4.3 Article

Biomass burning smoke aerosol properties measured during Fire Laboratory at Missoula Experiments (FLAME)

Journal

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2009JD013601

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Park Service
  2. Joint Fire Science Program (JFSP) [05-3-1-06]
  3. Department of Energy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

[1] During the Fire Laboratory at Missoula Experiments (FLAME), we studied the physical, chemical, and optical properties of biomass burning smoke from the laboratory combustion of various wildland fuels. A good understanding of these properties is important in determining the radiative effects of biomass burning aerosols, with impacts on both local and regional visibility and global climate. We measured aerosol size distributions with two instruments: a differential mobility particle sizer (DMPS) and an optical particle counter (OPC). Volume size distributions from different burns varied from monomodal to multimodal, with geometric mean diameters ranging from 0.20-0.57 mu m and geometric standard deviations ranging from 1.68-2.97. By reconciling the differences between the two sizing instruments, we estimated aerosol effective refractive indices with values ranging from 1.41 to 1.61. We reconstructed aerosol chemical composition for each burn using data from filters collected and analyzed with the Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) samplers and protocols. Aerosols were generally comprised of carbon with organic species accounting for the largest mass fraction in most cases. We used composition data to calculate aerosol density, which ranged from 1.22-1.92 g cm(-3), and real and imaginary refractive indices, which had ranges of 1.55-1.80 and 0.01-0.50 respectively. Aerosol physical, chemical, and optical characterizations were combined to calculate dry mass scattering (MSE) and absorption (MAE) efficiencies at 532 nm. These parameters had values between 1.6-5.7 m(2) g(-1) and 0.04-0.94 m(2) g(-1).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available