Articles | Volume 13, issue 12
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-6215-2020
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-6215-2020
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Development and technical paper
| 
07 Dec 2020
Development and technical paper |
| 07 Dec 2020
| 07 Dec 2020
In-cloud scavenging scheme for sectional aerosol modules – implementation in the framework of the Sectional Aerosol module for Large Scale Applications version 2.0 (SALSA2.0) global aerosol module
Eemeli Holopainen
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Atmospheric Research Centre of Eastern Finland, Finnish Meteorological Institute, P.O. Box 1627, 70211 Kuopio, Finland
Harri Kokkola
Atmospheric Research Centre of Eastern Finland, Finnish Meteorological Institute, P.O. Box 1627, 70211 Kuopio, Finland
Anton Laakso
Atmospheric Research Centre of Eastern Finland, Finnish Meteorological Institute, P.O. Box 1627, 70211 Kuopio, Finland
Thomas Kühn
Atmospheric Research Centre of Eastern Finland, Finnish Meteorological Institute, P.O. Box 1627, 70211 Kuopio, Finland
Aerosol Physics Research Group, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 1627, 70211 Kuopio, Finland
Related authors
Sini Talvinen, Paul Kim, Emanuele Tovazzi, Eemeli Holopainen, Roxana Cremer, Thomas Kühn, Harri Kokkola, Zak Kipling, David Neubauer, João C. Teixeira, Alistair Sellar, Duncan Watson-Parris, Yang Yang, Jialei Zhu, Srinath Krishnan, Annele Virtanen, and Daniel G. Partridge
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-721, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-721, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Climate models struggle to predict how clouds and aerosols interact, affecting Earth’s energy balance. This study compares models to observations to see how they describe effects of clouds and rain on aerosols. While both models show similar overall trends, seasonal differences emerged. These, however, align with differences in key variables participating in cloud formation. The study provides tools to improve the representation of aerosol-cloud interactions in climate models.
Sara M. Blichner, Theodore Khadir, Sini Talvinen, Paulo Artaxo, Liine Heikkinen, Harri Kokkola, Radovan Krejci, Muhammed Irfan, Twan van Noije, Tuukka Petäjä, Christopher Pöhlker, Øyvind Seland, Carl Svenhag, Antti Vartiainen, and Ilona Riipinen
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2559, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2559, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study looks at how well climate models capture the impact of rain on particles that help form cloud droplets. Using data from three measurement stations and applying both a correlation analysis and a machine learning approach, we found that models often miss how new particles form after rain and struggle in cold environments. This matters because these particles influence cloud formation and climate.
Oskari Rockas, Pia Isolähteenmäki, Marko Laine, Anders V. Lindfors, Karoliina Hämäläinen, and Anton Laakso
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1745, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1745, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
When ice buildup occurs on an energy infrastructure such as a power transmission line or a wind turbine, this can cause disturbances in energy production and transmission efficiency. In our study, we assessed how atmospheric icing conditions will change in the future climate in northern Europe. Towards the end of the century, the climate projections suggest a mostly decreasing trend in ice accumulation. However, the northern parts of Fennoscandia can locally experience increasing amounts of ice.
Silvia M. Calderón, Noora Hyttinen, Harri Kokkola, Tomi Raatikainen, R. Paul Lawson, and Sami Romakkaniemi
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2730, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2730, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Field campaigns suggest that secondary ice production (SIP) via millimeter-sized supercooled droplets is responsible for the rapid glaciation and precipitation development in summer cumulus congestus clouds that lack of ice nucleating particles. We used large-eddy-simulations with sectional representation of aerosol and hydrometeor microphysics that reproduced observed hydrometeor size distributions and explained how SIP boosted rates of aggregation processes that increase surface precipitation.
Antti Vartiainen, Santtu Mikkonen, Ville Leinonen, Tuukka Petäjä, Alfred Wiedensohler, Thomas Kühn, and Tuuli Miinalainen
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-774, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-774, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Global climate models, commonly used for climate predictions, struggle at capturing local-scale variations in air quality. We have used measurements of ultrafine particles (UFPs), a less understood air pollutant with potentially significant health implications, for training machine learning models that can substantially reduce the inaccuracy in UFP concentrations predicted by a climate model. This approach could aid epidemiological studies of ultrafine particles by extending exposure records.
Sini Talvinen, Paul Kim, Emanuele Tovazzi, Eemeli Holopainen, Roxana Cremer, Thomas Kühn, Harri Kokkola, Zak Kipling, David Neubauer, João C. Teixeira, Alistair Sellar, Duncan Watson-Parris, Yang Yang, Jialei Zhu, Srinath Krishnan, Annele Virtanen, and Daniel G. Partridge
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-721, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-721, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Climate models struggle to predict how clouds and aerosols interact, affecting Earth’s energy balance. This study compares models to observations to see how they describe effects of clouds and rain on aerosols. While both models show similar overall trends, seasonal differences emerged. These, however, align with differences in key variables participating in cloud formation. The study provides tools to improve the representation of aerosol-cloud interactions in climate models.
George Jordan, Florent Malavelle, Jim Haywood, Ying Chen, Ben Johnson, Daniel Partridge, Amy Peace, Eliza Duncan, Duncan Watson-Parris, David Neubauer, Anton Laakso, Martine Michou, and Pierre Nabat
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-835, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-835, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The 2014–15 Holuhraun eruption created a vast aerosol plume that acted as a natural experiment to assess how well climate models capture changes in cloud properties due to increased aerosol. We find that the models accurately represent the observed shift to smaller, more numerous cloud droplets. However, the models diverge in their aerosol induced changes to large-scale cloud properties, particularly cloud liquid water content. Our study shows that Holuhraun had a cooling effect on the Earth.
Prashant Chavan, Suvarna Fadnavis, Anton Laakso, Jean-Paul Vernier, Simone Tilmes, and Rolf Müller
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3825, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3825, 2025
Preprint archived
Short summary
Short summary
Our simulations with volcanoes, when compared without volcanoes, show that volcanic aerosol precursors enter the tropical stratosphere, propagating upward and enhancing sulphate aerosol and heating. This stratospheric heating caused by the volcanoes reduces the amplitude of the QBO and disrupts its phases. Since QBO also modulates tropical convection and weather, we suggest including volcanic emissions and the QBO in the weather prediction model for a better forecast.
Mariya Petrenko, Ralph Kahn, Mian Chin, Susanne E. Bauer, Tommi Bergman, Huisheng Bian, Gabriele Curci, Ben Johnson, Johannes W. Kaiser, Zak Kipling, Harri Kokkola, Xiaohong Liu, Keren Mezuman, Tero Mielonen, Gunnar Myhre, Xiaohua Pan, Anna Protonotariou, Samuel Remy, Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Philip Stier, Toshihiko Takemura, Kostas Tsigaridis, Hailong Wang, Duncan Watson-Parris, and Kai Zhang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 1545–1567, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1545-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1545-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We compared smoke plume simulations from 11 global models to each other and to satellite smoke amount observations aimed at constraining smoke source strength. In regions where plumes are thick and background aerosol is low, models and satellites compare well. However, the input emission inventory tends to underestimate in many places, and particle property and loss rate assumptions vary enormously among models, causing uncertainties that require systematic in situ measurements to resolve.
