Atmospheric Chemistry - Science topic

MODIS Firecounts

Atmospheric aerosol particles affect atmospheric radiation and air quility, and there are various size particles in air. Humidity, gravity, air velocity and other fators may influence particles state (aggregate/agglomerate, disperse,sedimentation etc.)

Are there physical models to interpret the state of atmospheric particles?

I sincerely hope you can help me. Thank you!

I have downloaded data of 10 Aug 2015 from SABER instrument on the NASA TIMED satellite by choosing altitude (10 to 155 km), latitude (-90 to 90) and longitude (0 to 360) and converted in to .mat files. If possible then kindly help me selecting NO_VER for latitude of 69.58° N, altitude of 145 km and longitude of 19.23° E at (01 – 02 UT) from my MAT file of 10 Aug 2015.

THANKS

The threats that global warming has recently posed to humans in many parts of the world have led us to continue this debate.

So the main question is that what actions need to be taken to reduce the risk of climate warming?

Reducing greenhouse gases now seems an inevitable necessity.

In this part in addition to the aforementioned main question, other specific well-known subjects from previous discussion are revisited. Please support or refute the following arguments in a scientific manner.

% -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------%

% ---------------- *** Updated Discussions of Global Warming (section 1) *** ---------------%

The rate of mean temperature of the earth has been increased almost twice with respect to 60 years ago, it is a fact (Goddard Institute for Space Studies, GISS, data). Still a few questions regarding physical processes associated with global warming remain unanswered or at least need more clarification. So the causes and prediction of this trend are open questions. The most common subjects are listed below:

1) "Greenhouse effect increases temperature of the earth, so we need to diminish emission of CO2 and other air pollutants." The logic behind this reasoning is that the effects of other factors like the sun's activity (solar wind contribution), earth rotation orbit, ocean CO2 uptake, volcanoes activities, etc are not as important as greenhous effect. Is the ocean passive in the aforementioned scenario?

2) Two major physical turbulent fluids, the oceans and the atmosphere, interacting with each other, each of them has different circulation timescale, for the oceans it is from year to millennia that affects heat exchange. It is not in equilibrium with sun instantaneously. For example the North Atlantic Ocean circulation is quasi-periodic with recurrence period of about 7 kyr. So the climate change always has occurred. Does the timescale of crucial players (NAO, AO, oceans, etc) affect the results?

3) Energy of the atmospheric system including absorption and re-emission is about 200 Watt/m2 ; the effect of CO2 is about how many percent to this budget ( 2% or more?), so does it have just a minor effect or not?

4) Climate system is a multi-factor process and there exists a natural modes of temperature variations. How anthropogenic CO2 emissions makes the natural temperature variations out of balance.

6) Some weather and climate models that are based on primitive equations are able to reproduce reliable results.  Are the available models able to predict future decadal variability exactly? How much is the uncertainty of the results. An increase in CO2 apparently leads in higher mean temperature value due to radiative transfer.

7) How is global warming related to extreme  weather events?

Some of the consequences of global warming are frequent rainfall, heat waves, and cyclones. If we accept  global warming as an effect of anthropogenic fossil fuels, how can we stop the increasing trend of temperature anomaly and switching to clean energies?

8) What are the roles of sun activities coupled with Milankovitch cycles?

9) What are the roles of politicians to alarm the danger of global warming? How much are scientists sensitive to these decisions?

10) How much is the CO2’s residence time in the atmosphere? To answer this question precisely, we need to know a good understanding of CO2 cycle.

11) Clean energy reduces toxic buildups and harmful smog in air and water. So, how much building renewable energy generation and demanding for clean energy is urgent?

% -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------%

% ---------------- *** Discussions of Global Warming (section 2) *** ---------------%

Warming of the climate system in the recent decades is unequivocal; nevertheless, in addition to a few scientific articles that show the greenhouse gases and human activity as the main causes of global warming, still the debate is not over and some opponents claim that these effects have minor effects on human life. Some relevant topics/criticisms about global warming, causes, consequences, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), etc are putting up for discussion and debate:

1) All the greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydro-fluorocarbons, including HCFCs and HFCs, and ozone) account for about a tenth of one percent of the atmosphere. Based on Stefan–Boltzmann law in basic physics, if you consider the earth with the earth's albedo (a measure of the reflectivity of a surface) in a thermal balance, that is: the power radiated from the earth in terms of its temperature = Solar flux at the earth's cross section, you get Te =(1-albedo)^0.25*Ts.*sqrt(Rs/(2*Rse)), where Te (Ts) is temperature at the surface of the earth (Sun), Rs: radius of the Sun, Rse: radius of the earth's orbit around the Sun. This simplified equation shows that Te depends on these four variables: albedo, Ts, Rs, Rse. Just 1% variation in the Sun's activity lead to variation of the earth's surface temperature by about half a degree.

