Issues in modeling the
Download
1 / 45

Other issues - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 232 Views
  • Updated On :

Issues in modeling the aerosol direct effects on climate Chul Eddy Chung Center for Cloud, Chemistry and Climate (C 4 ) Scripps Institution of Oceanography La Jolla, California, USA (IPCC report 2001) INDOEX (Indian Ocean EXperiment) Aerosol Radiative Forcing (W m -2 )

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Other issues' - benjamin


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Slide1 l.jpg

Issues in modeling theaerosol direct effectson climate

Chul Eddy Chung

Center for Cloud, Chemistry and Climate (C4)

Scripps Institution of Oceanography

La Jolla, California, USA



Slide3 l.jpg

INDOEX (Indian Ocean EXperiment)

Aerosol Radiative Forcing (W m-2)

(Jan - March, 1999; 0 - 20°N)

-7.0±1

-2.0±2

-5±2.5

+16.0±2

+18.0±3

+1±0.5

-23±2

-20±3

-6±3

Direct

(Clear Sky)

Direct

(Cloudy Sky)

First Indirect

(Ramanathan et al. 2001a)


Slide4 l.jpg

Why do the surface forcing and atmosphere forcing oppose strongly

in South Asia and the Indian Ocean?

(BC SSA = 0.2)

(sulfate SSA = 0.99)

(Ramanathan et al. 2001a)


Slide5 l.jpg

Global mean vs. local impact strongly

AA

(Ramanathan et al. 2001b)


Slide6 l.jpg

Global anthropogenic strongly

aerosol forcing estimate

(2001-03)

(Chung, Ramanathan,

Kim and Podgorny 2005)

Methodology:

1) Integrate satellite and ground

based aerosol observations with

GOCART model outputs;

2) Bring cloud observation from the

ISCCP; and

2) Insert integrated global AOD,

SSA and asymmetry parameter

into the MACR (Monte-Carlo

Aerosol Cloud Radiation) model.


Slide7 l.jpg

Global anthropogenic strongly

aerosol forcing estimate

for the period 2001-03

(Chung, Ramanathan,

Kim and Podgorny 2005)


Other issues l.jpg
Other issues? strongly


Vertical profile of aerosols and convective precipitation l.jpg
Vertical profile of aerosols and convective precipitation strongly

From Chung and Zhang (2004)


Slide10 l.jpg

Typical “PBL” profile strongly

Typical “lifted” profile

5

5

3 / 25 / 1999

2 / 16/ 1999

4

4

…. : C-130 (5.7°N, 73.3°E)

— : Lidar (4.2°N,73.5°E)

3

3

Ca

Altitude (km)

Cs

2

2

1

1

C-130 (4.2°N, 73.5°E)

0

0

0

50

100

150

-10

10

30

50

70

90

110

Extinction Coefficient (Mm-1)

Cs, Ca (Mm-1)

Idealized profiles for this study

670

700

Lifted profile

Altitude (hPa)

800

Uniform profile

850

PBL profile

Ps

0.7

Prescribed aerosol forcing (K/day)



Slide12 l.jpg

January-March Ts change (CCM3) South-Asian haze forcing)


Slide13 l.jpg

Precipitation change (CCM3) South-Asian haze forcing)


Slide14 l.jpg

Understanding precipitation change: CAPE South-Asian haze forcing)

CAPE variation consists of two parts: contributions from the boundary layer (parcel’s) changes and contributions from the free tropospheric (parcel’s environment) changes:



Spatial and seasonal variation of aerosol radiative forcing l.jpg
Spatial and seasonal variation of aerosol radiative forcing South-Asian haze forcing)

From Ramanathan, Chung et al. (2005), and Chung and Ramanathan (2005)



Slide18 l.jpg

An improved S. Asian haze experiment with PCM Climate Model)

(Regional and temporal average from 1995 to 1999)


Slide19 l.jpg

Latitudinal gradient Climate Model)

(Longitudinal and temporal average from 1995 to 1999)


Slide20 l.jpg

ABC effects in 1985-2000 (60-100 Climate Model)°E streamline)

In winter,

F(A) outweighs F(S).

In summer,

F(S) outweighs F(A).



