Abstract

Abstract. We investigate the sensitivity of black carbon (BC) in the Arctic, including BC concentration in snow (BCsnow, ng g−1) and surface air (BCair, ng m−3), as well as emissions, dry deposition, and wet scavenging using the global three-dimensional (3-D) chemical transport model (CTM) GEOS-Chem. We find that the model underestimates BCsnow in the Arctic by 40 % on average (median = 11.8 ng g−1). Natural gas flaring substantially increases total BC emissions in the Arctic (by ∼ 70 %). The flaring emissions lead to up to 49 % increases (0.1–8.5 ng g−1) in Arctic BCsnow, dramatically improving model comparison with observations (50 % reduction in discrepancy) near flaring source regions (the western side of the extreme north of Russia). Ample observations suggest that BC dry deposition velocities over snow and ice in current CTMs (0.03 cm s−1 in the GEOS-Chem) are too small. We apply the resistance-in-series method to compute a dry deposition velocity (vd) that varies with local meteorological and surface conditions. The resulting velocity is significantly larger and varies by a factor of 8 in the Arctic (0.03–0.24 cm s−1), which increases the fraction of dry to total BC deposition (16 to 25 %) yet leaves the total BC deposition and BCsnow in the Arctic unchanged. This is largely explained by the offsetting higher dry and lower wet deposition fluxes. Additionally, we account for the effect of the Wegener–Bergeron–Findeisen (WBF) process in mixed-phase clouds, which releases BC particles from condensed phases (water drops and ice crystals) back to the interstitial air and thereby substantially reduces the scavenging efficiency of clouds for BC (by 43–76 % in the Arctic). The resulting BCsnow is up to 80 % higher, BC loading is considerably larger (from 0.25 to 0.43 mg m−2), and BC lifetime is markedly prolonged (from 9 to 16 days) in the Arctic. Overall, flaring emissions increase BCair in the Arctic (by ∼ 20 ng m−3), the updated vd more than halves BCair (by ∼ 20 ng m−3), and the WBF effect increases BCair by 25–70 % during winter and early spring. The resulting model simulation of BCsnow is substantially improved (within 10 % of the observations) and the discrepancies of BCair are much smaller during the snow season at Barrow, Alert, and Summit (from −67–−47 % to −46–3 %). Our results point toward an urgent need for better characterization of flaring emissions of BC (e.g., the emission factors, temporal, and spatial distribution), extensive measurements of both the dry deposition of BC over snow and ice, and the scavenging efficiency of BC in mixed-phase clouds. In addition, we find that the poorly constrained precipitation in the Arctic may introduce large uncertainties in estimating BCsnow. Doubling precipitation introduces a positive bias approximately as large as the overall effects of flaring emissions and the WBF effect; halving precipitation produces a similarly large negative bias.

Highlights

  • Black carbon (BC; loosely known as soot), light absorbing refractory carbonaceous aerosol, influences climate through direct absorption of solar radiation, semi-direct cloud effects, indirect cloud effects, and snow-albedo effect (Bond et al, 2013; IPCC, 2014)

  • Barrow is part of the NOAA Global Monitoring Division (GMD) network, where BC light absorption coefficients have been measured from a particle soot absorption photometer (PSAP) since 1997 (Bond et al, 1999; Delene and Ogren, 2002; data available at http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aero/ net/)

  • We find that flaring emissions improve the agreement of BCsnow with observations significantly, with a 50 % reduction to the negative bias of modeled BCsnow across the Arctic and a substantially stronger correlation (0.15 to 0.24) between simulated and observed BCsnow in the region (Table 6)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Black carbon (BC; loosely known as soot), light absorbing refractory carbonaceous aerosol, influences climate through direct absorption of solar radiation, semi-direct cloud effects, indirect cloud effects, and snow-albedo effect (Bond et al, 2013; IPCC, 2014). Previous studies found large discrepancies between modeled and observed BCsnow (up to a factor of 6) in the Arctic (e.g., Flanner et al, 2007; Koch et al, 2009). Studies have shown that Arctic atmospheric BC on average cools the surface due to surface dimming, while BC in the lower troposphere warms the surface with a climate sensitivity (surface temperature change per unit forcing) of 2.8 ± 0.5 K W−1 m2 due to low clouds and sea-ice feedbacks that amplify the warming (e.g., Flanner, 2013). We use BCair as an additional constraint of these simulations

Measurements of BC in snow
Measurements of BC in surface air
GEOS-Chem simulation of BC
Gas-flaring emissions of BC
Experiments
BC concentration in snow
Gas-flaring emissions
Dry deposition velocity
WBF in mixed-phase clouds
Precipitation
Discussions
Findings
Summary and conclusions
Full Text
Paper version not known

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.