Meteoric smoke and H<sub>2</sub>SO<sub>4</sub> aerosols in the upper stratosphere and mesosphere

Hervig, Mark E.; Bardeen, Charles G.; Siskind, David E.; Mills, Michael J.; Stockwell, R. G.

doi:10.1002/2016gl072049

Cited by 9 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This approach is taken because the retrievals do not allow negative values and thus yield a high bias for measurements near the noise (see Hervig et al, , for detail). The present study uses 5 day signal averages, as discussed in Hervig et al (). Some additional enhancements to the retrievals were employed to reduce the smoke measurement uncertainties, as described now.…”

Section: Sofie Observationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The model reports vertical profiles of smoke concentration versus radius, which can be used to determine smoke properties such as volume density ( V ) or extinction. This version, known here as WACCM‐1 (run for 2007–2012), was used in a recent investigation of SOFIE smoke observations by Hervig et al (). WACCM‐1 was shared with the University of Leeds, where a variety of enhancements have been implemented (known here as WACCM‐2).…”

Section: Meteoric Smoke Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The composition of meteoric smoke was constrained by comparing model results with multiwavelength extinctions measured during 2011 near ~70°S latitude. The annual cycle in smoke is due to transport by the global meridional circulation, with the greatest smoke volume density in fall/winter and a minimum in summer (Hervig et al, ; Megner et al, ). An example of the annual cycle in observed extinctions is shown in Figure for 0.1 hPa.…”

Section: Meteoric Smoke Compositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Constraints on Meteoric Smoke Composition and Meteoric Influx Using SOFIE Observations With Models

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The composition of meteoric smoke particles in the mesosphere is constrained using measurements from the Solar Occultation For Ice Experiment (SOFIE) in conjunction with models. Comparing the multiwavelength observations with models suggests smoke compositions of magnetite, wüstite, magnesiowüstite, or iron‐rich olivine. Smoke compositions of pure pyroxene, hematite, iron‐poor olivine, magnesium silicate, and silica are excluded, although this may be because these materials have weak signatures at the SOFIE wavelengths. Information concerning smoke composition allows the SOFIE extinction measurements to be converted to smoke volume density. Comparing the observed volume density with model results for varying meteoric influx (MI) provides constraints on the ablated fraction of incoming meteoric material. The results indicate a global ablated MI of 3.3 ± 1.9 t d−1, which represents only iron, magnesium, and possibly silica, given the smoke compositions indicated here. Considering the optics and iron content of individual smoke compositions gives an ablated Fe influx of 1.8 ± 0.9 t d−1. Finally, the global total meteoric influx (ablated plus surviving) is estimated to be 30 ± 18 t d−1, when considering the present results and a recent description of the speciation of meteoric material.

show abstract

Section: Sofie Observationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Meteoric Smoke Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Meteoric Smoke Compositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Constraints on Meteoric Smoke Composition and Meteoric Influx Using SOFIE Observations With Models

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We will consider this data set for use in future versions of GloSSAC. In addition, the data must have a peerreviewed validation paper for stratospheric aerosol products and this requirement currently excludes OMPS (Gorkavyi et al, 2013), MAESTRO (Kar et al, 2007), and SOFIE (Hervig et al, 2017). We also excluded data sets that do not fill a unique function in the data set particularly due to lifetime or spatial coverage (some of which also present additional use challenges).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A global space-based stratospheric aerosol climatology: 1979–2016