Harri Kokkola, Juha Tonttila, Silvia M. Calderón, Sami Romakkaniemi, Antti Lipponen, Aapo Peräkorpi, Tero Mielonen, Edward Gryspeerdt, Timo Henrik Virtanen, Pekka Kolmonen, and Antti Arola
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 1533–1543, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1533-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1533-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Understanding how atmospheric aerosols affect clouds is a scientific challenge. One question is how aerosols affects the amount of cloud water. We used a cloud-scale model to study these effects on marine clouds. The study showed that variations in cloud properties and instrument noise can cause bias in satellite-derived cloud water content. However, our results suggest that for similar weather conditions with well-defined aerosol concentrations, satellite data can reliably track these effects.
Muhammed Irfan, Thomas Kühn, Taina Yli-Juuti, Anton Laakso, Eemeli Holopainen, Douglas R. Worsnop, Annele Virtanen, and Harri Kokkola
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 8489–8506, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-8489-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-8489-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The study examines how the volatility of semi-volatile organic compounds affects secondary organic aerosol (SOA) formation and climate. Our simulations show that uncertainties in these volatilities influence aerosol mass and climate impacts. Accurate representation of these compounds in climate models is crucial for predicting global climate patterns.
Christina V. Brodowsky, Timofei Sukhodolov, Gabriel Chiodo, Valentina Aquila, Slimane Bekki, Sandip S. Dhomse, Michael Höpfner, Anton Laakso, Graham W. Mann, Ulrike Niemeier, Giovanni Pitari, Ilaria Quaglia, Eugene Rozanov, Anja Schmidt, Takashi Sekiya, Simone Tilmes, Claudia Timmreck, Sandro Vattioni, Daniele Visioni, Pengfei Yu, Yunqian Zhu, and Thomas Peter
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 5513–5548, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-5513-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-5513-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The aerosol layer is an essential part of the climate system. We characterize the sulfur budget in a volcanically quiescent (background) setting, with a special focus on the sulfate aerosol layer using, for the first time, a multi-model approach. The aim is to identify weak points in the representation of the atmospheric sulfur budget in an intercomparison of nine state-of-the-art coupled global circulation models.
Anton Laakso, Daniele Visioni, Ulrike Niemeier, Simone Tilmes, and Harri Kokkola
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 405–427, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-405-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-405-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study is the second in a two-part series in which we explore the dependency of the impacts of stratospheric sulfur injections on both the model employed and the strategy of injection utilized. The study uncovers uncertainties associated with these techniques to cool climate, highlighting how the simulated climate impacts are dependent on both the selected model and the magnitude of the injections. We also show that estimating precipitation impacts of aerosol injection is a complex task.
Alejandro Baró Pérez, Michael S. Diamond, Frida A.-M. Bender, Abhay Devasthale, Matthias Schwarz, Julien Savre, Juha Tonttila, Harri Kokkola, Hyunho Lee, David Painemal, and Annica M. L. Ekman
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 4591–4610, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-4591-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-4591-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We use a numerical model to study interactions between humid light-absorbing aerosol plumes, clouds, and radiation over the southeast Atlantic. We find that the warming produced by the aerosols reduces cloud cover, especially in highly polluted situations. Aerosol impacts on drizzle play a minor role. However, aerosol effects on cloud reflectivity and moisture-induced changes in cloud cover dominate the climatic response and lead to an overall cooling by the biomass burning plumes.
George Jordan, Florent Malavelle, Ying Chen, Amy Peace, Eliza Duncan, Daniel G. Partridge, Paul Kim, Duncan Watson-Parris, Toshihiko Takemura, David Neubauer, Gunnar Myhre, Ragnhild Skeie, Anton Laakso, and James Haywood
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 1939–1960, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-1939-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-1939-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The 2014–15 Holuhraun eruption caused a huge aerosol plume in an otherwise unpolluted region, providing a chance to study how aerosol alters cloud properties. This two-part study uses observations and models to quantify this relationship’s impact on the Earth’s energy budget. Part 1 suggests the models capture the observed spatial and chemical evolution of the plume, yet no model plume is exact. Understanding these differences is key for Part 2, where changes to cloud properties are explored.
Kalle Nordling, Jukka-Pekka Keskinen, Sami Romakkaniemi, Harri Kokkola, Petri Räisänen, Antti Lipponen, Antti-Ilari Partanen, Jaakko Ahola, Juha Tonttila, Muzaffer Ege Alper, Hannele Korhonen, and Tomi Raatikainen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 869–890, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-869-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-869-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Our results show that the global model is stable and it provides meaningful results. This way we can include a physics-based presentation of sub-grid physics (physics which happens on a 100 m scale) in the global model, whose resolution is on a 100 km scale.
Tuuli Miinalainen, Harri Kokkola, Antti Lipponen, Antti-Pekka Hyvärinen, Vijay Kumar Soni, Kari E. J. Lehtinen, and Thomas Kühn
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 3471–3491, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-3471-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-3471-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We simulated the effects of aerosol emission mitigation on both global and regional radiative forcing and city-level air quality with a global-scale climate model. We used a machine learning downscaling approach to bias-correct the PM2.5 values obtained from the global model for the Indian megacity New Delhi. Our results indicate that aerosol mitigation could result in both improved air quality and less radiative heating for India.
Ilaria Quaglia, Claudia Timmreck, Ulrike Niemeier, Daniele Visioni, Giovanni Pitari, Christina Brodowsky, Christoph Brühl, Sandip S. Dhomse, Henning Franke, Anton Laakso, Graham W. Mann, Eugene Rozanov, and Timofei Sukhodolov
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 921–948, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-921-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-921-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The last very large explosive volcanic eruption we have measurements for is the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in 1991. It is therefore often used as a benchmark for climate models' ability to reproduce these kinds of events. Here, we compare available measurements with the results from multiple experiments conducted with climate models interactively simulating the aerosol cloud formation.
