Regional Production Quarterly report on the daily analyses ... · EMEP: D50.4.2-2016Q1, D50.4.4 -2016Q1 , D50.5.1-2016Q1, for the quarter December 2015 – Janu ary 2016 – February

Regional ProductionQuarterly report on the daily analyses and forecasts activities, and verification of the EMEP performances

December 2015 – January 2016 – February 2016

Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service

Qr. report on daily analyses and forecasts activities, verification of the EMEP performances |

This document has been produced in the context of the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring

Service (CAMS). The activities leading to these results have been contracted by the

European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, operator of CAMS on behalf of the

European Union (Delegation Agreement signed on 11/11/2014). All information in this

document is provided "as is" and no guarantee or warranty is given that the information is

fit for any particular purpose. The user thereof uses the information at its sole risk and

liability. For the avoidance of all doubts, the European Commission and the European Centre

for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts has no liability in respect of this document, which is

merely representing the authors view.



Quarterly report on the dailyanalyses and forecasts activities, and verification ofthe EMEP performances

December 2015 – January 2016 – February 2016

MET NORWAY (A. Benedictow, M. Gauss)

METEO-FRANCE (M. Pithon, M. Plu, J. Parmentier,

J. Arteta, S. Guidotti, N. Assar)

Date: 04/05/2016

REF.:

CAMS50_2015SC1_D50.3.2.EMEP-2016Q1_201605CAMS50_2015SC1_D50.3.4.EMEP-2016Q1_201605

CAMS50_2015SC1_D50.5.1.EMEP-2016Q1_201605


Contents:


1. Executive Summary.........................................................................................42. The EMEP model (MET Norway).........................................................................5Product portfolio..................................................................................................5Availability statistics.............................................................................................5

Use for observations for data assimilation...............................................................73. Verification report..........................................................................................10Verification of NRT forecasts................................................................................10Verification of NRT analyses................................................................................15

Analysis of EMEP performances for the quarter......................................................19


1. Executive Summary

The Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (CAMS, www.copernicus-atmosphere.eu) is establishing the core global and regional atmospheric environmental

service delivered as a component of Europe's Copernicus programme. The regionalforecasting service provides daily 4-days forecasts of the main air quality species andanalyses of the day before, from 7 state-of-the-art atmospheric chemistry models andfrom the median ensemble calculated from the 7 model forecasts. The regional service

also provides posteriori reanalyses using the latest validated observation datasetavailable for assimilation.

This report covers the deliverables related to Near Real Time Production (NRT) for

EMEP: D50.4.2-2016Q1, D50.4.4-2016Q1, D50.5.1-2016Q1, for the quarter December2015 – January 2016 – February 2016. Verification is done against in-situ surfaceobservations; they are described in the report D50.1.2-2016Q1, that will be deliveredshortly. The verification of analyses is done against non assimilated observations.

Compared to previous quarters, there have not been any significant changes in modelperformance, neither to the better nor to the worse. The slight changes are assumed tobe due to different meteorological conditions.

Delivery rates were slightly lower than during the summer period, but remain above95%. Recently, MET Norway organized an internal meeting on how to improve stabilityeven further, and it is expected that the delivery rate will be well above 95% in future

reporting periods.

Qr. report on daily analyses and forecasts activities, verification of the EMEP performances | 4


2. The EMEP model (MET Norway)

Product portfolio

Name Forecast Analysis

Description Forecast at surface, 50m,

250m, 500m, 1000m, 2000m,

3000m, 5000m above ground

Analysis at the surface

Available for users at 2:00 UTC 08:45 UTC for the day before

Species O3, NO2, CO, SO2, PM2.5, PM10,

NO, NH3, NMVOC, PANs,

Birch pollen at surface during

season

O3, NO2, CO, SO2, PM2.5, PM10,

NO

Time span 0-96h, hourly 0-24h for the day before,

hourly

Availability statistics

The statistics below describe the ratio of days for which the EMEP model outputs wereavailable on time to be included in the ENSEMBLE fields (analyses and forecasts) that

are computed at METEO-FRANCE. They are based on the following schedule for theprovision at METEO-FRANCE of:

- forecasts data before: 05:30 UTC for D0-D1 (up to 48h), 07:30 UTC for D2-D3 (from49h to 96h)

- analyses data: before 11:00 UTC

These schedules have been set to meet the IT requirements for ENSEMBLE products(no later than 8 UTC for 0-48h, 10 UTC for 49-96h and 12 UTC for analyses).

