English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The sensitivity to two different emission inventories, injection altitudeand temporal variations of anthropogenic emissions in aerosol modelling isstudied, using the two way nested global transport chemistry model TM5focussing on Europe in June and December 2000. The simulations of gas andaerosol concentrations and aerosol optical depth (AOD) with the EMEP andAEROCOM emission inventories are compared with EMEP gas and aerosol surfacebased measurements, AERONET sun photometers retrievals and MODIS satellitedata.For the aerosol precursor gases SO2 and NOx in both months themodel results calculated with the EMEP inventory agree better (overestimatedby a factor 1.3 for both SO2 and NOx) with the EMEP measurementsthan the simulation with the AEROCOM inventory (overestimated by a factor2.4 and 1.9, respectively).Besides the differences in total emissions between the two inventories, animportant role is also played by the vertical distribution of SO2 andNOx emissions in understanding the differences between the EMEP andAEROCOM inventories.In December NOx and SO2 from both simulations agree within 50%with observations.In June SO4= evaluated with the EMEP emission inventory agreesslightly better with surface observations than the AEROCOM simulation,whereas in December the use of both inventories results in an underestimateof SO4 with a factor 2. Nitrate aerosol measured in summer is not reliable,however in December nitrate aerosol calculations with the EMEP and AEROCOMemissions agree with 30%, and 60%, respectively with the filtermeasurements. Differences are caused by the total emissions and the temporaldistribution of the aerosol precursor gases NOx and NH3. Despitethese differences, we show that the column integrated AOD is less sensitiveto the underlying emission inventories. Calculated AOD values with bothemission inventories underestimate the observed AERONET AOD values by 20–30%, whereas a case study using MODIS data shows a high spatialagreement.Our evaluation of the role of temporal distribution of anthropogenicemissions on aerosol calculations shows that the daily and weekly temporaldistributions of the emissions are only important for NOx, NH3 andaerosol nitrate. However, for all aerosol species SO4=,NH4+, POM, BC, as well as for AOD, the seasonal temporalvariations used in the emission inventory are important. Our study shows thevalue of including at least seasonal information on anthropogenic emissions,although from a comparison with a range of measurements it is oftendifficult to firmly identify the superiority of specific emissioninventories, since other modelling uncertainties, e.g. related to transport,aerosol removal, water uptake, and model resolution, play a dominant role

The sensitivity of aerosol in Europe to two different emission inventories and temporal distribution of emissions