Ville Leinonen, Harri Kokkola, Taina Yli-Juuti, Tero Mielonen, Thomas Kühn, Tuomo Nieminen, Simo Heikkinen, Tuuli Miinalainen, Tommi Bergman, Ken Carslaw, Stefano Decesari, Markus Fiebig, Tareq Hussein, Niku Kivekäs, Radovan Krejci, Markku Kulmala, Ari Leskinen, Andreas Massling, Nikos Mihalopoulos, Jane P. Mulcahy, Steffen M. Noe, Twan van Noije, Fiona M. O'Connor, Colin O'Dowd, Dirk Olivie, Jakob B. Pernov, Tuukka Petäjä, Øyvind Seland, Michael Schulz, Catherine E. Scott, Henrik Skov, Erik Swietlicki, Thomas Tuch, Alfred Wiedensohler, Annele Virtanen, and Santtu Mikkonen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 12873–12905, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12873-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12873-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We provide the first extensive comparison of detailed aerosol size distribution trends between in situ observations from Europe and five different earth system models. We investigated aerosol modes (nucleation, Aitken, and accumulation) separately and were able to show the differences between measured and modeled trends and especially their seasonal patterns. The differences in model results are likely due to complex effects of several processes instead of certain specific model features.
Silvia M. Calderón, Juha Tonttila, Angela Buchholz, Jorma Joutsensaari, Mika Komppula, Ari Leskinen, Liqing Hao, Dmitri Moisseev, Iida Pullinen, Petri Tiitta, Jian Xu, Annele Virtanen, Harri Kokkola, and Sami Romakkaniemi
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 12417–12441, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12417-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12417-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The spatial and temporal restrictions of observations and oversimplified aerosol representation in large eddy simulations (LES) limit our understanding of aerosol–stratocumulus interactions. In this closure study of in situ and remote sensing observations and outputs from UCLALES–SALSA, we have assessed the role of convective overturning and aerosol effects in two cloud events observed at the Puijo SMEAR IV station, Finland, a diurnal-high aerosol case and a nocturnal-low aerosol case.
Sini Isokääntä, Paul Kim, Santtu Mikkonen, Thomas Kühn, Harri Kokkola, Taina Yli-Juuti, Liine Heikkinen, Krista Luoma, Tuukka Petäjä, Zak Kipling, Daniel Partridge, and Annele Virtanen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 11823–11843, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11823-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11823-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This research employs air mass history analysis and observations to study how clouds and precipitation affect atmospheric aerosols during transport to a boreal forest site. The mass concentrations of studied chemical species showed exponential decrease as a function of accumulated rain along the air mass route. Our analysis revealed in-cloud sulfate formation, while no major changes in organic mass were seen. Most of the in-cloud-formed sulfate could be assigned to particle sizes above 200 nm.
Qirui Zhong, Nick Schutgens, Guido van der Werf, Twan van Noije, Kostas Tsigaridis, Susanne E. Bauer, Tero Mielonen, Alf Kirkevåg, Øyvind Seland, Harri Kokkola, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, David Neubauer, Zak Kipling, Hitoshi Matsui, Paul Ginoux, Toshihiko Takemura, Philippe Le Sager, Samuel Rémy, Huisheng Bian, Mian Chin, Kai Zhang, Jialei Zhu, Svetlana G. Tsyro, Gabriele Curci, Anna Protonotariou, Ben Johnson, Joyce E. Penner, Nicolas Bellouin, Ragnhild B. Skeie, and Gunnar Myhre
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 11009–11032, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11009-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11009-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Aerosol optical depth (AOD) errors for biomass burning aerosol (BBA) are evaluated in 18 global models against satellite datasets. Notwithstanding biases in satellite products, they allow model evaluations. We observe large and diverse model biases due to errors in BBA. Further interpretations of AOD diversities suggest large biases exist in key processes for BBA which require better constraining. These results can contribute to further model improvement and development.
Marje Prank, Juha Tonttila, Jaakko Ahola, Harri Kokkola, Thomas Kühn, Sami Romakkaniemi, and Tomi Raatikainen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 10971–10992, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-10971-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-10971-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Aerosols and clouds persist as the dominant sources of uncertainty in climate projections. In this modelling study, we investigate the role of marine aerosols in influencing the lifetime of low-level clouds. Our high resolution simulations show that sea spray can both extend and shorten the lifetime of the cloud layer depending on the model setup. The impact of the primary marine organics is relatively limited while secondary aerosol from monoterpenes can have larger impact.
Cynthia H. Whaley, Rashed Mahmood, Knut von Salzen, Barbara Winter, Sabine Eckhardt, Stephen Arnold, Stephen Beagley, Silvia Becagli, Rong-You Chien, Jesper Christensen, Sujay Manish Damani, Xinyi Dong, Konstantinos Eleftheriadis, Nikolaos Evangeliou, Gregory Faluvegi, Mark Flanner, Joshua S. Fu, Michael Gauss, Fabio Giardi, Wanmin Gong, Jens Liengaard Hjorth, Lin Huang, Ulas Im, Yugo Kanaya, Srinath Krishnan, Zbigniew Klimont, Thomas Kühn, Joakim Langner, Kathy S. Law, Louis Marelle, Andreas Massling, Dirk Olivié, Tatsuo Onishi, Naga Oshima, Yiran Peng, David A. Plummer, Olga Popovicheva, Luca Pozzoli, Jean-Christophe Raut, Maria Sand, Laura N. Saunders, Julia Schmale, Sangeeta Sharma, Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Henrik Skov, Fumikazu Taketani, Manu A. Thomas, Rita Traversi, Kostas Tsigaridis, Svetlana Tsyro, Steven Turnock, Vito Vitale, Kaley A. Walker, Minqi Wang, Duncan Watson-Parris, and Tahya Weiss-Gibbons
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 5775–5828, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5775-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5775-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Air pollutants, like ozone and soot, play a role in both global warming and air quality. Atmospheric models are often used to provide information to policy makers about current and future conditions under different emissions scenarios. In order to have confidence in those simulations, in this study we compare simulated air pollution from 18 state-of-the-art atmospheric models to measured air pollution in order to assess how well the models perform.
Jaakko Ahola, Tomi Raatikainen, Muzaffer Ege Alper, Jukka-Pekka Keskinen, Harri Kokkola, Antti Kukkurainen, Antti Lipponen, Jia Liu, Kalle Nordling, Antti-Ilari Partanen, Sami Romakkaniemi, Petri Räisänen, Juha Tonttila, and Hannele Korhonen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 4523–4537, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-4523-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-4523-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Clouds are important for the climate, and cloud droplets have a significant role in cloud properties. Cloud droplets form when air rises and cools and water vapour condenses on small particles that can be natural or of anthropogenic origin. Currently, the updraft velocity, meaning how fast the air rises, is poorly represented in global climate models. In our study, we show three methods that will improve the depiction of updraft velocity and which properties are vital to updrafts.
Tomi Raatikainen, Marje Prank, Jaakko Ahola, Harri Kokkola, Juha Tonttila, and Sami Romakkaniemi
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 3763–3778, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-3763-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-3763-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Mineral dust or similar ice-nucleating particles (INPs) are needed to initiate cloud droplet freezing at temperatures common in shallow clouds. In this work we examine how INPs that are released from the sea surface impact marine clouds. Our high-resolution simulations show that turbulent updraughts carry these particles effectively up to the clouds, where they initiate cloud droplet freezing. Sea surface INP emissions become more important with decreasing background dust INP concentrations.
