Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- emep:action_groups [2010-12-13 16:08:08]
svetlanat
+++ — (current)
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-====== MSC-W Action Groups ======
-===== Aerosol Modelling =====
- * [[emep:page2:meeting23APR2010|Here]] is (requires login)
-==== Meeting December 9, 2010 ====
-Aerosol modelling group meeting
-December 9, 2010
-Participated: MS, ØS, ST
-The main aim of the first (kick-off and brain storming) meeting on aerosol modelling was to initiate a discussion within AP&CM section on necessary/desirable updates and further developments as regards aerosol relevant processes. There was not a strict agenda, but rather a free-flowing discussion.
-ST suggested the following quite general issues for the discussion:
-* specific purposes/interests as regards aerosol modelling (AQ, RF,.....);
-* importance (purpose specific?) of various aerosol processes and sources
-* what are presently the weakest elements in modelling of aerosol relevant processes
-(in NorESM and EMEP models and based on the experience from AEROCOM exercises);
-* what are the most “urgent” processes/sources to implement/ update in the models;
-* what parameterisations/models or data are available from the 'international aerosol modelling basket',
-* that would be interesting to test and that could be considered for use in our models?
-The group spent some time discussing the purpose and strategy of the group as regards long-term ideas for improvement of aerosol modelling and more concrete and immediate, mostly project required, developments and implementations. It was decided to make two plans: the long-term development plan and short-term action plan.
-The group went on further discussing a variety of aerosol modelling related issues and potential ways of joining our efforts. Some of the most identifiable points from the rather :
-development and further exchange of different parameterisation for aerosol processes within EMEP and NorESM models - this requires making more or less alone-standing modules which can easily be implemented in the other model (the old, non-modular, parameterisations should probably be re-written);
-implementing EMEP model in the AEROCOM system has a high priority – this will hopefully help us to identify the processes which needs more attention
-looking at the life cycles of different species
-about making use of existing aerosol models (e.g. M7, SALSA,  INCA, GLOMAP) or parts from them
-regarding the use of different types of aerosol models (i.e. modal, sectional, monodisperse) – MS suggested that we could read his reflections concerning this in his rehabilitation thesis
-xx
-The main outcome from the meeting – first formulations for working plans
-Long-term Development Plan (2-3 years???):
-Explore the possibility of implementing selected aerosol models (modules) in the EMEP model, or the possibility of using their individual subroutines (processes).
-Short-term Action Plan (up to 1 year):
-.Improvements of the modelling of aerosol size distribution:
-.1 New size-resolved TNO particle number (PN) emissions (ST)
-.2 Update of nucleation parameterisation (suggested to test the  one developed in EUCAARI – MS, or Janne Berge)
-.3 Evaluation within AEROCOM
-.Windblown dust modelling:
-.1 Suggested that NorESM could test EMEP dust scheme; EMEP and NorESM could work together on extending the EMEP dust scheme to a global scale (preparation of input data on soil properties, etc.)
-.2 ST could evaluate implementation of MS's dust scheme in the EMEP model and compare results with these two parameterisations
-  * [[emep:page2:meeting9Dec|TEST]] (requires login)