GOALS FOR THIS MEETING

• Assess transition, report on working groups

• Specific, “nuts and bolts” definition of ongoing and future problems to be carried out.

– Specific scientific/assessment problem.

– Which simulation results and diagnostics are required: do we have them, can we get them.

– What input do we need for a specific problem (for example, METEOROLOGICAL FIELDS, emission inventories...).

– In case of a new module, what can of interface do we envision with GMI; what variables are needed from meteorological fields, others...

– What is the expected time line, point person.

GOALS FOR THIS MEETING (II)

• Continue exploration of GMI’s future contributions, IN ADDITION TO ASSESSMENT. Research tool? User support?

UEET

• Conference on Aviation in the Atmosphere and Climate (AAC), Friedrichshafen, 7/03– Extended abstract submitted on chemical perturbations– Peer-reviewed paper based on abstract? (Dec. 31)

• Report from TRADEOFF– Changes in radiative forcing from contrails, cirrus

• Assessments– Sulfate/soot perturbations from aircraft (2004)– “Final” assessment (mid-2006)

• Decide on “best” set of meteorological fields, other?• Use GMI for exploring flight parameters – flight altitude,

routing, emission indices…• UEET Forum 10/30/03

Mannstein, AAC Conference, 2003

What will GMI do for UEET Final Assessment?

• Use coupled trop/strat model

• Chemical Perturbations

• Aerosol Direct Effect

– Sulfate

– Soot

• First indirect effect?

– Aerosol-cloud interaction? (Nenes)

– Cirrus? (Not funded…)

• Contrails?

IPCC TIMELINE

WGI panelJan 2007

Lead Author meeting 4 (TBD)Jun 2006

Second draft completeFeb 2006

Lead Author meeting 3 (Christchurch)Dec 2005

First draft completeAug 2005

Lead Author meeting 2 (Beijing)May 2005

Second scoping meeting Sep 2003

Zero order draft completeFeb 2005

Lead Author meeting 1 (Trieste)Sep 2004

Lead author teams selected by WGI BureauApr 2004

Panel approval of outlines for reportsNov 2003

First scoping meetingApr 2003

QUADRENNIAL OZONE SYMPOSIUM

FOR ALL WORKING GROUPS

• Specific tasks/point persons

• Timelines – 18 mos.

• Met. Fields

• Model Resolution

• Specific needs (for NRA, website)

• Define “routine” diagnostics

• User support – Needs from “core” group. “Proposal?”

WORKING GROUPSI

• GSFC with Dan to sort out existing I/O issues –– Synthetic runs (Prather)

• Stratospheric group– Status of current manuscripts– Do timelines make sense?– Analyses needs we do not have– Model resolution– WHAT DO WE DO NEXT IN STRATOSPHERE

• Aerosols– Refine paper suggestions - IPCC– Look very carefully at timelines AND priorities– Aircraft-related issues: contrails, cirrus, what is possible?– Diagnostics; analyses needs– Wet scavenging schemes– Putting in microphysical package: issues– Photolysis?– Radiative forcing

WORKING GROUPS(II)

• Strat-trop– Mechanism

• Testing strategy (tracers, full chemistry)• Unify treatment of photolysis, hydrological cycle• Scavenge additional species

– Short-lived compounds (A “quick” application?)• Troposphere

– DEFINE FIRST GENERATION OF MANUSCRIPTS• Additional diagnostics• What do we do with boundary layer• Outline manuscript (When?)

– DEFINE SECOND GENERATION OF PROBLEMS – IPCC!?• Hindcast• Lightning• HNO3/NOy, PAN/NOy • HC ratios

WORKING GROUPS(III)

• Aircraft

– Specific proposal for GMI work for final assessment

• Numerical issues

– Multiprocessors

– TPCORE, resolution, etc.

TROPOSPHERIC WORKING GROUPBOUNDARY LAYER MIXING

• Look at profiles - Harvard (GISS CO, where disagreement is worst)

• Dan will get monthly average maximum BL height from GISS ? met. Fields

• Conference call with interested parties- Decide on strategy, implement, rerun full chemistry runs

• Need to look at simple tracer runs to make sure things are ok.

– Start runs by ?????

• Put bulk of comparisons on web site

DIAGNOSTICS

• Monthly averaged rates for all thermal and photolytic processes in model – Need post-process Ox (to be defined by Harvard), HOx, P and L of CO, Harvard – Code?

• 3-D vertical advective fluxes (monthly average)

• 2-D tendencies for each operator (latitude and “height”}

• Deposition fluxes

• Emissions

• WANT: Global budgets of ozone, CO, methane, HOx….

• Diagnosing met. Fields: water vapor, clouds, cloud cover (see papers

• WE HAVE SUFFICIENT DIAGNOSTICS FOR FIRST GENERATION OF MANUSCRIPTS

PAPERS“FIRST GENERATION” – NO NEW MET FIELDS

DRAFTS BY MARCH 31

I. DESCRIPTION OF PHYSICAL COMPONENTS OF MODEL, DIFFERENCES AMONG MET. FIELDS (Considine)

– Model Description (Rodriguez)– Met. Field comparison/validation for chemistry (H2O, convective mass fluxes,

clouds, boundary layer) (Prather, Rodriguez, Bergmann,Penner)– Rn, Pb 7Be

III. DESCRIPTION OF CHEMICAL COMPONENTS OF MODEL/MET. FIELD DIFFERENCES (Rodriguez; Jacob)

– OH, CH3CCl3 lifetimes– Global budgets of O3, CO, CH4…– 2-D tendencies

II. Comparison to data (Logan) (Put bulk of comparisons in web site)– MOZAIC (Prather, Harvard)– Use simple tracers for examples– Chatfield, Wang, etc

IV. Numerical paper using simple tracers (Prather) • Does it improve comparison to observations?

Second Generation Papers

SECOND GENERATIONV. Compare two chemical mechanisms (Considine) Second generation

– NO NEW MET. FIELDSVI. Lightning (Pickering; Chatfield) Sensitivities GEOS-TRMM 1998-2001;

others;? VII. Sensitivity to wet scavenging (in conjunction with aerosols?)VII. Hydrocarbon ratios (Wang) (Need HCs at each time step; Fields? C2Cl4,

CO, Jacob)VIII. IPCC Impact – Prather, Jacob, Stratospheric people?, Rodriguez

– Methane feedback lifetime– Future changes in ozone, CO, – Future OH – Lifetimes– Air quality; intercontinental transport?– Update GCM fields in view of future climate forecasts Which ones?

Find out: Daniel: GISS; Prather: UKMet; NCAR: Logan; fvGCM: Rodriguez

More generations?

• Hindcast 15-40 years? NCEP – MATCH (Logan)

• Specific campaign/satellite data

– 2000-2001 (EC-Oslo; NCEP; fvDAS) Compare all three for campaigns during this period

– OSSEs

• GMAO

NEXT MEETING

• May 10-12 East Coast. Daniel for meeting committee

• Different format – one day of working groups, one day of presentations (more scientific) – Invite larger scientific community.

• Steering Committee: March m Telecon