Difference between revisions of "Talk:CF Standard Names - Discussed Atmospheric Chemistry and Aerosol Terms"

From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
Line 18: Line 18:
 
:I've made changes to some of the tables. In addition, Can you consider these remarks:  
 
:I've made changes to some of the tables. In addition, Can you consider these remarks:  
  
:*-AOD should always be associated with a wavelength. We can make the
+
:*-AOD should always be associated with a wavelength. We can make the decision that it should be a wavelength and not a wavenumber and that the wavelength should be given in nm (easier than micrometer in ascii!). :*-I prefer sulfate_aerosol_as_sulfate to sulfate_as_sulfate_aerosol. Sulfate aerosol is generic, it means sulfate-containing aerosol (whatever the cation is), but we measure it by the amount of dry sulfate (SO4=).  
decision that it should be a wavelength and not a wavenumber and that
 
the wavelength should be given in nm (easier than micrometer in ascii!).
 
:*-I prefer sulfate_aerosol_as_sulfate to sulfate_as_sulfate_aerosol.  
 
Sulfate aerosol is generic, it means sulfate-containing aerosol
 
(whatever the cation is), but we measure it by the amount of dry sulfate
 
(SO4=).  
 
  
:*-If all aerosols are measured dry, shouldn't there be a dry in the
+
:*-If all aerosols are measured dry, shouldn't there be a dry in the title?  
title?  
 
  
:*-I've removed, the "fine fraction", "ultrafine fraction" and so on in
+
:*-I've removed, the "fine fraction", "ultrafine fraction" and so on in the comment because the qualifier may apply to everything and it may have a unit so "fraction" is anorppriate as it may imply that it is associated to a unitless quantity. The size ranges is self-sufficient.
the comment because the qualifier may apply to everything and it may
 
have a unit so "fraction" is anorppriate as it may imply that it is
 
associated to a unitless quantity. The size ranges is self-sufficient.
 
  
:*-Avoid size and replace by diameter or radius.  
+
:*-Avoid size and replace by diameter or radius.
  
:*-diameter and radius should be qualified systematically by "dry" or
+
:*-diameter and radius should be qualified systematically by "dry" or "ambient".  
"ambient".  
 
  
:*-RF: we may want to define a RF at the surface in addition to TOA and
+
:*-RF: we may want to define a RF at the surface in addition to TOA and tropopause ones.
tropopause ones.
 

Revision as of 05:14, July 3, 2006

Vincent-Henri PEUCH

Thank you for this work! A few minor comments/suggestions/questions :
  • 1) "nitrogen_monooxide" -> "nitrogen monoxide"?
  • 2) there is always the problem that "NOy" has no fully agreed definition in the literature... It is perhaps unwise to use it in the name? Could we use "total_nitrogen_oxides" instead?
We have also to chose :
- if only the species with the name listed go in the sum
- or if it is up to the modeller to select all nitrogen oxides in his/her chemical scheme.
  • 3) the description of the "troposphere_content*" variables is not enough detailed because it is indeed verticaly integrated, but up to the tropopause only. We can specify in the explanation "up to the tropopause level", but we probably also have to specify the tropopause definition to be used (2PVU,380K ?) as the value is quite sensitive to the specific criterion used (for species with strong vertical gradients at the tropopause like ozone). A drawback of specifying is that any other type of hypotheses (other "tropopause" definition : 150 ppb of ozone, 100 hPa,...) or other ways of computation (specific tracer in the model) would then no longer fit with the name. I don't know the solution...
  • 4) we could add, for ozone at least, "total_atmosphere_content_of_*_in_air" (in Dobson units for ozone, mol/m2 for others if needed).
  • 5) the variable "mole_fraction_of_ozone_from_stratosphere_in troposphere" is a modeler's concept, with no chance of being measured. The way it is implemented in a model has an impact on the actual values, due to non linearities etc... I would not be in favor of including it as a standard variable. What do you think?
  • 6) add "mole_fraction_of_lead_in_air". Lead is the radioactive daughter of Radon, with wet scavenging as principal sink. There are some observations and it is useful to evaluate models, as decided in GRG+VAL.

Olivier Boucher

I've made changes to some of the tables. In addition, Can you consider these remarks:
  • -AOD should always be associated with a wavelength. We can make the decision that it should be a wavelength and not a wavenumber and that the wavelength should be given in nm (easier than micrometer in ascii!). :*-I prefer sulfate_aerosol_as_sulfate to sulfate_as_sulfate_aerosol. Sulfate aerosol is generic, it means sulfate-containing aerosol (whatever the cation is), but we measure it by the amount of dry sulfate (SO4=).
  • -If all aerosols are measured dry, shouldn't there be a dry in the title?
  • -I've removed, the "fine fraction", "ultrafine fraction" and so on in the comment because the qualifier may apply to everything and it may have a unit so "fraction" is anorppriate as it may imply that it is associated to a unitless quantity. The size ranges is self-sufficient.
  • -Avoid size and replace by diameter or radius.
  • -diameter and radius should be qualified systematically by "dry" or "ambient".
  • -RF: we may want to define a RF at the surface in addition to TOA and tropopause ones.