Anton Laakso, Ulrike Niemeier, Daniele Visioni, Simone Tilmes, and Harri Kokkola
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 93–118, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-93-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-93-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The use of different spatio-temporal sulfur injection strategies with different magnitudes to create an artificial reflective aerosol layer to cool the climate is studied using sectional and modal aerosol schemes in a climate model. There are significant differences in the results depending on the aerosol microphysical module used. Different spatio-temporal injection strategies have a significant impact on the magnitude and zonal distribution of radiative forcing and atmospheric dynamics.
Maria Sand, Bjørn H. Samset, Gunnar Myhre, Jonas Gliß, Susanne E. Bauer, Huisheng Bian, Mian Chin, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Paul Ginoux, Zak Kipling, Alf Kirkevåg, Harri Kokkola, Philippe Le Sager, Marianne T. Lund, Hitoshi Matsui, Twan van Noije, Dirk J. L. Olivié, Samuel Remy, Michael Schulz, Philip Stier, Camilla W. Stjern, Toshihiko Takemura, Kostas Tsigaridis, Svetlana G. Tsyro, and Duncan Watson-Parris
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 15929–15947, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-15929-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-15929-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Absorption of shortwave radiation by aerosols can modify precipitation and clouds but is poorly constrained in models. A total of 15 different aerosol models from AeroCom phase III have reported total aerosol absorption, and for the first time, 11 of these models have reported in a consistent experiment the contributions to absorption from black carbon, dust, and organic aerosol. Here, we document the model diversity in aerosol absorption.
Twan van Noije, Tommi Bergman, Philippe Le Sager, Declan O'Donnell, Risto Makkonen, María Gonçalves-Ageitos, Ralf Döscher, Uwe Fladrich, Jost von Hardenberg, Jukka-Pekka Keskinen, Hannele Korhonen, Anton Laakso, Stelios Myriokefalitakis, Pirkka Ollinaho, Carlos Pérez García-Pando, Thomas Reerink, Roland Schrödner, Klaus Wyser, and Shuting Yang
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5637–5668, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5637-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5637-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper documents the global climate model EC-Earth3-AerChem, one of the members of the EC-Earth3 family of models participating in CMIP6. We give an overview of the model and describe in detail how it differs from its predecessor and the other EC-Earth3 configurations. The model's performance is characterized using coupled simulations conducted for CMIP6. The model has an effective equilibrium climate sensitivity of 3.9 °C and a transient climate response of 2.1 °C.
Antti Ruuskanen, Sami Romakkaniemi, Harri Kokkola, Antti Arola, Santtu Mikkonen, Harri Portin, Annele Virtanen, Kari E. J. Lehtinen, Mika Komppula, and Ari Leskinen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1683–1695, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1683-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1683-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The study focuses mainly on cloud-scavenging efficiency of absorbing particulate matter (mainly black carbon) but additionally covers cloud-scavenging efficiency of scattering particles and statistics of cloud condensation nuclei. The main findings give insight into how black carbon is distributed in different particle sizes and the sensitivity to cloud scavenged. The main findings are useful for large-scale modelling for evaluating cloud scavenging.
Juha Tonttila, Ali Afzalifar, Harri Kokkola, Tomi Raatikainen, Hannele Korhonen, and Sami Romakkaniemi
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1035–1048, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1035-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1035-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The focus of this study is on rain enhancement by deliberate injection of small particles into clouds (
cloud seeding). The particles, usually released from an aircraft, are expected to enhance cloud droplet growth, but its practical feasibility is somewhat uncertain. To improve upon this, we simulate the seeding effects with a numerical model. The model reproduces the main features seen in field observations, with a strong sensitivity to the total mass of the injected particle material.
Jonas Gliß, Augustin Mortier, Michael Schulz, Elisabeth Andrews, Yves Balkanski, Susanne E. Bauer, Anna M. K. Benedictow, Huisheng Bian, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Mian Chin, Paul Ginoux, Jan J. Griesfeller, Andreas Heckel, Zak Kipling, Alf Kirkevåg, Harri Kokkola, Paolo Laj, Philippe Le Sager, Marianne Tronstad Lund, Cathrine Lund Myhre, Hitoshi Matsui, Gunnar Myhre, David Neubauer, Twan van Noije, Peter North, Dirk J. L. Olivié, Samuel Rémy, Larisa Sogacheva, Toshihiko Takemura, Kostas Tsigaridis, and Svetlana G. Tsyro
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 87–128, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-87-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-87-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Simulated aerosol optical properties as well as the aerosol life cycle are investigated for 14 global models participating in the AeroCom initiative. Considerable diversity is found in the simulated aerosol species emissions and lifetimes, also resulting in a large diversity in the simulated aerosol mass, composition, and optical properties. A comparison with observations suggests that, on average, current models underestimate the direct effect of aerosol on the atmosphere radiation budget.
Jessica Slater, Juha Tonttila, Gordon McFiggans, Paul Connolly, Sami Romakkaniemi, Thomas Kühn, and Hugh Coe
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 11893–11906, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11893-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11893-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The feedback effect between aerosol particles, radiation and meteorology reduces turbulent motion and results in increased surface aerosol concentrations during Beijing haze. Observational analysis and regional modelling studies have examined the feedback effect but these studies are limited. In this work, we set up a high-resolution model for the Beijing environment to examine the sensitivity of the aerosol feedback effect to initial meteorological conditions and aerosol loading.
Jaakko Ahola, Hannele Korhonen, Juha Tonttila, Sami Romakkaniemi, Harri Kokkola, and Tomi Raatikainen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 11639–11654, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11639-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11639-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we present an improved cloud model that reproduces the behaviour of mixed-phase clouds containing liquid droplets and ice crystals in more detail than before. This model is a convenient computational tool that enables the study of phenomena that cannot fit into a laboratory. These clouds have a significant role in climate, but they are not yet properly understood. Here, we show the advantages of the new model in a case study focusing on Arctic mixed-phase clouds.
