DOCSLIB.ORG

“Solar” Geoengineering: What Is It? What Role Might It Play in an Overall Climate Strategy?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
“Solar” Geoengineering: What Is It? What Role Might It Play in an Overall Climate Strategy? “Solar” Geoengineering: What is it? What role might it play in an overall climate strategy? Douglas MacMartin Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Cornell University Computing + Mathematical Sciences, California Institute of Technology 4/20/2018 D. MacMartin 1 What is the role for geoengineering? Business as usual Cut emissions aggressively 1 CO2 removal (“CDR”) 3 2 BECCS Climate Impacts Climate Solar geoengineering? Direct air capture Afforestation Stratospheric aerosols Soil mgmt… Marine cloud brightening Time 4/20/2018 D. MacMartin 2 NOT a substitute for mitigation • Would require high forcing – Business Risks scale Cut emissions with amount as usual aggressively • Would require practically CO2 indefinite removal commitment Solar geoengineering? • Doesn’t address Climate Impacts Climate all impacts of climate change Time – E.g. ocean acidification 4/20/2018 D. MacMartin 3 Key Observations • A limited deployment of solar geoengineering in addition to mitigation might reduce many climate risks and avoid tipping points • We don’t know enough today to make an informed decision – My guess is we need ~20 years – There will always be uncertainty; this will always be a risk/risk tradeoff • There are both physical climate risks and societal risks associated with solar geoengineering 4/20/2018 D. MacMartin 4 Mt. Pinatubo Resulted in 30Mt of 1991 sulfate aerosols in stratosphere Volcanoes caused global cooling by putting small particles 23/05/2018 D. MacMartin 5 in the stratosphere Marine Cloud Brightening Ship tracks due to aerosols • A fleet of wind-powered ships spraying salt-water into low clouds might cool the planet • Cloud-aerosol interactions are poorly understood! • Doesn’t work everywhere: spatially 23/05/2018 D. MacMartin 6 heterogeneous radiative forcing A specific scenario… • “CDR” level is chosen to reduce CO2 at 1ppm per year – Of order 15 Gt per year • Temperature overshoots are measured in centuries MacMartin, Ricke, Keith, 4/20/2018 D. MacMartin 7 Phil. Trans. Royal Soc. A 2018 Not all variables respond the same way • Solar geoengineering would overcompensate global mean precipitation • Other variables like ocean pH would hardly be affected 4/20/2018 D. MacMartin 8 Median over 12 models: C, no geo C, ° • Temperature is reduced 2.7 everywhere • Precipitation changes are geo C, ° reduced in most places 1.5 C • Median ° hides model 2.7 uncertainty! • Solar reduction; not same as geo no C, ° stratospheric aerosols 1.5 9 4/20/2018 TemperatureD. MacMartin Precipitation (%) Detection: Moderate Scenario (1.5°C with RCP4.5) 66% Confidence 95% Confidence Temperature Temperature Precipitation 4/20/2018 D. MacMartin 10 MacMartin et al, submitted Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering: What don’t we know? • What size distribution of aerosol particles are created? • Effect on stratospheric dynamics and heating, atmospheric chemistry • What is the effect on cirrus clouds? (A positive or negative feedback?) “Forcing” • Regional precipitation response remains uncertain (ditto for CO2) • Effect on ecosystems? Impacts? • The answers to all of these depend on how it was implemented: & impacts “Response” – How much, for how long, and to meet what goals? • How well can we design the system given uncertainty, nonlinearity, and variability? • What are the limits to how well we can know the system? Strategic • Societal response: – Would people emit more CO2? – Would people blame everything on the deployment? Societal – How might this be governed, how would amount be adjusted over time? Feedbacks 4/20/2018 D. MacMartin 11 Physical-Science Research • How would one (responsibly) deploy? • What are the resulting impacts of a responsible and limited deployment strategy? – Including ecosystem, agriculture, etc. • How confident are we? – What is the range of possible outcomes? – Reducing uncertainty is likely to require some small-scale outdoor experimentation 4/20/2018 D. MacMartin 12 Summary Context: • Mitigation is necessary, it probably won’t be sufficient to avoid serious risks – 2°C target requires • extremely aggressive reductions in emissions, combined with • negative emissions (or CO2 removal) – 1.5°C is much harder than 2°C – Current INDC commitments are more likely to lead to ~3°C A strategic approach for managing climate change • Developing capability for CO2 removal is essential • It is plausible that an additional, limited deployment of solar geoengineering could reduce aggregate climate risks – Not enough is known today to make informed decisions – Raises