Disclaimer: This material is being kept online for historical purposes. Though accurate at the time of publication, it is no longer being updated. The page may contain broken links or outdated information, and parts may not function in current web browsers. Visit https://espo.nasa.gov for information about our current projects.


Evaluation of the NAQFC driven by the NOAA Global Forecast System (version 16):...

Tang, Y., P. C. Campbell, P. Lee, R. Saylor, F. Yang, B. Baker, D. Tong, A. Stein, J. Huang, H. Huang, L. Pan, J. McQueen, I. Stajner, J. Tirado-Delgado, Y. Jung, M. Yang, I. Bourgeois, J. Peischl, T. B. Ryerson, D. R. Blake, J. Schwarz, J. L. Jimenez, J. Crawford, G. S. Diskin, R. Moore, J. W. Hair, L. G. Huey, A. Rollins, J. Dibb, and X. Zhang (2023), Evaluation of the NAQFC driven by the NOAA Global Forecast System (version 16): comparison with the WRF-CMAQ during the summer 2019 FIREX-AQ campaign, Geosci. Model. Dev., doi:10.5194/gmd-15-7977-2022.

The latest operational National Air Quality Forecast Capability (NAQFC) has been advanced to use the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model (version 5.3.1) with the CB6r3 (Carbon Bond 6 revision 3) AERO7 (version 7 of the aerosol module) chemical mechanism and is driven by the Finite-Volume Cubed-Sphere (FV3) Global Forecast System, version 16 (GFSv16). This update has been accomplished via the development of the meteorological preprocessor, NOAA-EPA Atmosphere–Chemistry Coupler (NACC), adapted from the existing Meteorology–Chemistry Interface Processor (MCIP). Differing from the typically used Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) CMAQ system in the air quality research community, the interpolationbased NACC can use various meteorological outputs to drive the CMAQ model (e.g., FV3-GFSv16), even though they are on different grids. In this study, we compare and evaluate GFSv16-CMAQ and WRFv4.0.3-CMAQ using observations over the contiguous United States (CONUS) in summer 2019 that have been verified with surface meteorological and AIRNow observations. During this period, the Fire Influence on Regional to Global Environments and Air Quality (FIREX-AQ) field campaign was performed, and we compare the two models with airborne measurements from the NASA DC-8 aircraft. The GFS-CMAQ and WRF-CMAQ systems show similar performance overall with some differences for certain events, species and regions. The GFSv16 meteorology tends to have a stronger diurnal variability in the planetary boundary layer height (higher during daytime and lower at night) than WRF over the US Pacific coast, and it also predicted lower nighttime 10 m winds. In summer 2019,

PDF of Publication: 
Download from publisher's website.
Research Program: 
Tropospheric Composition Program (TCP)