2001
DOI: 10.1016/s0169-8095(00)00068-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A method for the parameterization of cloud optical properties in bulk and bin microphysical models. Implications for arctic cloudy boundary layers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
44
0
2

Year Published

2004
2004
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
1
44
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Detailed cloud-resolving model studies suggest that modest increases in ice nuclei concentrations in Arctic mixedphase clouds can transform a largely liquid stratus deck of wide aerial coverage into a broken, optically thin cloud system (Harrington and Olsson, 2001;Harrington, et al, 1999;Jiang, et al, 2000;Morrison, et al, 2005;Prenni, et al, 2007). Based on observations from the Mixed-Phase Arctic Cloud Experiment (M-PACE); (Verlinde, et al, 2007) conducted on the north slope of Alaska in October 2004, (Fridlind, et al, 2007) concluded that observed concentrations of ice nuclei are insufficient by several orders of magnitude to explain observed ice, and that other mechanisms have to be invoked to explain ice formation in mixed-phase clouds.…”
Section: Clouds and Aerosolsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Detailed cloud-resolving model studies suggest that modest increases in ice nuclei concentrations in Arctic mixedphase clouds can transform a largely liquid stratus deck of wide aerial coverage into a broken, optically thin cloud system (Harrington and Olsson, 2001;Harrington, et al, 1999;Jiang, et al, 2000;Morrison, et al, 2005;Prenni, et al, 2007). Based on observations from the Mixed-Phase Arctic Cloud Experiment (M-PACE); (Verlinde, et al, 2007) conducted on the north slope of Alaska in October 2004, (Fridlind, et al, 2007) concluded that observed concentrations of ice nuclei are insufficient by several orders of magnitude to explain observed ice, and that other mechanisms have to be invoked to explain ice formation in mixed-phase clouds.…”
Section: Clouds and Aerosolsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Aerosol variations also appear to have a direct impact on the surface cloud radiative forcing through the liquid phase: recent work (Garrett, et al, 2004;Lubin and Vogelmann, 2006) suggested a longwave indirect effect of aerosol, in which higher droplet numbers and smaller droplet sizes increases the longwave emissivity of clouds. In addition to these aerosol effects, cloud liquid water content depends on cloud-scale dynamics, sea ice coverage and thickness, and large-scale atmospheric circulation patterns (Curry, et al, 1990;Curry, et al, 1996;Harrington and Olsson, 2001;Jiang, et al, 2000;Vavrus, 2004), all of which have strong seasonal dependence.…”
Section: Clouds and Aerosolsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Extensive spatial and temporal cloud coverage in the Arctic has a large impact on the radiative budget of the Arctic system (Curry et al 1996;Harrington and Olsson, 2001) with clouds having a cooling effect in the summer (up to -59 W m -2 ) and a warming effect (up to 20-30 W m -2 ) in winter (Walsh and Chapman 1998). Because of this strong cloud dependence, surface radiative fluxes are quite sensitive to perturbations in cloud properties and amount.…”
Section: North Slope Of Alaskamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other studies in laboratory and field experiments suggest that the freezing nucleation dominates over the deposition nucleation (e.g., Ansmann et al 2009;Field et al 2006). Finally, some studies have shown that deposition ice nucleation is the dominant nucleation mode and that contact freezing is only a minor contributor in Arctic mixed-phase clouds (Harrington et al 1999;Harrington and Olsson 2001).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%