Back
Full-text
Journal article

Evaluation of the aerosol vertical distribution in global aerosol models through comparison against CALIOP measurements: AeroCom phase II results.

  • Koffi B European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability, Ispra, Italy.
  • Schulz M Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway.
  • Bréon FM Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement, Gif-sur-Yvette, France.
  • Dentener F European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability, Ispra, Italy.
  • Steensen BM Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway.
  • Griesfeller J Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway.
  • Winker D NASA Langley Research Center, MS/475, Hampton, Virginia, USA.
  • Balkanski Y Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement, Gif-sur-Yvette, France.
  • Bauer SE Center for Climate Systems Research, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.
  • Bellouin N Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, Reading, UK.
  • Berntsen T Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
  • Bian H NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA.
  • Chin M NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA.
  • Diehl T European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability, Ispra, Italy.
  • Easter R Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington, USA.
  • Ghan S Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington, USA.
  • Hauglustaine DA Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement, Gif-sur-Yvette, France.
  • Iversen T Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway.
  • Kirkevåg A Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway.
  • Liu X Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington, USA.
  • Lohmann U ETH-Zentrum, Zürich, Switzerland.
  • Myhre G Center for International Climate and Environmental Research-Oslo (CICERO), Oslo, Norway.
  • Rasch P NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA.
  • Seland Ø Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway.
  • Skeie RB Center for International Climate and Environmental Research-Oslo (CICERO), Oslo, Norway.
  • Steenrod SD NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA.
  • Stier P Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
  • Tackett J Science Systems and Applications, Inc., Hampton, Virginia, USA.
  • Takemura T Research Institute for Applied Mechanics, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
  • Tsigaridis K Center for Climate Systems Research, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.
  • Vuolo MR Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement, Gif-sur-Yvette, France.
  • Yoon J Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington, USA.
  • Zhang K Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington, USA.
Show more…
  • 2020-08-21
Published in:
  • Journal of geophysical research. Atmospheres : JGR. - 2016
English The ability of 11 models in simulating the aerosol vertical distribution from regional to global scales, as part of the second phase of the AeroCom model intercomparison initiative (AeroCom II), is assessed and compared to results of the first phase. The evaluation is performed using a global monthly gridded data set of aerosol extinction profiles built for this purpose from the CALIOP (Cloud-Aerosol Lidar with Orthogonal Polarization) Layer Product 3.01. Results over 12 subcontinental regions show that five models improved, whereas three degraded in reproducing the interregional variability in Z α0-6 km, the mean extinction height diagnostic, as computed from the CALIOP aerosol profiles over the 0-6 km altitude range for each studied region and season. While the models' performance remains highly variable, the simulation of the timing of the Z α0-6 km peak season has also improved for all but two models from AeroCom Phase I to Phase II. The biases in Z α0-6 km are smaller in all regions except Central Atlantic, East Asia, and North and South Africa. Most of the models now underestimate Z α0-6 km over land, notably in the dust and biomass burning regions in Asia and Africa. At global scale, the AeroCom II models better reproduce the Z α0-6 km latitudinal variability over ocean than over land. Hypotheses for the performance and evolution of the individual models and for the intermodel diversity are discussed. We also provide an analysis of the CALIOP limitations and uncertainties contributing to the differences between the simulations and observations.
Language
  • English
Open access status
bronze
Identifiers
Persistent URL
https://folia.unifr.ch/global/documents/56282
Statistics
Document views: 21 File downloads:
  • Full-text: 0