MM5, RAMS, & CAMx Simulations of Summer-time Middle-East O3

(Funding: USAID-MERC Program)

Shouk_mcsd@yahoo.com

Shoukri Kasakseh†o, Robert Bornsteino, Erez Weinroth#

ºSan Jose State University, San Jose, CA, USA†Applied Research Institute-Jerusalem, Bethlehem, West Bank, Palestine

#Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel

Presented at the

86th AMS Annual Meeting

Jan-Feb 2006

Atlanta, Georgia

Outline

• Background

• Synoptic-scale circulation patterns

• Obs of 03 mesoscale transport-patterns

• MM5 and RAMS met simulations

• CAMx 03 simulations

• Conclusions

• Future work

Middle East Synoptic Typesref: Dyan and Levy (2002), JGR

• Account for 74% of O3 episodes over region High pressure over eastern Med Sea (Spring): 25% Red sea trough over Israel (Fall): 29% Shallow Persian trough (Summer): 20% Five others + undefined: 26%

• Shallow Persian (thermal) troughs: produce high O3, as they are caped by N. African sub-tropical H, which produces: subsidence warming, stabilization, & shallow mixed layers sunshine and rapid photochemistry

• Current effort investigates a Persian trough occurrence that coincided with HUJI aircraft O3 observations

• Eastern-Med dominated by Low-p system inland lobe of Azores H thus split into W & NE segments • Protrusion from Western High penetrates inland to

Western Saudi Arabia

Obs IMS 700 hPa, July 29, 0000 UTC

*

700 hPa ECMWF: same day

L

L

H

H

ECMWF IC/BC captures position & strength of: L; split (W & NE) Highs; & protrusion from W high good upper IC/BC for RAMS/MM5

*

• Eastern edge of Azores High (1023 hPa): over Europe (NW of study region), with eastward (“projection”) ridge from its S-lobe; over center of study region• Sfc Persian Trough (“projection”) line (996 hPa): N of study area• E-W oriented cold-front to N: between H & Persian L

IMS SFC Obs, July 29, 0000 UTC

H

L

*H

Trough line

Ridge line

• ECMWF SFC Pressure (left): Correctly captures position & strength of H, Persian Trough Low, W-E cold front (grey area), & both “projections” (hard to see)

• ECMWF D-1 concurrent SFC V (right): dominated by “projections,” with counterclockwise flow N of area (over Med Sea) is influenced by eastern-L and clockwise flow S of area (Israel & Sinai) is influenced by South-lobe of western-H

• good SFC IC/BC for RAMS/MM5

H

L

H

L

H

3 4 .4 3 5 .0 3 5 .6

L O N G IT U D E (D eg E )

2 9 .6

3 0 .1

3 0 .6

3 1 .1

3 1 .6

3 2 .1

3 2 .6

3 3 .1

LA

TIT

UD

E (D

eg N

)

J eru sa lem

T el A v iv

H a ifa

W est B a n k

G a za S tr ip

3 4 .5 3 4 .8 3 5 .1 3 5 .4

L O N G IT U D E (D eg E )

O 3 s ta tio n lo ca tio n s

3 1 .1

3 1 .4

3 1 .7

3 2 .0

3 2 .3

3 2 .6

3 2 .9

LA

TIT

UD

E (

Deg

N)

12 3

4

56

7

8

9

1 0

11 1 21 31 4

1 5

1 6

5 0 m2 5 0 m7 5 0 m1 0 0 0 m

Available O3 sites (Left is sub-domain of MM5 Domain 2); ridge-lines shown

.

3 4 .5 3 4 .8 3 5 .1 3 5 .4

L O N G IT U D E (D eg E )

O 3 s ta tio n lo ca tio n s

3 1 .1

3 1 .4

3 1 .7

3 2 .0

3 2 .3

3 2 .6

3 2 .9

LA

TIT

UD

E (

Deg

N)

12 3

4

56

7

8

9

1 0

11 1 21 31 4

1 5

1 6

5 0 m2 5 0 m7 5 0 m1 0 0 0 m

O3 Station # Station Name

1 Kiryat Ata

2 Newe Shaanan (CU)

3 Nesher

4 Maapil (I)

5 Cent. Station

6Antokolski (CU)

