Technical note: An assessment of the performance of statistical bias correction techniques for global chemistry–climate model surface ozone fields
-
Published:2024-05-24
Issue:10
Volume:24
Page:5953-5969
-
ISSN:1680-7324
-
Container-title:Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Atmos. Chem. Phys.
Author:
Staehle Christoph, Rieder Harald E., Fiore Arlene M.ORCID, Schnell Jordan L.
Abstract
Abstract. State-of-the-art chemistry–climate models (CCMs) still show biases compared to ground-level ozone observations, illustrating the difficulties and challenges remaining in the simulation of atmospheric processes governing ozone production and loss. Therefore, CCM output is frequently bias-corrected in studies seeking to explore the health or environmental impacts from changing air quality burdens. Here, we assess four statistical bias correction techniques of varying complexities and their application to surface ozone fields simulated with four CCMs and evaluate their performance against gridded observations in the EU and US. We focus on two time periods (2005–2009 and 2010–2014), where the first period is used for development and training and the second to evaluate the performance of techniques when applied to model projections. We find that all methods are capable of significantly reducing the model bias. However, biases are lowest when we apply more complex approaches such as quantile mapping and delta functions. We also highlight the sensitivity of the correction techniques to individual CCM skill at reproducing the observed distributional change in surface ozone. Ensemble simulations available for one CCM indicate that model ozone biases are likely more sensitive to the process representation embedded in chemical mechanisms than to meteorology.
Funder
Klima- und Energiefonds
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Reference45 articles.
1. Akritidis, D., Zanis, P., Pytharoulis, I., Mavrakis, A., and Karacostas, T.: A deep stratospheric intrusion event down to the earth's surface of the megacity of Athens, Meteorol. Atmos. Phys., 109, 9–18, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00703-010-0096-6, 2010. 2. Archibald, A. T., Neu, J. L., Elshorbany, Y. F., Cooper, O. R., Young, P. J., Akiyoshi, H., Cox, R. A., Coyle, M., Derwent, R. G., Deushi, M., Finco, A., Frost, G. J., Galbally, I. E., Gerosa, G., Granier, C., Griffiths, P. T., Hossaini, R., Hu, L., Jöckel, P., Josse, B., Lin, M. Y., Mertens, M., Morgenstern, O., Naja, M., Naik, V., Oltmans, S., Plummer, D. A., Revell, L. E., Saiz-Lopez, A., Saxena, P., Shin, Y. M., Shahid, I., Shallcross, D., Tilmes, S., Trickl, T., Wallington, T. J., Wang, T., Worden, H. M., and Zeng, G.: Tropospheric Ozone Assessment Report: A critical review of changes in the tropospheric ozone burden and budget from 1850 to 2100, Elementa, 8, 1–53, https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.2020.034, 2020. 3. Chameides, W. L., Lindsay, R. W., Richardson, J., and Kiang, C. S.: The Role of Biogenic Hydrocarbons in Urban Photochemical Smog: Atlanta as a Case Study, Science, 241, 1473–1475, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3420404, 1988. 4. Checa-Garcia, R., Hegglin, M. I., Kinnison, D., Plummer, D. A., and Shine, K. P.: Historical Tropospheric and Stratospheric Ozone Radiative Forcing Using the CMIP6 Database, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 3264–3273, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL076770, 2018. 5. Da, Y., Xu, Y., and McCarl, B.: Effects of Surface Ozone and Climate on Historical (1980–2015) Crop Yields in the United States: Implication for Mid-21st Century Projection, Environ. Resour. Econ., 81, 355–378, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-021-00629-y, 2022.
|
|