Simulation of Below-cloud and In-cloud Aerosol Scavenging in ECHAM5-HAM Betty Croft, Ulrike Lohmann, Philip Stier, Sabine Wurzler, Sylvaine Ferrachat,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
R. Forbes, 17 Nov 09 ECMWF Clouds and Radiation University of Reading ECMWF Cloud and Radiation Parametrization: Recent Activities Richard Forbes, Maike.
Advertisements

Strong Sensitivity of Aerosol Concentrations to Convective Wet Scavenging Parameterizations in ECHAM5-HAM B. Croft 1, J.R. Pierce 1, R.V. Martin 1,2, C.
URBAN GROWTH AND AEROSOL EFECTS ON CONVECTION OVER HOUSTON Gustavo G. Carrió, William R. Cotton, William Y. Cheng, and Steve M. Saleeby Colorado State.
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009 Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009.
Aerosol Lifetimes at High Latitudes Betty Croft 1, Jeff Pierce 1,2 and Randall Martin 1,3 1 Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada 2 Colorado State University,
By : Kerwyn Texeira. Outline Definitions Introduction Model Description Model Evaluation The effect of dust nuclei on cloud coverage Conclusion Questions.
Sensitivity of cloud droplet nucleation to kinetic effects and varying updraft velocity Ulrike Lohmann, Lisa Phinney and Yiran Peng Department of Physics.
 Similar picture from MODIS and MISR aerosol optical depth (AOD)  Both biomass and dust emissions in the Sahel during the winter season  Emissions.
Brief review of my previous work in Beijing Xiaofeng Wang Directed by : Guoguang Zheng Huiwen Xue 1.
Satellite Remote Sensing of a Multipollutant Air Quality Health Index Randall Martin, Dalhousie and Harvard-Smithsonian Aaron van Donkelaar, Lok Lamsal,
Vivek SantGroup Meeting ECHAM activities – Ulrike Lohmann’s group 1 February 1, 2011 Sylvaine Ferrachat: Maintainance of ECHAM6-HAM and previously developed.
The Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research A partnership between CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology The Effect of Turbulence on Cloud Microstructure,
Ultrafine Particles and Climate Change Peter J. Adams HDGC Seminar November 5, 2003.
Satellite-based Global Estimate of Ground-level Fine Particulate Matter Concentrations Aaron van Donkelaar1, Randall Martin1,2, Lok Lamsal1, Chulkyu Lee1.
Aerosols and climate Rob Wood, Atmospheric Sciences.
Chapter 7 – Precipitation Processes
Climate model grid meshes are too coarse to explicitly simulate storm system winds and therefore must rely on simplified models referred to as parameterizations.
Processes Controlling the Seasonal Cycle of Arctic Aerosol Number and Size B. Croft 1, J. R. Pierce 2, R. V. Martin 1,3, R. Leaitch 4, T. Breider 5, A.
Factors controlling BC deposition in the Arctic Ling Qi 1, Qinbin Li 1,2,3, Yinrui Li 4, Cenlin He 1,3 1 Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences,
Global Simulation of the Indirect Aerosol Effect With the ECHAM5 GCM III LBA Scientific Conference Brasilia 28/07/2004 P. Stier (1), J. Feichter (1), S.
Microphysics Parameterizations 1 Nov 2010 (“Sub” for next 2 lectures) Wendi Kaufeld.
Aerosol Microphysics: Plans for GEOS-CHEM
(Impacts are Felt on Scales from Local to Global) Aerosols Link Climate, Air Quality, and Health: Dirtier Air and a Dimmer Sun Emissions Impacts == 
In this work we present results of cloud electrification obtained with the RAMS model that includes the process of charge separation between ice particles.
School of something FACULTY OF OTHER 1 Lecture 2: Aerosol sources and sinks Ken Carslaw.
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.
Evaluation of CMIP5 Simulated Clouds and TOA Radiation Budgets in the SMLs Using NASA Satellite Observations Erica K. Dolinar Xiquan Dong and Baike Xi.
Marine organic matter in sea spray Nd vs. SO4, binned into low-OM, intermediate OM, and high-OM groups Adding marine organic matter as a source into ACME.
Progress on Application of Modal Aerosol Dynamics to CAM Xiaohong Liu, Steve Ghan, Richard Easter, Rahul Zaveri, Yun Qian (Pacific Northwest National.
Influences of In-cloud Scavenging Parameterizations on Aerosol Concentrations and Deposition in the ECHAM5-HAM GCM Betty Croft - Dalhousie University,
Department of Mechanical Engineering The Pearlstone Center for Aeronautical Engineering Studies Ben-Gurion University of the Negev P.O.B. 653, Beer Sheva.
Chapter 8: Precipitation ATS 572. “Precipitation” Can be: 1.Rain 2.Snow 3.Hail 4.Etc. However, it MUST reach the ground. –Otherwise, it is called “virga”—hydrometeors.
Representation of Sea Salt Aerosol in CAM coupled with a Sectional Aerosol Microphysical Model CARMA Tianyi Fan, Owen Brian Toon LASP/ATOC, University.
Carbonaceous aerosols – a global modeling view Betty Croft and Ulrike Lohmann * Department of Physics and Atmospheric Science Dalhousie University, Halifax,
IACETH Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Sciences Indirect aerosol effects in EC earth Trude Storelvmo and Ulrike Lohmann, ETH-Zurich.
Morrison/Gettelman/GhanAMWG January 2007 Two-moment Stratiform Cloud Microphysics & Cloud-aerosol Interactions in CAM H. Morrison, A. Gettelman (NCAR),
Aerosol Size-Dependent Impaction Scavenging in Warm, Mixed, and Ice Clouds in the ECHAM5-HAM GCM Betty Croft, and Randall V. Martin – Dalhousie University,
On the Definition of Precipitation Efficiency Sui, C.-H., X. Li, and M.-J. Yang, 2007: On the definition of precipitation efficiency. J. Atmos. Sci., 64,
Betty Croft, and Randall V. Martin – Dalhousie University, Canada
Desert Dust Suppressing Precipitation: A possible Feedback Loop Paper by Daniel Rosenfeld et al. Presented by Derek Ortt February 19, 2007.
Influences of In-cloud Scavenging and Cloud Processing on Aerosol Concentrations in ECHAM5-HAM Betty Croft - Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada Ulrike.
Cloud Microphysics Liz Page NWS/COMET Hydromet February 2000.
Regional analysis of multi- year aerosol indirect effects Dr. Thomas Jones University of Alabama in Huntsville January 13, th Annual AMS Conference,
High-Resolution Simulation of Hurricane Bonnie (1998). Part II: Water Budget SCOTT A. BRAUN J. Atmos. Sci., 63,
An Interactive Aerosol-Climate Model based on CAM/CCSM: Progress and challenging issues Chien Wang and Dongchul Kim (MIT) Annica Ekman (U. Stockholm) Mary.
Global Simulations of Below-Cloud and In-Cloud Aerosol Scavenging
Estimating PM 2.5 from MODIS and MISR AOD Aaron van Donkelaar and Randall Martin March 2009.
CCN Variability During LBA-SMOCC-EMfiN! 2002 and Its Role on Precipitation Initiation Over the Amazon Basin.
Black Carbon Ageing in the CCCma GCM Betty Croft and Ulrike Lohmann Department of Physics and Atmospheric Science Dalhousie University, Halifax, N.S. Canada.
Particle Size, Water Path, and Photon Tunneling in Water and Ice Clouds ARM STM Albuquerque Mar Sensitivity of the CAM to Small Ice Crystals.
COSMO General Meeting, WG3-Session, 7 Sep Cloud microphysics in the COSMO model: New parameterizations of ice nucleation and melting of snow.
Update on the 2-moment stratiform cloud microphysics scheme in CAM Hugh Morrison and Andrew Gettelman National Center for Atmospheric Research CCSM Atmospheric.
Aerosol Indirect Effects in CAM and MIRAGE Steve Ghan Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Jean-Francois Lamarque, Peter Hess, and Francis Vitt, NCAR.
Application of Ice Microphysics to CAM Xiaohong Liu, S. J. Ghan (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory) M. Wang, J. E. Penner (University of Michigan)
Update on progress with the implementation of a new two-moment microphysics scheme: Model description and single-column tests Hugh Morrison, Andrew Gettelman,
Chien Wang Massachusetts Institute of Technology A Close Look at the Aerosol-Cloud Interaction in Tropical Deep Convection.
Development of cloud resolving model with microphysical bin model and parameterizations to predict the initial cloud droplet size distribution KUBA, Naomi.
The Third Indirect Aerosol-Cloud Effect: Global Model Sensitivity and Restrictions Hans-F. Graf and Frank J. Nober EGS-AGU-ESF meeting Nice, April 2003.
Aerosol 1 st indirect forcing in the coupled CAM-IMPACT model: effects from primary-emitted particulate sulfate and boundary layer nucleation Minghuai.
Modal Aerosol Treatment in CAM: Evaluation and Indirect Effect X. Liu, S. J. Ghan, R. Easter (PNNL) J.-F. Lamarque, P. Hess, N. Mahowald, F. Vitt, H. Morrison,
Impact of Cloud Microphysics on the Development of Trailing Stratiform Precipitation in a Simulated Squall Line: Comparison of One- and Two-Moment Schemes.
Part II: Implementation of a New Snow Parameterization EXPLICIT FORECASTS OF WINTER PRECIPITATION USING AN IMPROVED BULK MICROPHYSICS SCHEME Thompson G.,
NATURAL pH OF RAIN Equilibrium with natural CO 2 (280 ppmv) results in a rain pH of 5.7: This pH can be modified by natural acids (H 2 SO 4, HNO 3, RCOOH…)
Diagnosing latent heating rates from model and in-situ microphysics data: Some (very) early results Chris Dearden University of Manchester DIAMET Project.
H. Morrison, A. Gettelman (NCAR) , S. Ghan (PNL)
GEORGE H. BRYAN AND HUGH MORRISON
Satellite Remote Sensing of a Multipollutant Air Quality Health Index
Influences of Wet Scavenging on Aerosol Concentrations and Deposition in the ECHAM5-HAM Global Climate Model Betty Croft1 Ulrike.
Development of a New Parameterization for Below-Cloud Scavenging of Size-Resolved Particles by Rain and Snow Xihong Wang1, Leiming Zhang2, and Michael.
Presentation transcript:

Simulation of Below-cloud and In-cloud Aerosol Scavenging in ECHAM5-HAM Betty Croft, Ulrike Lohmann, Philip Stier, Sabine Wurzler, Sylvaine Ferrachat, Hans Feichter, Randall Martin, and Ulla Heikkilä ETH Group Retreat Presentation Einsiedeln, Switzerland February 6, 2008

Motivation : Below-cloud scavenging should depend on aerosol size and precipitation rates, as opposed to fixed scavenging ratios for each aerosol mode. In-cloud scavenging should be linked to the cloud microphysics and depend on cloud droplet (or ice crystal) number concentrations, cloud droplet size and aerosol size, as opposed to fixed scavenging ratios for each aerosol mode. Project Goals: 1) Size-dependent below-cloud scavenging 2) Microphysically-dependent in-cloud scavenging

In-cloud scavenging processes (aerosol  droplets or crystals) 1)Nucleation 2)Impaction Below-cloud scavenging processes (precipitation-aerosol collisions) 1)Inertial impaction and interception 2)Brownian motion 3)Thermophoresis and diffusionphoresis 4)Turbulence 5)Electrostatic attraction Wet scavenging of aerosols:

ECHAM5-HAM has 7 lognormal aerosol modes and includes black carbon, particulate organic matter, sulfate, sea salt and dust. All results shown are from 5-year simulations after 3-month spin-up.

Below-cloud scavenging coefficients for rain: Present-day GCMs use typically mean scavenging coefficients (solid red steps). This study selects mass (solid lines) and number (dashed lines) below-cloud scavenging coefficients from a look- up table based on aerosol size and rainfall rate.

Below-cloud:N(D p ) = Marshall-Palmer distribution In-cloud:N(D p )= Gamma distribution Then, The scavenging coefficients are found assuming both a raindrop (or cloud droplet) distribution and a log-normal aerosol distribution

Below-cloud scavenging coefficients for snow (Slinn, 1984) : (normalized by precipitation rate) Previously, ECHAM5-HAM used 5x10 -3 mm -1 for all aerosol sizes (dashed line).

Global and annual mean deposition budgets (black carbon): Below-cloud scavenging (BCS) is increased with the new parameterization.

Simulated Geographic distribution of wet deposition (SO4): Changes in the annual mean wet deposition near source regions can be above 10% as compared to the simulation with mean coefficients. Scavenging is increased for rain rates near 1mm/hr and higher, but decreased for rain rates below 1mm/hr. All scavenging by snow is increased.

Validation with MODIS-MISR: (global zonal mean optical depth comparison) Compare the control simulation (MEANC) and revised below cloud scavenging (ASDS-RS) with solid red (observations from MODIS- MISR).

