United States
               Environmental Protection
               Agency
Atmospheric Research and
Exposure Assessment Laboratory
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
               Research and Development
EPA/600/S3-91/070 Jan. 1992
EPA       Project  Summary
               Tropospheric  Nitrogen:  The
                Influence  of Anthropogenic
               Sources on Distributions and
                Deposition

               J.E. Penner, C.S. Atherton, and J.J. Walton
                  In this report, we describe our simu-
               lations of the global cycle of reactive
               nitrogen. We use a three-dimensional
               chemistry-transport-deposition model.
               Our  model is a Lagrangian model in
               which trace species react and are car-
               ried  in constant-mass air parcels; the
               parcels are advected by winds calcu-
               lated by the NCAR Community Climate
               Model (CCM), a nine-layer general cir-
               culation model. We describe the model,
               together with our specification  of the
               reactive nitrogen  sources. Predicted
               concentrations and deposition amounts
               are compared with measurements. The
               report  includes regional analysis of
               sources and deposition.
                  This Project Summary was  devel-
               oped by EPA's Atmospheric Research
               and Exposure Assessment Laboratory,
               Research  Triangle Park, NC,  to an-
               nounce key findings of the research
               project that Is fully documented In a
               separate report of the  same title (see
               Project Report ordering Information at
               back).


               Introduction
                  Nitrogen oxides are important for glo-
               bal photochemistry  because they deter-
               mine whether O3 is produced or destroyed.
               Elevated concentrations of O3 are  of con-
               cern because O3 affects the growth of plants
               and the respiratory systems of man and
               other animals, because it absorbs infrared
               radiation and contributes to the greenhouse
               warming, and because it is a key player in
               the photochemistry of hydroxyl, the most
               important chemical scavenger in the atmo-
 sphere. In regions of high NOX concentra-
 tions, a photochemical sequence, initiated
 by the reaction of CO with OH, leads to O3
 production. At low NOX concentrations, the
 reaction of HO2 with NO, is slow. Instead,
 HO2 reacts with O3 and the  reaction se-
 quence initiated by the reaction of CO with
 OH leads to O3 destruction. For typical O3
 production, this occurs when NOX (NO +
 NO2) concentrations are around 20 to 50
 ppt.  Indeed, fossil fuel emissions of NOX
 have increased substantially over the last
 two decades. A further  increase in these
 sources could  fundamentally  alter the at-
 mosphere by turning vast portions from
 regions which  are typically regions of net
 O3 destruction to regions of net O3 produc-
 tion.
   In addition to its importance for O3 and
 the photochemistry of the troposphere, re-
 active nitrogen is also important because
 NO3-, the end product of the reactive nitro-
 gen cycle, is a key component of acid rain
 and  a key nutrient for both ocean phyto-
 plankton and for land biota.

 Model Description
   The model we use  is based on the
 GRANTOUR model. The chemistry of re-
 active nitrogen in the model has been sim-
 plified. We treat reactive nitrogen as NOX
 (NO + NO2) and HNO3. The ratio of NO to
 NO2 is determined by the photostationary
 state such that the reaction of NO with O3
 is instantaneously balanced by photolysis
 of NO2:
   NO + O3 ->  NO2 + O2
    NO2+hv  -»  NO + O
   Transformations  between NOX and
 HNO3 follow the reactions:
                                                                Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
   NOj + OH  -»  HN03
   HNOa + OH  -» H2O + NOX + OX
   HNOa+hv  -» OH + NO2
Here, we have assumed that NO3 (which is
produced by the reaction HNO3 with OH) is
immediately photolized to  produce  either
NO or NOj,. The concentration of hydroxyl,
OH, is specified to vary with latitude and
height, according to the predicted con-
centrations in  the LLNL two-dimensional
model. We also use photolysis  rates from
the LLNL model, but our reaction rate co-
efficients, which vary with temperature and
pressure, have a longitudinal variation, as
well, according to the  monthly-averaged
temperatures calculated in the Community
Climate Model (CCM).
   Dry deposition velocities are applied to
the concentrations of NO, NO2,  and  HNO3
in the lowest 100 mb of the atmosphere
according to:
   vd(NO) - 0.05 cm/s
   vd(NOj,) - 0.25 cm/s
   vd(HNO3) - 0.5 cm/s
which are chosen as representative  mean
values. Precipitation scavenging of  HNO3
is assumed to be proportional to the pre-
cipitation rate in the CCM.
   The sources of reactive nitrogen  in our
model are specified as emission rates (Mt
N/yr) as  follows: fossil-fuel  combustion,
22.4; lightning  discharges, 3.0; soil micro-
bial  activity, 10.0; production  in strato-
sphere, 1.0; and biomass burning, 5.8.
Fossil fuel is by far the largest source of
NO,, and its dominant contribution to  the
total of all sources is seen in the maximum
contours over North America, Europe, and
Japan and eastern Asia. The biomass burn-
Ing source is  a major contributor in  the
tropics and Southern  Hemisphere,  while
soil microbial sources shift in importance
from the Southern Hemisphere in January
to the Northern Hemisphere in July.

Comparison to Measurements
   We have  attempted to validate our
model by comparison of the predicted con-
centrations and wet deposition values with
measured quantities. The model does well
in predicting the removal of nitrate by pre-
cipitation  in the United States, especially in
summer.  In Europe, the predicted rainout
is too small, especially in January, perhaps
because  the winds in the CCM  are too
high and the model placement of precipita-
tion fields is incorrect relative to  the ob-
served fields  and the  emissions. The
comparison of the predicted and observed
wet deposition at remote areas confirms
that, overall, the transport of nitrate to re-
mote regions is relatively well represented.
The predicted values of HNO3  in remote
areas are in reasonable agreement with
the measured concentrations,  but those
over continental areas are somewhat high.
   In contrast to the comparison of our
predictions with the data of Huebert and
Lazrus, where we tend  to be somewhat
high, the predicted concentrations from the
model appear to be low relative to the
surface concentrations of nitrate measured
during the SEAREX program. Savoie mea-
sured  nitrate using a high-volume sam-
pling system, and the measurements refer
to total inorganic nitrate  (i.e., particulate
nitrate plus gaseous HNO3), but it is be-
lieved that much of the nitrate is present in
the particulate form.

Global Deposition

Wet Deposition
   Maps of wet deposition of HNO3 in both
January and July are shown for the all-
sources scenario.  The peak continental
wet HNO3 deposition magnitudes are com-
parable for many  regions. For example,
South  America and  southern Africa are
both enveloped by the 3 kg N knv2 contour,
and have  peak contours of 15 kg N knrv2.
Likewise,  in the Northern Hemisphere the
3 kg N knv2 contour encircles the eastern
U.S., much of Europe, and a region from
east Asia  across the  north Pacific Ocean.
Peak values are 15,5, and 10 kg N knv1 for
the U.S., Europe, and east Asia, respec-
tively. Additionally, a 1 kg N knv1 contour
covers most of the oceans north of 20° S.
Although the  precipitation in the Northern
and Southern Hemispheres contains com-
parable HNO3 levels, different sources are
responsible. All sources  include biomass
burning.
   Conclusions about wet HNO3 deposi-
tion on a  regional basis  also hold on  a
hemispheric scale because within  each
hemisphere most regions have similar fuel
use and vegetation patterns. In the North-
ern Hemisphere, fossil fuel sources ac-
count for  roughly 51-53% of  wet HNO3
deposition and natural sources for 34-38%.
In the  Southern  Hemisphere, 60-63% of
the wet HNO3 in precipitation arises from
natural sources.

Dry Deposition
   The dry deposition of both HNO3 and
NO, can be important. The dry deposition
of HNO3 is generally comparable to its wet
deposition. Additionally,  NOX dry deposi-
tion can account for 18-44% of total depo-
sition for  the Northern  and  Southern
Hemispheres. The deposition amounts are
also functions of season. The relative im-
portance of NOX. dry deposition  increases
in the winter, when the conversion of NOX
to HNO3 is slower and more NOX is sent.
These calculations, of course, are based
on a very simple model of dry deposition
and on highly uncertain dry deposition ve-
locities. The results may be subject to
change as more information becomes avail-
able in the future.

Regional  Analysis of Sources
and Deposition
   All  regions  have the  same  order of
magnitude of emissions, although the
sources responsible vary.  Thus, the domi-
nant sources for Northern  Hemisphere re-
gions (U.S.,  Canada, Europe, China) are
fossil fuel combustion, followed by soil
emissions. Conversely, for the equatorial
and  Southern Hemisphere continents of
South America and Africa, the primary NOX
sources are soil emissions and biomass
burning.
   The deposition  results also reflect the
findings discussed  earlier  for the Northern
and Southern Hemispheres. All three types
of deposition  (dry NOX,  wet  HNO3, dry
HNO3) contribute significantly to total depo-
sition. In January, the Northern Hemisphere
regions see relatively strong NO, dry depo-
sition,  due to the slow wintertime conver-
sion of NOX to HNO3. Conversely, the
Southern  Hemisphere  regions of South
America and Africa, see substantial depo-
sition (wet and dry) of HNO3 in this sum-
mer month.
   The situation differs slightly in July. In
the Northern Hemisphere, more NOX is
converted to HNO3. Thus,  NOX dry deposi-
tion is low, while HNO3 wet and dry deposi-
tion are relatively higher. For the Southern
Hemisphere  regions in South America and
Africa in July (winter), more NOX is present.
Consequently, NOX dry deposition is rela-
tively larger (especially for South America,
which  is  almost entirely contained in the
Southern Hemisphere).
   Three other oceanic regions—the south
Atlantic, Indian, and south Pacific Oceans
receive less  total nitrogen deposition than
the Northern Hemisphere oceans, and a
relatively smaller fraction is due to anthro-
pogenic nitrogen sources. This is expected
because  these three  oceans lie  in the
Southern Hemisphere, where the largest
nitrogen source is natural: soil emissions.
However, the fraction from anthropogenic
sources is still surprisingly large, ranging
from 19-42%.
   Man's activities  contribute a significant
fraction of the amount of oceanic nitrogen
deposition. In the  Northern  Hemisphere,
anthropogenic sources of reactive  nitro-
gen from  the burning of  fossil fuel and
biomass may account for 53-80% of the
nitrogen deposited to oceanic surfaces. In
the Southern Hemisphere, these anthro-

-------
pogenic sources contribute roughly 19-51%
of the total nitrogen deposition to oceans.

Conclusions
   We have shown that we  are able to
successfully simulate many of the observed
features of the reactive nitrogen cycle in
the troposphere. Many significant prob-
lems remain to be addressed. In particular,
there is a need to quantify  the role of
anthropogenic sources of NOX  in the global
budget of O3. The spatial  extent of the
contribution of anthropogenic sources of
NOX  to surface concentrations  is  unex-
pected. In the future, we hope to extend
our model in order to quantify the role of
anthropogenic sources of NOX  in the global
budget of tropospheric O3.

Acknowledgments
   This work was supported  by  the U.S.
EPA  under  Interagency  Agreement
DW89932676-01-0 and by the Institutional
Research and Development  Program of
the Lawrence Livermore National Labora-
tory. Computer time was supplied by the
D.O.E. Office of Health and  Energy  Re-
search. Lawrence Livermore National Labo-
ratory is  operated by the  University of
California under contract number W-7405-
Eng-48 with  the U.S. Department of  En-
ergy.
                                                                     &U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1992-€48-080/40127

-------
  J.E. Penner, C.S. Atherton, andJJ. Walton are with Lawrence Livermore National
    Laboratory, University of California, Livermore, CA 94550.
  Joseph P. Pinto is the EPA Project Officer, (see below).
  The complete report, entitled  "Tropospheric Nitrogen: The Influence of Anthropogenic
    Sources on Distributions and Deposition," (Order No. PB92-126937/AS; Cost: $26.00,
    subject to change)  will be available only from:
          National Technical Information Service
          5285 Port Royal Road
          Springfield,VA22161
           Telephone: 703-487-4650
  The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
          Atmospheric Research and Exposure Assessment Laboratory
           U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
          Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati, OH 45268
      BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
 EPA PERMIT NO. G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
EPA/600/S3-91/070

-------