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

Abstract. We assessed the biomass burning (BB) smoke aerosol optical depth (AOD) simulations of 11 global models that participated in the AeroCom phase III BB emission experiment. By comparing multi-model simulations and satellite observations in the vicinity of fires over 13 regions globally, we (1) assess model-simulated BB AOD performance as an indication of smoke source–strength, (2) identify regions where the common emission dataset used by the models might underestimate or overestimate smoke sources, and (3) assess model diversity and identify underlying causes as much as possible. Using satellite-derived AOD snapshots to constrain source strength works best where BB smoke from active sources dominates background non-BB aerosol, such as in boreal forest regions and over South America and southern hemispheric Africa. The comparison is inconclusive where the total AOD is low, as in many agricultural burning areas, and where the background is high, such as parts of India and China. Many inter-model BB AOD differences can be traced to differences in values for the mass ratio of organic aerosol to organic carbon, the BB aerosol mass extinction efficiency, and the aerosol loss rate from each model. The results point to a need for increased numbers of available BB cases for study in some regions and especially to a need for more extensive regional-to-global-scale measurements of aerosol loss rates and of detailed particle microphysical and optical properties; this would both better constrain models and help distinguish BB from other aerosol types in satellite retrievals. More generally, there is the need for additional efforts at constraining aerosol source strength and other model attributes with multi-platform observations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Atmospheric chemistry and physics
Published
2025-02-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1545-2025
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.90

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

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

Harri Kokkola, Zak Kipling, Huisheng Bian, Toshihiko Takemura et al.
3 citations
Atmospheric chemistry and physics
Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
3.90
article

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

Harri Kokkola, Zak Kipling, Huisheng Bian, Toshihiko Takemura, Susanne Elizabeth Bauer, Anna Protonotariou, Duncan Watson‐Parris, Gunnar Myhre, Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Tero Mielonen, Mian Chin, Ben T. Thomas Johnson, Tommi Bergman, Johannes W. Kaiser, Kostas Tsigaridis, Xiaohua Pan, Xiaohong Liu, Gabriele Curci, Hailong Wang, Samuel Rémy, Keren Mezuman, Philip Stier, Ralph A. Kahn, Kai Zhang, Maksym Petrenko
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Abstract. We assessed the biomass burning (BB) smoke aerosol optical depth (AOD) simulations of 11 global models that participated in the AeroCom phase III BB emission experiment. By comparing multi-model simulations and satellite observations in the vicinity of fires over 13 regions globally, we (1) assess model-simulated BB AOD performance as an indication of smoke source–strength, (2) identify regions where the common emission dataset used by the models might underestimate or overestimate smoke sources, and (3) assess model diversity and identify underlying causes as much as possible. Using satellite-derived AOD snapshots to constrain source strength works best where BB smoke from active sources dominates background non-BB aerosol, such as in boreal forest regions and over South America and southern hemispheric Africa. The comparison is inconclusive where the total AOD is low, as in many agricultural burning areas, and where the background is high, such as parts of India and China. Many inter-model BB AOD differences can be traced to differences in values for the mass ratio of organic aerosol to organic carbon, the BB aerosol mass extinction efficiency, and the aerosol loss rate from each model. The results point to a need for increased numbers of available BB cases for study in some regions and especially to a need for more extensive regional-to-global-scale measurements of aerosol loss rates and of detailed particle microphysical and optical properties; this would both better constrain models and help distinguish BB from other aerosol types in satellite retrievals. More generally, there is the need for additional efforts at constraining aerosol source strength and other model attributes with multi-platform observations.

Atmospheric chemistry and physicsVol. 25(3)
Goddard Institute for Space Studies (US), Finnish Meteorological Institute (FI), Met Office (GB), Goddard Space Flight Center (US), Kyushu University (JP), Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (US), Scripps Institution of Oceanography (US), University of Eastern Finland (FI), University of Colorado Boulder (US), National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (GR), University of L'Aquila (IT), University of California San Diego (US), University of Oxford (GB), CICERO Center for International Climate Research (NO), Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics (US), Eastern Finland Laboratory Center (FI), Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center (US), Adnet Systems (United States) (US), University of Maryland, College Park (US), NILU (NO), Columbia University (US), Texas A&M University (US), Hyosung Corporation (South Korea) (KR)
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
3.90
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.