Current model capabilities for simulating black carbon and sulfate concentrations in the Arctic atmosphere: a multi-model evaluation using a comprehensive measurement data set

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.

Ions in the atmosphere

In Earth’s atmosphere, an ion is a cluster of molecules carrying an overall charge, known as a molecular cluster ion. Such cluster ions, with dimensions of approximately one nanometre, have usually been referred to as small ions, and their motion in air constitutes a small electric current. Large ions (or Langevin ions), by comparison, are physically larger (tens to hundreds of nm) and consequently electrically less mobile. Usage of the term “ion” to represent these molecular clusters originates from the early history of atmospheric electricity, which spans the discovery of the electron and the elucidation of the structure of matter. The distinction between large and small ions originates from distinguishing ions that could be accelerated by atmospheric electric fields (and therefore directly contribute to the conductivity of air), and those (the large ions) which were insufficiently electrically mobile to contribute to electrical conduction in air.

Cosmic ray measurements in the atmosphere at several latitudes in October, 2014

Cosmic ray fluxes in the atmosphere were recorded during balloon flights in October 2014 in northern Murmansk region, Apatity (Russia; 67o33’N, 33o24’E), in Antarctica (observatory Mirny; 66o33’S, 93o00’E), in Moscow (Russia; 55o45’N, 37o37’E), in Reading (United King-dom; 51o27’N, 0o 58’W), in Mitzpe-Ramon (Israel; 30o36’N, 34o48’E) and in Zaragoza (Spain; 41o9’N, 0o54’W). Two type of cosmic ray detectors were used, namely, (1) the standard ra-diosonde and its modification constructed at the Lebedev Physical Institute (Moscow, Russia) and (2) the device manufactured at the Reading University (Reading, United Kingdom). We compare and analyze obtained data and focus on the estimation of the cosmic ray latitudinal effect in the atmosphere.

Fathoming solar effects in Neptune’s atmosphere

Long-duration observations of Neptune’s brightness in two visible wavelengths provide a disk-averaged estimate of its atmospheric aerosol. Brightness variations were previously associated with the 11-year solar cycle, through solar-modulated mechanisms linked with either ultra-violet (UV) or galactic cosmic ray (GCR) effects on atmospheric particles. Here we use a recently extended brightness dataset (1972-2014), with physically realistic modelling to show that rather than alternatives, UV and GCR are likely to be modulating Neptune’s atmosphere in combination. The importance of GCR is further supported by the response of Neptune's atmosphere to an intermittent 1.5 to 1.9 year periodicity, which occurred preferentially in GCR (not UV) during the mid-1980s. This periodicity was detected both at Earth, and in GCR measured by Voyager 2, then near Neptune. A similar coincident variability in Neptune’s brightness suggests nucleation onto GCR ions. Both GCR and UV mechanisms may occur more rapidly than the subsequent atmospheric particle transport.

An idealized study of coupled atmosphere-ocean 4D-Var in the presence of model error

Atmosphere only and ocean only variational data assimilation (DA) schemes are able to use window lengths that are optimal for the error growth rate, non-linearity and observation density of the respective systems. Typical window lengths are 6-12 hours for the atmosphere and 2-10 days for the ocean. However, in the implementation of coupled DA schemes it has been necessary to match the window length of the ocean to that of the atmosphere, which may potentially sacrifice the accuracy of the ocean analysis in order to provide a more balanced coupled state. This paper investigates how extending the window length in the presence of model error affects both the analysis of the coupled state and the initialized forecast when using coupled DA with differing degrees of coupling. Results are illustrated using an idealized single column model of the coupled atmosphere-ocean system. It is found that the analysis error from an uncoupled DA scheme can be smaller than that from a coupled analysis at the initial time, due to faster error growth in the coupled system. However, this does not necessarily lead to a more accurate forecast due to imbalances in the coupled state. Instead coupled DA is more able to update the initial state to reduce the impact of the model error on the accuracy of the forecast. The effect of model error is potentially most detrimental in the weakly coupled formulation due to the inconsistency between the coupled model used in the outer loop and uncoupled models used in the inner loop.