DataSheet1_Towards reliable retrievals of cloud droplet number for non-precipitating planetary boundary layer clouds and their susceptibility to aerosol.pdf

Remote sensing has been a key resource for developing extensive and detailed datasets for studying and constraining aerosol-cloud-climate interactions. However, aerosol-cloud collocation challenges, algorithm limitations, as well as difficulties in unraveling dynamic from aerosol-related effects on cloud microphysics, have long challenged precise retrievals of cloud droplet number concentrations. By combining a series of remote sensing techniques and in situ measurements at ground level, we developed a semi-automated approach that can address several retrieval issues for a robust estimation of cloud droplet number for non-precipitating Planetary Boundary Layer (PBL) clouds. The approach is based on satellite retrievals of the PBL cloud droplet number (Ndsat) using the geostationary meteorological satellite data of the Optimal Cloud Analysis (OCA) product, which is obtained by the Spinning Enhanced Visible and InfraRed Imager (SEVIRI) of the European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT). The parameters of the retrieval are optimized through closure with droplet number obtained from a combination of ground-based remote sensing data and in situ observations at ground level. More specifically, the remote sensing data are used to retrieve cloud-scale vertical velocity, and the in situ aerosol measurements at ground level were used constrain as input to a state-of-the-art droplet activation parameterization to predict the respective Cloud Condensation Nuclei (CCN) spectra, cloud maximum supersaturation and droplet number concentration (Nd), accounting for the effects of vertical velocity distribution and lateral entrainment. Closure studies between collocated Nd and Ndsat are then used to evaluate exising droplet spectral width parameters used for the retrieval of droplet number, and determine the optimal values for retrieval. This methodology, used to study aerosol-cloud interactions for non-precipitating clouds formed over the Athens Metropolitan Area (AMA), Greece from March to May 2020, shows that droplet closure can be achieved to within 30%, comparable to the level of closure obtained in many in situ studies. Given this, the ease of applying this approach with satellite data obtained from SEVIRI with high temporal (15 min) and spatial resolution (3.6 km × 4.6 km), opens the possibility of continuous and reliable Ndsat, giving rise to high value datasets for aerosol-cloud-climate interaction studies.</p

Mass absorption cross section of black carbon for Aethalometer in the Arctic

Long-term measurements of the mass concentration of black carbon (BC) in the atmosphere (MBC) with well-constrained accuracy are indispensable to quantify its emission, transport, and deposition. The aerosol light absorption coefficient (babs), usually measured by a filter-based absorption photometer, including an Aethalometer (AE), is often used to estimate MBC. The measured babs is converted to MBC by assuming a value for the mass absorption cross section (MAC). Previously, we derived the MAC for AE (MAC (AE)) from measured babs and independently measured MBC values at two sites in the Arctic. MBC was measured with a filter-based absorption photometer with a heated inlet (COSMOS). The accuracy of the COSMOS-derived MBC (MBC (COSMOS)) was within about 15%. Here, we obtained additional MAC (AE) measurements to improve understanding of its variability and uncertainty. We measured babs (AE) and MBC (COSMOS) at Alert (2018–2020), Barrow (2012–2022), Ny-Ålesund (2012–2019), and Pallas (2019–2022). At Pallas, we also obtained four-wavelength photoacoustic aerosol absorption spectrometer (PAAS-4λ) measurements of babs. babs (AE) and MBC (COSMOS) were tightly correlated; the average MAC (AE) at the four sites was 11.4 ± 1.2 m2 g−1 (mean ± 1σ) at 590 nm and 7.76 ± 0.73 m2 g−1 at 880 nm. The spatial variability of MAC (AE) was about 11% (1σ), and its year-to-year variability was about 18%. We compared MAC (AE) in the Arctic with values at mid-latitudes, measured by previous studies, and with values obtained by using other types of filter-based absorption photometer, and PAAS-4λ. Copyright © 2024 American Association for Aerosol Research</p