Aerosols: What are we missing? What should we do in the future? Peter J. Adams Carnegie Mellon University Chemistry-Climate Interactions Workshop February.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Whitecaps, sea-salt aerosols, and climate Magdalena D. Anguelova Physical Oceanography Dissertation Symposium College of Marine Studies, University of.
Advertisements

Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009 Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009.
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009 Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009.
Section highlights Organic Aerosol and Field Studies.
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009 Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009.
Aerosol radiative effects from satellites Gareth Thomas Nicky Chalmers, Caroline Poulsen, Ellie Highwood, Don Grainger Gareth Thomas - NCEO/CEOI-ST Joint.
Global Climatology of Fine Particulate Matter Concentrations Estimated from Remote-Sensed Aerosol Optical Depth Aaron van Donkelaar 1, Randall Martin 1,2,
Sensitivity of cloud droplet nucleation to kinetic effects and varying updraft velocity Ulrike Lohmann, Lisa Phinney and Yiran Peng Department of Physics.
Climate modeling Current state of climate knowledge – What does the historical data (temperature, CO 2, etc) tell us – What are trends in the current observational.
Global Aerosol Microphysics With TOMAS Peter J. Adams Acknowledgments: Win Trivitayanurak GEOS-CHEM User’s Meeting April 7, 2009 Center for Atmospheric.
Clouds and Climate: Forced Changes to Clouds SOEE3410 Ken Carslaw Lecture 4 of a series of 5 on clouds and climate Properties and distribution of clouds.
Two-Moment Aerosol Microphysics (TOMAS) Development GEOS-CHEM User’s Meeting 4-6 April 2005 Funding: NSF / NASA Peter Adams Kaiping Chen Jeffrey Pierce.
Integrating satellite observations for assessing air quality over North America with GEOS-Chem Mark Parrington, Dylan Jones University of Toronto
Ultrafine Particles and Climate Change Peter J. Adams HDGC Seminar November 5, 2003.
Implementation of Sulfate and Sea-Salt Aerosol Microphysics in GEOS-Chem Hi everyone. My name is Win Trivitayanurak… I’m a PhD student working with Peter.
Satellite-based Global Estimate of Ground-level Fine Particulate Matter Concentrations Aaron van Donkelaar1, Randall Martin1,2, Lok Lamsal1, Chulkyu Lee1.
1 High Time-Resolution Size- Resolved Aerosol Predictions: Learning about CCN from Aerosol Field Campaigns Win Trivitayanurak GEOS-CHEM Meeting Harvard.
Aerosols and climate Rob Wood, Atmospheric Sciences.
MET 12 Global Climate Change – Lecture 8
The Role of Aerosols in Climate Change Eleanor J. Highwood Department of Meteorology, With thanks to all the IPCC scientists, Keith Shine (Reading) and.
Clouds and Climate: Forced Changes to Clouds SOEE3410 Ken Carslaw Lecture 4 of a series of 5 on clouds and climate Properties and distribution of clouds.
Photochemical and aerosol pollution of the environment in the regional and global scales accounting for kinetic processes of transformation A.E.Aloyan.
Effects of size resolved aerosol microphysics on photochemistry and heterogeneous chemistry Gan Luo and Fangqun Yu ASRC, SUNY-Albany
Aerosol Working Group The 7 th International GEOS-Chem User’s Meeting May 4, 2015 Aerosol WG Co-Chairs Colette Heald: Jeff Pierce (outgoing):
Aerosol Microphysics: Plans for GEOS-CHEM
Mixing State of Aerosols: Excess Atmospheric Absorption Paradox Shekhar Chandra Graduate Student, EAS Term Paper Presentation for EAS-6410.
(Impacts are Felt on Scales from Local to Global) Aerosols Link Climate, Air Quality, and Health: Dirtier Air and a Dimmer Sun Emissions Impacts == 
Clouds, Aerosols and Precipitation GRP Meeting August 2011 Susan C van den Heever Department of Atmospheric Science Colorado State University Fort Collins,
Improving Black Carbon (BC) Aging in GEOS-Chem Based on Aerosol Microphysics: Constraints from HIPPO Observations Cenlin He Advisers: Qinbin Li, Kuo-Nan.
INTERACTIONS OF AIR POLLUTION AND CLIMATE CHANGE Daniel J. Jacob How do air pollutants contribute to climate change? How will climate change affect air.
Earth&Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Tech Modeling the impacts of convective transport and lightning NOx production over North America: Dependence on cumulus.
Comparing droplet activation parameterisations against adiabatic parcel models using a novel inverse modelling framework Warsaw: April 20 th 2015: Eulerian.
Climate Modeling at GFDL: The Scientific Challenges V. Ramaswamy NOAA/ Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory November 12, 2008.
Progress on Application of Modal Aerosol Dynamics to CAM Xiaohong Liu, Steve Ghan, Richard Easter, Rahul Zaveri, Yun Qian (Pacific Northwest National.