Indicators:

Availability_model_Forecast

Quarterly basis

D0:96%

D1:96%

D2:95%

D3:96%

Availability _model_Analysis D:98%



During this quarter, the following issues have been encountered by the EMEPproduction system:

Date Problem description

(origin, effects)

Impact

on production

18/12/2015 NRT boundary conditions was

missing from dissemination

No analysis and forecast

results available for ENSEMBLE

calculation

20/01/2016 Forecast results late due to an

error in a preprocessing script

modification

EMEP results arrived too late

for ENSEMBLE calculation

23/01/2016 Post processing job for

analysis was not started due

to missing links

EMEP analysis results non

available for ENSEMBLE

calculation

04/02/2016 Forecasts results late due to a

change of the timing in the

post processing to handle the

new interpolated fields

EMEP forecast results arrived

too late for participating to

ENSEMBLE calculation

11/02/2016 Issue with the provision of one

forecast step to CRPU due to

post processing job running

out of time, caused by change

to new interpolated fields

Some EMEP results missing

(D2 only)

12/02/2016 Error in post processing script

modification

EMEP forecast missing for

ENSEMBLE calculation



Use for observations for data assimilation

Day

Use of observation for EMEP

December

O3 NO2 NO SO2 CO PM10 PM2.5

1 1,546 1,623

2 1,448 1,633

3 1,465 1,595

4 1,609 1,741

5 1,447 1,500

6 1,504 902

7 1,444 1,541

8 1,503 1,599

9 1,608 1,697

10 1,594 1,657

11 1,534 576

12 1,527 1,650

13 1,525 1,571

14 600 1,574

15 1,617 1,699

16 1,527 1,611

17 623 547

18 1,463 862

19 675 673

20 1,471 1,644

21 661 1,553

22 1,579 1,719

23 1,530 1,572

24 1,437 1,511

25 1,490 1,528

26 115 67

27 0 0

28 112 97

29 114 92

30 127 104

31 126 101

average 1,130 1,169



Day


January


1 221 184

2 318 259

3 17 13

4 623 675

5 1,091 1,022

6 1,535 1,607

7 238 169

8 1,426 1,441

9 251 185

10 0 0

11 490 397

12 1,087 1,056

13 1,588 1,712

14 1,577 1,699

15 669 672

16 460 384

17 454 384

18 1,661 1,820

19 0 0

20 1,640 1,778

21 1,629 1,779

22 1,628 1,786

23 1,599 1,679

24 1,560 1,662

25 1,632 1,769

26 833 894

27 1,568 1,756

28 1,584 1,745

29 1,622 1,783

30 1,541 1,659

31 1,555 1,686

average 1,035 1,086



Day


February


1 1,575 1,746

2 449 305

3 1,615 1,784

4 1,566 1,743

5 1,582 1,743

6 1,583 1,701

7 1,553 1,665

8 1,559 1,679

9 1,525 1,646

10 1,474 1,645

11 1,515 1,683

12 1,418 1,590

13 1,349 1,505

14 1,387 1,570

15 1,452 1,623

16 1,478 1,687

17 1,384 1,605

18 0 0

19 0 0

20 1,406 1,581

21 1,417 1,576

22 1,434 1,639

23 1,287 1,453

24 1,413 1,592

25 1,428 1,634

26 1,067 1,233

27 38 8

28 37 8

29 0 0

average 1,172 1,298



3. Verification report

This verification report covers the period December 2015 – January 2016 – February2016. The EMEP skill scores are successively presented for four pollutants: ozone, NO2,PM10 and PM2.5. The skill is shown for the entire forecast horizon from 0 to 96h(hourly values), allowing to evaluate the entire diurnal cycle and the evolution of

performance from day 0 to day 3. The forecasts and the analyses cover a largeEuropean domain (25°W-45°E, 30°N-70°N). The statistical scores that are reported arethe root-mean-square error, the modified mean bias and the correlation. The surfaceobservations that are acquired by METEO-FRANCE and used for verification are

described in D50.1.2-2016Q1, that will be delivered shortly.

Verification of NRT forecasts

The following figures present, for each pollutant (ozone, NO2, PM10, PM2.5):

- in the upper-left panel, the root-mean square error of daily maximum (for ozone and

NO2) or of daily mean (PM10) for the first-day forecasts with regards to surfaceobservations, for every quarter since DJF2014/2015, a target reference value isindicated as an orange line,

- in the upper-right panel, the root-mean square error of pollutant concentration

forecasts with regards to surface observations as a function of forecast term,

- in the lower-left panel, the modified mean bias of pollutant concentration forecastswith regards to surface observations as a function of forecast term,

- in the lower-right panel, the correlation of pollutant concentration forecasts with

regards to surface observations as a function of forecast term.

The graphics show the performance of EMEP (black curves) and of the ENSEMBLE (bluecurves).



EMEP forecasts: ozone skill scores against data from representative sites,period December 2015 - January 2016 - February 2016

The RMSE of EMEP meets the target value. It is very similar compared to the previouswinter period DJF 2014/15, and about the same as that of the ENSEMBLE. The

maximum RMSE occurs in the morning at +10h and minimum around +14h.

EMEP has about the same MMB values, except a little higher values in the night (~0.05µg/m3) compared to the previous winter period. MMB is highest in the morning at

+10h and minimum at +16h. The MMB of EMEP is lower than that of the ENSEMBLEduring most of the forecast time.

The correlation values of EMEP have increased (~0.02 µg/m3) since the previous

period, and especially around +16h. The EMEP correlation values are lowest aroundnoon and degrade gradually with forecast length. The EMEP correlation is very similarto that of the ENSEMBLE except around noon, when it is lower.