1.1) Is the Sun's surface (photosphere layer) temperature (Ts) constant?

1.2) How much is the uncertainty in measuring the Sun's photosphere layer temperature?

1.3) Is solar irradiance spectrum universal?

1.4) Is the earth's orbit around the sun (Rse) constant?

1.5) Is the radius of the Sun (Rs) constant?

1.6) Is the largeness of albedo mostly because of clouds or the man-made greenhouse gases?

So the sensitivity of global mean temperature to variation of tracer gases is one of the main questions.

2) A favorable climate model essentially is a coupled non-linear chaotic system; that is, it is not appropriate for the long term future prediction of climate states. So which type of models are appropriate?

3) Dramatic temperature oscillations were possible within a human lifetime in the past. So there is nothing to worry about. What is wrong with the scientific method applied to extract temperature oscillations in the past from Greenland ice cores or shifts in types of pollen in lake beds?

4) IPCC Assessment Reports,

IPCC's reports are known as some of the reliable sources of climate change, although some minor shortcomings have been observed in them.

4.1) "What is Wrong With the IPCC? Proposals for a Radical Reform" (Ross McKitrick):

IPCC has provided a few climate-change Assessment Reports during last decades. Is a radical reform of IPCC necessary or we should take all the IPCC alarms seriously? What is wrong with Ross argument? The models that are used by IPCC already captured a few crudest features of climate change.

4.2) The sort of typical issues of IPCC reports:

- The summary reports focus on those findings that support the human interference theory.

- Some arguments are based on this assumption that the models account for most major sources of variation in the global mean temperature anomaly.

- "Correlation does not imply causation", in some Assessment Reports, results gained from correlation method instead of investigating the downstream effects of interventions or a double-blind controlled trial; however, the conclusions are with a level of reported uncertainty.

4.3) Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) also has produced some massive reports to date.

4.4) Is the NIPCC a scientific or a politically biased panel? Can NIPCC climate reports be trusted?

4.5) What is wrong with their scientific methodology?

5) Changes in the earth's surface temperature cause changes in upper level cirrus and consequently radiative balance. So the climate system can increase its cooling processes by these types of feedbacks and adjust to imbalances.

6) What is your opinion about political intervention and its effect upon direction of research budget?

I really appreciate all the researchers who have had active participation with their constructive remarks in these discussion series.

% -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------%

% ---------------- *** Discussions of Global Warming (section 3) *** ---------------%

In this part other specific well-known subjects are revisited. Please support or refute the following arguments in a scientific manner.

1) Still there is no convincing theorem, with a "very low range of uncertainty", to calculate the response of climate system in terms of the averaged global surface temperature anomalies with respect to the total feedback factors and greenhouse gases changes. In the classical formula applied in the models a small variation in positive feedbacks leads to a considerable changes in the response (temperature anomaly) while a big variation in negative feedbacks causes just small variations in the response.

2) NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 indicate the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be emitted into space than computer models have predicted (i.e. Spencer and Braswell, 2011, DOI: 10.3390/rs3081603). Based on this research "the response of the climate system to an imposed radiative imbalance remains the largest source of uncertainty. It is concluded that atmospheric feedback diagnosis of the climate system remains an unsolved problem, due primarily to the inability to distinguish between radiative forcing and radiative feedback in satellite radiative budget observations." So the contribution of greenhouse gases to global warming is exaggerated in the models used by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). What is wrong with this argument?

3) Ocean Acidification

Ocean acidification is one of the consequences of CO2 absorption in the water and a main cause of severe destabilising the entire oceanic food-chain.

4) The IPCC reports which are based on a range of model outputs suffer somehow from a range of uncertainty because the models are not able to implement appropriately a few large scale natural oscillations such as North Atlantic Oscillation, El Nino, Southern ocean oscillation, Arctic Oscillation, Pacific decadal oscillation, deep ocean circulations, Sun's surface temperature, etc. The problem with correlation between historical observations of the global averaged surface temperature anomalies with greenhouse gases forces is that it is not compared with all other natural sources of temperature variability. Nevertheless, IPCC has provided a probability for most statements. How the models can be improved more?

5) If we look at micro-physics of carbon dioxide, theoretically a certain amount of heat can be trapped in it as increased molecular kinetic energy by increasing vibrational and rotational motions of CO2, but nothing prevents it from escaping into space. During a specific relaxation time, the energetic carbon dioxide comes back to its rest statement.

6) As some alarmists claim there exists a scientific consensus among the scientists. Nevertheless, even if this claim is true, asking the scientists to vote on global warming because of human made greenhouse gases sources does not make sense because the scientific issues are not based on the consensus; indeed, appeal to majority/authority fallacy is not a scientific approach.

