Systematic analysis of interannual and seasonal variations of model-simulated tropospheric NO 2 in Asia and comparison with GOME-satellite data
Systematic analysis of interannual and seasonal variations of model-simulated tropospheric NO 2 in Asia and comparison with GOME-satellite data
复制标题
DOI：
10.5194/acp-7-1671-2007
复制
发表时间：
2006-11
影响因子：
6.3
通讯作者：
I. Uno;Y. J. He;T. Ohara;K. Yamaji;J. Kurokawa;Manabu Katayama;Zhaoyi Wang;K. Noguchi;S. Hayashida;A. Richter;J. Burrows
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
I. Uno;Y. J. He;T. Ohara;K. Yamaji;J. Kurokawa;Manabu Katayama;Zhaoyi Wang;K. Noguchi;S. Hayashida;A. Richter;J. Burrows
利用GOME卫星资料和区域尺度化学输送模式(CTM)和社区多尺度空气质量模式(CMAQ)，系统地分析了1996~2003年6月东亚地区对流层NO2垂直柱密度(VCDS)的年际和季节变化。新开发的逐年排放清单(REAS)被用于CMAQ。国美二号VCD的年平均水平分布与CMAQ结果基本一致。然而，CMAQ/REAS的结果低估了国美对污染工业区的因子2-4，如中东部中国(CEC)、韩国的主要部分、香港和日本中西部。在CEC上低估的最可能原因是用于建立排放清单的基本能源统计数据、排放系数和社会经济数据的准确性。在日本地区，GOME和CMAQ NO2资料在年际变化方面表现出合理的一致性，没有明显的增加趋势。对于CEC，GOME和CMAQ No.2数据显示自2000年以来有非常迅速的增长趋势。对NO2VCDS季节周期的分析表明，在2-4月和9-11月期间，国美数据比CMAQ NO2有更大的下降。固定发射强度下的灵敏度实验表明，由于气象条件的变化，卫星秋季或冬季排放趋势的探测误差较大。夏季检验和年平均NO2VCD在气象变化方面是稳健的，因此更适合于排放趋势的分析。对中国近期年排放量变化趋势的分析表明，1996年至1998年和2000年至2002年，国美和国美−的年排放量增长趋势基本一致，但国美在2000年以后的−年增长率约为10-11%，略高于国美的年增长率(8%-9%)。最大的差异在1998年和2000年之间表现得很明显：CMAQ/REAS只显示出几个百分点的增长，而国美的−1年增长超过8%。具体原因尚不清楚，但最有可能的解释是，基于中国排放相关统计数据的排放趋势低估了排放量的快速增长。
Systematic analyses of interannual and seasonal variations of tropospheric NO 2 vertical column densities (VCDs) based on GOME satellite data and the regional scale chemical transport model (CTM), Community Multi-scale Air Quality (CMAQ), are presented for the atmosphere over eastern Asia between 1996 and June 2003. A newly developed year-by-year emission inventory (REAS) was used in CMAQ. The horizontal distribution of annual averaged GOME NO 2 VCDs generally agrees well with the CMAQ results. However, CMAQ/REAS results underestimate the GOME retrievals with factors of 2–4 over polluted industrial regions such as Central East China (CEC), a major part of Korea, Hong Kong, and central and western Japan. The most probable reasons for the underestimation typically over the CEC are accuracy of the basic energy statistic data, emission factors, and socio-economic data used for construction of emission inventory. For the Japan region, GOME and CMAQ NO 2 data show reasonable agreement with respect to interannual variation and show no clear increasing trend. For CEC, GOME and CMAQ NO 2 data indicate a very rapid increasing trend from 2000. Analyses of the seasonal cycle of NO 2 VCDs show that GOME data have larger dips than CMAQ NO 2 during February–April and September–November. Sensitivity experiments with fixed emission intensity reveal that the detection of emission trends from satellite in fall or winter has a larger error caused by the variability of meteorology. Examination during summer time and annual averaged NO 2 VCDs are robust with respect to variability of meteorology and are therefore more suitable for analyses of emission trends. Analysis of recent trends of annual emissions in China shows that the increasing trends of 1996–1998 and 2000–2002 for GOME and CMAQ/REAS show good agreement, but the rate of increase by GOME is approximately 10–11% yr −1 after 2000; it is slightly steeper than CMAQ/REAS (8–9% yr −1 ). The greatest difference was apparent between the years 1998 and 2000: CMAQ/REAS only shows a few percentage points of increase, whereas GOME gives a greater than 8% yr −1 increase. The exact reason remains unclear, but the most likely explanation is that the emission trend based on the Chinese emission related statistics underestimates the rapid growth of emissions.