global and regional modeling of clouds and aerosols in the marine boundary layer during vocals: the voca intercomparison

Clicks: 163
ID: 196698
2015
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #355 of 850 articles by views in Journal of agricultural and food chemistry

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 850 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
A diverse collection of models are used to simulate the marine boundary layer in the southeast Pacific region during the period of the October–November 2008 VOCALS REx (VAMOS Ocean Cloud Atmosphere Land Study Regional Experiment) field campaign. Regional models simulate the period continuously in boundary-forced free-running mode, while global forecast models and GCMs (general circulation models) are run in forecast mode. The models are compared to extensive observations along a line at 20° S extending westward from the South American coast. Most of the models simulate cloud and aerosol characteristics and gradients across the region that are recognizably similar to observations, despite the complex interaction of processes involved in the problem, many of which are parameterized or poorly resolved. Some models simulate the regional low cloud cover well, though many models underestimate MBL (marine boundary layer) depth near the coast. Most models qualitatively simulate the observed offshore gradients of SO2, sulfate aerosol, CCN (cloud condensation nuclei) concentration in the MBL as well as differences in concentration between the MBL and the free troposphere. Most models also qualitatively capture the decrease in cloud droplet number away from the coast. However, there are large quantitative intermodel differences in both means and gradients of these quantities. Many models are able to represent episodic offshore increases in cloud droplet number and aerosol concentrations associated with periods of offshore flow. Most models underestimate CCN (at 0.1% supersaturation) in the MBL and free troposphere. The GCMs also have difficulty simulating coastal gradients in CCN and cloud droplet number concentration near the coast. The overall performance of the models demonstrates their potential utility in simulating aerosol–cloud interactions in the MBL, though quantitative estimation of aerosol–cloud interactions and aerosol indirect effects of MBL clouds with these models remains uncertain.
Reference Key
wyant2015atmosphericglobal Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;M. C. Wyant;C. S. Bretherton;R. Wood;G. R. Carmichael;A. Clarke;J. Fast;R. George;W. I. Gustafson Jr.;C. Hannay;A. Lauer;Y. Lin;J.-J. Morcrette;J. Mulcahy;P. E. Saide;S. N. Spak;Q. Yang
Journal Journal of agricultural and food chemistry
Year 2015
DOI
10.5194/acp-15-153-2015
URL
http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/15/153/2015/acp-15-153-2015.pdf
Keywords
physicschemistry

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.