challenging issues in ethics, governance, etc. 4/20/2018 D. MacMartin 13 Options CO2-removal Solar geoengineering • BECCS (bio-energy with carbon • Stratospheric aerosols capture and sequestration) – Guaranteed to “work”, relatively • Direct air capture (DAC) straightforward to implement • Afforestation/reforestation • Marine cloud brightening • Carbon-smart soil management – Cloud aerosol interactions • Enhanced mineral weathering • Cirrus cloud thinning?? • Ocean iron fertilization?? • Ocean albedo, land albedo,… • Typically either expensive or hard • Cools quickly to do at sufficient scale • Doesn’t affect the climate the • Low climate risk but potentially same way as increased CO2 significant local issues if deployed • Novel risks, both climate and at scale socio-political 4/20/2018 D. MacMartin 14.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Marine Cloud Brightening
    MARINE CLOUD BRIGHTENING Alan Gadian , John Latham, Mirek Andrejczuk, Keith Bower, Tom Choularton, Hugh Coe, Paul Connolly, Ben Parkes, Phillip Rasch, Stephen Salter, Hailong Wang and Rob Wood . Contents:- • Background to the philosophical approach • Some L.E.M . and climate model results • Technological issues. • Future plans and publications. Science Objectives:- • To explain the science of how stratocumulus clouds can have a significant effect on the earth’s radiation balance • To present some modelling results from Latham et al 2011 Marine Cloud Brightening, WRCP October 2011 1 Stratocumulus clouds cover more than 30% of ocean surface Stratocumulus clouds have a high reflectance, which depends on droplet number and mean droplet size. Twomey Effect .:- Smaller drops produce whiter clouds . Proposal :- To advertently to enhance the droplet concentration N in low-level maritime stratocumulus clouds, so increasing cloud albedo (Twomey, JAS, 1977 ) and longevity ( Albrecht, Science, 1989 ) Technique:- To disseminate sea-water droplets of diameter about 1um at the ocean surface. Some of these ascend via turbulence to cloud-base where they are activated to form cloud droplets, thereby enhancing cloud droplet number concentration, N (Latham, Nature 1990 ; Phil Trans Roy Soc 2008 and 2011, under review ) 2 Above:- Computed spherical albedo for increasing pollution in THIN, MEDIUM and THICK clouds. ( Twomey, JAS, 1977 ) Right:- Frequency distributions of the reflectances at 1,535 nm versus reflectances at 754 nm. From ACE-2. Isolines of geometrical thickness (H) and droplet number concentration (N): higher reflectance in polluted cloud, normalised by a similar geometrical thickness (Brenguier et al. 2000 ). 3 Figure 1. Panel (a): Map of MODIS-derived annual mean cloud droplet concentration N 0 for stratiform marine warm clouds.
    [Show full text]
  • Studying Geoengineering with Natural and Anthropogenic Analogs
    Studying Geoengineering with Natural and Anthropogenic Analogs Alan Robocka, Douglas G. MacMartinb, Riley Durenc, and Matthew W. Christensend aDepartment of Environmental Sciences, Rutgers University, 14 College Farm Road, New Brunswick, NJ 08901 bControl and Dynamical Systems, California Institute of Technology, 1200 E. California Blvd., Pasadena, CA 91125 cJet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, 4800 Oak Grove Dr., Pasadena, CA 91109 dDepartment of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 Submitted to Climatic Change November 2012 Corresponding Author: Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University 14 College Farm Road New Brunswick, NJ 08901 Phone: 848-932-5751 Fax: 732-932-8644 E-mail: [email protected] 1 Abstract 2 Solar radiation management (SRM) has been proposed as a possible option for offsetting 3 some anthropogenic radiative forcing, with the goal of reducing some of the associated climatic 4 changes. There are clearly significant uncertainties associated with SRM, and even small-scale 5 experiments that might reduce uncertainty would carry some risk. However, there are also 6 natural and anthropogenic analogs to SRM, such as volcanic eruptions in the case of 7 stratospheric aerosol injection and ship tracks in the case of marine cloud albedo modification. It 8 is essential to understand what we can learn from these analogs in order to validate models, 9 particularly because of the problematic nature of outdoor experiments. It is also important to 10 understand what we cannot learn, as this might better focus attention on what risks would need to 11 be solely examined by numerical models. Stratospheric conditions following a major volcanic 12 eruption, for example, are not the same as those to be expected from intentional geoengineering, 13 both because of confounding effects of volcanic ash and the differences between continuous and 14 impulsive injection of material into the stratosphere.