Slide22 l.jpg

Drying Sahel! Climate Model)


Slide23 l.jpg

1985-2002 Climate Model)

observed trend

1951-2002

observed trend


Connection between indian summer monsoon and n african summer monsoon l.jpg
Connection between Indian summer monsoon and Climate Model)N. African summer monsoon

Monsoon dynamics explained by Webster and Fascullo (2003)


Slide26 l.jpg

AOD Climate Model)

SST (K)

Surface aerosol forcing

Ramanathan et al. (2005)

FS (W/m2)

SST (K)

2001-02 mean

SST (K)

Hadley

SST

1930-50 mean



Slide28 l.jpg

Precipitation change Climate Model)


Slide29 l.jpg

SST gradient change Climate Model)

vs. haze heating


Slide30 l.jpg

500-300hPa vertical motion and surface streamline Climate Model)

(June−September)



Slide32 l.jpg

Greenhouse gas effects Climate Model)

1951-2002

observed trend

S. Asian haze effects

S. Asian haze effects

1985-2002

observed trend

1951-2002

observed trend


Conclusions l.jpg
Conclusions Climate Model)

  • Observations show that SSTs in the equatorial Indian Ocean have warmed by about 0.6 to 0.8 K since the 1950s, accompanied by very little warming or even a slight cooling trend over the northern Indian Ocean. The SST meridional gradient in N. Indian has been weakened in summer.

  • The weakening of the meridional SST gradient in N. Indian Ocean alone leads to a large decrease in Indian rainfall during summer months, ranging from 2 to 3 mm/day (CCM3 experiments). The SST weakening also enhances rainfall in sub-Saharan Africa.

  • The SST gradient change in this basin is likely due to anthropogenic aerosols in South Asia and the Indian Ocean.

  • The overall S. Asian haze effects (SST gradient change + aerosol radiative forcing) in CCM3 still produce drought in Indian and excess rainfall in Sahel.

  • It is thus implicated that the South Asian haze has mitigated the Sahel desiccation considerably.



Issues l.jpg
Issues Climate Model)

  • Absorbing aerosols are another atmospheric diabatic heating source, and their distribution and amounts fluctuate as circulation and precipitation change.

  • In modeling the climatic effects of aerosols, aerosols are either simulated or prescribed.

  • When aerosols are simulated (i.e., coupling approach), the simulated aerosols inevitably differ from the observed due to the model deficiencies.

  • In case of prescribed aerosols (off-line approach), aerosols do not affect climate on fine time scales.


Is it acceptable to use monthly aerosol observations and prescribe them into a climate model l.jpg
Is it acceptable to use monthly aerosol observations and prescribe them into a climate model?


Methodology l.jpg
Methodology prescribe them into a climate model?

  • A tracer is added in the NCAR/CCM3. Aerosol emission at the surface was used for the source for the added tracer. Two cases are chosen: Chinese haze and Indian haze.

  • The aerosol wet deposition code by Rasch et al. (1997) was linked to the CCM3, as the sink for the added tracer.

  • The enhancement of the atmospheric solar radiation by the added tracer was accounted for in the CCM3 solar radiation module.


Indian haze and ccm3 precipitation climatology l.jpg
Indian haze and CCM3 precipitation climatology prescribe them into a climate model?


Chinese haze and ccm3 precipitation climatology l.jpg
Chinese haze and CCM3 precipitation climatology prescribe them into a climate model?


Slide40 l.jpg

Interactive Indian haze prescribe them into a climate model?

Interactive Chinese haze


Slide41 l.jpg

Analysis of the Indian haze prescribe them into a climate model?


Slide43 l.jpg

Average forcing: prescribe them into a climate model?

0.31 K/day

interactive

steady

Average forcing:

0.65 K/day

interactive

steady


Conclusions45 l.jpg
Conclusions prescribe them into a climate model?

  • Using monthly haze-induced diabatic heating does not produce sizable errors related to ignoring the sub-monthly fluctuations in the case of the Chinese haze. However, ignoring such sub-monthly scales leads to overestimation of the impacts of the haze heating on precipitation around India.

  • The Indian haze heating has 2–3 times higher precipitation increase efficiency than the Chinese haze heating.

  • Precipitation increase within the Chinese haze is totally irrelevant to the climatological precipitation

Implication

The climatic effects of tropical absorbing haze need to be handled more carefully

than those of extratropical absorbing haze.


ad