Hi Alison,
I totally agree with Philip. We have to strike a balance between discussing/defining absolute best practice and the requirements of the CF user community to be able to get on with their work. The semantic model is a case in point - something we can aspire to, but in no way should it be become a blocker to standard name allocation. The essential thing as Jonatahn says is to ensure that the definitions of the terms are as accurate and as complete as we can make them.
Cheers, Roy.
>>> "Philip J. Cameron-smith" <cameronsmith1 at llnl.gov> 11/6/2007 7:14 pm >>>
Hi Alison,
I wouldn't worry about isomers at this point. You are absolutely correct
that xylene has three structural isomers, and they are a bit different
chemically. However, there are different sorts of isomer, including
isotopic isomers, that will apply to many or all of these species.
The good news is that it is generally assumed that if nothing is specified
then a chemical name includes all of the isomers. Of course, it would be
good to state that in a comment somewhere so that there can be no doubt.
On the issue of ozone GROSS production and loss which I raised in
(
http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2007/001788.html) I am
conflicted. This is a useful and commonly reported variable, but the
definition is not universally agreed upon. In practice, experts generally
use definitions that are within the same ball-park as each other, but an
outside user could be led astray, and judicious care needs to be used when
comparing figures from different models. Whether this is enough to
stop it being accepted by CF, I don't know.
I also spotted a trivial typo: there was a space instead of an underscore
in
"tendency_of_atmosphere_mole_concentration_of_methane_due_to_chemical_gro
ss destruction"
Best wishes,
Philip
On Tue, 6 Nov 2007, Pamment, JA (Alison) wrote:
> Dear Christiane,
>
> following our exchange of emails last week, I would like to bring the
> aerosol and chemistry thread back to the list. An update of the
> standard name table is due to take place on Tuesday 13th November, so
> during the next few days I would like to finalise the list of names to
> be included.
>
> Over the summer there was quite a lengthy discussion of the idea of
> introducing a systematic method for constructing chemical names from a
> number of constituent components (Roy's "semantic model" - see
> http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2007/001774.html). There
> seems to be a good deal of support for this idea. However, as it will
> inevitably take some time to agree how to go about this and put
> something in place, I suggest that for the present we could go ahead and
> include many of the names that have been waiting a long time to go into
> the table. This does not, of course, preclude the introduction of a
> more hierarchical approach to constructing standard names in the future.
>
> Looking at the discussion copied to your HTAP wiki page,
> http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/Talk:CF_Standard_Names_-_CF_Standard_N
> ames_-_Submitted_Atmospheric_Chemistry_and_Aerosol_Terms
> there is a question concerning the sulphate/nitrate names, particularly
> with regard to optical thickness. For sulphate/nitrogen_oxide names in
> general it seems there is a need to specify exactly which species are
> included in each model. We would need to think about how to do it in CF
> because at the moment there isn't an obvious place to record such
> information. I propose that for the moment we should not add these
> particular names to the table. A similar question of how to define
> group chemical names has also been raised, e.g. in Martin Schultz's post
> http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2007/001811.html. The
> general feeling seems to be that an ontological approach is the way to
> deal with this problem.
>
> There is also the question raised by Philip
> (http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2007/001788.html)
> regarding how gross production/destruction are defined. Do we have a
> clear enough definition of what these should mean in CF?
>
> Taking into account as far as possible all the previous discussions I
> suggest that the following names could be included in the standard name
> table on November 13th.
>
> Volume mixing ratios:
> mole_fraction_of_gaseous_elemental_mercury_in_air
> mole_fraction_of_gasesous_divalent_mercury_in_air
> (Define divalent as meaning all compounds where Hg has two binding sites
> to (an)other ion(s) in a salt or an(other) atom(s) in a molecule).