    [Show full text]
  • Automated Underway Oceanic and Atmospheric Measurements from Ships
    AUTOMATED UNDERWAY OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC MEASUREMENTS FROM SHIPS Shawn R. Smith (1), Mark A. Bourassa (1), E. Frank Bradley (2), Catherine Cosca (3), Christopher W. Fairall (4), Gustavo J. Goni (5), John T. Gunn (6), Maria Hood (7), Darren L. Jackson (8), Elizabeth C. Kent (9), Gary Lagerloef (6), Philip McGillivary (10), Loic Petit de la Villéon (11), Rachel T. Pinker (12), Eric Schulz (13), Janet Sprintall (14), Detlef Stammer (15), Alain Weill (16), Gary A. Wick (17), Margaret J. Yelland (9) (1) Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306-2840, USA, Emails: [email protected], [email protected] (2) CSIRO Land and Water, PO Box 1666, Canberra, ACT 2601, AUSTRALIA, Email: [email protected] (3) NOAA/PMEL, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA 98115, USA, Email: [email protected] (4) NOAA/ESRL/PSD, R/PSD3, 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80305-3328, USA, Email: [email protected] (5) USDC/NOAA/AOML/PHOD, 4301 Rickenbacker Causeway, Miami, FL 33149, USA, Email: [email protected] (6) Earth and Space Research, 2101 Fourth Ave., Suite 1310, Seattle, WA, 98121, USA, Emails: [email protected], [email protected] (7) Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission UNESCO, 1, rue Miollis, 75732 Paris Cedex 15, FRANCE, Email: [email protected] (8) Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, NOAA/ESRL/PSD, 325 Broadway, R/PSD2, Boulder, CO 80305, USA, Email: [email protected] (9) National Oceanography Centre, European Way, Southampton, SO14 3ZH, UK, Emails: [email protected],
    [Show full text]
  • The Monterey Area Ship Track Experiment
    Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive Faculty and Researcher Publications Faculty and Researcher Publications 2000-08-15 The Monterey Area Ship Track Experiment Durkee, Philip A. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, Vol. 57, 15 August 2000, pp. 2523-2541. http://hdl.handle.net/10945/46745 15 AUGUST 2000 DURKEE ET AL. 2523 The Monterey Area Ship Track Experiment PHILIP A. DURKEE Department of Meteorology, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California KEVIN J. NOONE Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden ROBERT T. B LUTH Office of Naval Research, Arlington, Virginia (Manuscript received 14 November 1996, in final form 23 February 1999) ABSTRACT In June 1994 the Monterey Area Ship Track (MAST) experiment was conducted off the coast of California to investigate the processes behind anthropogenic modification of cloud albedo. The motivation for the MAST experiment is described here, as well as details of the experimental design. Measurement platforms and strategies are explained, and a summary of experiment operations is presented. The experiment produced the largest dataset to date of direct measurements of the effects of ships on the microphysics and radiative properties of marine stratocumulus clouds as an analog for the indirect effects of anthropogenic pollution on cloud albedo. 1. Introduction ever, the upper limit of the indirect aerosol forcing es­ timate was 21.5 W m22. Clearly, reducing the uncer­ Determining the effects of atmospheric aerosol par­ tainty in, or even arriving at, a central value for the ticles on the radiative balance of the earth has been a estimates of the indirect radiative effect of aerosols is major focus of recent climate research.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Intervention (July 2021)
    State of the Science FACT SHEET Climate Intervention Climate Intervention (CI), also called climate engineering or geoengineering, refers to deliberate, large‐scale actions intended to counteract aspects of climate change. This Fact Sheet explains some of the fundamental principles and issues associated with CI (1). Why Might Climate Intervention Be Considered? The main driver of climate change over the past century has been anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas (GHG). Increasing emission rates have caused present‐day atmospheric CO2 to reach the highest value in over a million years based on studies of emissions of atmospheric CO2 and its accumulation in the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere. The increased emissions of other GHGs, such as methane, nitrous oxide and ozone, also contribute to anthropogenic climate change. The increased accumulation of GHGs has led to warming over much of the globe, to acidification of ocean surface waters (from CO2) (2), and to many other well‐documented climate impacts (3). As climate change continues, if the world does not make the desired greenhouse gas emissions reductions (4) such as those initiated by the Paris agreement (5), governments and other entities might turn to CI to counteract increasing climate change impacts. CI could potentially be implemented by