Applications of Satellite Remote Sensing to Estimate Global Ambient Fine Particulate Matter Concentrations Randall Martin, Dalhousie and Harvard-Smithsonian.
Coupling between the aerosols and hydrologic cycles Xiaoyan Jiang Climatology course, 387H Dec 5, 2006.
Assessment of the Impacts of Global Change on Regional U.S. Air Quality: A synthesis of climate change impacts on ground-level ozone An Interim Report.
Representation of Sea Salt Aerosol in CAM coupled with a Sectional Aerosol Microphysical Model CARMA Tianyi Fan, Owen Brian Toon LASP/ATOC, University.
AEROSOL INDIRECT EFFECT: THE ELUSIVE COMPONENT OF CLIMATE CHANGE Athanasios Nenes HDGC Seminar, November 20, 2002 photo: G.Roberts.
IACETH Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Sciences Indirect aerosol effects in EC earth Trude Storelvmo and Ulrike Lohmann, ETH-Zurich.
AEROSOL & CLIMATE ( IN THE ARCTIC) Pamela Lehr METEO 6030 Spring 2006
Morrison/Gettelman/GhanAMWG January 2007 Two-moment Stratiform Cloud Microphysics & Cloud-aerosol Interactions in CAM H. Morrison, A. Gettelman (NCAR),
Modelling the radiative impact of aerosols from biomass burning during SAFARI-2000 Gunnar Myhre 1,2 Terje K. Berntsen 3,1 James M. Haywood 4 Jostein K.
Group proposal Aerosol, Cloud, and Climate ( EAS 8802) April 24 th, 2006 Does Asian dust play a role as CCN? Gill-Ran Jeong, Lance Giles, Matthew Widlansky.
Aerosol Size-Dependent Impaction Scavenging in Warm, Mixed, and Ice Clouds in the ECHAM5-HAM GCM Betty Croft, and Randall V. Martin – Dalhousie University,
Betty Croft, and Randall V. Martin – Dalhousie University, Canada
Boundary Layer Clouds.
OVERVIEW OF ATMOSPHERIC PROCESSES: Daniel J. Jacob Ozone and particulate matter (PM) with a global change perspective.
K.S Carslaw, L. A. Lee, C. L. Reddington, K. J. Pringle, A. Rap, P. M. Forster, G.W. Mann, D. V. Spracklen, M. T. Woodhouse, L. A. Regayre and J. R. Pierce.
Observational Constraints on Aerosol Deposition and Optical Depth Mark Flanner 1 Phil Rasch 1 Jim Randerson 2 Joe McConnell 3 Tami Bond 4 1 NCAR 2 University.
Estimating PM 2.5 from MODIS and MISR AOD Aaron van Donkelaar and Randall Martin March 2009.
Atmospheric Chemistry Chemical effects on cloud activation with special emphasis on carbonaceous aerosol from biomass burning M. C. Facchini, S. Decesari,
Some Applications of Satellite Remote Sensing for Air Quality: Implications for a Geostationary Constellation Randall Martin, Dalhousie and Harvard-Smithsonian.
Georgia Institute of Technology SUPPORTING INTEX THROUGH INTEGRATED ANALYSIS OF SATELLITE AND SUB-ORBITAL MEASUREMENTS WITH GLOBAL AND REGIONAL 3-D MODELS:
WORKSHOP ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND AIR QUALITY : part I: Intercontinental transport and climatic effects of pollutants OBJECTIVE: Define a near-term (-2003)
Modeling. How Do we Address Aerosol-Cloud Interactions? The Scale Problem Process Models ~ 10s km Mesoscale Models Cloud resolving Models Regional Models.
Understanding The Effect Of Anthropogenic Aerosol Weekly Cycles Upon The Climate Using A Global Model Of Aerosol Processes (GLOMAP) Introduction GLOMAP.
Towards parameterization of cloud drop size distribution for large scale models Wei-Chun Hsieh Athanasios Nenes Image source: NCAR.
PAPERSPECIFICS OF STUDYFINDINGS Kohler, 1936 (“The nucleus in and the growth of hygroscopic droplets”) Evaporate 2kg of hoar-frost and determined Cl content;
Parameterization of cloud droplet formation and autoconversion in large-scale models Wei-Chun Hsieh Advisor: Athanasios Nenes 10,Nov 2006 EAS Graduate.
BACKGROUND AEROSOL IN THE UNITED STATES: NATURAL SOURCES AND TRANSBOUNDARY POLLUTION Daniel J. Jacob and Rokjin J. Park with support from EPRI, EPA/OAQPS.
Aerosol 1 st indirect forcing in the coupled CAM-IMPACT model: effects from primary-emitted particulate sulfate and boundary layer nucleation Minghuai.
Aerosol Indirect Effects in CAM A. Gettelman (NCAR), F. Vitt (NCAR), P. Hess (Cornell) H. Morrison (NCAR), P. R. Field (Met Office), S.J. Ghan (PNNL)
Global Air Pollution Inferred from Satellite Remote Sensing Randall Martin, Dalhousie and Harvard-Smithsonian with contributions from Aaron van Donkelaar,
What Are the Implications of Optical Closure Using Measurements from the Two Column Aerosol Project? J.D. Fast 1, L.K. Berg 1, E. Kassianov 1, D. Chand.
H. Morrison, A. Gettelman (NCAR) , S. Ghan (PNL)
What are the causes of GCM biases in cloud, aerosol, and radiative properties over the Southern Ocean? How can the representation of different processes.
Modelling the radiative impact of aerosols from biomass burning during SAFARI-2000   Gunnar Myhre, Terje K. Berntsen, James M. Haywood, Jostein K. Sundet,
Influences of Wet Scavenging on Aerosol Concentrations and Deposition in the ECHAM5-HAM Global Climate Model Betty Croft1 Ulrike.
Atmospheric modelling of HMs Sensitivity study
Presentation transcript:

Aerosols: What are we missing? What should we do in the future? Peter J. Adams Carnegie Mellon University Chemistry-Climate Interactions Workshop February 11, 2003

Overview  How good are models?  What observations are needed?  How to deal with subgrid variability?  Where do we stand in modeling the indirect effect?

How good are models?

Uncertainty in Direct Forcing Estimates

COSAM (nmol SO4 / mol air) Barrie et al., Tellus 53B, , 2001

Model Capabilities  IPCC 2001 workshop compared 11 models against observations: Sulfate: monthly average concentrations generally within a factor of two Other species are “inferior” BC: factor of 10 Model-model discrepancies strong in free and upper troposphere Models differ in terms of transport distance  Insufficient for climate studies

Reasons for Model Uncertainties  Sparse data Spatial: free troposphere / remote regions Temporal: short-term field campaigns  Measurement difficulties Black carbon  Comparisons often use inconsistent meteorological fields GCM aerosol models for climate studies But GCM met fields generally do not match time period of observations Especially problematic for short-term comparisons (i.e. field campaigns)

What observations are needed?

Future Directions: Models / Observations  New data sets Satellite instruments: MODIS, MISR, others Lidar  Consistent meteorological fields GCMs with nudging capabilities GCM / CTM combinations (e.g. GISS GCM and GEOS-CHEM) “Correct” for meteorological differences  Detailed comparisons not “glamorous” but sorely needed  Need to move from minimal to systematic comparisons

Future Directions: Observations  Need more long-term data sets Field campaigns provide process understanding but are weak at providing aerosol climatologies  AERONET as a prototype  Other ideas Lidar networks Size and chemically resolved data Regular aircraft sampling (John Ogren) Coordination

AERONET  ~180 sun photometers across globe  From  Standardized instruments and processing  Provides: spectral optical depth  Infers size distribution for column  Levels of data: raw, quality-assured, climatological  Available on web

AERONET Holben et al., JGR 106, , 2001

How to deal with subgrid variability?

Subgrid Variability: Direct Effect  Calculated direct forcing with and without subgrid variability in clouds and RH  Limited area model (2 x 2 km) Forcing GCM:-1.92 W m -2 LAM:-3.09 W m -2 Haywood et al., GRL 24, , 1997.

Challenge: Subgrid Variability  Direct Effect water uptake is nonlinear function of RH  Indirect Effect subgrid spectrum of updraft velocities and cooling rates  Microphysics nucleation is often a subgrid phenomenon  Models and observations

Confronting Subgrid Variability  Frameworks Brute force (probably not) Probability distribution functions Spatial homogenization (computational mechanics)  Data availability Observations: aircraft / satellites Models: Large eddy simulations

Probability Distribution Functions  Cloud modeling P(w,  l, q t ) w: updraft velocity  l : liquid water potential temperature q t : total specific water  Functional form of P assumed  Parameters describing P become prognostic variables

Larson et al., JAS 59, , 2002

Probability Distribution Functions  Applications Diagnose aerosol variability from cloud parameters Integrate prognostic variability into scheme Focused studies in single column models Use in GCMs and CTMs

Where do we stand in modeling the indirect effect?

Mechanistic vs. Empirical Models Sulfate Mass (  g m -3 ) Cloud Droplets (cm -3 ) Boucher & Lohmann, 1995 Particle Size Number Mechanistic: number of cloud drops depends on number of particles large enough to activate Empirical: number of cloud drops correlated with sulfate mass based on observations

Empirical Approach: Limitations I: Martin et al. [1994]: W/m 2 II: Martin et al. with background CCN: W/m 2 III: Jones et al. [1994]: W/m 2 IV: Boucher and Lohmann [1995]: W/m 2 “It is argued that a less empirical and more physically based approach is required…” Cloud Droplets (cm -3 ) Sulfate Mass (  g m -3 ) Kiehl et al., JGR 105, , 2000

Aerosol Microphysics Algorithms Modal N i, D pgi,  i Variable  i makes a difference Moment Prognostic equations for M i

Aerosol Microphysics Algorithms Modal N i, D pgi,  i Variable  i makes a difference Moment Prognostic equations for M i Sectional Mass(species, bin) Moment-Sectional Number(bin) Mass(species, bin)

 Two moments of the size distribution (mass and number) are tracked for each size bin.  The average size of particles in a given section is not constant with time  Two-moment method conserves both mass and number precisely  Prevents numerical diffusion present in single- moment methods  Excellent size resolution: 30 sections from.01  m to 10  m Two-Moment Sectional Algorithm m o 2m o … Mass M1N1M1N1 M2N2M2N2... Tzivion et al., JAS 44, 3139 – 3149, 1987 Adams et al., JGR /2001JD001010, 2002

CCN 0.2%

Microphysical Models: Uncertainties  Particulate Emissions Most sulfate aerosols results from gas-phase SO 2 emissions Particulate sulfate: <5% of anthropogenic sulfur emissions  Nucleation of new aerosol particles Important uncertainties in mechanism and rate  Both processes contribute significant numbers of small particles insignificant contribution to sulfate mass important contribution to aerosol number concentrations and size distributions  Must quantify sensitivity to these uncertainties

Sensitivity Scenarios  Base Case 1985 sulfur emissions all emissions as gas-phase SO 2 nucleation based on critical concentration from binary (H 2 SO 4 -H 2 O) theory  Primary Emissions 3% of sulfur emissions as sulfate  Enhanced Nucleation critical H 2 SO 4 concentration factor of 10 lower  Pre-industrial no anthropogenic emissions (but no sea salt)

Vertical Profiles

Impact of Particulate Emissions

Continental / Marine

Implications  More aerosol models are including explicit microphysics to predict CCN concentration  Such models are sensitive to inputs that influence aerosol number Nucleation / Primary particles  Physical insight into factors controlling CCN  Needs Size-resolved emission inventories Better understanding of nucleation  Aerosol number budgets (e.g. sea-salt)

Fitting ambient size distributions to prescribed functional form introduces biases which can be important for indirect effect. Parameterizations: prescribed size distribution bias This aerosol is “shifted” to larger sizes. This will bias droplet number Predictions. source: Roberts et al., in press

Current parameterizations: other weaknesses Lack of explicit treatment of mass transfer limitations in droplet growth; this has been shown to be important for polluted conditions (Nenes et al., 2001). Empirical correlations are used in many. They are derived from numerical simulations and can introduce biases when used outside their region of applicability. They lack important chemical effects that can influence cloud droplet formation. Such effects are the presence of : slightly soluble species in the aerosol (Shulman et al., 1996) water soluble gas-phase species (Kulmala et al., 1993) surface tension changes from surface-active species in the aerosol (Facchini et al., 1999). changes in water vapor accommodation coefficient from the presence of film-forming compounds (Feingold & Chuang, 2002).

insoluble organic no  organic with  5 ppb HNO 3 x 2 conc. 0.1 m s m s m s m s -1 marine aerosol Cooling effect Warming effect Chemical effects: assessment of their importance. Calculate the maximum change in cloud properties when a chemical effect is present. Numerical cloud parcel model used for the calculations. Chemical effects can be as effective in altering cloud properties as doubling the aerosol concentrations!

New effect: Black Carbon heating Black carbon exists in polluted aerosol; it absorbs visible sunlight and heats the surrounding air. This can leads to decreased cloud coverage, and climatic warming. If black carbon is included in cloud droplets, the heat released can increase the droplet temperature enough to affect the droplet equilibrium. This is a new effect. drop BC core Absence of heating Presence of heating: droplet and gas phase get heated

Black Carbon heating: potential effect on drizzle BC can effectively decrease the probability for drizzle formation. A heating mechanism can lead to climatic cooling! This effect can be parameterized (not shown). Is it important? We don’t know yet. 500 parcel average Cloud base Cloud top

Conclusions  Observations Long-term Standardized networks Vertical profiling Satellites

Conclusions  Observations Long-term Standardized networks Vertical profiling Satellites  Comparisons Systematic and critical Assimilated / nudged meteorologies Correct for meteorology

Conclusions  Models Explicit microphysics Particle number budgets  Primary emissions  Nucleation

Conclusions  Models Explicit microphysics Particle number budgets  Primary emissions  Nucleation Activation: “chemical effects” Other processes?  E.g. Could black carbon lead to cooling? Subgrid parameterizations