7 Fire Dept.

8 Yavne Group

9 Oil Site

10 Modiin (I)

11 Ashdod

12 Gedera

13 Ashdod YA (CNU)

14 Ashdod Y

15 Ashkelon

16 Kiryat Gat

Sites: I = Inland, CU = Coastal Urban

CNU = Coastal Non-Urban

3 m /s

5 0 m2 5 0 m7 5 0 m1 0 0 0 m

Med

iterr

anea

n S e

a

3 4 .5 3 4 .8 3 5 .1 3 5 .4

L O N G IT U D E (D eg E )

1 0 m o b s sp eed (m /s) & O 3 a t 0 3 0 0 L S T o r 0 0 0 0 U T C o n 1 A u g

3 1 .5

3 1 .8

3 2 .1

3 2 .4

3 2 .7

3 3L

AT

ITU

DE

(D

eg N

)

H Flow Dir: weak down-slope off coastal mountains: for Coastal plain: offshore (to W) from W-facing slopes Haifa Pen. (square): offshore (to E ) from E- facing slopes Inland sites: directed inland (to E) from E-facing slopes

Low-O3 generally <40 ppb)Haifa still at 51 ppb

Night : 3 AM LST (00 UTC)

L

3 4 .5 3 4 .8 3 5 .1 3 5 .4

L O N G IT U D E (D eg E )

1 0 m o b s sp eed (m /s) a t 1 2 0 0 L S T o r 0 9 0 0 U T C o n 1 A u g

3 1 .5

3 1 .8

3 2 .1

3 2 .4

3 2 .7

3 3L

AT

ITU

DE

(D

eg N

)

3 m /s

5 0 m2 5 0 m7 5 0 m1 0 0 0 m

Med

iterr

anea

n S e

a

H

Winds: Reversed Stronger: up 6 m s-1

Coastal plain: Onshore/upwind, from SW Inland sites: Channeling (from W) in corridor (box): Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem (Modiin station). High daytime O3

Max at Mappil, 66 ppb 2nd max at Modiin, 63 ppb

Day : 1200 NOON LST

L

H

H

O3 time series for Aug,1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Local Time (hours)

O3

(pp

b)

Maapil Modiin sta6(Tel Aviv) sta2(Haifa) sta13(Ashdod YA)

Inland sites: day max (auto sources)

Coastal urban: day min (via max titration)

Coastal non-urbanized: Moderate day values (less titration)

Night time min

ObsPeak is at 11 LST. Why?

RAMS Configuration (Weinroth 2004)

3 Grids– 20 km over E-Med for

background synoptic forcing– 5 km over Israel, West Bank,

and Gaza for meso-scale sea/land & mt/valley flows

– 1.25 km for Tel Aviv-Jeru-salem transport-corridor

Domains GPs: 45 x 45, 74 x 54, and 146 x 218 for Domains 1-3

24 vertical levels 1st full grid cell at 125 m Topography GTOPO30 project ECMWF for IC and BC Simulations start at 0000 UTC on

1 August 97 & end 72-h later

900 Km

270 Km

370 Km

180 Km

270 Km

900 Km

MM5 Configuration (Kasakseh 2006)

Version 3.7 3 domains:

– 15, 5, 1.67 km Grid Spacing– 59 x 61, 55 x 76, 58 x 85 Grid

Points 32 σ-levels

– up to 100 mb– first full σ-level at 19 m

ECMWF IC and BC Two-way nesting 5-layer soil model Gayno-Seaman PBL Simulations

– Start: 0000 UTC, 29 July ‘97– End: 0000 UTC, 3 Aug ‘97

Single LINUX CPU (SJSU-Lightning)

Obs vs. MM5: T(t)

July 29 August 1 August 2

July 31 Aug 1 Aug2

Standard MM5 over-predicts summer night-time min-T (Bornstein 2006, this Conf) lower deep soil temp better T-results better Winds better O3

from changing GC/synoptic conditions MM5 needs analysis nudging

obs

MM5:Run1

MM5:Run 4

3 4 .5 3 4 .8 3 5 .1 3 5 .4

L O N G IT U D E (D eg E )

1 0 m o b s sp eed (m /s) a t 0 7 0 0 L S T o r 0 4 0 0 U T C o n 1 A u g

3 1 .5

3 1 .8

3 2 .1

3 2 .4

3 2 .7

3 3

LA

TIT

UD

E (

Deg

N)

3 m /s

5 0 m2 5 0 m7 5 0 m1 0 0 0 m

Med

iterr

anea

n S e

a

Obs, 7 AM, 1 Aug: all down-slope:off-shore (except where inland-direct at inland sites)

• Off coast: South-Westerly (no obs, so ?)