consensus or unilaterally; either way, a thorough understanding of CI methods, and their associated uncertainties and unintended side effects is essential. Principal CI methods are divided into two How might CDR be accomplished? general categories (6) (see figure): Oceanic sequestration: Adding nutrients, such as iron, to “ferti‐ lize” the ocean enhances biological growth (e.g., phytoplank‐ Carbon dioxide removal (CDR): CDR is a process to remove ton), which removes CO2 from surface waters and leads to lower CO2 from the atmosphere for long‐term storage on land or atmospheric levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Experimental Studies on Particle Emissions from Cruising Ship, Their Characteristic Properties, Transformation and Atmospheric Lifetime in the Marine Boundary Layer
    Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 2387–2403, 2008 www.atmos-chem-phys.net/8/2387/2008/ Atmospheric © Author(s) 2008. This work is distributed under Chemistry the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. and Physics Experimental studies on particle emissions from cruising ship, their characteristic properties, transformation and atmospheric lifetime in the marine boundary layer A. Petzold1, J. Hasselbach1, P. Lauer2, R. Baumann1, K. Franke3, C. Gurk4, H. Schlager1, and E. Weingartner5 1Dt. Zentrum fur¨ Luft- und Raumfahrt, Inst. fur¨ Physik der Atmosphare,¨ Oberpfaffenhofen, 82234 Wessling, Germany 2MAN Diesel SE, Stadtbachstr. 1, 86135 Augsburg, Germany 3Institute for Environmental Physics, University of Bremen, Otto-Hahn-Allee 1, 28359 Bremen, Germany 4Max-Planck-Institute for Chemistry, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 27, 55128 Mainz, Germany 5Laboratory of Atmospheric Chemistry, Paul Scherrer Institute, CH-5232 Villigen PSI, Switzerland Received: 9 October 2007 – Published in Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss.: 19 October 2007 Revised: 17 March 2008 – Accepted: 15 April 2008 – Published: 6 May 2008 Abstract. Particle emissions from ship engines and their ship exhaust particle number concentrations in an expanding atmospheric transformation in the marine boundary layer plume, a maximum plume life time of approx. 24 h is esti- (MBL) were investigated in engine test bed studies and in mated for a well-mixed marine boundary layer. airborne measurements of expanding ship plumes. During the test rig studies, detailed aerosol microphysical and chem- ical properties were measured in the exhaust gas of a serial 1 Introduction MAN B&W seven-cylinder four-stroke marine diesel engine under various load conditions. The emission studies were Shipping represents a major contribution to the international complemented by airborne aerosol transformation studies in transportation sector which, however, is not well quantified the plume of a large container ship in the English Chan- in terms of global emissions and climate impacts.
    [Show full text]
  • Observations of Ship Tracks from Ship-Based Platforms
    JANUARY 1999 PORCH ET AL. 69 Observations of Ship Tracks from Ship-Based Platforms W. P ORCH,* R. BORYS,1 P. D URKEE,# R. GASPAROVIC,@ W. H OOPER,& E. HINDMAN,** AND K. NIELSEN# * Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 1 Atmospheric Sciences Center, Desert Research Institute, Reno, Nevada # Department of Meteorology, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California @ The Johns Hopkins University, APL, Laurel, Maryland & Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, D.C. ** Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Department, City College of New York, New York, New York (Manuscript received 17 October 1997, in ®nal form 17 February 1998) ABSTRACT Ship-based measurements in June 1994 provided information about ship-track clouds and associated atmo- spheric environment observed from below cloud levels that provide a perspective different from satellite and aircraft measurements. Surface measurements of latent and sensible heat ¯uxes, sea surface temperatures, and meteorological pro®les with free and tethered balloons provided necessary input conditions for models of ship- track formation and maintenance. Remote sensing measurements showed a coupling of ship plume dynamics and entrainment into overlaying clouds. Morphological and dynamic effects were observed on clouds unique to the ship tracks. These morphological changes included lower cloud bases early in the ship-track formation, evidence of raised cloud bases in more mature tracks, sometimes higher cloud tops, thin cloud-free regions paralleling the tracks, and often stronger radar returns. The ship-based lidar aerosol measurements revealed that ship plumes often interacted with the overlying clouds in an intermittent rather than continuous manner. These observations imply that more must be learned about ship-track dynamics before simple relations between cloud condensation nuclei and cloud brightness can be developed.
