Implementation of a comprehensive ice crystal formation parameterization for cirrus and mixed-phase clouds in the EMAC model (based on MESSy 2.53)

Bacer, Sara; Sullivan, Sylvia C.; Karydis, Vlassis A.; Barahona, Donifan; Krämer, Martina; Nenes, Athanasios; Tost, Holger; Tsimpidi, Alexandra P.; Lelieveld, Jos; Pozzer, Andrea

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4021-2018

Articles | Volume 11, issue 10

https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4021-2018

© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Special issue:

The Modular Earth Submodel System (MESSy) (ACP/GMD inter-journal...

https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4021-2018

© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 11, issue 10

Development and technical paper

|

05 Oct 2018

Development and technical paper |

| 05 Oct 2018

Implementation of a comprehensive ice crystal formation parameterization for cirrus and mixed-phase clouds in the EMAC model (based on MESSy 2.53)

Sara Bacer, Sylvia C. Sullivan, Vlassis A. Karydis, Donifan Barahona, Martina Krämer, Athanasios Nenes, Holger Tost, Alexandra P. Tsimpidi, Jos Lelieveld, and Andrea Pozzer

Download

Final revised paper (published on 05 Oct 2018)
Supplement to the final revised paper
Preprint (discussion started on 13 Mar 2018)
Supplement to the preprint

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Review of Implementation of a comprehensive ice crystal formation parameterization for cirrus and mixed-phase clouds into the EMAC model (based on MESSy 2.53)', Anonymous Referee #1, 10 Apr 2018
- AC1: 'Reply to Referee#1', Sara Bacer, 05 Jun 2018
RC2: 'Review of "Bacer et al."', Anonymous Referee #2, 10 Apr 2018
- AC2: 'Reply to Referee#2', Sara Bacer, 05 Jun 2018

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

AR by Sara Bacer on behalf of the Authors (11 Jun 2018) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (04 Jul 2018) by Simon Unterstrasser

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (11 Jul 2018) by Simon Unterstrasser

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (21 Jul 2018)

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (09 Aug 2018) by Simon Unterstrasser

Dear Sara and co-authors

I appreciate the changes to the manuscript.
As you have probably seen one reviewer provided a review commenting the current manuscript version.
He/she gives valuable comments on how to further improve the presentation.
Originally, I intended to nominate two reviewers for this round. But, in the meantime I came to the conclusion that the one review is sufficient for my decision finding.

I think following the reviewer's recommendations will improve the manuscript.

Moreover, I have a few comments. The page/line numbers refer to the document with highlighted changes.

1.) I read multiple times the term cold/warm temperature which is a common mistake in cloud physics literature.
Temperatures are high or low and tell whether an air parcel or some other material is warm or cold.
Please change to low/high temperature.

2.) A bin model may explicitly compute the size distribution, but a two moment scheme certainly does not. Please reformulate p.5, l.25.

3.) p.8, l.20 "required to KEEP (?) s_max below s_hom

4.) p.10, l.9: I guess what you want to say is that "the standard deviations are constants depending only on the mode". The word "differentiated" is misleading.

5.) Sometimes you use the word "to comment" where I would favour the word "to remark" (e.g. p.11, l.25)

6.) p.12, l.5: as a function of LATITUDE AND altitude

7.) replace big by large: p.14,l.33; p.15, l.24

8.) p.17, l.5: "(in total, 113 flights with about ..)"

9.) add short explanation after p.20, l.12 why cirrus param affects mixed phase cloud properties.

10.) check "?" in Brinkop reference

Please provide point-to-point replies to all raised points of the reviewer and myself.

Best wishes,
Simon

Hide

AR by Sara Bacer on behalf of the Authors (06 Sep 2018) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (12 Sep 2018) by Simon Unterstrasser

AR by Sara Bacer on behalf of the Authors (12 Sep 2018) Author's response Manuscript

Short summary

The complexity of ice nucleation mechanisms and aerosol--ice interactions makes their representation still challenging in atmospheric models. We have implemented a comprehensive ice crystal formation parameterization in the global chemistry-climate model EMAC to improve the representation of ice crystal number concentrations. The newly implemented parameterization takes into account processes which were previously neglected by the standard version of the model.