% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Jin:1017878,
      author       = {Jin, Lixu and Permar, Wade and Selimovic, Vanessa and
                      Ketcherside, Damien and Yokelson, Robert J. and Hornbrook,
                      Rebecca S. and Apel, Eric C. and Ku, I-Ting and Collett Jr.,
                      Jeffrey L. and Sullivan, Amy P. and Jaffe, Daniel A. and
                      Pierce, Jeffrey R. and Fried, Alan and Coggon, Matthew M.
                      and Gkatzelis, Georgios and Warneke, Carsten and Fischer,
                      Emily V. and Hu, Lu},
      title        = {{C}onstraining emissions of volatile organic compounds from
                      western {US} wildfires with {WE}-{CAN} and {FIREX}-{AQ}
                      airborne observations},
      journal      = {Atmospheric chemistry and physics},
      volume       = {23},
      number       = {10},
      issn         = {1680-7316},
      address      = {Katlenburg-Lindau},
      publisher    = {EGU},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2023-04390},
      pages        = {5969 - 5991},
      year         = {2023},
      abstract     = {The impact of biomass burning (BB) on the atmospheric
                      burden of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) is highly
                      uncertain. Here we apply the GEOS-Chem chemical transport
                      model (CTM) to constrain BB emissions in the western USA at
                      ∼ 25 km resolution. Across three BB emission
                      inventories widely used in CTMs, the inventory–inventory
                      comparison suggests that the totals of 14 modeled BB VOC
                      emissions in the western USA agree with each other within
                      $30 \%–40 \%.$ However, emissions for individual VOCs
                      can differ by a factor of 1–5, driven by the regionally
                      averaged emission ratios (ERs, reflecting both assigned ERs
                      for specific biome and vegetation classifications) across
                      the three inventories. We further evaluate GEOS-Chem
                      simulations with aircraft observations made during WE-CAN
                      (Western Wildfire Experiment for Cloud Chemistry, Aerosol
                      Absorption and Nitrogen) and FIREX-AQ (Fire Influence on
                      Regional to Global Environments and Air Quality) field
                      campaigns. Despite being driven by different global BB
                      inventories or applying various injection height
                      assumptions, the model–observation comparison suggests
                      that GEOS-Chem simulations underpredict observed vertical
                      profiles by a factor of 3–7. The model shows small to no
                      bias for most species in low-/no-smoke conditions. We thus
                      attribute the negative model biases mostly to underestimated
                      BB emissions in these inventories. Tripling BB emissions in
                      the model reproduces observed vertical profiles for primary
                      compounds, i.e., CO, propane, benzene, and toluene. However,
                      it shows no to less significant improvements for oxygenated
                      VOCs, particularly for formaldehyde, formic acid, acetic
                      acid, and lumped ≥ C3 aldehydes, suggesting the model is
                      missing secondary sources of these compounds in BB-impacted
                      environments. The underestimation of primary BB emissions in
                      inventories is likely attributable to underpredicted amounts
                      of effective dry matter burned, rather than errors in fire
                      detection, injection height, or ERs, as constrained by
                      aircraft and ground measurements. We cannot rule out
                      potential sub-grid uncertainties (i.e., not being able to
                      fully resolve fire plumes) in the nested GEOS-Chem which
                      could explain the negative model bias partially, though
                      back-of-the-envelope calculation and evaluation using
                      longer-term ground measurements help support the argument of
                      the dry matter burned underestimation. The total ERs of the
                      14 BB VOCs implemented in GEOS-Chem only account for half of
                      the total 161 measured VOCs (∼ 75 versus
                      150 ppb ppm−1). This reveals a significant amount of
                      missing reactive organic carbon in widely used BB emission
                      inventories. Considering both uncertainties in effective dry
                      matter burned (× 3) and unmodeled VOCs (× 2), we infer
                      that BB contributed to $10 \%$ in 2019 and $45 \%$ in
                      2018 (240 and 2040 Gg C) of the total VOC primary
                      emission flux in the western USA during these two fire
                      seasons, compared to only $1 \%–10 \%$ in the standard
                      GEOS-Chem.},
      cin          = {IEK-8},
      ddc          = {550},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-8-20101013},
      pnm          = {2111 - Air Quality (POF4-211)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-2111},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:001000070100001},
      doi          = {10.5194/acp-23-5969-2023},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1017878},
}