Cited articles
Albrecht, B. A.: Aerosols, Cloud Microphysics, and Fractional Cloudiness,
Science, 245, 1227–1230, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.245.4923.1227, 1989. a
AMAP: AMAP assessment 2015: Black carbon and ozone as Arctic climate forcers, vol. 7, Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP),, Oslo, Norway, 2015. a
Andersson, C., Bergström, R., Bennet, C., Robertson, L., Thomas, M., Korhonen, H., Lehtinen, K. E. J., and Kokkola, H.: MATCH-SALSA – Multi-scale Atmospheric Transport and CHemistry model coupled to the SALSA aerosol microphysics model – Part 1: Model description and evaluation, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 171–189, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-171-2015, 2015. a
Andronache, C.: Estimated variability of below-cloud aerosol removal by rainfall for observed aerosol size distributions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 131–143, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-131-2003, 2003. a
Andronache, C., Grönholm, T., Laakso, L., Phillips, V., and Venäläinen, A.: Scavenging of ultrafine particles by rainfall at a boreal site: observations and model estimations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 4739–4754, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-4739-2006, 2006. a
Archuleta, C. M., DeMott, P. J., and Kreidenweis, S. M.: Ice nucleation by surrogates for atmospheric mineral dust and mineral dust/sulfate particles at cirrus temperatures, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 2617–2634, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-2617-2005, 2005. a
Barahona, D. and Nenes, A.: Parameterization of cloud droplet formation in
large-scale models: Including effects of entrainment, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 112, D16206, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008473, 2007. a
Bergman, T., Kerminen, V.-M., Korhonen, H., Lehtinen, K. J., Makkonen, R., Arola, A., Mielonen, T., Romakkaniemi, S., Kulmala, M., and Kokkola, H.: Evaluation of the sectional aerosol microphysics module SALSA implementation in ECHAM5-HAM aerosol-climate model, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 845–868, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-845-2012, 2012. a, b
Berrisford, P., Dee, D., Poli, P., Brugge, R., Fielding, K., Fuentes, M., Kållberg, P., Kobayashi, S., Uppala, S., and Simmons, A.: The ERA-Interim
archive Version 2.0, Shinfield Park, Reading, 2011. a
Bond, T. C., Doherty, S. J., Fahey, D. W., Forster, P. M., Berntsen, T.,
DeAngelo, B. J., Flanner, M. G., Ghan, S., Kärcher, B., Koch, D., Kinne,
S., Kondo, Y., Quinn, P. K., Sarofim, M. C., Schultz, M. G., Schulz, M.,
Venkataraman, C., Zhang, H., Zhang, S., Bellouin, N., Guttikunda, S. K.,
Hopke, P. K., Jacobson, M. Z., Kaiser, J. W., Klimont, Z., Lohmann, U.,
Schwarz, J. P., Shindell, D., Storelvmo, T., Warren, S. G., and Zender,
C. S.: Bounding the role of black carbon in the climate system: A scientific
assessment, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 5380–5552,
https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50171, 2013. a, b
Bourgeois, Q. and Bey, I.: Pollution transport efficiency toward the Arctic:
Sensitivity to aerosol scavenging and source regions, J. Geophys.
Res., 116, D08213, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015096, 2011. a, b
Brock, C. A., Williamson, C., Kupc, A., Froyd, K. D., Erdesz, F., Wagner, N., Richardson, M., Schwarz, J. P., Gao, R.-S., Katich, J. M., Campuzano-Jost, P., Nault, B. A., Schroder, J. C., Jimenez, J. L., Weinzierl, B., Dollner, M., Bui, T., and Murphy, D. M.: Aerosol size distributions during the Atmospheric Tomography Mission (ATom): methods, uncertainties, and data products, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 3081–3099, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-3081-2019, 2019. a
Browse, J., Carslaw, K. S., Arnold, S. R., Pringle, K., and Boucher, O.: The scavenging processes controlling the seasonal cycle in Arctic sulphate and black carbon aerosol, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 6775–6798, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-6775-2012, 2012. a
Chate, D., Rao, P., Naik, M., Momin, G., Safai, P., and Ali, K.: Scavenging of aerosols and their chemical species by rain, Atmos. Environ., 37,
2477–2484, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(03)00162-6, 2003. a, b
Chate, D., Murugavel, P., Ali, K., Tiwari, S., and Beig, G.: Below-cloud rain
scavenging of atmospheric aerosols for aerosol deposition models, Atmospheric
Research, 99, 528–536,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.12.010, 2011. a
Chen, J.-P. and Lamb, D.: Simulation of Cloud Microphysical and Chemical
Processes Using a Multicomponent Framework. Part I: Description of the
Microphysical Model, J. Atmosp. Sci., 51, 2613–2630,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1994)051<2613:SOCMAC>2.0.CO;2, 1994. a
Corbin, J. C., Pieber, S. M., Czech, H., Zanatta, M., Jakobi, G., Massabò, D.,
Orasche, J., El Haddad, I., Mensah, A. A., Stengel, B., Drinovec, L.,
Mocnik, G., Zimmermann, R., Prévôt, A. S. H., and Gysel, M.: Brown and
Black Carbon Emitted by a Marine Engine Operated on Heavy Fuel Oil and
Distillate Fuels: Optical Properties, Size Distributions, and Emission
Factors, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 6175–6195,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2017JD027818, 2018. a
roft, B., Lohmann, U., Martin, R. V., Stier, P., Wurzler, S., Feichter, J., Posselt, R., and Ferrachat, S.: Aerosol size-dependent below-cloud scavenging by rain and snow in the ECHAM5-HAM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 4653–4675, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-4653-2009, 2009. a, b, c, d
Croft, B., Lohmann, U., Martin, R. V., Stier, P., Wurzler, S., Feichter, J., Hoose, C., Heikkilä, U., van Donkelaar, A., and Ferrachat, S.: Influences of in-cloud aerosol scavenging parameterizations on aerosol concentrations and wet deposition in ECHAM5-HAM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 1511–1543, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-1511-2010, 2010. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l, m, n, o, p, q
Croft, B., Martin, R. V., Leaitch, W. R., Tunved, P., Breider, T. J., D'Andrea, S. D., and Pierce, J. R.: Processes controlling the annual cycle of Arctic aerosol number and size distributions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 3665–3682, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-3665-2016, 2016. a, b, c
de Bruine, M., Krol, M., van Noije, T., Le Sager, P., and Röckmann, T.: The impact of precipitation evaporation on the atmospheric aerosol distribution in EC-Earth v3.2.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 1443–1465, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1443-2018, 2018. a