% -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------%

% ---------------- *** Discussions of Global Warming (section 4) *** ---------------%

In this part in addition to new subjects, I have highlighted some of responses from previous sections for further discussion. Please leave you comments to support/weaken any of the following statements:

1) @Harry ten Brink recapitulated a summary of a proof that CO2 is such an important Greenhouse component/gas. Here is a summary of this argument:

"a) Satellites' instruments measure the radiation coming up from the Earth and Atmosphere.

b) The emission of CO2 at the maximum of the terrestrial radiation at 15 micrometer.

b1. The low amount of this radiation emitted upwards: means that "back-radiation" towards the Earth is high.

b2. Else said the emission is from a high altitude in the atmosphere and with more CO2 the emission is from an even higher altitude where it is cooler. That means that the emission upwards is less. This is called in meteorology a "forcing", because it implies that less radiation /energy is emitted back into space compared to the energy coming in from the sun.

The atmosphere warms so the energy out becomes equals the solar radiation coming in. Summary of the Greenhouse Effect."

At first glance, this reasoning seems plausible. It is based on these assumptions that the contribution of CO2 is not negligible and any other gases like N2O or Ozone has minor effect. The structure of this argument is supported by an article by Schmidt et al., 2010:

By using the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) ModelE radiation module, the authors claim that "water vapor is the dominant contributor (∼50% of the effect), followed by clouds (∼25%) and then CO2 with ∼20%. All other absorbers play only minor roles. In a doubled CO2 scenario, this allocation is essentially unchanged, even though the magnitude of the total greenhouse effect is significantly larger than the initial radiative forcing, underscoring the importance of feedbacks from water vapour and clouds to climate sensitivity."

The following notions probably will shed light on the aforementioned argument for better understanding the premises:

Q1) Is there any observational data to support the overall upward/downward IR radiation because of CO2?

Q2) How can we separate practically the contribution of water vapor from anthropogenic CO2?

Q3) What are the deficiencies of the (GISS) ModelE radiation module, if any?

Q4) Some facts, causes, data, etc relevant to this argument, which presented by NASA, strongly support this argument (see: https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/)

Q5) Stebbins et al, (1994) showed that there exists "A STRONG INFRARED RADIATION FROM MOLECULAR NITROGEN IN THE NIGHT SKY" (thanks to @Brendan Godwin for mentioning about this paper). As more than 78% of the dry air contains nitrogen, so the contribution of this element is not negligible too.

2) The mean global temperature is not the best diagnostic to study the sensitivity to global forcing. Because given a change in this mean value, it is almost impossible to attribute it to global forcing. Zonal and meridional distribution of heat flux and temperature are not uniform on the earth, so although the mean temperature value is useful, we need a plausible map of spatial variation of temperature .

3) "The IPCC model outputs show that the equilibrium response of mean temperature to a doubling of CO2 is about 3C while by the other observational approaches this value is less than 1C." (R. Lindzen)

4) What is the role of the thermohaline circulation (THC) in global warming (or the other way around)? It is known that during Heinrich events and Dansgaard‐Oeschger (DO) millennial oscillations, the climate was subject to a number of rapid cooling and warming with a rate much more than what we see in recent decades. In the literature, these events were most probably associated with north-south shifts in convection location of the THC. The formation speed of North Atlantic Deep Water (NADW) affects northerly advection velocity of the warm subtropical waters that would normally heat/cool the atmosphere of Greenland and western Europe.

I really appreciate all the researchers who have participated in this discussion with their useful remarks, particularly Harry ten Brink, Filippo Maria Denaro, Tapan K. Sengupta, Jonathan David Sands, John Joseph Geibel, Aleš Kralj, Brendan Godwin, Ahmed Abdelhameed, Jorge Morales Pedraza, Amarildo de Oliveira Ferraz, Dimitris Poulos, William Sokeland, John M Wheeldon, Michael Brown, Joseph Tham, Paul Reed Hepperly, Frank Berninger, Patrice Poyet, Michael Sidiropoulos, Henrik Rasmus Andersen, and Boris Winterhalter.

%%-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------%%

1. Which software is comparatively easier to learn in order to analyze the available satellite data for air pollutants such as tropospheric ozone, PM10, NO2 etc.

2. Please recommend a guide to follow as well, if possible.

3. Approximately, how much time will it take to analyze data spanning 6 months?

Hi,

I need column integrated total aerosol optical depth at a specific location. For this, I used WRF-ARW model and added AODTOT in iofields_filename as a text file. I extracted the variable through ARWpost after running WRF. I got AODTOT

as constant field throughout the forecast period. If I want to get time varying AODTOT, what are the things I need to change?. Please help me regarding this.

