1,229
Views
41
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Research Articles

Sensitivity of aerosol direct radiative forcing to aerosol vertical profile

&
Article: 24376 | Received 17 Mar 2014, Accepted 30 Apr 2014, Published online: 23 May 2014

Figures & data

Fig. 1 Annual-mean low-level cloud fraction.

Fig. 1 Annual-mean low-level cloud fraction.

Fig. 2 CERES ISCCP-like cloud (2001–2010 average).

Fig. 2 CERES ISCCP-like cloud (2001–2010 average).

Fig. 3 Aerosol radiative forcing difference: ΔRF=RF2.5–3.5 km − RF0.0–1.0 km, where RF2.5–3.5 km refers to the forcing with aerosols between 2.5 and 3.5 km in height. The aerosol forcing is computed with the MACR model at two different locations: 5.63°E, 6.98°S and 75.94°E, 4.19°N (see b for the visual illustration of the locations), and the computed forcing represents the annual mean values at the TOA level. In (a), the overcast sky refers to a 100% cloud fraction by low-level cloud. The low cloud here is assumed to extend from 1.0 to 2.0 km in height. In (c), the surface is assumed to be land with an albedo of 0.9. In (d), the overcast sky refers to a 100% cloud fraction by mid-level cloud, which is set to extend from 4.0 to 6.0 km in height.

Fig. 3 Aerosol radiative forcing difference: ΔRF=RF2.5–3.5 km − RF0.0–1.0 km, where RF2.5–3.5 km refers to the forcing with aerosols between 2.5 and 3.5 km in height. The aerosol forcing is computed with the MACR model at two different locations: 5.63°E, 6.98°S and 75.94°E, 4.19°N (see Fig. 1b for the visual illustration of the locations), and the computed forcing represents the annual mean values at the TOA level. In (a), the overcast sky refers to a 100% cloud fraction by low-level cloud. The low cloud here is assumed to extend from 1.0 to 2.0 km in height. In (c), the surface is assumed to be land with an albedo of 0.9. In (d), the overcast sky refers to a 100% cloud fraction by mid-level cloud, which is set to extend from 4.0 to 6.0 km in height.

Fig. 4 Same as except for the aerosol forcing in the atmosphere.

Fig. 4 Same as Fig. 3 except for the aerosol forcing in the atmosphere.

Table 1. The global sum of annual mean ∣ΔRF∣=∣RFupper-RFlower

Fig. 5 AAOD (Absorption Aerosol Optical Depth) at 550 nm in (a). Aerosol radiative forcing difference: ΔRF=RF2.5–3.0 km − RF0.0–0.5 km, in (b) and (c). The aerosol forcing is computed with the MACR model, and the computed forcing represents the 2001–2010 mean values at the TOA level. Realistic 3D clouds from satellite observations are used in (c). These clouds are removed in (b).

Fig. 5 AAOD (Absorption Aerosol Optical Depth) at 550 nm in (a). Aerosol radiative forcing difference: ΔRF=RF2.5–3.0 km − RF0.0–0.5 km, in (b) and (c). The aerosol forcing is computed with the MACR model, and the computed forcing represents the 2001–2010 mean values at the TOA level. Realistic 3D clouds from satellite observations are used in (c). These clouds are removed in (b).

Fig. 6 Aerosol radiative forcing difference: ΔRF=RF2.5–3.0 km − RF0.0–0.5 km. Realistic 3D clouds as in c are expanded in fraction to have a 100% cloud fraction collectively in a). In b), the fraction of low cloud is set to 100% while other clouds are zeroed. In c), the low cloud is zeroed and other clouds are expanded in fraction to have a 100% cloud fraction collectively.

Fig. 6 Aerosol radiative forcing difference: ΔRF=RF2.5–3.0 km − RF0.0–0.5 km. Realistic 3D clouds as in Fig. 5c are expanded in fraction to have a 100% cloud fraction collectively in a). In b), the fraction of low cloud is set to 100% while other clouds are zeroed. In c), the low cloud is zeroed and other clouds are expanded in fraction to have a 100% cloud fraction collectively.