Hello Roy,
Thank you very much for your comment! It is the only one I got so far
during the three weeks since submission. As you say a little more work
is needed and I would appreciate some more input (as my colleagues and I
did already quite a bit of work). I would very much appreciate more
comments on the proposed aerosol and chemistry names, especially as they
will be used in their current form within the HTAP model intercomparison
that is starting these days.
Concerning you comments:
What is wrong with surface_emission_flux?
The state of aerosols (liquid or dry) is dependent on their composition
and the ambient humidity. The proposed aerosol terms state clearly if
they relate to dry aerosol, or to which humidity they refer
(e.g. mass_fraction_of_pm10_aerosol_at_50_percent_relative_humidity_in_air
mass_fraction_ of_dust_dry_aerosol_in_air)
Do you have any suggestions for the mercury variables?
Best regards,
Christiane
Roy Lowry a ?crit :
> Hello Christine,
>
> My main comment is that your work is a first step taking CF into a new area. I therefore feel definitions are especially important.
Whilst there are some really good definitions in your list (e.g. NOy)
there are other areas where more
information would be extermely helpful The ones that hit me straight
away are mercury_0, mercury_2,
'surface_emission_mass_flux', the aerosol terms (does this include solid
particulates or just liquid phase?),
'pm10' and 'pm2p5', but there may be others.
>
> A little more work on this area would I think greatly enhance a good piece of work.
>
> Cheers, Roy
>
>
>>>>Christiane Textor <christiane.textor at aero.jussieu.fr> 08/18/06 5:53 PM >>>
>
> Dear all,
>
> I would like to propose you new_standard names for aerosols and chemical
> variables. These names will be used in the model intercomparisons in the
> framework of the Task Force on Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution
> (http://www.htap.org/, http://aqm.jrc.it/HTAP/) and the European
> Integrated Project GEMS (http://www.ecmwf.int/research/EU_projects/GEMS/).
>
> The proposed names have been extensively discussed by a 'virtual
> workgroup' activity through a wiki page
> http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/Air_Quality/Chemistry_Naming_Conventions
> with the aid of some CF experts to whom we are very grateful for their
> support.
>
> Many other people who contributed to discussion:
> Olivier Boucher, Frank Dentener, Rudy Husar, Jonathan Gregory,
> KyleHalliday, BryanLawrence, Vincent-Henri Peuch, Sebastian Rast, Martin
> Schultz, Michael Schulz, Ranjeet Sokhi, David Stevenson, Karl Taylor,
> Christiane Textor, Peter van Velthoven.
>
> Please find attached a file with the proposed standard names.
> More information on how these names are constructed can be found at
> http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/CF_Standard_Names_-_Future_Atmospheric_Chemistry_and_Aerosol_Terms
>
> I am looking forward to your comments.
>
> Best regards,
> Christiane Textor
>
> (on vacation until September 11)
>
--
Christiane Textor
GMES France Atmosph?re - GEMS France
Service d'A?ronomie INSU CNRS, Tour 46, RDC # 2
Universit? Pierre et Marie Curie, Boite 102
4 place Jussieu
75252 Paris C?dex 05
France
Tel: ++33 1.44.27.21.82
Fax: ++33 1.44.27.21.81
Email: christiane.textor at aero.jussieu.fr
Received on Mon Sep 11 2006 - 06:15:24 BST