One more doubt is, what is the difference between AODTOT, AOD5502D, AOD5503D?. Out of three, Which variable I need to to use to get total integrated aerosol optical depth at a specific location using WRF-ARW?

Waiting for your reply,

Thanks & Regards,

Malleswararao M

Do we have any empirical model to model the combined effect of carbonation and chloride attack in concrete concerning time-dependent temperature, relative humidity and concentration of carbon dioxide?

Hello,

I am interested in how the concentration of O2 varies over time close to ground level. I have been informed that the concentration can drop when an inversion layer is present in the local area due to reduced atmospheric mixing and have seen this effect in data collected by my group.

What else can lead to O2 changes?

Also, what is the best way to identify when an inversion layer is present?

Background:

The reason for my asking is that my group use a constant value for oxygen concentration and use atmospheric air to calibrate our continuous gas oxygen analysers. These analysers are used for a clinical measurement called whole body room calorimetry, where we compare the changes in oxygen concentration of a room (nearly air tight) and air being pumped in to it. Further in the data processing, we calculate the amount of oxygen used by a person, which along with other gas exchange rates is used to calculate biological power output and fuel oxidation ratios.

Thanks for reading.

We are running WRF/Chem 4.5.1 with RADM2.

In the wrfchemi files, I am looking at the E_NH3, BIGALK and E_C3H6. In the wrf output file, there seems to be several variables related to VOCs, but I am looking only at 'ald', 'tol', and 'xyl'.

We are running two simulations, a control and a sensitivity scenario - in the latter, there were decreases in total pollutants emissions, including VOCs... However, I don't see much change in VOCs between the two simulations, neither in the emission files nor in the output files. If I look at other pollutants such as CO, NO2, etc. there is a change, but not for VOCs. I am not sure if I am missing something here.

Which variables in those files do you usually look into when you want to analyse the VOCs? I have limited chemistry knowledge so I wanted to hear from anyone who's got more experience.

Any comemnts or recommendations are appreciated!

I want to measure the gas temperature of the atmospheric He/H2O plasma. But since the OH radicals may not be Boltzmann distributed, I introduced a small amount of nitrogen to verify the gas temperature by using the emission of the second positive nitrogen system. I used the Specair to automatically fit the spectrum and calculate the gas temperature, but it gives me the result of 2400 Kelvin, which is definitely much higher than the real gas temperature. Besides the fitting residual is quite large. I think the gas temperature should be around 1000 K, so I used Specair and generated a spectrum of N2 at 1000 K. The experiment spectrum (the second picture) and calculated spectrum by Specair (the first picture) are shown in the attachment. All the automatically generated spectrum by Specair below 2000 K look very weird, they don't have the basic shape of N2 band, and they even don't change with the temperature settings. I think this is the reason why the fitting residual is quite large when gas temperature was set below 2000 K, and the final result calculated by computer is always above 2000 K, because the computer will try to minimize the fitting residual. Does anyone know why the calculated N2 spectrum below 2000 K looks like that? Are there any other method or software that can be used to fit the N2 second positive spectrum? The settings that I used to generate the spectrum at 1000 K are shown in the third picture. The spectrum fitting is shown in the fourth picture (the black line is the experiment spectrum). 

As an early career scientist, I will be teaching on the Fundaments of Air Quality, my first teaching experience. I do have some good books in my recommended literature, but I would love to see students going a bit further. I believe papers can be a good way to do so.

The same subject, Fundaments of Air Quality, will be taught to both undergraduate and graduate students in different semesters.

Please, any ideas of good educational journals will be very much appreciated.

Are they significantly influence Earth’s climate?

I am manipulating water vapor data obtained by radiosondeo, according to the manual these are given in units of water vapor mixture ratio (g / kg) but in the article I use this data are used in g / cm **2. I am a beginner in the subject of atmospheric chemistry and do not handle this type of units much.

The demonstration of the existence of Silicon TetraFluoride in volcanic emissions and the importance of monitoring it, and its ratio to Hydrogen Fluoride gas, in prediction of eruptions is relatively recent.

This leads me to ask if perhaps Sulfur Fluoride compounds might also be present, especially where high levels of Hydrogen Sulfide and elemental Sulfur are observed.

I will be most grateful for any literature references.

This is the third call for applications for Short Term Scientific Missions (STSMs) for grant period 2 of the COST Action CA17136 - INDAIRPOLLNET (https://indairpollnet.eu/). STSMs are institutional visits aimed at supporting individual mobility, fostering collaboration between individuals. These missions contribute to the scientific objectives of COST Action CA17136 - INDAIRPOLLNET. They are particularly intended for young scientists. The selection of applicants is based on the scientific scope of the STSM application which must clearly contribute to the overall objectives of the Action CA17136 and be related to a specific Working Group. Interested researchers can apply by following the instructions provided in the attached document and submitting their application and supporting documents until 31 January 2020.