EMEP forecasts: NO2 skill scores against data from representative sites, periodDecember 2015 - January 2016 - February 2016

EMEP has generally higher (~0.1 µg/m3) MMB compared to the previous winter period.In agreement with the ENSEMBLE, EMEP has largest underestimations at +11h. EMEP

underestimates slightly less than the ENSEMBLE during daytime and slightly moreduring night.

Compared to the previous winter period the correlation values of EMEP are very

similar, except at +19h when they are higher by about 0.02 µg/m3. Lowest correlationvalues of EMEP are at +11h. EMEP is in phase with the ENSEMBLE, with only a slightlylower correlation.



EMEP forecasts: PM10 skill scores against data from representative sites,period December 2015 - January 2016 - February 2016

The MMB of EMEP is overestimating less in the morning at +7h and underestimatingmore in the evening at +20h compared to the previous winter period. EMEP is in phase

with the ENSEMBLE and underestimates less during daytime.

The correlation of EMEP is lower (~0.02 µg/m3) compared to the previous winterperiod. In line with the ENSEMBLE, EMEP has its highest correlation at +7h and its

lowest at +11h. Around noon and at midnight the deviation from the ENSEMBLE islargest.



EMEP forecasts: PM2.5 skill scores against data from representative sites,period December 2015 - January 2016 - February 2016

The MMB of EMEP is overestimating less and underestimating more, compared to theprevious winter period. In line with the ENSEMBLE, EMEP has its highest

overestimation at +7h and its highest underestimation at +21h. EMEP isunderestimating more than the ENSEMBLE during daytime.

The correlation of EMEP is higher (~ 0.03 µg/m3) compared to the previous winter

period. EMEP is in phase with the ENSEMBLE and the forecast degradation with time issmaller compared to the previous period. The correlations of EMEP and the ENSEMBLEare quite similar, with highest values in the morning around +9h and lowest values inthe afternoon.



Verification of NRT analyses

The following figures present, for each pollutant (ozone, NO2, PM10):

- in the upper-left panel, the root-mean square error of daily maximum (for ozone andNO2) or of daily mean (PM10) for the analyses (solid line) and for the first-day forecasts

(dashed line) with regards to surface observations, for every quarter sinceDJF2014/2015, a target reference value is indicated as an orange line,

- in the upper-right panel, the root-mean square error of pollutant concentration of theanalyses (solid line) and of the first-day forecasts (dashed line), with regards to

surface observations as a function of forecast term,

- in the lower-left panel, the modified mean bias of pollutant concentration forecasts ofthe analyses (solid line) and of the first-day forecasts (dashed line), with regards tosurface observations as a function of forecast term,

- in the lower-right panel, the correlation of pollutant concentration of the analyses(solid line) and of the first-day forecasts (dashed line), with regards to surfaceobservations as a function of forecast term.

The graphics show the performances of EMEP (black curves) and of the ENSEMBLE(blue curves). The superposition of the analysis scores (solid lines) and of the forecastscores (dashed lines) computed over the same observation dataset is helpful to assessthe added value of data assimilation.



EMEP analyses: ozone skill scores against data from representative sites,period December 2015 - January 2016 - February 2016

The MMB is reduced for EMEP AN compared to FC, except at +6h and +16h whereunderestimation is larger for EMEP AN than the overestimation for FC. But the largest

overestimation of EMEP FC around +10h is reduced by about 0.04 µg/m3.

The correlation values of EMEP AN are higher compared to the EMEP FC. By and large,the improvement due to data assimilation of ozone is clear, though not quite as large

as for the ENSEMBLE.



EMEP analyses: NO2 skill scores against data from representative sites, periodDecember 2015 - January 2016 - February 2016

The EMEP AN MMB is underestimating less than the EMEP FC. Largest improvement isfound in the afternoon and during night time.

Correlation values of EMEP AN are higher than of EMEP FC, especially in evening andmorning hours. The improvement of EMEP AN is very low between +12h and +17h.



EMEP analyses: PM10 skill scores against data from representative sites,period December 2015 - January 2016 - February 2016

The RMSE of EMEP AN meets the target value by a slightly wider margin than the EMEPFC. The EMEP AN has largest improvements of RMSE values in the afternoon.

The MMB is overestimating more for EMEP AN compared to FC, especially in night time.Largest overestimations are found during morning hours.

Correlation values of EMEP AN are generally lower than of EMEP FC, particularly in themorning and afternoon. This situation will improve when PM is assimilated later thisyear.



Analysis of EMEP performances for the quarter

The performance of the EMEP model is satisfactory for this period and is in line with theperformance in earlier periods, with some improvement for ozone and NO2 and a littleworse for PM10 and PM2.5 performance compared to the previous winter period. Thesedifferences can probably be explained by meteorological conditions. However, none of

the changes in performance are considerable. Assimilation of particulate matter in thefuture should improve the performance of EMEP AN as compared to EMEP FC.


Documents

Regional Production Quarterly report on the daily analyses ... · EMEP: D50.4.2-2016Q1, D50.4.4 -2016Q1 , D50.5.1-2016Q1, for the quarter December 2015 – Janu ary 2016 – February