Articles | Volume 25, issue 3
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1545-2025
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1545-2025
Research article
 | 
04 Feb 2025
Research article |  | 04 Feb 2025

Biomass burning emission analysis based on MODIS aerosol optical depth and AeroCom multi-model simulations: implications for model constraints and emission inventories

Mariya Petrenko, Ralph Kahn, Mian Chin, Susanne E. Bauer, Tommi Bergman, Huisheng Bian, Gabriele Curci, Ben Johnson, Johannes W. Kaiser, Zak Kipling, Harri Kokkola, Xiaohong Liu, Keren Mezuman, Tero Mielonen, Gunnar Myhre, Xiaohua Pan, Anna Protonotariou, Samuel Remy, Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Philip Stier, Toshihiko Takemura, Kostas Tsigaridis, Hailong Wang, Duncan Watson-Parris, and Kai Zhang

Related authors

Introducing Volatile Organic Compound Model Intercomparison Project (VOCMIP)
Gunnar Myhre, Øivind Hodnebrog, Srinath Krishnan, Maria Sand, Marit Sandstad, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Lieven Clarisse, Bruno Franco, Dylan B. Millet, Kelley C. Wells, Alexander Archibald, Hannah N. Bryant, Alex T. Chaudhri, David S. Stevenson, Didier Hauglustaine, Michael Prather, J. Christopher Kaiser, Dirk J. L. Olivie, Michael Schulz, Oliver Wild, Ye Wang, Thérèse Salameh, Jason E. Williams, Philippe Le Sager, Fabien Paulot, Kostas Tsigaridis, and Haley E. Plaas
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3057,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3057, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Observationally constrained analysis on the distribution of fine- and coarse-mode nitrate in global models
Mingxuan Wu, Hailong Wang, Zheng Lu, Xiaohong Liu, Huisheng Bian, David D. Cohen, Yan Feng, Mian Chin, Didier A. Hauglustaine, Vlassis A. Karydis, Marianne T. Lund, Gunnar Myhre, Andrea Pozzer, Michael Schulz, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Alexandra P. Tsimpidi, Svetlana G. Tsyro, and Shaocheng Xie
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 10049–10074, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-10049-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-10049-2025, 2025
Short summary
ROCKE-3D 2.0: an updated general circulation model for simulating the climates of rocky planets
Kostas Tsigaridis, Andrew S. Ackerman, Igor Aleinov, Mark A. Chandler, Thomas L. Clune, Christopher M. Colose, Anthony D. Del Genio, Maxwell Kelley, Nancy Y. Kiang, Anthony Leboissetier, Jan P. Perlwitz, Reto A. Ruedy, Gary L. Russell, Linda E. Sohl, Michael J. Way, and Eric T. Wolf
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 5825–5871, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-5825-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-5825-2025, 2025
Short summary
Features of mid- and high-latitude low-level clouds and their relation to strong aerosol effects in the Energy Exascale Earth System Model version 2 (E3SMv2)
Hui Wan, Abhishek Yenpure, Berk Geveci, Richard C. Easter, Philip J. Rasch, Kai Zhang, and Xubin Zeng
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 5655–5680, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-5655-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-5655-2025, 2025
Short summary
Response of marine post-frontal clouds to Gulf Stream variability
Jingyi Chen, Hailong Wang, Bo Zhang, Hongyu Liu, David Painemal, Armin Sorooshian, Sheng-Lun Tai, and Christiane Voigt
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.22541/essoar.175376670.02806644/v1,https://doi.org/10.22541/essoar.175376670.02806644/v1, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary

Cited articles

AeroCom: Finalized Benchmark Data, AeroCom [data set], https://aerocom.met.no/data, last access: 22 January 2025. 
Anderson, K., Chen, J., Englefield, P., Griffin, D., Makar, P. A., and Thompson, D.: The Global Forest Fire Emissions Prediction System version 1.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7713–7749, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7713-2024, 2024. 
Andreae, M. O., Rosenfeld, D., Artaxo, P., Costa, A. A., Frank, G. P., Longo, K. M., and Silva-Dias, M. A. F.: Smoking Rain Clouds over the Amazon, Science, 303, 1337–1342, 2004. 
Bauer, S. E., Koch, D., Unger, N., Metzger, S. M., Shindell, D. T., and Streets, D. G.: Nitrate aerosols today and in 2030: a global simulation including aerosols and tropospheric ozone, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 5043–5059, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-5043-2007, 2007. 
Download
Short summary
We compared smoke plume simulations from 11 global models to each other and to satellite smoke amount observations aimed at constraining smoke source strength. In regions where plumes are thick and background aerosol is low, models and satellites compare well. However, the input emission inventory tends to underestimate in many places, and particle property and loss rate assumptions vary enormously among models, causing uncertainties that require systematic in situ measurements to resolve.

Share
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint