| 4 | |
| 5 | Back to summer holiday |
| 6 | |
| 7 | === On Friday 19th July === |
| 8 | With Didier, Nicolas, Anne, Thibaut and Marion. |
| 9 | |
| 10 | Show different results for preindustrial runs with different initial concentration (315/325/320ppb whole atmosphere). Always big jump at the beginning. |
| 11 | |
| 12 | Run pisces ok, many years already computed: meeting next monday with the two Marion. |
| 13 | |
| 14 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 15 | * Remake of ratio atm/surf (not the first year) |
| 16 | * Find equilibrium state with lifetime of 130 years and ratio atm/surf=0.967 |
| 17 | |
| 18 | === On Friday 15th July === |
| 19 | |
| 20 | Results with 1.3 reduction parameter: ok with Prather's observations. Then run a preindustrial simulation with initial concnetration of 315ppb (325ppb for box model but not at the surface): big jump at the beginning and no equilibrium state. |
| 21 | Find a problem between python script and ferret. |
| 22 | |
| 23 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 24 | * Understand problem with script, |
| 25 | * Plot profiles, |
| 26 | * Add burden output at first timestep (ask Julien D.) |
| 27 | * On long simulation, compute ratio between vmr at the surface and on the whole atmosphere. |
| 28 | |
| 29 | === On Friday 5th July === |
| 30 | With Didier, Nicolas, Juliette and Anne. |
| 31 | |
| 32 | Run with pisces step by step, changes in namelist comparing with Thibaut's run but it's not working. |
| 33 | |
| 34 | Prather's run: now better with 1.3 reduction parameter. Slight difference with the initial concentration given (due to vmr2mmr change with mbar ~1 ppb) |
| 35 | Reduction of 3 ppb or more for equilibrium concentration but increase of 8 years for lifetime, difference of 0.8 TgN/y in loss. (comparing new 1.1 factor with old 1.1) |
| 36 | |
| 37 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 38 | * Write doc to explain mass conservation and test made, |
| 39 | * Make some image emi-lot, burden-burden initial etc. |
| 40 | |
| 41 | === On Friday 26th June === |
| 42 | With everyone. |
| 43 | |
| 44 | Conservation problem solved: reduction factor not on the good variable, real factor done. Profiles without sink are converging to a constant value. |
| 45 | Now, Prather's run in present day with 1.2 value not good (too high lifetime: 132 vs 127). |
| 46 | Run fr0Emi0 not mass conserved (very small changes - values on notes) |
| 47 | |
| 48 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 49 | * Run simulation with 1.3 for reduction parameter, |
| 50 | * Change diag by computing with airmass ponderation (for vmr) |
| 51 | * Test if value of equilibrium profile may be the value of the box model (and it is not at the surface only). |
| 52 | * Nemo configuration alone. |
| 53 | |
| 54 | === On Friday 21st June === |
| 55 | |
| 56 | With no sink, profil are always converging to 0 at the top of the atmosphere... This is changed with no call to expslv. |
| 57 | Compare value before and after different call in LMDZ and INCA: problem seems to be after chemmain and before chemhook_end. Maybe something in vmr2mmr. |
| 58 | Values are different if in LMDZ or in INCA. Due to a integer factor and not a real... |
| 59 | Reduction factor put on jrates which is a diag and not in photos. |
| 60 | |
| 61 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 62 | * Continue investigating mass conservation. |
| 63 | * Pisces configuration for preindustrial and stable simulation (meeting with Christian). |
| 64 | |
| 65 | === On Friday 7th June === |
| 66 | Add output in inca and lmdz to find mass conservation problem. |
| 67 | |
| 68 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 69 | * Begin to find of a preindustrial and stable state for pisces (forcing with JRA): how to make it). |
| 70 | |
| 71 | === On Friday 31st May === |
| 72 | With Didier, Nicolas, Juliette and Marion. + Thibaut. |
| 73 | |
| 74 | sh and mbar are taken into the diags. Daily outputs made to better understand annual burden. |
| 75 | Anne said phytrac subroutine might be moved in the code but no change appears. |
| 76 | |
| 77 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 78 | * Different simulation without emissions, without only bbg, without reaction rate. |
| 79 | |
| 80 | === On Friday 24th May === |
| 81 | With Didier, Anne, Nicolas, Juliette and Thibaut. |
| 82 | |
| 83 | Time interpolation better understand now. But always a problem of mass conservation. Excel file made with different values of emissions, burden, loss... |
| 84 | Over 10 years, decrese of 3TgN (9.45-9.15=0.3 over 1 year=> 3 TgN over 10years but only 1TgN seen in burden) |
| 85 | Find incoherence with mbar or dry airmass and way to go from mmr to vmr (not same formule for vmr output). |
| 86 | |
| 87 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 88 | * Add aflux as output, |
| 89 | * Change diag by using airmass now. |
| 90 | * Problem mass conservation. |
| 91 | |
| 92 | === On Friday 26th April === |
| 93 | |
| 94 | Simulation done to find equilibrium state. Seems ok for low emissions (around 250ppb) but not yet for original emissions. |
| 95 | Continue to investiguate where the problem is. Maybe the way we compute lifetime is not good. |
| 96 | Input and output emissions problem solved: output file doesn't contain bbg fluxes (in another variable aflux and not eflux). |
| 97 | |
| 98 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 99 | * Test with only in troposphere (until 10km), |
| 100 | * Compute ratio sum of burden over sum of vmr (near of 4.78 ppb/TgN), |
| 101 | * Homogeneise sflx_input time axis. |
| 102 | |
| 103 | === On Friday 19th April === |
| 104 | |
| 105 | Same difference between input and output with CH4. Time interpolation daily were made to understand the problem. Results are coherent but not with input emissions. |
| 106 | |
| 107 | Thibaut has changed the namelist in pisces. Beware on the sinkN2O value. |
| 108 | |
| 109 | === On Friday 12th April === |
| 110 | With everyone. |
| 111 | |
| 112 | Lifetimes are around 128 years over 20 years (1880-1900), 129 years over 10 years. Then, equilibrium concentrations given by the box model are around 330 ppb or 332 ppb with a lifetime between 128 and 129 years. Incoherence with simulation. (Same result with low emissions with an equilibrium concentration around 245 ppb but seems to be lower). |
| 113 | |
| 114 | Different time interpolations have been made but no change in results (inputs =/= output). Maybe, area are different. |
| 115 | |
| 116 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 117 | * Compare input and output values, |
| 118 | * Compare area files. |
| 119 | |
| 120 | === On Friday 5th April === |
| 121 | With Didier, Nicolas, Anne and Marion. + Thibaut. |
| 122 | |
| 123 | A new run with lower emissions have been made: emissions of around 9Tg/y to be around 280 ppb of surface concentration (computed with the box model). |
| 124 | |
| 125 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 126 | * Continue to find equilibrium, |
| 127 | * Try changing the time interpolation for emissions, |
| 128 | * Put anthropogenic emissions to 0. |
| 129 | |
| 130 | === On Friday 29th March === |
| 131 | |
| 132 | Show result on preindustrial and reduction parameter of 1.1. Continue to find equilibrium state and compare loss and input emissions. |
| 133 | |
| 134 | === On Friday 22nd March === |
| 135 | |
| 136 | Now, Thibaut has H2S emissions correct (error in INCAflx with an ocean mask on ocean value so distribution only on the coasts). Values are ok on land. |
| 137 | |
| 138 | Different preindustrial simulation have been done. Starting at 322 ppb (box model) is too high, starting at 280 ppb (observations) is too low. |
| 139 | |
| 140 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 141 | * Continue to find equilibrium state for preindustrial, |
| 142 | * On long runs, calculate annual mean over 10 years and loss and burden. |
| 143 | * Test if plausible: knowing lifetime, calculate emissions to have (around 14% = (320-280)/280). |
| 144 | * What is the impact of a decreasing emissions on lifetime? |
| 145 | |
| 146 | === On Friday 15th March === |
| 147 | With Didier, Nicolas and Thibaut. |
| 148 | |
| 149 | Thibaut explain a problem using ocean or land mask. H2S emissions seem weird with only value on the coasts. |
| 150 | |
| 151 | I show results with reduction parameter of 1.1 (better than 1.2 because appear in the two types of reaction rates). On present day simulation, lifetimes are now comparable to Prathers's obeservations. |
| 152 | |
| 153 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 154 | * Run preindustrial simulation with CM5A2 oxidants and initial concentration computed with a lifetime of 110 year in the box model. |
| 155 | * Make a comparison between HEMCO and CEDS inventories and write a document on it. |
| 156 | |
| 157 | === On Friday 8th March === |
| 158 | With everyone and Thibaut. |
| 159 | |
| 160 | Thibaut explain the model with oceanic transfert and its results with DMS. |
| 161 | |
| 162 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 163 | * On Obelix and Spirit: prepare launch files for INCAflx and push them on svn. + write documentation. |
| 164 | |
| 165 | === On Friday 28th February === |
| 166 | With Didier, Juliette and Marion. |
| 167 | |
| 168 | Reduction parameter was only on reaction rate and not on photolysis too. Change doesn't seem to go in the right way (increase of lifetime whereas it has to decrease). |