    [Show full text]
  • Contrails, Contrail Cirrus, and Ship Tracks
    214 Proceedings of the TAC-Conference, June 26 to 29, 2006, Oxford, UK Contrails, contrail cirrus, and ship tracks K. Gierens* DLR-Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany Keywords: Aerosol effects on clouds and climate ABSTRACT: The following text is an enlarged version of the conference tutorial lecture on con- trails, contrail cirrus, and ship tracks. I start with a general introduction into aerosol effects on clouds. Contrail formation and persistence, aviation’s share to cirrus trends and ship tracks are treated then. 1 INTRODUCTION The overarching theme above the notions “contrails”, “contrail cirrus”, and “ship tracks” is the ef- fects of anthropogenic aerosol on clouds and on climate via the cloud’s influence on the flow of ra- diation energy in the atmosphere. Aerosol effects are categorised in the following way: - Direct effect: Aerosol particles scatter and absorb solar and terrestrial radiation, that is, they in- terfere directly with the radiative energy flow through the atmosphere (e.g. Haywood and Boucher, 2000). - Semidirect effect: Soot particles are very effective absorbers of radiation. When they absorb ra- diation the ambient air is locally heated. When this happens close to or within clouds, the local heating leads to buoyancy forces, hence overturning motions are induced, altering cloud evolu- tion and potentially lifetimes (e.g. Hansen et al., 1997; Ackerman et al., 2000). - Indirect effects: The most important role of aerosol particles in the atmosphere is their role as condensation and ice nuclei, that is, their role in cloud formation. The addition of aerosol parti- cles to the natural aerosol background changes the formation conditions of clouds, which leads to changes in cloud occurrence frequencies, cloud properties (microphysical, structural, and op- tical), and cloud lifetimes (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Cloud Brightening
    MARINE CLOUD BRIGHTENING Authors:- John Latham1,4 , Keith Bower4 , Tom Choularton4 , Hugh Coe4, Paul Connelly4 , Gary Cooper7 ,Tim Craft4, Jack Foster7, Alan Gadian5, Lee Galbraith7 Hector Iacovides4 , David Johnston7 , Brian Launder4, Brian Leslie7 , John Meyer7, Armand Neukermans7, Bob Ormond7, Ben Parkes5 , Phillip Rasch3, John Rush7, Stephen Salter6, Tom Stevenson6, Hailong Wang3, Qin Wang7 & Rob Wood2 . Affiliations:- 1 National Centre for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO. 2 U Washington, Seattle, 3 PNNL, Richland, WA., 4 U Manchester, 5 U of Leeds, 6 U of Edinburgh, 7 Silver Lining, CA. Abstract The idea behind the marine cloud brightening (MCB) geoengineering technique is that seeding marine stratocumulus clouds with copious quantities of roughly monodisperse sub-micrometre seawater particles could significantly enhance the cloud droplet number concentration thus increasing the cloud albedo and longevity – thereby producing a cooling, which computations suggest could be adequate to balance the warming associated with a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide. We review herein recent research on a number of critical issues associated with MCB: (1) general circulation model (GCM) studies, which are our primary tools to evaluate globally the effectiveness of marine cloud brightening and to assess its climate impacts on rainfall amounts and distribution, as well as on polar sea-ice cover and thickness: (2) high resolution modeling of the effects of seeding on marine stratocumulus, which are required to understand the complex array
    [Show full text]
  • Process-Modeling Study of Ship Tracks and Marine Cloud Brightening
    Process-Modeling Study of Ship Tracks and Marine Cloud Brightening Hailong Wang Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Monitoring of Geoengineering Effects and their Natural and Anthropogenic Analogues (Part II) Workshop November 16, 2011 California Institute of Technology, Pasadena Acknowledgments Keck Institute for Space Studies Collaborators: Graham Feingold (NOAA) Phil Rasch (PNNL) Funding support: CIRES Fellowship NOAA Climate Program University of Calgary (Canada), FICER PNNL/DOE 2 Outline Introduction Simulation of shiptrack in open and closed cells (Wang and Feingold, 2009b) Marine cloud brightening by sea-salt injection (Wang, Rasch, Feingold, 2011; Wang et al., in preparation) Summary and issues for discussion 3 Introduction Geoengineering: deliberate manipulation of the Earth’s climate to counteract the effect of global warming by GHGs Solar radiation management Marine cloud albedo enhancement Seawater spray Ocean sulfur cycle enhancement Stratospheric aerosols Cool roof space shade Cirrus cloud seeding GHG removal Limiting arctic sea ice loss Ocean heat transport 4 About the seawater spray method Latham (1990, 2002) proposed injecting submicron sea-salt particles to increase marine Sc cloud albedo to offset the -2 +3.7 Wm forcing from 2xCO2 Salter et al. (2008) proposed a wind-driven sprayer that can produce sea-salt to increase CDNC by 200 cm-3 The idea was evaluated by a few global/box modeling studies (e.g., Bower et al. 2006; Latham et al. 2008; Jones et al. 2009; Rasch et al. 2009; Korhonen et al. 2010; Bala et al. 2010) Process modeling is needed to understand the transport of injected particles and interactions with clouds 5 Motivation Credit : Jeff Schmaltz Ship exhaust NASA/GSFC modifies marine Scu cloud albedo.
