4.8 Article

Top-of-atmosphere radiative forcing affected by brown carbon in the upper troposphere

Journal

NATURE GEOSCIENCE
Volume 10, Issue 7, Pages 486-+

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/NGEO2960

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NASA [NNX14AP74G, NNX12AB80G, NNX12AC03G, NNX15AT96G]
  2. National Science Foundation [DGE-1650044]
  3. NASA [674800, NNX14AP74G, 30955, NNX12AB80G] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER
  4. Div Atmospheric & Geospace Sciences
  5. Directorate For Geosciences [1243220, 1243232] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Carbonaceous aerosols affect the global radiative balance by absorbing and scattering radiation, which leads to warming or cooling of the atmosphere, respectively. Black carbon is the main light-absorbing component. A portion of the organic aerosol known as brown carbon also absorbs light. The climate sensitivity to absorbing aerosols rapidly increases with altitude, but brown carbon measurements are limited in the upper troposphere. Here we present aircraft observations of vertical aerosol distributions over the continental United States in May and June 2012 to show that light-absorbing brown carbon is prevalent in the troposphere, and absorbs more short-wavelength radiation than black carbon at altitudes between 5 and 12 km. We find that brown carbon is transported to these altitudes by deep convection, and that in-cloud heterogeneous processing may produce brown carbon. Radiative transfer calculations suggest that brown carbon accounts for about 24% of combined black and brown carbon warming effect at the tropopause. Roughly two-thirds of the estimated brown carbon forcing occurs above 5 km, although most brown carbon is found below 5 km. The highest radiative absorption occurred during an event that ingested a wildfire plume. We conclude that high-altitude brown carbon from biomass burning is an unappreciated component of climate forcing.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available