| 169 | |
| 170 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 171 | * Continue to test Prather's transport scheme, |
| 172 | * Understand where the problem is by changing reduction parameter. |
| 173 | |
| 174 | === On Friday 16th February === |
| 175 | With Anne, Nicolas, Juliette and Marion. Special guest: Thibaut in visio. |
| 176 | |
| 177 | WP1 asks for specific simulations, so Thibaut will make them including his work on DMS and mine on N2O. |
| 178 | |
| 179 | === On Friday 25th January === |
| 180 | With everybody. |
| 181 | |
| 182 | I have used pisces model, understand its inputs and outputs. Some vertical profile are made in a specific zone. We have seen a seasonal distribution of N2O. |
| 183 | |
| 184 | Invariants map are now in good shape (no more inverted). |
| 185 | |
| 186 | Reduction parameter has been include in INCA. First results with different factors done. It seems that 1.2 is better than others (compare to Prather's results: lifetime around 110 years). |
| 187 | |
| 188 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 189 | * Write the methodology to add a input parameter in INCA, |
| 190 | * Run preindustrial simulation with 1.2 reduction on reaction rates, |
| 191 | * Add in INCA a map to reduce input emissions of orchidee), |
| 192 | * See change on N2O profiles with the reduction factor, |
| 193 | * Test with Prather's transport scheme (ask Anne). |
| 194 | |
| 195 | === On Friday 19th January === |
| 196 | With Didier, Anne, Nicolas and Juliette. |
| 197 | |
| 198 | Using Christian restart doesn't change result (except inland seas). Deposite of DMS and N2O are zero. |
| 199 | |
| 200 | Full simulation in present day were finish. Comparison of lifetime with Prather's result give values around other models but too high from observations. The idea now is to put a factor to reduce sinks (reaction rate and photolysis). |
| 201 | |
| 202 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 203 | * Continue pisces investigation (outputs), |
| 204 | * Implement a reduction parameter for reaction rates. |
| 205 | * Investigate error in coupled model (LMDZ problem with limit.nc) |
| 206 | |
| 207 | === On Friday 12th January === |
| 208 | With Didier, Juliette and Marion. |
| 209 | |
| 210 | Back to holidays. |
| 211 | |
| 212 | Show profiles of O1D and O3: seems good. Maybe a unit problem when taking the ratio of the two. |
| 213 | |
| 214 | Simulation with correct oxidants over 30 years: find lifetime around 135 or more years. Few differences by changing oxidant. |
| 215 | In order to reduce the concentration, we have 2 solutions: reduce emissions by 10-15% (1-120/135 ; 120y = lft obs, 135y=our lft) or reduce atmospheric sink (ie transport). |
| 216 | |
| 217 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 218 | * investiguate problem with ratio, |
| 219 | * output of pisces run (factor of 1000 on oceanic emissions in coupled model), |
| 220 | * change initial state of pisces (mail of Christian). |
| 221 | |
| 222 | === On Friday 15th December === |
| 223 | With Didier, Nicolas, Juliette and Marion. |
| 224 | |
| 225 | Lifetimes between simulation are different because of initial state taken at different time (restart from a simulation or from scratch). Convergence toward an equilibrium seems reached around 322 ppb. |
| 226 | |
| 227 | Ozone profiles and evolution are shown. There is no stratosphere in IPCC/AR6 oxidants. Reconstruction seems ok: we will use these one (from Olivier's script) now. |
| 228 | |
| 229 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 230 | * Include DMS and COS in Orchidee and Inca, |
| 231 | * Include those species into the transfert between Orchidee and Inca, |
| 232 | * Study ratio between O1D and O3 (constant for Sophie's files, different for others), |
| 233 | * Use CM5A2 oxidants in 1990 over 10 years and compare with simulations already made, |
| 234 | * Check convergence over 30 years. |
| 235 | |
| 236 | === On Friday 8th December === |
| 237 | With Didier, Nicolas, Juliette and Marion. |
| 238 | |
| 239 | 4 runs were made with a different initial concentration (350, 330, 315 and 310 ppb). It shows a convergence in concentration at the surface for the run with 315ppb as initial surface concentration. This value doesn't correspond to the value we find using the box model. |
| 240 | Oxidants files were created with Olivier's scripts. Few differences appear with those of Yann. |
| 241 | |
| 242 | __//**TO DO**//__ |
| 243 | * Compute lifetime of runs over last 10 years of simulation, |
| 244 | * Continue 315ppb 's run and/or restart from an other initial state. |
| 245 | * Start with pisces. |
| 246 | |