>
> Tendency of atmospheric mass content due to dry deposition:
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_ozone_due_to_dry_deposition OK
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_nitric_acid_due_to_dry_depositon
> OK
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_nitrogen_dioxide_due_to_dry_depos
> ition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_ammonia_due_to_dry_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_ammonium_due_to_dry_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_dimethyl_sulfide_due_to_dry_depos
> ition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfur_dioxide_due_to_dry_deposit
> ion
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_black_carbon_dry_aerosol_due_to_d
> ry_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_particulate_organic_matter_dry_ae
> ro
> sol_due_to_dry_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_secondary_particulate_organic_mat
> ter_dry_aerosol_due_to_dry_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_primary_particulate_organic_matte
> r_dry_aerosol_due_to_dry_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_seasalt_dry_aerosol_due_to_dry_de
> position
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_dust_dry_aerosol_due_to_dry_depos
> ition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_hexachlorobiphenyl_due_to_dry_dep
> osition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_alpha_hexachlorocyclohexane_due_t
> o_dry_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_gasesous_elemental_mercury_due_to
> _dry_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_gaseous_divalent_mercury_due_to_d
> ry_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_mercury_dry_aerosol_due_to_dry_de
> position
>
> Tendency of atmospheric mass content due to dry deposition into stomata:
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_ozone_due_to_dry_deposition_into_
> stomata
>
> Tendency of atmospheric mass content due to wet deposition:
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_nitric_acid_due_to_wet_depositon
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_ammonia_due_to_wet_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_ammonium_due_to_wet_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_dimethyl_sulfide_due_to_wet_depos
> ition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfur_dioxide_due_to_wet_deposit
> ion
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_black_carbon_dry_aerosol_due_to_w
> et_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_particulate_organic_matter_dry_ae
> rosol_due_to_wet_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_secondary_particulate_organic_mat
> ter_dry_aerosol_due_to_wet_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_primary_particulate_organic_matte
> r_dry_aerosol_due_to_wet_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_seasalt_dry_aerosol_due_to_wet_de
> position
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_dust_dry_aerosol_due_to_wet_depos
> it
> ion
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_hexachlorobiphenyl_due_to_wet_dep
> osition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_alpha_hexachlorocyclohexane_due_t
> o_wet_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_gasesous_elemental_mercury_due_to
> _wet_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_gaseous_divalent_mercury_due_to_w
> et_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_mercury_dry_aerosol_due_to_wet_de
> position
>
> Tendency of atmospheric mass content due to emissions:
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_carbon_monoxide_due_to_emission
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_ammonia_due_to_emission
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfur_dioxide_due_to_emission
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_dimethyl_sulfide_due_to_emission
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_black_carbon_dry_aerosol_due_to_e
> mission
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_particulate_organic_matter_dry_ae
> rosol_due_to_net_production_and_emission
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_secondary_particulate_organic_mat
> ter_dry_aerosol_due_to_net_production
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_primary_particulate_organic_matte
> r_dry_aerosol_due_to_emission
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_seasalt_dry_aerosol_due_to_emissi
> on
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_dust_dry_aerosol_due_to_emission
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_hexachlorobiphenyl_due_to_emissio
> n
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_alpha_hexachlorocyclohexane_due_t
> o_emission
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_hexachlorobiphenyl_due_to_re_emis
> sion
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_alpha_hexachlorocyclohexane_due_t
> o_re_emission
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_gaseous_elemental_mercury_due_to_
> emission
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_gaseous_divalent_mercury_due_to_e
> mission
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_mercury_dry_aerosol_due_to_emissi
> on
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_nox_expressed_as_nitrogen_due_to_
> emission (where NOx=NO+NO2)
>
> Tendencies due to chemical reactions:
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mole_concentration_of_ozone_due_to_chemical_gross
> _production
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mole_concentration_of_ozone_due_to_chemical_gross
> _destruction
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mole_concentration_of_methane_due_to_chemical_gro
> ss
> destruction
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mole_concentration_of_carbon_monoxide_due_to_chem
> ical_gross_destruction
>
> Optical thickness:
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_pm10_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_pm2p5_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_pm1_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_black_carbon_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_seasalt_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_dust_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_particulate_organic_matter_ambient_a
> erosol
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_water_in_ambient_aerosol
> (Define as the difference between the total dry aerosol and the total
> ambient aerosol optical thickness: it is due to the increase in aerosol
> radius due to water uptake).
>
>
> The following proposed names would be left out for now:
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_all_nitrogen_oxides_expressed_as_
> nitrogen_due_to_dry_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_dry_aerosol_due_to_dry_de
> position
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_all_nitrogen_oxides_expressed_as_
> nitrogen_due_to_wet_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_dry_aerosol_due_to_wet_de
> position
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_dry_aerosol_due_to_emissi
> on
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_nitrate_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_sulfate_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_ammonium_ambient_aerosol (The HTAP
> discussion indicates that this proposed name may be withdrawn).
>
> You also put forward a more recent set of proposals:
> mole_fraction_of_carbon_dioxide_in_air
> mole_fraction_of_methane_in_air
> mole_fraction_of_formaldehyde_in_air
> mole_fraction_of_ethane_in_air
> mole_fraction_of_ethene_in_air
> mole_fraction_of_ethyne_in_air
> mole_fraction_of_propane_in_air
> mole_fraction_of_propene_in_air
> mole_fraction_of_benzene_in_air
> mole_fraction_of_toluene_in_air
> mole_fraction_of_xylene_in_air
> mole_fraction_of_isoprene_in_air
>
> I think the names look OK. Not being an organic chemist, I don't know
> much about the last three species on your list. I'm aware that xylene
> has a number of isomers. Could any of these names be considered 'group'
> names? If so, they might be best left out of the table for now until we
> can decide on how we're going to proceed with chemical names in the
> future.
>
> Best wishes,
> Alison
>
> ------
> Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065
> NCAS/British Atmospheric Data Centre Fax: +44 1235 446314
> Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Email: J.A.Pamment at rl.ac.uk
> Chilton, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Philip Cameron-Smith Energy & Environment Directorate
pjc at llnl.gov Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
+1 925 4236634 7000 East Avenue, Livermore, CA94550, USA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
--
This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC
is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents
of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless
it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to
NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system.
Received on Wed Nov 07 2007 - 01:22:31 GMT
