Articles | Volume 20, issue 19
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 11349–11369, 2020
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11349-2020
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 11349–11369, 2020
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11349-2020
Research article
 | Highlight paper
05 Oct 2020
Research article  | Highlight paper | 05 Oct 2020

Impacts of future land use and land cover change on mid-21st-century surface ozone air quality: distinguishing between the biogeophysical and biogeochemical effects

Lang Wang et al.

Related authors

Satellite-derived constraints on the effect of drought stress on biogenic isoprene emissions in the southeastern US
Yuxuan Wang, Nan Lin, Wei Li, Alex Guenther, Joey C. Y. Lam, Amos P. K. Tai, Mark J. Potosnak, and Roger Seco
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 14189–14208, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-14189-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-14189-2022, 2022
Short summary
Development of an ecophysiology module in the GEOS-Chem chemical transport model version 12.2.0 to represent biosphere−atmosphere fluxes relevant for ozone air quality
Joey C. Y. Lam, Amos P. K. Tai, Jason A. Ducker, and Christopher D. Holmes
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-786,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-786, 2022
Short summary
Influence of plant ecophysiology on ozone dry deposition: comparing between multiplicative and photosynthesis-based dry deposition schemes and their responses to rising CO2 level
Shihan Sun, Amos P. K. Tai, David H. Y. Yung, Anthony Y. H. Wong, Jason A. Ducker, and Christopher D. Holmes
Biogeosciences, 19, 1753–1776, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-1753-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-1753-2022, 2022
Short summary
Modeling the interinfluence of fertilizer-induced NH3 emission, nitrogen deposition, and aerosol radiative effects using modified CESM2
Ka Ming Fung, Maria Val Martin, and Amos P. K. Tai
Biogeosciences, 19, 1635–1655, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-1635-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-1635-2022, 2022
Short summary
Effects of ozone–vegetation interactions on meteorology and air quality in China using a two-way coupled land–atmosphere model
Jiachen Zhu, Amos P. K. Tai, and Steve Hung Lam Yim
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 765–782, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-765-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-765-2022, 2022
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Gases | Research Activity: Atmospheric Modelling | Altitude Range: Troposphere | Science Focus: Physics (physical properties and processes)
Methane emissions from China: a high-resolution inversion of TROPOMI satellite observations
Zichong Chen, Daniel J. Jacob, Hannah Nesser, Melissa P. Sulprizio, Alba Lorente, Daniel J. Varon, Xiao Lu, Lu Shen, Zhen Qu, Elise Penn, and Xueying Yu
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 10809–10826, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-10809-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-10809-2022, 2022
Short summary
Estimated regional CO2 flux and uncertainty based on an ensemble of atmospheric CO2 inversions
Naveen Chandra, Prabir K. Patra, Yousuke Niwa, Akihiko Ito, Yosuke Iida, Daisuke Goto, Shinji Morimoto, Masayuki Kondo, Masayuki Takigawa, Tomohiro Hajima, and Michio Watanabe
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 9215–9243, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9215-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9215-2022, 2022
Short summary
Assessing the representativity of NH3 measurements influenced by boundary-layer dynamics and the turbulent dispersion of a nearby emission source
Ruben B. Schulte, Margreet C. van Zanten, Bart J. H. van Stratum, and Jordi Vilà-Guerau de Arellano
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 8241–8257, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-8241-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-8241-2022, 2022
Short summary
Towards monitoring CO2 source-sink distribution over India via inverse modelling: Quantifying the fine-scale spatiotemporal variability of atmospheric CO2 mole fraction
Vishnu Thilakan, Dhanyalekshmi Pillai, Christoph Gerbig, Michal Galkowski, Aparnna Ravi, and Thara Anna Mathew
Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2022-214,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2022-214, 2022
Revised manuscript accepted for ACP
Short summary
Analysis of CO2, CH4, and CO surface and column concentrations observed at Réunion Island by assessing WRF-Chem simulations
Sieglinde Callewaert, Jérôme Brioude, Bavo Langerock, Valentin Duflot, Dominique Fonteyn, Jean-François Müller, Jean-Marc Metzger, Christian Hermans, Nicolas Kumps, Michel Ramonet, Morgan Lopez, Emmanuel Mahieu, and Martine De Mazière
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7763–7792, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7763-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7763-2022, 2022
Short summary

Cited articles

Arora, V. K. and Montenegro, A.: Small benefits provided by realistic afforestation efforts, Nat. Geosci., 4, 514–518, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1182, 2011. 
Avnery S., Mauzerall D. L., Liu J., and Horowitz L. W.: Global crop yield reductions due to surface ozone exposure: 2. Year 2030 potential crop production losses and economic damage under two scenarios of O3 pollution, Atmos. Environ., 45, 2297–2309, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.01.002, 2011. 
Betts, R. A.: Biogeophysical impacts of land use on present-day climate: near-surface temperature change and radiative forcing, Atmos. Sci. Lett., 2, 39–51, https://doi.org/10.1006/asle.2001.0023, 2001. 
Boisier, J. P., de Noblet-Ducoudré, N., Pitman, A. J., Cruz, F. T., Delire, C., van den Hurk, B. J. J. M., van der Molen, M. K., Müller, C., and Voldoire, A.: Attributing the impacts of land-cover changes in temperate regions on surface temperature and heat fluxes to specific causes: Results from the first LUCID set of simulations, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, D12, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017106, 2012. 
Bonan, G. B.: Forests and climate change: Forcings, feedbacks, and the climate benefits of forests, Science, 320, 1444–1449, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1155121, 2008. 
Download
Short summary
We investigate the effects of future land use and land cover change (LULCC) on surface ozone air quality worldwide and find that LULCC can significantly influence ozone in North America and Europe via modifying surface energy balance, boundary-layer meteorology, and regional circulation. The strength of such “biogeophysical effects” of LULCC is strongly dependent on forest type and generally greater than the “biogeochemical effects” via changing deposition and emission fluxes alone.
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint