Abstract

Abstract. The concentrations of sulfate, black carbon (BC) and other aerosols in the Arctic are characterized by high values in late winter and spring (so-called Arctic Haze) and low values in summer. Models have long been struggling to capture this seasonality and especially the high concentrations associated with Arctic Haze. In this study, we evaluate sulfate and BC concentrations from eleven different models driven with the same emission inventory against a comprehensive pan-Arctic measurement data set over a time period of 2 years (2008–2009). The set of models consisted of one Lagrangian particle dispersion model, four chemistry transport models (CTMs), one atmospheric chemistry-weather forecast model and five chemistry climate models (CCMs), of which two were nudged to meteorological analyses and three were running freely. The measurement data set consisted of surface measurements of equivalent BC (eBC) from five stations (Alert, Barrow, Pallas, Tiksi and Zeppelin), elemental carbon (EC) from Station Nord and Alert and aircraft measurements of refractory BC (rBC) from six different campaigns. We find that the models generally captured the measured eBC or rBC and sulfate concentrations quite well, compared to previous comparisons. However, the aerosol seasonality at the surface is still too weak in most models. Concentrations of eBC and sulfate averaged over three surface sites are underestimated in winter/spring in all but one model (model means for January–March underestimated by 59 and 37 % for BC and sulfate, respectively), whereas concentrations in summer are overestimated in the model mean (by 88 and 44 % for July–September), but with overestimates as well as underestimates present in individual models. The most pronounced eBC underestimates, not included in the above multi-site average, are found for the station Tiksi in Siberia where the measured annual mean eBC concentration is 3 times higher than the average annual mean for all other stations. This suggests an underestimate of BC sources in Russia in the emission inventory used. Based on the campaign data, biomass burning was identified as another cause of the modeling problems. For sulfate, very large differences were found in the model ensemble, with an apparent anti-correlation between modeled surface concentrations and total atmospheric columns. There is a strong correlation between observed sulfate and eBC concentrations with consistent sulfate/eBC slopes found for all Arctic stations, indicating that the sources contributing to sulfate and BC are similar throughout the Arctic and that the aerosols are internally mixed and undergo similar removal. However, only three models reproduced this finding, whereas sulfate and BC are weakly correlated in the other models. Overall, no class of models (e.g., CTMs, CCMs) performed better than the others and differences are independent of model resolution.

Highlights

  • Aerosols are important climate forcers (Ramanathan and Carmichael, 2008; Myhre et al, 2013), but the magnitude of their forcing is highly uncertain and depends on altitude, position relative to clouds, the surface albedo and the optical properties of the aerosol as well as cloud indirect effects

  • Following the nomenclature of Petzold et al (2013), we refer to measurements based on light absorption as equivalent black carbon (BC), measurements based on thermal-optical methods as elemental carbon (EC) and measurements based on refractory methods as refractory BC

  • Our model-mean underestimate of Arctic equivalent BC (eBC) at Barrow and Alert is about a factor of 2, compared to 1 order of magnitude reported in Shindell et al (2008)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Aerosols are important climate forcers (Ramanathan and Carmichael, 2008; Myhre et al, 2013), but the magnitude of their forcing is highly uncertain and depends on altitude, position relative to clouds, the surface albedo and the optical properties of the aerosol as well as cloud indirect effects. While absorbing aerosols such as black carbon (BC) are likely to increase climate warming (Shindell and Faluvegi, 2009), scattering aerosols such as sulfate have a cooling effect (Myhre et al, 2013). Increased transport during the cold season (Stohl, 2006) and increased removal by wet deposition during the warm season can explain this annual variation (Shaw, 1995; Law and Stohl, 2007) and shape the aerosol size distribution (Tunved et al, 2013)

Objectives
Methods
Findings
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.