Validation with NADP data: (observed sulfate wet deposition from US) Sea salt deposition has improved correlation coefficients and slope-offset parameters in simulation ASDS-RS as opposed to the MEANC simulations. Sulfate deposition is more within factor of 2.

Part II - In-cloud scavenging: 1) Impaction scavenging (aerosol-cloud droplet collisions) Project goal: Introduce aerosol size dependent in-cloud impaction scavenging. Look-up table is a function of mean cloud droplet size, aerosol size and CDNC. Mass (dashed) and number (solid) coefficients

In-cloud scavenging: 2) Nucleation scavenging parameterization: Standard ECHAM5-HAM uses fixed in-cloud stratiform scavenging ratios for each of the 7 modes. These are 0.1, 0.25, 0.85, 0.99 for the NS, KS, AS, and CS modes, respectively. Revised scavenging parameterization is consistent with the Lin and Leaitch cloud droplet activation scheme. Assume CDNC = total number of aerosols to be scavenged. Scavenging ratio for i th mode is, Where N a is the sum over all soluble modes of the number of aerosols > 35nm, and xfracn i is the fraction of aerosol number >35 nm in the i th mode.

We use the cumulative lognormal function to find a critical radius where C i is the number in the lognormal tail if r > r crit. Scavenge all aerosol mass above r crit. For mixed clouds, same approach but CDNC+ICNC = total number of aerosols scavenged. Ice clouds, do not use same activation, so assume ICNC = total number scavenged and scavenge from largest to smallest mode progressively and find r crit for the partially scavenged mode. Alternatively, Tost et al., 2006 gave the scavenging ratio as a function of aerosol radius. We also tested this parameterization.

Predicted scavenging ratios: (normalized frequency of occurrence) Warm stratiform clouds Warm convective clouds Generally, unity for AS and CS modes and greatest variability in KS mode, zero for NS mode. Greater variability in predicted convective cloud scavenging ratios.

Example: Dust deposition budgets - Higher stratiform in-cloud scavenging and lower convective in-cloud scavenging, comparing IC-ALL with CTL.

Validation: (global SO4 wet deposition – Dentener et al, 2006) Correlation coefficients are improved by revisions to in-cloud scavenging.

Summary and future work: 1) Aerosol size-dependent below-cloud scavenging was introduced to ECHAM5-HAM and is a more physical representation of below-cloud scavenging 2) Microphysically dependent in-cloud scavenging was implemented in all stratiform, and warm convective clouds and results are comparable with simulations using fixed coefficients and the method of Tost et al. (2005). This approach is desirable since the scavenging physics are now more consistent with the cloud parameterizations. 3) Convective ice cloud scavenging will be implemented. 4) The sensitivity of the below-cloud scavenging to the assumptions about the raindrop distribution will be investigated. 5) Global validation of vertical profiles of extinction will be conducted with CALIPSO data to better examine influence of the scavenging parameterizations on the vertical aerosol profiles.

Simulations: MEANC – uses the existing mean below-cloud scavenging coefficients ASDS-RS – revised below-cloud scavenging by both rain and snow (aerosol size dependent scavenging). ASDS-R – revisions only for rain ASDS-RS-PF – as ASDS-RS but uses the old precipitation fraction parameterization labelled as method 1 in the subsequent slides. ASDS-RT – as ASDS-R but add the thermophoretic effects – so that scavenging also depends on the below-cloud relative humidity IC-ALL – revised in-cloud impaction and nucleation scavenging IC-WARM – revised in-cloud scavenging only in warm clouds IC-WARM-T – applies the parameterization of Tost et al (2006) for warm clouds IC-STRAT – revised in-cloud scavenging only for stratiform clouds

Collection efficiency for snow (Slinn 1984): where, Scavenging coefficient, normalized by precipitation rate is, Parameters are varied for different types of snow (powder, rimed and dendrites).

Precipitation fraction parameterization: Methods for finding the fraction of grid box that is raining (PF), using cloud fraction (CF) – all simulations use method 2 except ASDS-RS-PF: Method 1 (Stratiform): Method 2 (Stratiform): If then else Weighting similar to method 1 only if CF(k) > PF (k-1). Where CF(k) follows Tompkins, 2001

Sensitivity to precipitation fraction parameterization: Method 1 (Convective): Based on updraft mass flux and velocity. Method 2 (Convective): Kiehl et al. 1996; Xu and Krueger (1991) PF (k) is limited to be within the range of 0.05 to 0.8