Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
H2 effects on CH4 lifetime #758
base: dev-h2
Are you sure you want to change the base?
H2 effects on CH4 lifetime #758
Changes from 6 commits
2203297
a46e14e
ec1511f
42479b7
8ed3f3e
95b3196
7058e56
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Same spelling note; also, is there a reference/source for this value? If so please note it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Was there some derivation needed for this, or was this coefficient in the right format from the original source? (And how similar were the coefficients for other emissions to the ones we are using now?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Okay there was a derivation that was needed for this parameter, which will be described in detail in the manuscript associated with this work although that is a TBD, so I have included a TODO-H2 tag which is linked to the H2 project as a reminder to address this issue before merging into main or anything.
@ssmithClimate Could you elaborate on this a bit more? (And how similar were the coefficients for other emissions to the ones we are using now?) I am not sure if I understand what you are asking here. It is also unclear where the original coefficients came from @ssmithClimate do you know the source of those?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry for the delay. The coefficients in hector now ultimately derive from this paper:
Wigley, T.M.L., Steven J. Smith, and M.J. Prather (2002) Radiative Forcing due to Reactive Gas Emissions. Journal of Climate 15(18), pp. 2690–2696
Although the hector paper quotes the source as :
Tanaka, K., Kriegler, E., Bruckner, T., Hooss, C., Knorr, W., and Raddatz, T.: Aggregated Carbon Cycle, Atmospheric Chemistry, and Climate Model (ACC2) – description of the forward and inverse models, 1–188, Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, Germany, 188, 2007.
(which is a more indirect reference)
So my question was - is the overall chemistry representation of the source we're drawing the H2 coefficients from is generally consistent with the chemistry representation used now in Hector. If not it's something to flag (e.g., means we ultimately might need to update more than H2) since the two things we're merging together are not entirely consistent with each other. (Given uncertainty its likely fine, but we would want to flag this at least.)
So the way I thought to evaluate that was to look if the relative magnitude of any common coefficients for the non-H2 components of the equations that were used in the H2 work we're using now and the original equation we use now in Hector were similar. For example is the ratio of the impact of NOx to impact of CH4 or NOx to CO in the original hector (e.g. Wigley et al, Tanaka et al) are similar to what's in the H2 papers we are citing (to the extent they contain these other effects).
For example, in hector we have something like this for the CH4 OH lifetime (Hartin et al. 2015):
ln(OH)t = −0.32(ln[CH4 ]t − ln[CH4 ]t 0 ) + 0.0042(E(NOx)t ) − (E(NOx)t0) − 0.000105(E(CO)t ) − (E(CO)t0) − 0.00315(E(VOC)t ) − (E(VOC)t0)
So the impact of NOx vs CO is: 0.0042 / 0.000105 = 40 times (on an emissions basis in this case). Or we could look at the relative impact of NOx to CH4 in this equation if that's what's common between what's in hector now and what is represented in the equations from the paper's we are drawing from for the new H2 components.
To do this we need to have both sets of equations cast into an equivalent form.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@kdorheim comments here!