Hi, I am interested in modeling atmospheric dynamics and composition on a global scale. I am looking for resources to study and implement global-scale modeling of Earth atmosphere and oceans.

Are there any open source models both GUI or CLI based which can be run on Windows 10 OS?

Thank you

There is a paper that was published in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics by Wang et al. in which they have plotted the mass absorption coefficient (MAC) of brown carbon (BrC) with -log(NOx/NOy). They say that they have used -log(NOx/NOy) as a photochemical clock. Could anyone explain as to why they have done that?

I am interested in knowing about the lifetime of a chemical species in the atmosphere. What are the techniques that can be applied in order to estimate the lifetime of a certain chemical species in the atmosphere based on the physical and chemical properties at different length and time scales? Is there any analytical or computational technique that can be used to estimate within limits of permissible errors? or can it be analysed from Earth Observation data?

In this part in addition to new subjects, I have highlighted some of responses from previous sections for further discussion. Please leave you comments to support/weaken any of the following statements:

1) @Harry ten Brink recapitulated a summary of a proof that CO2 is such an important Greenhouse component/gas. Here is a summary of this argument:

"a) Satellites' instruments measure the radiation coming up from the Earth and Atmosphere.

b) The emission of CO2 at the maximum of the terrestrial radiation at 15 micrometer.

b1. The low amount of this radiation emitted upwards: means that "back-radiation" towards the Earth is high.

b2. Else said the emission is from a high altitude in the atmosphere and with more CO2 the emission is from an even higher altitude where it is cooler. That means that the emission upwards is less. This is called in meteorology a "forcing", because it implies that less radiation /energy is emitted back into space compared to the energy coming in from the sun.

The atmosphere warms so the energy out becomes equals the solar radiation coming in. Summary of the Greenhouse Effect."

At first glance, this reasoning seems plausible. Nevertheless, it is based on these assumptions that the contribution of CO2 is not negligible and any other gas like N2O and Ozone has minor effect. The structure of this argument is supported by an article by Schmidt et al., 2010:

By using the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) ModelE radiation module, the authors claim that "water vapor is the dominant contributor (∼50% of the effect), followed by clouds (∼25%) and then CO2 with ∼20%. All other absorbers play only minor roles. In a doubled CO2 scenario, this allocation is essentially unchanged, even though the magnitude of the total greenhouse effect is significantly larger than the initial radiative forcing, underscoring the importance of feedbacks from water vapour and clouds to climate sensitivity."

The following notions probably will shed light on the aforementioned argument for better understanding the premises:

Q1) Is there any observational data to support the overall upward/downward IR radiation because of CO2?

Q2) How can we separate practically the contribution of water vapor from anthropogenic CO2?

Q3) What are the deficiencies of the (GISS) ModelE radiation module, if any?

Q4) Some facts, causes, data, etc relevant to this argument, which presented by NASA, strongly support this argument (see: https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/)

Q5) Stebbins et al, (1994) showed that there exists "A STRONG INFRARED RADIATION FROM MOLECULAR NITROGEN IN THE NIGHT SKY" (thanks to @Brendan Godwin for mentioning about this paper). As more than 78% of the dry air contains nitrogen, so the contribution of this element is not negligible.

2) The mean global temperature is not a good diagnostic to study the sensitivity to global forcing. Because given a change in this mean value, it is almost impossible to attribute it to global forcing. Zonal and meridional distribution of heat flux and temperature are not uniform on the earth, so the mean temperature value is misleading.

3) "The IPCC model outputs show that the equilibrium response of mean temperature to a doubling of CO2 is about 3C while for the other observational approaches this value is less than 1C." (R. Lindzen). What is wrong with these propositions?

4) What is the role of the thermohaline circulation (THC) in global warming (or the other way around)? It is known that during Heinrich events and Dansgaard‐Oeschger (DO) millennial oscillations, the climate was subject to a number of rapid cooling and warming with a rate much more than what we see in recent decades. In the literature, these events were most probably associated with north-south shifts in convection location of the THC. The formation speed of North Atlantic Deep Water (NADW) affects northerly advection velocity of the warm subtropical waters that would normally heat/cool the atmosphere of Greenland and western Europe.

I really appreciate all the researchers who have participated in these discussions with their useful remarks, particularly Harry ten Brink, Filippo Maria Denaro, Tapan K. Sengupta, Jonathan David Sands, John Joseph Geibel, Aleš Kralj, Brendan Godwin, Ahmed Abdelhameed, Jorge Morales Pedraza, Amarildo de Oliveira Ferraz, Dimitris Poulos, William Sokeland, John M Wheeldon, Joseph Tham, and Boris Winterhalter.

%% ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------%%

Link to the discussions of Global Warming (Part 1):

Link to the discussions of Global Warming (Part 2):

Link to the discussions of Global Warming (Part 3):

Atmospheric chemistry is very complex science with various processes work in tandem. Here, we discuss only about chemical transformations by ruling out transport and deposition processes, in the atmosphere. There are many chemical mechanisms available to choose from and work with for the chemistry and air quality studies. People work with either one mechanism for specific problem or many mechanisms as part of "intercomparison of mechanisms". A lot of such studies have been carried out so far.

Despite being it complex, one has to have kinetic level understanding of the processes in the modeling. Here, I would like to know if the atmospheric chemistry modelers have that understanding already. If so, how did they develop that skill?

I spent couple of days for searching daily global aerosol deposition datasets but I found that most of the models simulated in monthly time steps. Since daily AOD from different models and satellite observation are available, I was wondering if it is possible to convert AOD into the deposition (wet/dry) rate.

I have the following file.grd with the content shown below. This file is an output of the program CALPOST, which reads the outputs of the program CALPUFF. I can read the file.grd using R and raster:

However, the raster does not have coord. ref. and it is centered at 0,0. It seems that the units ar km.

Thanks

I want use the libradtran to calculate the aerosol radiation effects. So, I intend to import the outputs from atmospheric chemistry transport model to the libradtran. Who can tell me how to dispose? Thank you!

It is often said that when we were hunters we were more healthy, handsome, slim and higher, than after assuming settled rural lifestyle, causing diseases and adiposity. And if we start to "breed" wild animals in their natural environment, incresing areas of their natural habitats in the place of agriculture terrains exclusively devoted to needs of breeding our livestock? Could we lost or win on that? The biodiversity certainly would. Let us compare the two numbers from an attached picture:

(f) vertebratas: –28.9%; (i) ruminant livestock: +20.5%.

It demonstrates that we lost (by deforestation) for free approximately the same amount of meat as we produce in costly industrial breeding; If we have to be superpredators (which we are), wasn't it be better to left the forest for wild animals (deers and boars) than cut it for pastures and fodder for our livestock?

To what extent biomass burning (or forest fire) affects marine productivity?

Secondary aerosols are becoming a huge concern during pollution episodes esp. in cities. They can make up to 50% by mass of the total aerosol loading at a given time. While it is clear that some chemical species are only known to be produced by gaseous precursors rather than being directly emitted, how do observational scientists distinguish between primary and secondary aerosol species from their measurements, or do they?

I am wondering to know the exact and most appropriate method to studies the magnetic properties of ambient aerosols.  

Lots of studies used WRF/Chem to simulate aerosol direct radiative effect on boundary layer structure. I am curious about any observation to support their conclusion regarding the slight stable potential temperature profile? Especially in a heavily polluted condition, like haze in China.

Generaly，the fungal concentration has to be higher in PM_2.5 than in PM₁ because PM_2.5 is inclusive of PM₁. However, it is totally different with the result obtained in the current qPCR experiment. The PM1' fungal abundance (1.3 _ 10⁵ copies m-3) is higher than that in PM_2.5 (9.4 _ 10⁴ copies m-3).  I am curious about the potential explantion.The value is against basic law of physics.

what are the atmospheric aerosol are and their impact on health and climate?

I am trying to derive a relation with traffic volume and pollutant concentration observed during daytime for a week. It is seen that from time series of both data, the traffic volume seems to have an inverse relationship with pollutant concentration. I believe due to favourable meteorological conditions at day time, concentration is getting dispersed although the emission increases. Is it possible to remove the effect of meteorological parameters by deseasonalizing the pollutant data, so that the underlying trend between traffic and pollutant is more clear?

Does everyone believe the airborne fungal contribution to  organic matter in PM_2.5 (0.096%) truly nonnegligible? Why?

I would like to get equation for temperature + salinity corrected Henry's law constant to find the air-sea exchange of PAHs.

Please help me,

Hi, i'm looking for reflectance signatures of pure CO2 and H2O aerosols. Thanks. VIS & NIR bands.

Previous model investigations both on Beijing area and on the outskirts pollution have shown that based in US EPA Models-3/CMAQ about 34% of PM 2.5 on average and 35-60% of ozone  - in the Olimpic stadium site - can be attributed to sources outside Beijing. Our activity using passive sampling (at present still unpublished) has clearly shown a potential for a sensible influence  for e.g. SO2, O3, NOx and NO2. I am not aware that other activities employing passive sampling having the purpose to discriminate both types of source of pollution, has ever been performed.

I am working on the biomass burning aerosols over South-East Asia using satellite database. Can someone suggest me how I can distinguish between different types of biomass burning i.e., agricultural residue burning, forest fires etc.? Can we use the satellite sensors which provide trace gas information such as CO, O3, SO2, NO2 to identify the different sources of biomass burning aerosols?