    [Show full text]
  • Real-Case Simulations of Aerosol–Cloud Interactions in Ship Tracks Over the Bay of Biscay
    Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 2185–2201, 2015 www.atmos-chem-phys.net/15/2185/2015/ doi:10.5194/acp-15-2185-2015 © Author(s) 2015. CC Attribution 3.0 License. Real-case simulations of aerosol–cloud interactions in ship tracks over the Bay of Biscay A. Possner1, E. Zubler2, U. Lohmann1, and C. Schär1 1Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland 2Federal Office of Meteorology and Climatology MeteoSwiss, Zurich, Switzerland Correspondence to: A. Possner ([email protected]) Received: 18 September 2014 – Published in Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss.: 24 October 2014 Revised: 21 January 2015 – Accepted: 31 January 2015 – Published: 27 February 2015 Abstract. Ship tracks provide an ideal test bed for study- could therefore help to constrain global ACI estimates, which ing aerosol–cloud interactions (ACIs) and for evaluating their strongly rely on these parameterisations. representation in model parameterisations. Regional mod- elling can be of particular use for this task, as this approach provides sufficient resolution to resolve the structure of the produced track including their meteorological environment 1 Introduction whilst relying on the same formulations of parameterisations as many general circulation models. In this work we simulate Since their discovery in satellite imagery, ship tracks have a particular case of ship tracks embedded in an optically thin been viewed as convincing evidence of aerosol–cloud inter- stratus cloud sheet which was observed by a polar orbiting actions (ACIs) occurring in shallow, marine planetary bound- satellite at 12:00 UTC on 26 January 2003 around the Bay of ary layers (PBLs). Their exclusive existence within a nar- Biscay.
    [Show full text]
  • Combustion Organic Aerosol As Cloud Condensation Nuclei in Ship Tracks Lynn M
    University of Rhode Island DigitalCommons@URI Graduate School of Oceanography Faculty Graduate School of Oceanography Publications 2000 Combustion Organic Aerosol as Cloud Condensation Nuclei in Ship Tracks Lynn M. Russell Kevin J. Noone See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/gsofacpubs Terms of Use All rights reserved under copyright. Citation/Publisher Attribution Russell, L.M., K.J. Noone, R.J. Ferek, R.A. Pockalny, R.C. Flagan, and J.H. Seinfeld, 2000: Combustion Organic Aerosol as Cloud Condensation Nuclei in Ship Tracks. J. Atmos. Sci., 57, 2591–2606. doi: 10.1175/1520-0469(2000)0572.0.CO;2. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2000)0572.0.CO;2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School of Oceanography at DigitalCommons@URI. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate School of Oceanography Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@URI. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Authors Lynn M. Russell, Kevin J. Noone, Ronald J. Ferek, Robert Pockalny, Richard C. Flagan, and John H. Seinfeld This article is available at DigitalCommons@URI: https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/gsofacpubs/229 15 AUGUST 2000 RUSSELL ET AL. 2591 Combustion Organic Aerosol as Cloud Condensation Nuclei in Ship Tracks LYNN M. RUSSELL Department of Chemical Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey KEVIN J. NOONE Meteorological Institute, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden RONALD J. FEREK* Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington ROBERT A. POCKALNY Graduate School of Oceanography, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett, Rhode Island RICHARD C.
    [Show full text]