Dentener, F., Kinne, S., Bond, T., Boucher, O., Cofala, J., Generoso, S., Ginoux, P., Gong, S., Hoelzemann, J. J., Ito, A., Marelli, L., Penner, J. E., Putaud, J.-P., Textor, C., Schulz, M., van der Werf, G. R., and Wilson, J.: Emissions of primary aerosol and precursor gases in the years 2000 and 1750 prescribed data-sets for AeroCom, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 4321–4344, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-4321-2006, 2006. a, b
Easter, R. C., Ghan, S. J., Zhang, Y., Saylor, R. D., Chapman, E. G.,
Laulainen, N. S., Abdul-Razzak, H., Leung, L. R., Bian, X., and Zaveri,
R. A.: MIRAGE: Model description and evaluation of aerosols and trace gases,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 109, D20210,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004571, 2004. a
Eckhardt, S., Quennehen, B., Olivié, D. J. L., Berntsen, T. K., Cherian, R., Christensen, J. H., Collins, W., Crepinsek, S., Daskalakis, N., Flanner, M., Herber, A., Heyes, C., Hodnebrog, Ø., Huang, L., Kanakidou, M., Klimont, Z., Langner, J., Law, K. S., Lund, M. T., Mahmood, R., Massling, A., Myriokefalitakis, S., Nielsen, I. E., Nøjgaard, J. K., Quaas, J., Quinn, P. K., Raut, J.-C., Rumbold, S. T., Schulz, M., Sharma, S., Skeie, R. B., Skov, H., Uttal, T., von Salzen, K., and Stohl, A.: Current model capabilities for simulating black carbon and sulfate concentrations in the Arctic atmosphere: a multi-model evaluation using a comprehensive measurement data set, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 9413–9433, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9413-2015, 2015. a
Feichter, J., Kjellström, E., Rodhe, H., Dentener, F., Lelieveldi, J., and
Roelofs, G.-J.: Simulation of the tropospheric sulfur cycle in a global
climate model, Atmos. Environ., 30, 1693–1707,
https://doi.org/10.1016/1352-2310(95)00394-0, 1996. a
Flossmann, A. I. and Wobrock, W.: A review of our understanding of the
aerosol–cloud interaction from the perspective of a bin resolved cloud
scale modelling, Atmos. Res., 97, 478–497,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.05.008, 2010. a
Garrett, T., Zhao, C., and Novelli, P.: Assessing the relative contributions of transport efficiency and scavenging to seasonal variability in Arctic
aerosol, Tellus B, 62, 190–196,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00453.x, 2010. a
Gliß, J., Mortier, A., Schulz, M., Andrews, E., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S. E., Benedictow, A. M. K., Bian, H., Checa-Garcia, R., Chin, M., Ginoux, P., Griesfeller, J. J., Heckel, A., Kipling, Z., Kirkevåg, A., Kokkola, H., Laj, P., Le Sager, P., Lund, M. T., Lund Myhre, C., Matsui, H., Myhre, G., Neubauer, D., van Noije, T., North, P., Olivié, D. J. L., Sogacheva, L., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., and Tsyro, S. G.: Multi-model evaluation of aerosol optical properties in the AeroCom phase III Control experiment, using ground and space based columnar observations from AERONET, MODIS, AATSR and a merged satellite product as well as surface in-situ observations from GAW sites, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2019-1214, in review, 2020. a, b, c
HAMMOZ consortium: HAMMOZ Software Licence Agreement, available at:
https://redmine.hammoz.ethz.ch/attachments/291/License_ECHAM-HAMMOZ_June2012.pdf,
last access: 29 June 2012. a
Haywood, J. M. and Shine, K. P.: Multi-spectral calculations of the direct
radiative forcing of tropospheric sulphate and soot aerosols using a column
model, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 123,
1907–1930, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49712354307, 1997. a
Hobbs, P.: Aerosol-cloud-climate interactions, vol. 54, Academic Press, San
Diego, 1993. a
Holopainen, E., Kokkola, H., Laakso, A., and Kühn, T.: In-cloud scavenging
scheme for aerosol modules 2019–2020 data, Eemeli Holopainen
https://doi.org/10.23729/301df277-8147-4700-8652-ca491f2b58a6, 2020. a
Horowitz, L. W., Walters, S., Mauzerall, D. L., Emmons, L. K., Rasch, P. J.,
Granier, C., Tie, X., Lamarque, J.-F., Schultz, M., and Brasseur, G. P.: A
global simulation of tropospheric ozone and related tracers: Description and
evaluation of MOZART, version 2, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 4784, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002853, 2003. a
IPCC: Climate Change 2013 – The Physical Science Basis: Working Group I
Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, 659–740,
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.018, 2014. a
Kipling, Z., Stier, P., Johnson, C. E., Mann, G. W., Bellouin, N., Bauer, S. E., Bergman, T., Chin, M., Diehl, T., Ghan, S. J., Iversen, T., Kirkevåg, A., Kokkola, H., Liu, X., Luo, G., van Noije, T., Pringle, K. J., von Salzen, K., Schulz, M., Seland, Ø., Skeie, R. B., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., and Zhang, K.: What controls the vertical distribution of aerosol? Relationships between process sensitivity in HadGEM3–UKCA and inter-model variation from AeroCom Phase II, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 2221–2241, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-2221-2016, 2016. a, b, c, d
Köhler, H.: The nucleus in and the growth of hygroscopic droplets, Trans.
Faraday Soc., 32, 1152–1161, https://doi.org/10.1039/TF9363201152, 1936. a, b, c
Kokkola, H., Vesterinen, M., Anttila, T., Laaksonen, A., and Lehtinen, K. E. J.: Technical note: Analytical formulae for the critical supersaturations and droplet diameters of CCN containing insoluble material, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 1985–1988, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-1985-2008, 2008. a
Kokkola, H., Kühn, T., Laakso, A., Bergman, T., Lehtinen, K. E. J., Mielonen, T., Arola, A., Stadtler, S., Korhonen, H., Ferrachat, S., Lohmann, U., Neubauer, D., Tegen, I., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Schultz, M. G., Bey, I., Stier, P., Daskalakis, N., Heald, C. L., and Romakkaniemi, S.: SALSA2.0: The sectional aerosol module of the aerosol–chemistry–climate model ECHAM6.3.0-HAM2.3-MOZ1.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3833–3863, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3833-2018, 2018a. a, b, c, d, e, f, g
Kokkola, H., Tonttila, J., Romakkaniemi, S., Bergman, T., Laakso, A., Kühn,
T., Mielonen, T., Kudzotsa, I., and Raatikainen, T.: SALSA-standalone 2.0, Zenodo,
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1251669, 2018b. a
Korhonen, H., Carslaw, K. S., Spracklen, D. V., Ridley, D. A., and Ström, J.:
A global model study of processes controlling aerosol size distributions in
the Arctic spring and summer, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
113, D08211, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD009114, 2008. a, b
Korolev, A., Emery, E., Strapp, J., Cober, S., Isaac, G., Wasey, M., and
Marcotte, D.: Small Ice Particles in Tropospheric Clouds: Fact or Artifact?
Airborne Icing Instrumentation Evaluation Experiment, B.
Am. Meteorol. Soc., 92, 967–973, https://doi.org/10.1175/2010BAMS3141.1,
2011. a
Krecl, P., Johansson, C., Targino, A. C., Ström, J., and Burman, L.: Trends in black carbon and size-resolved particle number concentrations and vehicle
emission factors under real-world conditions, Atmos. Environ., 165,
155–168, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.06.036, 2017. a
Kristiansen, N. I., Stohl, A., Olivié, D. J. L., Croft, B., Søvde, O. A., Klein, H., Christoudias, T., Kunkel, D., Leadbetter, S. J., Lee, Y. H., Zhang, K., Tsigaridis, K., Bergman, T., Evangeliou, N., Wang, H., Ma, P.-L., Easter, R. C., Rasch, P. J., Liu, X., Pitari, G., Di Genova, G., Zhao, S. Y., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S. E., Faluvegi, G. S., Kokkola, H., Martin, R. V., Pierce, J. R., Schulz, M., Shindell, D., Tost, H., and Zhang, H.: Evaluation of observed and modelled aerosol lifetimes using radioactive tracers of opportunity and an ensemble of 19 global models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 3525–3561, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-3525-2016, 2016. a
Kurppa, M., Hellsten, A., Roldin, P., Kokkola, H., Tonttila, J., Auvinen, M., Kent, C., Kumar, P., Maronga, B., and Järvi, L.: Implementation of the sectional aerosol module SALSA2.0 into the PALM model system 6.0: model development and first evaluation, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1403–1422, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1403-2019, 2019. a
Ladino, L., Stetzer, O., Hattendorf, B., Günther, D., Croft, B., and Lohmann,
U.: Experimental Study of Collection Efficiencies between Submicron Aerosols
and Cloud Droplets, J. Atmos. Sci., 68, 1853–1864,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-11-012.1, 2011. a
Lamarque, J.-F., Bond, T. C., Eyring, V., Granier, C., Heil, A., Klimont, Z., Lee, D., Liousse, C., Mieville, A., Owen, B., Schultz, M. G., Shindell, D., Smith, S. J., Stehfest, E., Van Aardenne, J., Cooper, O. R., Kainuma, M., Mahowald, N., McConnell, J. R., Naik, V., Riahi, K., and van Vuuren, D. P.: Historical (1850–2000) gridded anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions of reactive gases and aerosols: methodology and application, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 7017–7039, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7017-2010, 2010. a
Lohmann, U.: Possible Aerosol Effects on Ice Clouds via Contact Nucleation, J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 647–656,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2001)059<0647:PAEOIC>2.0.CO;2, 2002. a, b, c
Lohmann, U., Stier, P., Hoose, C., Ferrachat, S., Kloster, S., Roeckner, E., and Zhang, J.: Cloud microphysics and aerosol indirect effects in the global climate model ECHAM5-HAM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 3425–3446, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-3425-2007, 2007. a
Lund, M. T., Samset, B. H., Skeie, R. B., Watson-Parris, D., Katich, J. M.,
Schwarz, J. P., and Weinzierl, B.: Short Black Carbon lifetime inferred from
a global set of aircraft observations, Clim. Atmos. Sci.,
1, 2397–3722, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-018-0040-x, 2018. a, b, c, d
Marcolli, C., Gedamke, S., Peter, T., and Zobrist, B.: Efficiency of immersion mode ice nucleation on surrogates of mineral dust, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 5081–5091, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-5081-2007, 2007. a
Paasonen, P., Kupiainen, K., Klimont, Z., Visschedijk, A., Denier van der Gon, H. A. C., and Amann, M.: Continental anthropogenic primary particle number emissions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 6823–6840, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-6823-2016, 2016. a
Rasch, P. J., Feitcher, J., Law, J., Mahowald, N., Penner, J., Benkovitz, C., Genthon, C., Giannakopoulos, C., Kasibhatla, P.,
Koch, D., Levy, H., Maki, T., Prather, M., Roberts, D. L., Roelofs, G.-J.,
Stevenson, D., Stockwell, Z., Taguchi, S., Kritz, M., Chipperfield, M., Baldocchi,
D., McMurry, P., Barrie, L., Balkanski, Y., Chatfield, R., Kjellstrom, E.,
Lawrence, M., Lee, H. N., Lelieveld, J., Noone, K. J., Seinfeld, J., Stenchikov, G., Schwartz, S., Walcek, C., and Williamson, D.: A comparison of scavenging
and deposition processes in global models: results from the WCRP Cambridge
Workshop of 1995, Tellus B, 52, 1025–1056, https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0889.2000.00980.x, 2000. a, b, c
Samset, B. H., Myhre, G., Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S., Berntsen, T. K., Bian, H., Bellouin, N., Diehl, T., Easter, R. C., Ghan, S. J., Iversen, T., Kinne, S., Kirkevåg, A., Lamarque, J.-F., Lin, G., Liu, X., Penner, J. E., Seland, Ø., Skeie, R. B., Stier, P., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., and Zhang, K.: Black carbon vertical profiles strongly affect its radiative forcing uncertainty, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 2423–2434, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2423-2013, 2013. a
Schultz, M. G., Stadtler, S., Schröder, S., Taraborrelli, D., Franco, B., Krefting, J., Henrot, A., Ferrachat, S., Lohmann, U., Neubauer, D., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Wahl, S., Kokkola, H., Kühn, T., Rast, S., Schmidt, H., Stier, P., Kinnison, D., Tyndall, G. S., Orlando, J. J., and Wespes, C.: The chemistry–climate model ECHAM6.3-HAM2.3-MOZ1.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 1695–1723, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1695-2018, 2018. a
Seland, O., Iversen, T., Kirkevåg, A., and Storelvmo, T.: Aerosol-climate
interactions in the CAM-Oslo atmospheric GCM and investigation of associated
basic shortcomings, Tellus A, 60, 459–491,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0870.2008.00318.x, 2008. a
Sharma, S., Ishizawa, M., Chan, D., Lavoué, D., Andrews, E., Eleftheriadis,
K., and Maksyutov, S.: 16-year simulation of Arctic black carbon: Transport,
source contribution, and sensitivity analysis on deposition, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 943–964, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017774, 2013. a
Simmons, A. J., Burridge, D. M., Jarraud, M., Girard, C., and Wergen, W.: The
ECMWF medium-range prediction models development of the numerical
formulations and the impact of increased resolution, Meteorol.
Atmos. Phys., 40, 28–60, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01027467, 1989. a
Slinn, W. G. N. and Hales, J. M.: A Reevaluation of the Role of Thermophoresis as a Mechanism of In- and Below-Cloud Scavenging, J. Atmos. Sci., 28, 1465–1471, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1971)028<1465:AROTRO>2.0.CO;2, 1971. a
Stier, P., Feichter, J., Kinne, S., Kloster, S., Vignati, E., Wilson, J., Ganzeveld, L., Tegen, I., Werner, M., Balkanski, Y., Schulz, M., Boucher, O., Minikin, A., and Petzold, A.: The aerosol-climate model ECHAM5-HAM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 1125–1156, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-1125-2005, 2005. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h
Stone, R., Sharma, S., Herber, A., Eleftheriadis, K., and Nelson, D.: A
characterization of Arctic aerosols on the basis of aerosol optical depth and
black carbon measurements, Elementa, 2,
000027, https://doi.org/10.12952/journal.elementa.000027, 2014. a
Tabazadeh, A., Djikaev, Y. S., and Reiss, H.: Surface crystallization of
supercooled water in clouds, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 99,
15873–15878, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.252640699, 2002. a, b, c, d
Tegen, I., Neubauer, D., Ferrachat, S., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Bey, I., Schutgens, N., Stier, P., Watson-Parris, D., Stanelle, T., Schmidt, H., Rast, S., Kokkola, H., Schultz, M., Schroeder, S., Daskalakis, N., Barthel, S., Heinold, B., and Lohmann, U.: The global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3 – Part 1: Aerosol evaluation, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1643–1677, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1643-2019, 2019. a, b
Textor, C., Schulz, M., Guibert, S., Kinne, S., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S., Berntsen, T., Berglen, T., Boucher, O., Chin, M., Dentener, F., Diehl, T., Easter, R., Feichter, H., Fillmore, D., Ghan, S., Ginoux, P., Gong, S., Grini, A., Hendricks, J., Horowitz, L., Huang, P., Isaksen, I., Iversen, I., Kloster, S., Koch, D., Kirkevåg, A., Kristjansson, J. E., Krol, M., Lauer, A., Lamarque, J. F., Liu, X., Montanaro, V., Myhre, G., Penner, J., Pitari, G., Reddy, S., Seland, Ø., Stier, P., Takemura, T., and Tie, X.: Analysis and quantification of the diversities of aerosol life cycles within AeroCom, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 1777–1813, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-1777-2006, 2006. a
Tissari, J., Lyyränen, J., Hytönen, K., Sippula, O., Tapper, U., Frey, A.,
Saarnio, K., Pennanen, A., Hillamo, R., Salonen, R., Hirvonen, M.-R., and
Jokiniemi, J.: Fine particle and gaseous emissions from normal and
smouldering wood combustion in a conventional masonry heater, Atmos.
Environ., 42, 7862–7873,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.07.019, 2008. a
Tonttila, J., Maalick, Z., Raatikainen, T., Kokkola, H., Kühn, T., and Romakkaniemi, S.: UCLALES–SALSA v1.0: a large-eddy model with interactive sectional microphysics for aerosol, clouds and precipitation, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 169–188, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-169-2017, 2017. a
Twomey, S.: Aerosol, clouds, and radiation., vol. 25A, Atmospheric
Environment, The University of Arizona, Tuczon, AZ, USA, 1991. a
van Vuuren, D. P., Edmonds, J., Kainuma, M., Riahi, K., Thomson, A., Hibbard,
K., Hurtt, G. C., Kram, T., Krey, V., Lamarque, J.-F., Masui, T.,
Meinshausen, M., Nakicenovic, N., Smith, S. J., and Rose, S. K.: The
representative concentration pathways: an overview, Clim. Chang., 109,
5–31, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0148-z, 2011. a
Wang, H., Easter, R. C., Rasch, P. J., Wang, M., Liu, X., Ghan, S. J., Qian, Y., Yoon, J.-H., Ma, P.-L., and Vinoj, V.: Sensitivity of remote aerosol distributions to representation of cloud–aerosol interactions in a global climate model, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 765–782, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-765-2013, 2013. a
Wang, P., Grover, S., and Pruppacher, H.: On the Effect of Electric Charges on the Scavenging of Aerosol Particles by Clouds and Small Raindrops, J. Atmos. Sci., 35, 1735–1743,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1978)035<1735:OTEOEC>2.0.CO;2, 1978. a, b
Watson-Parris, D., Schutgens, N., Cook, N., Kipling, Z., Kershaw, P., Gryspeerdt, E., Lawrence, B., and Stier, P.: Community Intercomparison Suite (CIS) v1.4.0: a tool for intercomparing models and observations, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3093–3110, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3093-2016, 2016. a
Watson-Parris, D., Schutgens, N., Reddington, C., Pringle, K. J., Liu, D., Allan, J. D., Coe, H., Carslaw, K. S., and Stier, P.: In situ constraints on the vertical distribution of global aerosol, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 11765–11790, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-11765-2019, 2019. a
Wofsy, S., Afshar, S., Allen, H., Apel, E., Asher, E., Barletta, B., Bent, J.,
Bian, H., Biggs, B., Blake, D., Blake, N., Bourgeois, I., Brock, C., Brune,
W., Budney, J., Bui, T., Butler, A., Campuzano-Jost, P., Chang, C., Chin, M.,
Commane, R., Correa, G., Crounse, J., Cullis, P., Daube, B., Day, D.,
Dean-Day, J., Dibb, J., Digangi, J., Diskin, G., Dollner, M., Elkins, J.,
Erdesz, F., Fiore, A., Flynn, C., Froyd, K., Gesler, D., Hall, S., Hanisco,
T., Hannun, R., Hills, A., Hintsa, E., Hoffman, A., Hornbrook, R., Huey, L.,
Hughes, S., Jimenez, J., Johnson, B., Katich, J., Keeling, R., Kim, M., Kupc,
A., Lait, L., Lamarque, J.-F., Liu, J., McKain, K., McLaughling, R.,
Meinardi, S., Miller, D., Montzka, S., Moore, F., Morgan, E., Murphy, D.,
Murray, L., Nault, B., Neuman, J., Newman, P., Nicely, J., Pan, X.,
Paplawsky, W., Peischl, J., Prather, M., Price, D., Ray, E., Reeves, J.,
Richardson, M., Rollins, A., Rosenlof, K., Ryerson, T., Scheuer, E., Schill,
G., Schroder, J., Schwarz, J., St.Clair, J., Steenrod, S., Stephens, B.,
Strode, S., Sweeney, C., Tanner, D., Teng, A., Thames, A., Thompson, C.,
Ullmann, K., Veres, P., Vizenor, N., Wagner, N., Watt, A., Weber, R.,
Weinzierl, B., Wennberg, P., Williamson, C., Wilson, J., Wolfe, G., Woods,
C., and Zeng, L.: ATom: Merged Atmospheric Chemistry, Trace Gases, and
Aerosols, ORNL DAAC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA, https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1581, 2018. a, b, c, d, e
Zhang, X., Chen, X., and Wang, J.: A number-based inventory of size-resolved
black carbon particle emissions by global civil aviation, Nat.
Commun., 10, 534, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-08491-9, 2019. a
Zikova, N. and Zdimal, V.: Precipitation scavenging of aerosol particles at a
rural site in the Czech Republic, Tellus B, 68, 27343, https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v68.27343, 2016. a
Short summary
This paper introduces an in-cloud wet deposition scheme for liquid and ice phase clouds for global aerosol–climate models. With the default setup, our wet deposition scheme behaves spuriously and better representation can be achieved with this scheme when black carbon is mixed with soluble compounds at emission time. This work is done as many of the global models fail to reproduce the transport of black carbon to the Arctic, which may be due to the poor representation of wet removal in models.
This paper introduces an in-cloud wet deposition scheme for liquid and ice phase clouds for...
