2 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
- ItemComparison of particle number size distribution trends in ground measurements and climate models(Katlenburg-Lindau : EGU, 2022) Leinonen, Ville; Kokkola, Harri; Yli-Juuti, Taina; Mielonen, Tero; Kühn, Thomas; Nieminen, Tuomo; Heikkinen, Simo; Miinalainen, Tuuli; Bergman, Tommi; Carslaw, Ken; Decesari, Stefano; Fiebig, Markus; Hussein, Tareq; Kivekäs, Niku; Krejci, Radovan; Kulmala, Markku; Leskinen, Ari; Massling, Andreas; Mihalopoulos, Nikos; Mulcahy, Jane P.; Noe, Steffen M.; van Noije, Twan; O'Connor, Fiona M.; O'Dowd, Colin; Olivie, Dirk; Pernov, Jakob B.; Petäjä, Tuukka; Seland, Øyvind; Schulz, Michael; Scott, Catherine E.; Skov, Henrik; Swietlicki, Erik; Tuch, Thomas; Wiedensohler, Alfred; Virtanen, Annele; Mikkonen, SanttuDespite a large number of studies, out of all drivers of radiative forcing, the effect of aerosols has the largest uncertainty in global climate model radiative forcing estimates. There have been studies of aerosol optical properties in climate models, but the effects of particle number size distribution need a more thorough inspection. We investigated the trends and seasonality of particle number concentrations in nucleation, Aitken, and accumulation modes at 21 measurement sites in Europe and the Arctic. For 13 of those sites, with longer measurement time series, we compared the field observations with the results from five climate models, namely EC-Earth3, ECHAM-M7, ECHAM-SALSA, NorESM1.2, and UKESM1. This is the first extensive comparison of detailed aerosol size distribution trends between in situ observations from Europe and five earth system models (ESMs). We found that the trends of particle number concentrations were mostly consistent and decreasing in both measurements and models. However, for many sites, climate models showed weaker decreasing trends than the measurements. Seasonal variability in measured number concentrations, quantified by the ratio between maximum and minimum monthly number concentration, was typically stronger at northern measurement sites compared to other locations. Models had large differences in their seasonal representation, and they can be roughly divided into two categories: for EC-Earth and NorESM, the seasonal cycle was relatively similar for all sites, and for other models the pattern of seasonality varied between northern and southern sites. In addition, the variability in concentrations across sites varied between models, some having relatively similar concentrations for all sites, whereas others showed clear differences in concentrations between remote and urban sites. To conclude, although all of the model simulations had identical input data to describe anthropogenic mass emissions, trends in differently sized particles vary among the models due to assumptions in emission sizes and differences in how models treat size-dependent aerosol processes. The inter-model variability was largest in the accumulation mode, i.e. sizes which have implications for aerosol-cloud interactions. Our analysis also indicates that between models there is a large variation in efficiency of long-range transportation of aerosols to remote locations. The differences in model results are most likely due to the more complex effect of different processes instead of one specific feature (e.g. the representation of aerosol or emission size distributions). Hence, a more detailed characterization of microphysical processes and deposition processes affecting the long-range transport is needed to understand the model variability.
- ItemSALSA2.0: The sectional aerosol module of the aerosol-chemistry-climate model ECHAM6.3.0-HAM2.3-MOZ1.0(Katlenburg-Lindau : Copernicus, 2018) Kokkola, Harri; Kühn, Thomas; Laakso, Anton; Bergman, Tommi; Lehtinen, Kari E. J.; Mielonen, Tero; Arola, Antti; Stadtler, Scarlet; Korhonen, Hannele; Ferrachat, Sylvaine; Lohmann, Ulrike; Neubauer, David; Tegen, Ina; Siegenthaler-Le Drian, Colombe; Schultz, Martin G.; Bey, Isabelle; Stier, Philip; Daskalakis, Nikos; Heald, Colette L.; Romakkaniemi, SamiIn this paper, we present the implementation and evaluation of the aerosol microphysics module SALSA2.0 in the framework of the aerosol-chemistry-climate model ECHAM-HAMMOZ. It is an alternative microphysics module to the default modal microphysics scheme M7 in ECHAM-HAMMOZ. The SALSA2.0 implementation within ECHAM-HAMMOZ is evaluated against observations of aerosol optical properties, aerosol mass, and size distributions, comparing also to the skill of the M7 implementation. The largest differences between the implementation of SALSA2.0 and M7 are in the methods used for calculating microphysical processes, i.e., nucleation, condensation, coagulation, and hydration. These differences in the microphysics are reflected in the results so that the largest differences between SALSA2.0 and M7 are evident over regions where the aerosol size distribution is heavily modified by the microphysical processing of aerosol particles. Such regions are, for example, highly polluted regions and regions strongly affected by biomass burning. In addition, in a simulation of the 1991 Mt. Pinatubo eruption in which a stratospheric sulfate plume was formed, the global burden and the effective radii of the stratospheric aerosol are very different in SALSA2.0 and M7. While SALSA2.0 was able to reproduce the observed time evolution of the global burden of sulfate and the effective radii of stratospheric aerosol, M7 strongly overestimates the removal of coarse stratospheric particles and thus underestimates the effective radius of stratospheric aerosol. As the mode widths of M7 have been optimized for the troposphere and were not designed to represent stratospheric aerosol, the ability of M7 to simulate the volcano plume was improved by modifying the mode widths, decreasing the standard deviations of the accumulation and coarse modes from 1.59 and 2.0, respectively, to 1.2 similar to what was observed after the Mt. Pinatubo eruption. Overall, SALSA2.0 shows promise in improving the aerosol description of ECHAM-HAMMOZ and can be further improved by implementing methods for aerosol processes that are more suitable for the sectional method, e.g., size-dependent emissions for aerosol species and size-resolved wet deposition.