The CLoud–Aerosol–Radiation Interaction and Forcing: Year 2017 (CLARIFY-2017) measurement campaign

Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Copernicus Publications 21:2 (2021) 1049-1084

Authors:

Jim M Haywood, Steven J Abel, Paul A Barrett, Nicolas Bellouin, Alan Blyth, Keith N Bower, Melissa Brooks, Ken Carslaw, Haochi Che, Hugh Coe, Michael I Cotterell, Ian Crawford, Zhiqiang Cui, Nicholas Davies, Beth Dingley, Paul Field, Paola Formenti, Hamish Gordon, Martin de Graaf, Ross Herbert, Ben Johnson, Anthony C Jones, Justin M Langridge, Florent Malavelle, Daniel G Partridge, Fanny Peers, Jens Redemann, Philip Stier, Kate Szpek, Jonathan W Taylor, Duncan Watson-Parris, Robert Wood, Huihui Wu, Paquita Zuidema

Abstract:

The representations of clouds, aerosols, and cloud–aerosol–radiation impacts remain some of the largest uncertainties in climate change, limiting our ability to accurately reconstruct past climate and predict future climate. The south-east Atlantic is a region where high atmospheric aerosol loadings and semi-permanent stratocumulus clouds are co-located, providing an optimum region for studying the full range of aerosol–radiation and aerosol–cloud interactions and their perturbations of the Earth's radiation budget. While satellite measurements have provided some useful insights into aerosol–radiation and aerosol–cloud interactions over the region, these observations do not have the spatial and temporal resolution, nor the required level of precision to allow for a process-level assessment. Detailed measurements from high spatial and temporal resolution airborne atmospheric measurements in the region are very sparse, limiting their use in assessing the performance of aerosol modelling in numerical weather prediction and climate models. CLARIFY-2017 was a major consortium programme consisting of five principal UK universities with project partners from the UK Met Office and European- and USA-based universities and research centres involved in the complementary ORACLES, LASIC, and AEROCLO-sA projects. The aims of CLARIFY-2017 were fourfold: (1) to improve the representation and reduce uncertainty in model estimates of the direct, semi-direct, and indirect radiative effect of absorbing biomass burning aerosols; (2) to improve our knowledge and representation of the processes determining stratocumulus cloud microphysical and radiative properties and their transition to cumulus regimes; (3) to challenge, validate, and improve satellite retrievals of cloud and aerosol properties and their radiative impacts; (4) to improve the impacts of aerosols in weather and climate numerical models. This paper describes the modelling and measurement strategies central to the CLARIFY-2017 deployment of the FAAM BAe146 instrumented aircraft campaign, summarizes the flight objectives and flight patterns, and highlights some key results from our initial analyses.

Isolating large-scale smoke impacts on cloud and precipitation processes over the Amazon with convection permitting resolution

Wiley (2021)

Authors:

Ross James Herbert, Philip Stier, Guy Dagan

Biomass burning aerosols in most climate models are too absorbing

Nature Communications Nature Research (part of Springer Nature) (2021)

Authors:

Hunter Brown, Xiaohong Liu, Rudra Pokhrel, Shane Murphy, zheng Lu, Rawad Saleh, Tero Mielonen, Harri Kokkola, Tommi Bergman, Gunnar Myhre, Ragnhild Skeie, Duncan WATSON-PARRIS, PHILIP STIER, Ben Johnson, Nicolas Bellouin, Michael Schulz, Ville Vakkari, Johan Paul Beukes, Pieter Gideon van Zyl, Shang Liu, Duli Chand

Cloud adjustments dominate the overall negative aerosol radiative effects of biomass burning aerosols in UKESM1 climate model simulations over the south-eastern Atlantic

Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Copernicus Publications 21:1 (2021) 17-33

Authors:

haochi Che, Philip Stier, Hamish Gordon, Duncan Watson-Parris, Lucia Deaconu

Abstract:

The South-eastern Atlantic Ocean (SEA) is semi-permanently covered by one of the most extensive stratocumulus cloud decks on the planet and experiences about one-third of the global biomass burning emissions from the southern Africa savannah region during the fire season. To get a better understanding of the impact of these biomass burning aerosols on clouds and radiation balance over the SEA, the latest generation of the UK Earth System Model (UKESM1) is employed. Measurements from the CLARIFY and ORACLES flight campaigns are used to evaluate the model, demonstrating that the model has good skill in reproducing the biomass burning plume. To investigate the underlying mechanisms in detail, the effects of biomass burning aerosols on the clouds are decomposed into radiative effects (via absorption and scattering) and microphysical effects (via perturbation of cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) and cloud microphysical processes). The July-August means are used to characterise aerosols, clouds and the radiation balance during the fire season. Results show around 65% of CCN at 0.2% supersaturation in the SEA domain can be attributed to biomass burning. The absorption effect of biomass burning aerosols is the most significant in affecting clouds and radiation. Near the continent, it increases the maximum supersaturation diagnosed by the activation scheme, while further from the continent it reduces the altitude of the maximum supersaturation. As a result, the cloud droplet number concentration responds with a similar pattern to the absorption effect of biomass burning aerosols. The microphysical effect, however, decreases the maximum supersaturation and increases the cloud droplets concentration over the ocean; although this change is relatively small. The liquid water path is also significantly increased over the SEA (mainly caused by the absorption effect of biomass burning aerosols) when biomass burning aerosols are above the stratocumulus cloud deck. The microphysical pathways lead to a slight increase in the liquid water path over the ocean. These changes in cloud properties indicate the significant role of biomass burning aerosols on clouds in this region. Among the effects of biomass burning aerosols on the radiation balance, the semi-direct radiative effects (rapid adjustments induced by biomass burning aerosols radiative effects) have a dominant cooling impact over the SEA, which offset the warming direct radiative effect (radiative forcing from biomass burning aerosol–radiation interactions) and lead to overall net cooling radiative effect in the SEA. However, the magnitude and the sign of the semi-direct effects are sensitive to the relative location of biomass burning aerosols and clouds, reflecting the critical task of the accurate modelling of the biomass burning plume and clouds in this region.

Description and evaluation of aerosol in UKESM1 and HadGEM3-GC3.1 CMIP6 historical simulations

Geoscientific Model Development Copernicus Publications 13:12 (2020) 6383-6423

Authors:

Jp Mulcahy, C Johnson, Cg Jones, Adam Povey, Ce Scott, A Sellar, St Turnock, Mt Woodhouse, Nl Abraham, Mb Andrews, N Bellouin, J Browse, Ks Carslaw, M Dalvi, Ga Folberth, M Glover, Dp Grosvenor, C Hardacre, R Hill, B Johnson, A Jones, Z Kipling, G Mann, J Mollard, Fm O'Connor, J Palmiéri, C Reddington, St Rumbold, M Richardson, Naj Schutgens, P Stier, M Stringer, Y Tang, J Walton, S Woodward, A Yool

Abstract:

We document and evaluate the aerosol schemes as implemented in the physical and Earth system models, the Global Coupled 3.1 configuration of the Hadley Centre Global Environment Model version 3 (HadGEM3-GC3.1) and the United Kingdom Earth System Model (UKESM1), which are contributing to the sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). The simulation of aerosols in the present-day period of the historical ensemble of these models is evaluated against a range of observations. Updates to the aerosol microphysics scheme are documented as well as differences in the aerosol representation between the physical and Earth system configurations. The additional Earth system interactions included in UKESM1 lead to differences in the emissions of natural aerosol sources such as dimethyl sulfide, mineral dust and organic aerosol and subsequent evolution of these species in the model. UKESM1 also includes a stratospheric–tropospheric chemistry scheme which is fully coupled to the aerosol scheme, while GC3.1 employs a simplified aerosol chemistry mechanism driven by prescribed monthly climatologies of the relevant oxidants. Overall, the simulated speciated aerosol mass concentrations compare reasonably well with observations. Both models capture the negative trend in sulfate aerosol concentrations over Europe and the eastern United States of America (US) although the models tend to underestimate sulfate concentrations in both regions. Interactive emissions of biogenic volatile organic compounds in UKESM1 lead to an improved agreement of organic aerosol over the US. Simulated dust burdens are similar in both models despite a 2-fold difference in dust emissions. Aerosol optical depth is biased low in dust source and outflow regions but performs well in other regions compared to a number of satellite and ground-based retrievals of aerosol optical depth. Simulated aerosol number concentrations are generally within a factor of 2 of the observations, with both models tending to overestimate number concentrations over remote ocean regions, apart from at high latitudes, and underestimate over Northern Hemisphere continents. Finally, a new primary marine organic aerosol source is implemented in UKESM1 for the first time. The impact of this new aerosol source is evaluated. Over the pristine Southern Ocean, it is found to improve the seasonal cycle of organic aerosol mass and cloud droplet number concentrations relative to GC3.1 although underestimations in cloud droplet number concentrations remain. This paper provides a useful characterisation of the aerosol climatology in both models and will facilitate understanding in the numerous aerosol–climate interaction studies that will be conducted as part of CMIP6 and beyond.