Thomason

Ernest²,

Millán³

et al. 2018

Earth Syst. Sci. Data

196

198

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We describe the construction of a continuous 38-year record of stratospheric aerosol optical properties. The Global Space-based Stratospheric Aerosol Climatology, or GloSSAC, provided the input data to the construction of the Climate Model Intercomparison Project stratospheric aerosol forcing data set and we have extended it through 2016 following an identical process. GloSSAC focuses on the Stratospheric Aerosol and Gas Experiment (SAGE) series of instruments through mid-2005, and on the Optical Spectrograph and InfraRed Imager System (OSIRIS) and the Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observation (CALIPSO) data thereafter. We also use data from other space instruments and from ground-based, air, and balloon borne instruments to fill in key gaps in the data set. The end result is a global and gap-free data set focused on aerosol extinction coefficient at 525 and 1020 nm and other parameters on an "as available" basis. For the primary data sets, we developed a new method for filling the post-Pinatubo eruption data gap for 1991-1993 based on data from the Cryogenic Limb Array Etalon Spectrometer. In addition, we developed a new method for populating wintertime high latitudes during the SAGE period employing a latitude-equivalent latitude conversion process that greatly improves the depiction of aerosol at high latitudes compared to earlier similar efforts. We report data in the troposphere only when and where it is available. This is primarily during the SAGE II period except for the most enhanced part of the Pinatubo period. It is likely that the upper troposphere during Pinatubo was greatly enhanced over non-volcanic periods and that domain remains substantially under-characterized. We note that aerosol levels during the OSIRIS/CALIPSO period in the lower stratosphere at mid-and high latitudes is routinely higher than what we observed during the SAGE II period. While this period had nearly continuous low-level volcanic activity, it is possible that the enhancement in part reflects deficiencies in the data set. We also expended substantial effort to quality assess the data set and the product is by far the best we have produced. GloSSAC version 1.0 is available in netCDF format at the NASA Atmospheric Data Center at https://eosweb.larc.nasa.gov/. GloSSAC users should cite this paper and the data set DOI (https://doi.org/10.5067/GloSSAC-L3-V1.0).

show abstract

“…With the assumption that the CN layers are formed only by the binary H 2 O-H 2 SO 4 homogeneous nucleation, a sulfur input of 1 t S d À1 (S-MIF/3) appears to be compatible with the available CN observations. There is increasing observational evidence supporting the uptake of H 2 SO 4 on MSPs and the formation of mixed MSP-sulfate particles in the lower mesosphere and the upper stratosphere [Neely et al, 2011;Saunders et al, 2012;Murphy et al, 2014;Hervig et al, 2017]. Given the uncertainties surrounding the role of MSPs as condensation nuclei of sulfate particles, we have not included MSP-sulfate interactions in the model simulations presented here.…”

Section: Meteoric Sulfur In the Upper Stratospherementioning

confidence: 99%

Impacts of meteoric sulfur in the Earth's atmosphere

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A meteoric sulfur input function and a sulfur ion chemistry scheme have been incorporated into a chemistry‐climate model, in order to study the speciation of sulfur between the stratosphere and the thermosphere (~20–120 km) and the impact of the sulfur input from ablation of cosmic dust. The simulations have been compared to rocket observations of SO+ between 85 and 110 km, MIPAS observations of SO2 between 20 and 45 km, and stratospheric balloon‐borne measurements of H2SO4 vapor and sulfate aerosol. These observations constrain the present‐day global flux of meteoric sulfur to ≤1.0 t S d−1, i.e., 2 orders of magnitude smaller than the flux of S into the stratosphere from OCS photooxidation and explosive volcanic SO2 injection. However, the meteoric sulfur flux is strongly focused into the polar vortices by the meridional circulation, and therefore, the contribution of SO2 of meteoric origin to the polar upper stratosphere during winter is substantial (~ 30% at 50 km for a flux of 1.0 t S d−1). The Antarctic spring sulfate aerosol layer is found to be very sensitive to a moderate increase of the input rate of meteoric sulfur, showing a factor of 2 enhancement in total sulfate aerosol number density at 30 km for an input of 3.0 t S d−1. The input rate estimate of 1.0 t S d−1 suggests an enrichment of sodium relative to sulfur of 2.7 ± 1.5 and is consistent with a total cosmic dust input rate of 44 t d−1.

show abstract

Meteoric smoke and H₂SO₄ aerosols in the upper stratosphere and mesosphere

Cited by 9 publications

References 25 publications

Constraints on Meteoric Smoke Composition and Meteoric Influx Using SOFIE Observations With Models

Constraints on Meteoric Smoke Composition and Meteoric Influx Using SOFIE Observations With Models

A global space-based stratospheric aerosol climatology: 1979–2016

Impacts of meteoric sulfur in the Earth's atmosphere

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Meteoric smoke and H2SO4 aerosols in the upper stratosphere and mesosphere

Cited by 9 publications

References 25 publications

Constraints on Meteoric Smoke Composition and Meteoric Influx Using SOFIE Observations With Models

Constraints on Meteoric Smoke Composition and Meteoric Influx Using SOFIE Observations With Models

A global space-based stratospheric aerosol climatology: 1979–2016

Impacts of meteoric sulfur in the Earth's atmosphere

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Meteoric smoke and H₂SO₄ aerosols in the upper stratosphere and mesosphere