Coastal plain: downslope/offshore from SSE (in obs, but can’t be in coarser ECMWF-results)

Inland sites: inland directed (in obs & ECMWF)

RAMS

Obs, 7 AM, 1 Aug: all down-slope, off-shore (except where inland-direct at inland sites)

3 4 .5 3 4 .8 3 5 .1 3 5 .4

L O N G IT U D E (D eg E )

1 0 m o b s sp eed (m /s) a t 0 7 0 0 L S T o r 0 4 0 0 U T C o n 1 A u g

3 1 .5

3 1 .8

3 2 .1

3 2 .4

3 2 .7

3 3

LA

TIT

UD

E (

Deg

N)

3 m /s

5 0 m2 5 0 m7 5 0 m1 0 0 0 m

Med

iterr

anea

n S e

a

MM5 Domain-2

Off coast: onshore from W (like ECMWF; no obs??)

Coastal plain: downslope/offshore from SSE

(in obs & RAMS, but can’t be in coarse ECMWF-results)

Inland sites: inland directed (in obs & ECMWF)

3 4 .5 3 4 .8 3 5 .1 3 5 .4

L O N G IT U D E (D eg E )

1 0 m o b s sp eed (m /s) a t 1 3 0 0 L S T o r 1 0 0 0 U T C o n 1 A u g

3 1 .5

3 1 .8

3 2 .1

3 2 .4

3 2 .7

3 3

LA

TIT

UD

E (

Deg

N)

3 m /s

5 0 m2 5 0 m7 5 0 m1 0 0 0 m

Obs, 1 PM on 1 Aug: All westerly/onshore flow

• Off coast: Onshore from SW (no obs??)

Coastal plain: upslope/onshore (in obs, but can’t be in coarse ECMWF-results)

Inland sites: inland directed (in obs, MM5, & ECMWF)

South (circle): NW as in MM5 (No Obs)

RAMS

3 4 .5 3 4 .8 3 5 .1 3 5 .4

L O N G IT U D E (D eg E )

1 0 m o b s sp eed (m /s) a t 1 3 0 0 L S T o r 1 0 0 0 U T C o n 1 A u g

3 1 .5

3 1 .8

3 2 .1

3 2 .4

3 2 .7

3 3

LA

TIT

UD

E (

Deg

N)

3 m /s

5 0 m2 5 0 m7 5 0 m1 0 0 0 m

Obs, 1 PM on 1 Aug: All westerly/onshore flow

MM5 Domain-2

Off coast: onshore from W (like ECMWF; no obs)

Coastal plain: upslope/Onshore (in obs & RAMS,

but not in ECMWF-results)

Inland sites: inland directed (in obs & ECMWF)

South (circle): NW (as in RAMS & ECMWF; no Obs?)

Jerusalem

Flight Path

0

0-20

20-40

40-60

60-70

70-80

80-90

90-95

95-105

105-120

O3 ppb

1 Aug, 1500 LST

RAMS/CAMx (left) vs. Airborne Obs (right): from Weinroth (2004) Secondary max (underestimated) from autos:

over Jerusalem (in obs) Primary max from power-plants: in Jordan (no obs)

Irbid,Jordan

Hadera Power Plant

.

SUMMARY OF RESULTS• Observations during a summer Persian-Trough period produced

typical (not episode-level) O3 (as it was somewhat N of area) show

– Meso (down/up slope + sea/land) breezes dominate coastal flows

– Jerusalem O3 max due to coastal auto emissions

– Coastal-urban O3 min due to NOx titration

• Model-results show

– RAMS & MM5 reproduce surface flows

– CAMx reproduced the observed Jerusalem O3 max and produced an even larger previously-unknown max over Jordan due to power plant emissions

FUTURE WORK• Improved MM5 simualtions

– Modified IC soil moisture to improve max-T– Incorporate FDDA analysis nudging

• Compare PBL transport patterns in RAMS and MM5

• Run CAMx with MM5 met-input and compare to results from RAMS/CAMx

• Move to uMM5 and uWRF

THANK YOU

FOR PAYING ATTENTION!