Engineering topics

Quaas, J.

Publications and source records attributed to Quaas, J..

3 records

DOE OSTI2022

The Global Atmosphere‐aerosol Model ICON‐A‐HAM2.3–Initial Model Evaluation and Effects of Radiation Balance Tuning on Aerosol Optical Thickness

Abstract The Hamburg Aerosol Module version 2.3 (HAM2.3) from the ECHAM6.3‐HAM2.3 global atmosphere‐aerosol model is coupled to the recently developed icosahedral nonhydrostatic ICON‐A (icon‐aes‐1.3.00) global atmosphere model to yield the new ICON‐A‐HAM2.3 atmosphere‐aerosol model. The ICON‐A and ECHAM6.3 host models use different dynamical cores, parameterizations of vertical mixing due to sub‐grid scale turbulence, and parameter settings for radiation balance tuning. Here, we study the role of the different host models for simulated aerosol optical thickness (AOT) and evaluate impacts of using HAM2.3 and the ECHAM6‐HAM2.3 two‐moment cloud microphysics scheme on several meteorological variables. Sensitivity runs show that a positive AOT bias over the subtropical oceans is remedied in ICON‐A‐HAM2.3 because of a different default setting of a parameter in the moist convection parameterization of the host models. The global mean AOT is biased low compared to MODIS satellite instrument retrievals in ICON‐A‐HAM2.3 and ECHAM6.3‐HAM2.3, but the bias is larger in ICON‐A‐HAM2.3 because negative AOT biases over the Amazon, the African rain forest, and the northern Indian Ocean are no longer compensated by high biases over the sub‐tropical oceans. ICON‐A‐HAM2.3 shows a moderate improvement with respect to AOT observations at AERONET sites. A multivariable bias score combining biases of several meteorological variables into a single number is larger in ICON‐A‐HAM2.3 compared to standard ICON‐A and standard ECHAM6.3. In the tropics, this multivariable bias is of similar magnitude in ICON‐A‐HAM2.3 and in ECHAM6.3‐HAM2.3. In the extra‐tropics, a smaller multivariable bias is found for ICON‐A‐HAM2.3 than for ECHAM6.3‐HAM2.3.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Bounding Global Aerosol Radiative Forcing of Climate Change

Abstract Aerosols interact with radiation and clouds. Substantial progress made over the past 40 years in observing, understanding, and modeling these processes helped quantify the imbalance in the Earth's radiation budget caused by anthropogenic aerosols, called aerosol radiative forcing, but uncertainties remain large. This review provides a new range of aerosol radiative forcing over the industrial era based on multiple, traceable, and arguable lines of evidence, including modeling approaches, theoretical considerations, and observations. Improved understanding of aerosol absorption and the causes of trends in surface radiative fluxes constrain the forcing from aerosol‐radiation interactions. A robust theoretical foundation and convincing evidence constrain the forcing caused by aerosol‐driven increases in liquid cloud droplet number concentration. However, the influence of anthropogenic aerosols on cloud liquid water content and cloud fraction is less clear, and the influence on mixed‐phase and ice clouds remains poorly constrained. Observed changes in surface temperature and radiative fluxes provide additional constraints. These multiple lines of evidence lead to a 68% confidence interval for the total aerosol effective radiative forcing of ‐1.6 to ‐0.6 W m −2 , or ‐2.0 to ‐0.4 W m −2 with a 90% likelihood. Those intervals are of similar width to the last Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment but shifted toward more negative values. The uncertainty will narrow in the future by continuing to critically combine multiple lines of evidence, especially those addressing industrial‐era changes in aerosol sources and aerosol effects on liquid cloud amount and on ice clouds.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2006

Model Intercomparison of Indirect Aerosol Effects

Modeled differences in predicted effects are increasingly used to help quantify the uncertainty of these effects. Here, we examine modeled differences in the aerosol indirect effect in a series of experiments that help to quantify how and why model-predicted aerosol indirect forcing varies between models. The experiments start with an experiment in which aerosol concentrations, the parameterization of droplet concentrations and the autoconversion scheme are all specified and end with an experiment that examines the predicted aerosol indirect forcing when only aerosol sources are specified. Although there are large differences in the predicted liquid water path among the models, the predicted aerosol first indirect effect for the first experiment is rather similar, about -0.6 W/sq m to -0.7 W/sq m. Changes to the autoconversion scheme can lead to large changes in the liquid water path of the models and to the response of the liquid water path to changes in aerosols. Adding an autoconversion scheme that depends on the droplet concentration caused a larger (negative) change in net outgoing shortwave radiation compared to the 1st indirect effect, and the increase varied from only 22% to more than a factor of three. The change in net shortwave forcing in the models due to varying the autoconversion scheme depends on the liquid water content of the clouds as well as their predicted droplet concentrations, and both increases and decreases in the net shortwave forcing can occur when autoconversion schemes are changed. The parameterization of cloud fraction within models is not sensitive to the aerosol concentration, and, therefore, the response of the modeled cloud fraction within the present models appears to be smaller than that which would be associated with model "noise". The prediction of aerosol concentrations, given a fixed set of sources, leads to some of the largest differences in the predicted aerosol indirect radiative forcing among the models, with values of cloud forcing ranging from -0.3 W/sq m to -1.4W/sq m. Thus, this aspect of modeling requires significant improvement in order to improve the prediction of aerosol indirect effects.

Penner, J. E.↗