Journal cover Journal topic
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 5.668 IF 5.668
  • IF 5-year value: 6.201 IF 5-year
    6.201
  • CiteScore value: 6.13 CiteScore
    6.13
  • SNIP value: 1.633 SNIP 1.633
  • IPP value: 5.91 IPP 5.91
  • SJR value: 2.938 SJR 2.938
  • Scimago H <br class='hide-on-tablet hide-on-mobile'>index value: 174 Scimago H
    index 174
  • h5-index value: 87 h5-index 87
Volume 14, issue 7
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 3511–3532, 2014
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-3511-2014
© Author(s) 2014. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Special issue: Megapoli-Paris 2009/2010 campaign

Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 3511–3532, 2014
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-3511-2014
© Author(s) 2014. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Research article 08 Apr 2014

Research article | 08 Apr 2014

Modelling and assimilation of lidar signals over Greater Paris during the MEGAPOLI summer campaign

Y. Wang2,1, K. N. Sartelet1, M. Bocquet3,1, and P. Chazette2 Y. Wang et al.
  • 1CEREA, Joint Laboratory École des Ponts ParisTech – EDF R & D, Université Paris-Est, 77455 Champs-sur-Marne, France
  • 2LSCE, Joint Laboratory CEA-CNRS – UMR8212, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France
  • 3INRIA, Paris-Rocquencourt Research Centre, Le Chesnay, France

Abstract. In this study, we investigate the ability of the chemistry transport model (CTM) Polair3D of the air quality modelling platform Polyphemus to simulate lidar backscattered profiles from model aerosol concentration outputs. This investigation is an important preprocessing stage of data assimilation (validation of the observation operator). To do so, simulated lidar signals are compared to hourly lidar observations performed during the MEGAPOLI (Megacities: Emissions, urban, regional and Global Atmospheric POLlution and climate effects, and Integrated tools for assessment and mitigation) summer experiment in July 2009, when a ground-based mobile lidar was deployed around Paris on-board a van. The comparison is performed for six different measurement days, 1, 4, 16, 21, 26 and 29 July 2009, corresponding to different levels of pollution and different atmospheric conditions. Overall, Polyphemus well reproduces the vertical distribution of lidar signals and their temporal variability, especially for 1, 16, 26 and 29 July 2009. Discrepancies on 4 and 21 July 2009 are due to high-altitude aerosol layers, which are not well modelled. In the second part of this study, two new algorithms for assimilating lidar observations based on the optimal interpolation method are presented. One algorithm analyses PM10 (particulate matter with diameter less than 10 μm) concentrations. Another analyses PM2.5 (particulate matter with diameter less than 2.5 μm) and PM2.5–10 (particulate matter with a diameter higher than 2.5 μm and lower than 10 μm) concentrations separately. The aerosol simulations without and with lidar data assimilation (DA) are evaluated using the Airparif (a regional operational network in charge of air quality survey around the Paris area) database to demonstrate the feasibility and usefulness of assimilating lidar profiles for aerosol forecasts. The evaluation shows that lidar DA is more efficient at correcting PM10 than PM2.5, probably because PM2.5 is better modelled than PM10. Furthermore, the algorithm which analyses both PM2.5and PM2.5–10 provides the best scores for PM10. The averaged root-mean-square error (RMSE) of PM10 is 11.63 μg m−3 with DA (PM2.5 and PM2.5–10), compared to 13.69 μg m−3 with DA (PM10) and 17.74 μg m−3 without DA on 1 July 2009. The averaged RMSE of PM10 is 4.73 μg m−3 with DA (PM2.5 and PM2.5–10), against 6.08 μg m−3 with DA (PM10) and 6.67 μg m−3 without DA on 26 July 2009.

Publications Copernicus
Download
Citation