I used WRFChem V3.5.1 to simulate aerosols and gas concentration over China during Nov,2015, and I found that at some grid the simulated SO2 and NO2 concentrations were negative, how can I deal this ?

 If the volume flow 10 SCCM at ground level. The what the flow rate at 12 km above the sea level?What is the factor?

I'm looking for a specific reference describing ozone chemistry in the upper troposphere associated with biomass burning emissions. I particularly want to know whether the OH radicals in the biomass burning plume are just from background or chemically produced though the ozone -related chemistry (e.g. RO2 or HO2 + NO). Can anybody let me know any specific references regarding those? I've already found several relevant references, but could not get the exact answer for my question. Thank you.

I am getting low BC and PM concentration on the days coming after dense fog events whats may be the reason ?

some reconstruction shows little or no change from current conditions in low latitude regions and significant warming of the ocean surface at mid and higher latitudes of both hemispheres. how to explain that?

SOA formed in the chamber experiment was collected on filter paper and extracted in methanol using orbital shaker. Now extracted is required to dry, how it can be done using nitrogen.

Northern Hemisphere 23 days and southern hemisphere 28 days. 

Source: PgNo228, Atmopsheric Chemistry and Physics, Second Edition, Authors:John H. Seinfeld and Spyros N Pandis.

The reason why  mobile method is effective than stationary method.

The example of this research.

Can anybody share the experience how to prepare the inlet system when I want to try to measure atmospheric nanoparticles (mobility diameter particle as small as 2.5 nm) at high altitude (~4 km)? I attach the meteorological conditions (T < 10 oC, Rh fluctuated, P ~ 650 hPa) at the site (Source: http://www.jma.go.jp/jp/amedas_h/today-50066.html?areaCode=000&groupCode=34). So far, I try to use the plastic tube from the outside to the diffusion dryer (then connect to the nano-SMPS with the flow rate 1.5 lpm) and to the pump with the flow rate 20 lpm. Thank you very much.

All of we know that, noble gases are highly inert in nature.. in periodic table before the Argon, Helium and neon are also there...but why Argon is present more  in the earth atmosphere rather than neon?....

What is the role of argon in evolution of earth's atmosphere..

I was reading this paper, Bertman, S. B., J. M. Roberts, D. D. Parrish, M. P. Buhr, P. D. Goldan, W. C. Kuster, F. C. Fehsenfeld, S. A. Montzka, and H. Westberg (1995), Evolution of alkyl nitrates with air mass age, J. Geophys. Res., 100(D11), 22805–22813, doi:10.1029/95JD02030 (link attached), and had a hard time trying to derive equation (12) from equation (11). If anyone knows how to do that, help would be highly appreciated.

Thank you

I want to develop the method on CAD but the component showing good response on UV but very poor in CAD i tried to optimize it through power function, charger current, temperature of detector.....but non of this working. Can any one suggest me what could be the best way.........

Do you have information about average concentrations of major ions (chlorides, sulphates, hydrocarbonates, sodium, calcium, magnesium) in atmospheric precipitation in unpolluted areas of Europe?

Any experience and references on this subject would be great!

Especially clean up procedure!

Thank you!

 I have also checked the wind trajectory the wind is not coming from the ocean side. So, what could be the other possible sources of Na, Cl and K in typical urban environment.

I am looking for paper(s) giving the oxidation rate of amorphous silicon under atmospheric conditions (humidity roughly around 40%). From our experiments it seems that (CVD)-deposited a-Si has a very high oxidation rate, and the oxide is very thick compared to c-Si (which I think is not surprising). Even more interesting would be to get the oxidation rate of a-Si formed by ion bombardment. Could anyone suggest some literature or share the experience? Thanks a lot in advance.

Can anyone suggest me some articles regarding source apportionment of gaseous compound using EPA PMF 5.00. Moreover, It will be very helpful if someone share his/her experiences and difficulties in working with PMF 5.00 while apportioning sources of gaseous compound.

Thanks in advance. :)

CO2 fluxes are in molecule/cm2/s. I don't know how to convert it into ppmv. I would be most grateful if anyone can give me some suggestions.

Hi, I am trying to determine Black and Brown carbon from SPM collected in quartz filter using a soot scanner model: OT21 optical transmissometer. This instrument uses two different wavelength one in IR region for determination of Black carbon, another in UV range for determination of Brown carbon. In the manual of OT21, it is written than Black Carbon can be determined quantitatively. But no clear indication is given about Brown carbon. Can someone suggest me, whether I can determine Brown carbon quantitatively by this instrument or not?

