Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Deushi, Makoto

Publications and source records attributed to Deushi, Makoto.

10 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Arctic tropospheric ozone: assessment of current knowledge and model performance

As the third most important greenhouse gas (GHG) after carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and methane (CH 4 ), tropospheric ozone (O 3 ) is also an air pollutant causing damage to human health and ecosystems. This study brings together recent research on observations and modeling of tropospheric O 3 in the Arctic, a rapidly warming and sensitive environment. At different locations in the Arctic, the observed surface O 3 seasonal cycles are quite different. Coastal Arctic locations, for example, have a minimum in the springtime due to O 3 depletion events resulting from surface bromine chemistry. In contrast, other Arctic locations have a maximum in the spring. The 12 state-of-the-art models used in this study lack the surface halogen chemistry needed to simulate coastal Arctic surface O 3 depletion in the springtime; however, the multi-model median (MMM) has accurate seasonal cycles at non-coastal Arctic locations. There is a large amount of variability among models, which has been previously reported, and we show that there continues to be no convergence among models or improved accuracy in simulating tropospheric O 3 and its precursor species. The MMM underestimates Arctic surface O 3 by 5% to 15% depending on the location. The vertical distribution of tropospheric O 3 is studied from recent ozonesonde measurements and the models. The models are highly variable, simulating free-tropospheric O 3 within a range of ±50% depending on the model and the altitude. The MMM performs best, within ±8% for most locations and seasons. However, nearly all models overestimate O 3 near the tropopause (~300 hPa or ~8 km), likely due to ongoing issues with underestimating the altitude of the tropopause and excessive downward transport of stratospheric O 3 at high latitudes. For example, the MMM is biased high by about 20% at Eureka. Observed and simulated O 3 precursors (CO, NO x , and reservoir PAN) are evaluated throughout the troposphere. Models underestimate wintertime CO everywhere, likely due to a combination of underestimating CO emissions and possibly overestimating OH. Throughout the vertical profile (compared to aircraft measurements), the MMM underestimates both CO and NO x but overestimates PAN. Perhaps as a result of competing deficiencies, the MMM O 3 matches the observed O 3 reasonably well. Our findings suggest that despite model updates over the last decade, model results are as highly variable as ever and have not increased in accuracy for representing Arctic tropospheric O 3 .

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Comparison of Arctic and Antarctic Stratospheric Climates in Chemistry Versus No‐Chemistry Climate Models

Using nine chemistry-climate and eight associated no-chemistry models, we investigate the persistence and timing of cold episodes occurring in the Arctic and Antarctic stratosphere during the period 1980–2014. We find systematic differences in behavior between members of these model pairs. In a first group of chemistry models whose dynamical configurations mirror their no-chemistry counterparts, we find an increased persistence of such cold polar vortices, such that these cold episodes often start earlier and last longer, relative to the times of occurrence of the lowest temperatures. Also the date of occurrence of the lowest temperatures, both in the Arctic and the Antarctic, is often delayed by 1–3 weeks in chemistry models, versus their no-chemistry counterparts. This behavior exacerbates a widespread problem occurring in most or all models, a delayed occurrence, in the median, of the most anomalously cold day during such cold winters. In a second group of model pairs there are differences beyond just ozone chemistry. In particular, here the chemistry models feature more levels in the stratosphere, a raised model top, and differences in non-orographic gravity wave drag versus their no-chemistry counterparts. Such additional dynamical differences can completely mask the above influence of ozone chemistry. The results point toward a need to retune chemistry-climate models versus their no-chemistry counterparts.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

The Climate Response to Emissions Reductions Due to COVID-19: Initial Results From CovidMIP

Many nations responded to the COVID-19 pandemic by restricting travel and other activities during 2020, resulting in temporarily reduced emissions of CO 2 , other greenhouse gases and ozone and aerosol precursors. We perform a coordinated Intercomparison, CovidMIP, of Earth System model simulations to assess the impact on climate of these emissions reductions. Eleven models performed multiple initial-condition ensembles to produce over 280 simulations spanning both initial condition and model structural uncertainty. We find model consensus on reduced aerosol amounts (particularly over East Asia) and associated increases in surface shortwave radiation levels. However, any impact on near-surface temperature or rainfall during 2020-2024 is extremely small and is not detectable in this initial analysis. Regional analyses on a finer scale, and closer attention to extremes (especially linked to changes in atmospheric composition and air quality) are required to test the impact of COVID-19-related emission reductions on near-term climate.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Historical total ozone radiative forcing derived from CMIP6 simulations

Radiative forcing (RF) time series for total ozone from 1850 up to the present day are calculated based on historical simulations of ozone from 10 climate models contributing to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). In addition, RF is calculated for ozone fields prepared as an input for CMIP6 models without chemistry schemes and from a chemical transport model simulation. A radiative kernel for ozone is constructed and used to derive the RF. The ozone RF in 2010 (2005–2014) relative to 1850 is 0.35 W m -2 [0.08–0.61] (5–95% uncertainty range) based on models with both tropospheric and stratospheric chemistry. One of these models has a negative present-day total ozone RF. Excluding this model, the present-day ozone RF increases to 0.39 W m -2 [0.27–0.51] (5–95% uncertainty range). The rest of the models have RF close to or stronger than the RF time series assessed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in the fifth assessment report with the primary driver likely being the new precursor emissions used in CMIP6. The rapid adjustments beyond stratospheric temperature are estimated to be weak and thus the RF is a good measure of effective radiative forcing.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2018

