MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766421004 · doi:10.5194/acp-18-2011-2018

Contributions of natural and anthropogenic sources to ambient ammonia in the Athabasca Oil Sands and north-western Canada

2018· article· en· W2766421004 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Cynthia Whaley, Paul A. Makar, Mark W. Shephard, Leiming Zhang, Junhua Zhang, Qiong Zheng, Ayodeji Akingunola, Gregory R. Wentworth, J. G. Murphy, Shailesh Kumar Kharol, Karen Cady‐Pereira

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsAlberta Environment and Protected AreasUniversity of TorontoEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsOil sandsEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesFlux (metallurgy)Deposition (geology)Air quality indexAerosolMeteorologyGeologyGeographyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atmospheric ammonia (NH 3 ) is a short-lived pollutant that plays an important role in aerosol chemistry and nitrogen deposition. Dominant NH 3 emissions are from agriculture and forest fires, both of which are increasing globally. Even remote regions with relatively low ambient NH 3 concentrations, such as northern Alberta and Saskatchewan in northern Canada, may be of interest because of industrial oil sands emissions and a sensitive ecological system. A previous attempt to model NH 3 in the region showed a substantial negative bias compared to satellite and aircraft observations. Known missing sources of NH 3 in the model were re-emission of NH 3 from plants and soils (bidirectional flux) and forest fire emissions, but the relative impact of these sources on NH 3 concentrations was unknown. Here we have used a research version of the high-resolution air quality forecasting model, GEM-MACH, to quantify the relative impacts of semi-natural (bidirectional flux of NH 3 and forest fire emissions) and direct anthropogenic (oil sand operations, combustion of fossil fuels, and agriculture) sources on ammonia volume mixing ratios, both at the surface and aloft, with a focus on the Athabasca Oil Sands region during a measurement-intensive campaign in the summer of 2013. The addition of fires and bidirectional flux to GEM-MACH has improved the model bias, slope, and correlation coefficients relative to ground, aircraft, and satellite NH 3 measurements significantly. By running the GEM-MACH-Bidi model in three configurations and calculating their differences, we find that averaged over Alberta and Saskatchewan during this time period an average of 23.1 % of surface NH 3 came from direct anthropogenic sources, 56.6 % (or 1.24 ppbv) from bidirectional flux (re-emission from plants and soils), and 20.3 % (or 0.42 ppbv) from forest fires. In the NH 3 total column, an average of 19.5 % came from direct anthropogenic sources, 50.0 % from bidirectional flux, and 30.5 % from forest fires. The addition of bidirectional flux and fire emissions caused the overall average net deposition of NH x across the domain to be increased by 24.5 %. Note that forest fires are very episodic and their contributions will vary significantly for different time periods and regions. This study is the first use of the bidirectional flux scheme in GEM-MACH, which could be generalized for other volatile or semi-volatile species. It is also the first time CrIS (Cross-track Infrared Sounder) satellite observations of NH 3 have been used for model evaluation, and the first use of fire emissions in GEM-MACH at 2.5 km resolution.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.193 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physicsSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207