Impact of biomass burning on pollutant surface concentrations in megacities of the Gulf of Guinea

Menut, Laurent; Flamant, Cyrille; Turquety, Solène; Deroubaix, Adrien; Chazette, Patrick; Meynadier, Rémi

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2687-2018

Articles | Volume 18, issue 4

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2687-2018

© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Special issue:

Results of the project "Dynamics–aerosol–chemistry–cloud...

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2687-2018

© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 18, issue 4

Research article

|

23 Feb 2018

Research article |

| 23 Feb 2018

Impact of biomass burning on pollutant surface concentrations in megacities of the Gulf of Guinea

Laurent Menut, Cyrille Flamant, Solène Turquety, Adrien Deroubaix, Patrick Chazette, and Rémi Meynadier

Download

Final revised paper (published on 23 Feb 2018)
Preprint (discussion started on 20 Sep 2017)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

SC1: 'Short comment on Menut et al. (2017)', Anne Swank, 04 Nov 2017
- AC1: 'Answer to comment of A.Swank', Laurent Menut, 06 Nov 2017
SC2: 'Peer Review by Jolanda Theeuwen', Jolanda Theeuwen, 06 Nov 2017
SC3: 'Comment on “Impact of biomass burning on pollutants surface concentrations in mega cities of the Gulf of Guinea” by Laurent Menut et al.', Vicky Meulenberg, 07 Nov 2017
RC1: 'Review of ACPD doi:10.5194/acp-2017-852', Anonymous Referee #1, 21 Nov 2017
RC2: 'Review of “Impact of biomass burning on pollutants surface concentrations in megacities of the Gulf of Guinea” by Menut, et al.', Mark Parrington, 28 Nov 2017

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

AR by Laurent Menut on behalf of the Authors (21 Dec 2017) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (08 Jan 2018) by Mathew Evans

RR by Mark Parrington (22 Jan 2018)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

Technical corrections to be addressed:

Page 3, lines 13-15: it would be helpfully to specify which observations from each instrument are used in this first sentence.

Page 4, line 22: extend should be extent.

Page 5, line 19: adressing should be addressing.

Page 5, line 25: altitudes should be altitude.

Page 5, line 26: please define what Hp means – it is defined as injection height in the next paragraph, but it would be useful before it is used here.

Page 5, line 29: than should be as.

Page 6, line 9: use “the surface”.

Page 6, line 13: using however rather than but is a cleaner way of starting sentences.

Page 7, line 6: “is injected” should be “are injected”.

Page 7, line 14: I think that merging Sections 3 and 4 could be helpful as they provide the method and results for the tracer experiments.

Page 7, line 27: tracers should be tracer.

Page 8, line 3: suggest changing “emissions sources” to “sources of emissions”.

Page 10, line 5: a definition of Harmattan flow would be useful here as it hasn’t been defined before.

Page 10, lines 6-7: suggest changing “towards the north towards Nigeria” to “towards the north and Nigeria”.

Page 10, line 11: change “allows to” to “allows us to”.

Page 10, line 16: it isn’t clear what is meant by “vertical constant profile”.

Page 10, line 23: “coast cities” should be “coastal cities”.

Page 11, line 5: change “enables to validate” to “enables validation of”.

Page 11, line 7: change “AOD are” to “AOD is”.

Page 11, line 12: please clarify what “section C” refers to.

Page 11, line 12: should “BADC stations” be “Met Office MIDAS land surface stations”?

Page 12, line 8 (section 5.2): change “strongly dependent” to “which is strongly dependent”.

Page 14, line 19: suggest changing “The comparison” to “The CO comparison” to reiterate that this section is for CO.

Page 14, line 20: correspond should be corresponds; sub-domain should be sub-domains.

Page 14, line 20-21: I don’t think this sentence is necessary.

Page 15, line 1: specify the “transition from ‘climatological’ values”?

Page 16, line 13: remove parentheses from citation of Jeethva et al.

Page 16, line 13: change “in case of optically” to “in case of an optically”.

Page 17, line 1: Apppendix should be Appendix.

Page 17, line 2: change “that there is no smoke” to “but rather that there is no smoke”.

Page 17, line 3: change “vertical extension” to “vertical extent”.

Page 17, line 24: POM and PPM should be defined in the text.

Page 18, line 6: pealing should be peaking.

Page 18, line 9: “mixed on” should be “mixed in”.

Page 19, lines 9-10: I appreciate that the authors removed references to pollution alerts but I think a a further comment on the (e.g. human health) implications of the pollution in these cities could be useful. A further comment on the range of harmful pollutants present in biomass burning smoke, beyond those that are considered in this study, could also be useful to the reader for context.

Appendices: I think swapping Appendix A and Appendix B, so that the model set-up is described first will be helpful.

Page 25, line 10: it might be helpful to clarify how many chemical species are emitted, and if they are all modelled in CHIMERE.

Hide

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (24 Jan 2018) by Mathew Evans

AR by Laurent Menut on behalf of the Authors (24 Jan 2018) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (28 Jan 2018) by Mathew Evans

Short summary

During the DACCIWA project, the tropospheric chemical composition in large cities along the Gulf of Guinea is modelled using WRF and CHIMERE, with and without biomass burning emissions. The difference shows the net impact of fires on air quality in Lagos and Abidjan.