Large-Scale Tropospheric Transport in the Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative (CCMI) Simulations

Understanding and modeling the large-scale transport of trace gases and aerosols is important for interpreting past (and projecting future) changes in atmospheric composition. Here we show that there are large differences in the global-scale atmospheric transport properties among the models participating in the IGAC SPARC Chemistry–Climate Model Initiative (CCMI). Specifically, we find up to 40% differences in the transport timescales connecting the Northern Hemisphere (NH) midlatitude surface to the Arctic and to Southern Hemisphere high latitudes, where the mean age ranges between 1.7 and 2.6 years. We show that these differences are related to large differences in vertical transport among the simulations, in particular to differences in parameterized convection over the oceans. While stronger convection over NH midlatitudes is associated with slower transport to the Arctic, stronger convection in the tropics and subtropics is associated with faster interhemispheric transport. We also show that the differences among simulations constrained with fields derived from the same reanalysis products are as large as (and in some cases larger than) the differences among free-running simulations, most likely due to larger differences in parameterized convection. Our results indicate that care must be taken when using simulations constrained with analyzed winds to interpret the influence of meteorology on tropospheric composition.

Orbe, Clara↗
NASA NTRS2018

Quantifying the Effect of Mixing on the Mean Age of Air in CCMVal-2 and CCMI-1 Models

The stratospheric age of air (AoA) is a useful measure of the overall capabilities of a general circulation model (GCM) to simulate stratospheric transport. Previous studies have reported a large spread in the simulation of AoA by GCMs and coupled chemistry-climate models (CCMs). Compared to observational estimates, simulated AoA is mostly too low. Here we attempt to untangle the processes that lead to the AoA differences between the models and between models and observations. AoA is influenced by both mean transport by the residual circulation and two-way mixing; we quantify the effects of these processes using data from the CCM inter-comparison projects CCMVal-2 (Chemistry-Climate Model Validation Activity 2) and CCMI-1 (Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative, phase 1). Transport along the residual circulation is measured by the residual circulation transit time (RCTT). We interpret the difference between AoA and RCTT as additional aging by mixing. Aging by mixing thus includes mixing on both the resolved and subgrid scale. We find that the spread in AoA between the models is primarily caused by differences in the effects of mixing and only to some extent by differences in residual circulation strength. These effects are quantified by the mixing efficiency, a measure of the relative increase in AoA by mixing. The mixing efficiency varies strongly between the models from 0.24 to 1.02. We show that the mixing efficiency is not only controlled by horizontal mixing, but by vertical mixing and vertical diffusion as well. Possible causes for the differences in the models' mixing efficiencies are discussed. Differences in subgrid-scale mixing (including differences in advection schemes and model resolutions) likely contribute to the differences in mixing efficiency. However, differences in the relative contribution of resolved versus parameterized wave forcing do not appear to be related to differences in mixing efficiency or AoA.

CCMI↗
NASA NTRS2018

Tropospheric Jet Response to Antarctic Ozone Depletion: An Update with Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative (CCMI) Models

The Southern Hemisphere (SH) zonal-mean circulation change in response to Antarctic ozone depletion is re-visited by examining a set of the latest model simulations archived for the Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative (CCMI) project. All models reasonably well reproduce Antarctic ozone depletion in the late 20th century. The related SH-summer circulation changes, such as a poleward intensification of westerly jet and a poleward expansion of the Hadley cell, are also well captured. All experiments exhibit quantitatively the same multi-model mean trend, irrespective of whether the ocean is coupled or prescribed. Results are also quantitatively similar to those derived from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 (CMIP5) high-top model simulations in which the stratospheric ozone is mostly prescribed with monthly- and zonally-averaged values. These results suggest that the ozone-hole-induced SH-summer circulation changes are robust across the models irrespective of the specific chemistry-atmosphere-ocean coupling.

chemistry-climate models↗
NASA NTRS2017

Review of the Global Models Used Within Phase 1 of the Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative (CCMI)

We present an overview of state-of-the-art chemistry-climate and chemistry transport models that are used within phase 1 of the Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative (CCMI-1). The CCMI aims to conduct a detailed evaluation of participating models using process-oriented diagnostics derived from observations in order to gain confidence in the models' projections of the stratospheric ozone layer, tropospheric composition, air quality, where applicable global climate change, and the interactions between them. Interpretation of these diagnostics requires detailed knowledge of the radiative, chemical, dynamical, and physical processes incorporated in the models. Also an understanding of the degree to which CCMI-1 recommendations for simulations have been followed is necessary to understand model responses to anthropogenic and natural forcing and also to explain inter-model differences. This becomes even more important given the ongoing development and the ever-growing complexity of these models. This paper also provides an overview of the available CCMI-1 simulations with the aim of informing CCMI data users.

CCMI↗