Advertisement

On the Interplay Between Upper and Ground Levels Dynamics and Chemistry in Determining the Surface Aerosol Budget

  • G. CurciEmail author
  • L. Ferrero
  • P. Tuccella
  • F. Angelini
  • F. Barnaba
  • E. Bolzacchini
  • M. C. Facchini
  • G. P. Gobbi
  • T. C. Landi
  • M. G. Perrone
  • S. Sangiorgi
  • P. Stocchi
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Complexity book series (SPCOM)

Abstract

We use the WRF/Chem model to interpret observations of the aerosol concentration and its chemical composition both at surface level and along vertical profiles performed during an intensive campaign in July 2007 in Milan urban area. The model is added with a new diagnostic for aerosol budget analysis, building on that available for gas species, in order to study the contribution of upper levels processes on the aerosol formation at ground level. The analysis illustrates a quite variegated evolution of budget terms, which we found to depend strongly on the hour of the day, the vertical level, the aerosol compound, and the aerosol size. Primary components are generally emitted near the ground and rapidly transported by turbulent motions to the upper levels, where they gradually disperse and age. For some secondary components, such as nitrate, we calculate a net chemical destruction in the bottom layers, as opposed to a net chemical production higher in the boundary layer, which supply new material to ground level aerosol through turbulent mixing.

Keywords

Secondary Organic Aerosol Budget Analysis Plume Height Isoprene Emission Road Dust Resuspension 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was funded by the Italian Space Agency (ASI) in the frame of the PRIMES project (contract n. I/017/11/0).

References

  1. 1.
    Grell GA et al (2005) Fully coupled “online” chemistry within the WRF model. Atmos Environ 39:6957–6975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahmadov R et al (2012) A volatility basis set model for summertime secondary organic aerosols over the eastern U.S. in 2006. J Geophys Res 117:D06301. doi: 10.1029/2011JD016831 Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tuccella P et al (2012) Modeling of gas and aerosol with WRF/Chem over Europe: evaluation and sensitivity study. J Geophys Res 117:D03303. doi: 10.1029/2011JD016302 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wong J et al, Budget and structural properties of the upper tropospheric ozone enhancement of North America in August 2006, in preparationGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Thunis P et al (2012) Performance criteria to evaluate air quality modeling applications. Atmos Environ 59:476–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Curci G et al (2012) Influenza su simulazioni meteo-chimiche dell’inventario di utilizzo del suolo: risultati preliminari dell’implementazione di CORINE in WRF/Chem, in Atti del V Convegno Nazionale “Il controllo degli agenti fisici: Ambiente, salute e qualità della vita”. Torino, Italia. ISBN: 978-88-7479-118-7Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Curci
    • 1
    Email author
  • L. Ferrero
    • 2
  • P. Tuccella
    • 1
  • F. Angelini
    • 3
  • F. Barnaba
    • 4
  • E. Bolzacchini
    • 2
  • M. C. Facchini
    • 5
  • G. P. Gobbi
    • 4
  • T. C. Landi
    • 5
  • M. G. Perrone
    • 2
  • S. Sangiorgi
    • 2
  • P. Stocchi
    • 5
  1. 1.CETEMPS Centre of Excellence, Department of Physical and Chemical SciencesUniversity of L’AquilaL’AquilaItaly
  2. 2.POLARIS Research Centre, Department of Environmental SciencesUniversity of Milano BicoccaMilanItaly
  3. 3.Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (ENEA)RomeItaly
  4. 4.Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Sciences (ISAC)National Research Council (CNR)RomeItaly
  5. 5.Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Sciences (ISAC)National Research Council (CNR)BolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations