Column burden and surface emissions in ADF

[adagj]

Hi,
I have added (tried at least) aerosol column burden and surface emissions to the ADF table. Here is a comparison between n1850.ne30_tn14.hybrid_fatessp.202401007 and NorESM2-MM. Can I get some feedback on the results, and if the values look reasonable?

https://ns2345k.web.sigma2.no/datalake/diagnostics/ADF/plots/n1850.ne30_tn14.hybrid_fatessp.202401007_5_10_vs_N1850frc2_f09_tn14_20191001_1204_1209/website/html_table/amwg_table_Case%20Comparison.html

There is also a new version of ADF with chemistry diagnostics which we probably want to test: Using ADF chemistry diagnostics: https://wiki.ucar.edu/display/camchem/Model+Diagnostics+and+Evaluation+with+ADF

@oyvindseland @DirkOlivie @MichaelSchulzMETNO @andrearosendahl

[MichaelSchulzMETNO]

This is great! I have suggested to Andrea, that we plot with pyaerocom/aeroval in parallel the maps of several key old simulations (CMIP6 MM PI + PD , CMIP6 LM PI +PD, Gliss et al AeroCom CAM5.3, plus the latest 2.5 PI). For comparison we also have the old AeroCom website - but it will take a little time to get it all right....

[MichaelSchulzMETNO]

[MichaelSchulzMETNO]

comment to my comparison table - - I think this looks all pretty correct in ADF !

[adagj]

Thanks for checking @MichaelSchulzMETNO ! Dirk also confirmed it was "pretty" correct :-)
I'll push my hacks to the ADF fork then :)

[oyvindseland]

It is also quite close to the ncl results so looks fine.

I think the ncl makes a simplification by averaging over the months, i.e. no variation in the number of days.
https://ns2345k.web.sigma2.no/datalake/oyvinds/ModIvsModII/n1850.ne30_tn14.hybrid_fatessp.202401007vsN1850frc2_f09_tn14_20191001/yr5-10/ModIvsModII_B.htm

The latitude weights are now named gw again in the model output files. P0 is still missing