the task of evaluating deposition modules across different regional-scale models very difficult.

Competing interests: One of the authors (stefano galmarini) is an associate editor at ACP

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Share
Ioannis Kioutsioukis, Christian Hogrefe, Paul A. Makar, Ummugulsun Alyuz, Jessy O. Bash, Roberto Bellasio, Roberto Bianconi, Tim Buttler, Olivia E. Clifton, Philippe Cheung, Alma Hodzic, Richard Kranenburg, Aurelia Lupascu, Kester Momoh, Juan Luis Perez-Camaño, John Pleim, Young-Hee Ryu, Robero San Jose, Donna Schwede, Ranjeet Sokhi, and Stefano Galmarini

Status: open (until 22 May 2025)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Ioannis Kioutsioukis, Christian Hogrefe, Paul A. Makar, Ummugulsun Alyuz, Jessy O. Bash, Roberto Bellasio, Roberto Bianconi, Tim Buttler, Olivia E. Clifton, Philippe Cheung, Alma Hodzic, Richard Kranenburg, Aurelia Lupascu, Kester Momoh, Juan Luis Perez-Camaño, John Pleim, Young-Hee Ryu, Robero San Jose, Donna Schwede, Ranjeet Sokhi, and Stefano Galmarini
Ioannis Kioutsioukis, Christian Hogrefe, Paul A. Makar, Ummugulsun Alyuz, Jessy O. Bash, Roberto Bellasio, Roberto Bianconi, Tim Buttler, Olivia E. Clifton, Philippe Cheung, Alma Hodzic, Richard Kranenburg, Aurelia Lupascu, Kester Momoh, Juan Luis Perez-Camaño, John Pleim, Young-Hee Ryu, Robero San Jose, Donna Schwede, Ranjeet Sokhi, and Stefano Galmarini

Viewed

Total article views: 112 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
87 20 5 112 11 7 6
  • HTML: 87
  • PDF: 20
  • XML: 5
  • Total: 112
  • Supplement: 11
  • BibTeX: 7
  • EndNote: 6
Views and downloads (calculated since 19 Mar 2025)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 19 Mar 2025)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 116 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 116 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 23 Apr 2025
Download
Short summary
Deposition is a key in air quality modelling. An evaluation of the AQMEII4 models is performed prior to analysing the different deposition schemes in relation to the LULC used. Such analysis is unprecedented. Among the results, LULC masks have to be harmonised and up-to-date information used in place of outdated and too course masks. Alternatively LULC masks should be evaluated and intercom pared when multiple model results are analysed.
Share