| Literature DB >> 32098848 |
Laura Fierce1, Timothy B Onasch2,3, Christopher D Cappa4, Claudio Mazzoleni5, Swarup China6, Janarjan Bhandari5, Paul Davidovits3, D Al Fischer7, Taylor Helgestad4, Andrew T Lambe2, Arthur J Sedlacek8, Geoffrey D Smith7, Lindsay Wolff3.
Abstract
Black carbon (BC) absorbs solar radiation, leading to a strong but uncertain warming effect on climate. A key challenge in modeling and quantifying BC's radiative effect on climate is predicting enhancements in light absorption that result from internal mixing between BC and other aerosol components. Modeling and laboratory studies show that BC, when mixed with other aerosol components, absorbs more strongly than pure, uncoated BC; however, some ambient observations suggest more variable and weaker absorption enhancement. We show that the lower-than-expected enhancements in ambient measurements result from a combination of two factors. First, the often used spherical, concentric core-shell approximation generally overestimates the absorption by BC. Second, and more importantly, inadequate consideration of heterogeneity in particle-to-particle composition engenders substantial overestimation in absorption by the total particle population, with greater heterogeneity associated with larger model-measurement differences. We show that accounting for these two effects-variability in per-particle composition and deviations from the core-shell approximation-reconciles absorption enhancement predictions with laboratory and field observations and resolves the apparent discrepancy. Furthermore, our consistent model framework provides a path forward for improving predictions of BC's radiative effect on climate.Entities:
Keywords: absorption enhancement; aerosol mixing state; black carbon; direct radiative forcing
Year: 2020 PMID: 32098848 PMCID: PMC7071900 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1919723117
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ISSN: 0027-8424 Impact factor: 11.205
Fig. 1.The complex, noncore-shell morphology of BC-containing particles (A–C) leads to lower enhancements in light absorption (denoted ; circles in D) than predicted under the core-shell approximation (black lines in D) for a given , consistent with findings reported in refs. 6, 7, and 34. However, both the core-shell model and the measurements from the BC4 experiment predict larger for the same than has been observed in ambient populations (shown by boxes in D) for BC sampled in urban outflow near Fontana, CA (10). The values for the ambient measurements are ensemble averages. The BC4 measurements provide for mass-selected BC cores, where the mass of the BC core, amount of coating, and composition of the coating varied between experiments. Particles were also imaged periodically to capture the internal morphology of the laboratory-generated particles (A–C). The model calculations and measurements shown here were performed at a wavelength of 532 nm. (Scale bars: A–C, 300 nm.)
Fig. 2.The previously reported gap between modeled and observed (illustrated here by comparison of the dashed black line with the box plot in A) is largely reconciled by the improved model (blue line and shading in A), which accounts for both heterogeneity in and deviations from the core-shell approximation. This improved model is compared with the default model (black line), which assumes a core-shell configuration and neglects particle-to-particle diversity entirely. Evaluation of two additional cases in which only deviation from the core-shell approximation is considered (red shading in A and B) and in which only heterogeneity in composition is considered (yellow shading in A and B) shows that neglecting variability in per-particle is the primary cause of differences in modeled and observed . Differences in between different particle populations having the same —both calculated and observed—are explained by differences in the variability in per-particle (C–E) between populations. Populations having large variability in per-particle , as expected among ambient BC, are predicted to have weaker levels of than populations having lower variability in per-particle . Variability in was estimated by fitting the ambient distributions in reported in ref. 7. In all cases, the best estimate (lines) and 1 – bounds (shading) were determined from a Bayesian regression of the particle-resolved model data, and the observational strength of one model over another is quantified using the Bayes factor (). The measurements and model calculations shown here were performed at a wavelength of 532 nm.
Model assumptions explored in this study
| Model | Description of assumptions |
| Default: core-shell approximation, uniform composition approximation | |
| Including deviation from core shell only while assuming uniform composition | |
| Including heterogeneity in | |
| Including deviation from core shell and heterogeneity in |