An 8th grade student wants to see how the conc. of CO2 changes the conductivity of air, ala air pollution (CO2) from combustion. Could one just use a TCD- with N2 as carrier gas-add CO2 (the sample) and measure the signal as a function of CO2 (%)?   Air is 78% N2--so N2 is close to air, and air (O2)  would burn the TCD resistors.  This is a neat Wheatstone  Bridge--and maybe one can get a relationship to ohms, and then CHANGE TEMPERATURE OF THE CELL---and compare to literature. May be a bit narrow T range.

What do you think?

I hope anyone working with the thermodynamic properties of moist air is aware of the history surrounding this topic. There are numerous errors in the literature related to the properties of moist air. The original data trace back to Hyland & Wexler, who worked for the National Bureau of Standard (NBS), which is now called the National Institute of Standards and Testing (NIST). The tabulated values in the recent editions of the ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals are correct, but the equations are wrong in most editions. If you write the equations provided in the accompanying text into functions in Excel and calculate some of the values in table, you will find that the two don't match. These errors go back for decades, in which errata were issued which fixed some errors but introduced new errors. NIST has lost H&W's original documents, but there was a copy in the archives at the Library of Congress (LOC). Several years ago a colleague, Al Feltzin, went to the LOC and made a photocopy of the original data, which, as it turned out, matched the tabulated data, not the equations. The ASHRAE table has since been updated, but the equations are still wrong. Do not use the saturation pressure of water vapor over water liquid when calculating the properties of water vapor in air. It's not the same. The equations in the ASHRAE handbook for enthalpy are also wrong. Again, use the table, which doesn't match the equations. The differences may seem small, but are significant in precise measurements and calculations. [Of course, there's really no excuse for there being any differences at all.] I have implemented the tables precisely in C and VBA (i.e., Excel macros), which I will put on my web page for convenient download for anyone who might need these.

Hi,

I am analyzing DEW WATER chemical composition. I have to calculate Backward Air Mass Trajectories from NOAA Hysplit model for tracing the sources of trace metals and ions. But i am not sure about the correct MAGL (Elevation) suitable for dew. Although, i have got a paper which suggest 100m elevation as dew is an lower atmospheric phenomena (Comparative chemical analysis of dew and rain water, Atmospheric Research 95 (2010) 224–234), But i want to be sure. I am planning to calculate it with 0-100m, 100-1100m, 1100-2500m. Hope someone have better suggestion. Thanks in advance.

If you can't physically be in the environment you're learning about, would listening to it's sound recordings aid your learning?

To provide formula if any.How can I calculate nitrogen deposition in atmosphere?

We are designing a LiBr+H2O solar absorption  cooling system where we need a pressure in the range 80 - 90 kPa in the condenser side and a pressure in the range 8 - 13 kPa in the evaporator side.

I want to compare the MOZART-4 simulations with different space borne instruments and In-situ measurements over the Indian sub-continent.

Thanks in advance.

I am planing to conduct a comprehensive research study on atmospheric wet precipitation in rural and urban environment of India to address:

1. Physico-chemical characterisation (inorganic and organic species) of rain water samples during a period of couple of years to assess associated spatiotemporal trend.

2. Distribution pattern of measured species between aerosols and rain water along with associated atmospheric chemistry

in connection to above stated plans, I am interested in new emerging objectives, especially for India type of atmospheric environment and different types of methodological approaches including sampling plan, choice of chemical species, and different mathematical/statistical methods of data interpretation to meet out the emerging objectives.

I shall be highly grateful for your valuable suggestions.

I am looking at isotherm models for gas adsorption in particular CO2 adsorption and which to model my experimental data using the Dual Langmuir model. How do I calculate the unknowns in order to do the model?

I have a reactor tube (length 70cm, diameter 20 cm) and I wish to see what the air/gas is doing as it enters the tubes.

I imagine sampling some kind of smoke/visible gas to the tube would do the trick, but I don't know how to generate something suitable and would welcome people suggestions.

I want it to convert total column to mixing ratio.

Is there any other method?

In most of the research papers i have found that generally the formula used for calculation of non sea salt fraction, Na measured is used multiplying with the sea ratio for particular ion with Na. 

I have surface ozone concentration data for few months and I want to determine if temperature remains constant what would be the concentration of ozone? How can I do this? Please support with statistical equations, literatures and calculations and however you can.

Thank you very much.

I'm preparing a xerogel and wanted to get rid of the boron in NaBH4. I've read that preparing the NaBH4 in a solution as a reducing agent will reduce chlorides but I still don't understand how it reacts with air to decompose. So 24 hours seems like an ideal time to allow the boron to exit, I just don't want the NaBH4 to reduce the D-Glucose in the solution. Any ideas would be appreciated

I am building a pH meter and am in the process of choosing my working electrode. I have narrowed the choices down to metal oxide electrodes in wire form. The reference electrode is an Ag/AgCl pellet electrode. I'd appreciate any help or insight on the matter.