Explore the vast range of titles available.

Globally, clouds are known to warm the climate system in the thermal infrared because they typically emit thermal radiation to space at effective temperatures lower than the combined cloud‐free atmosphere and surface. However, here we show that ∼40% of low‐level clouds over sea ice tend to cool the Arctic system at TOA and contribute to a radiative cooling of the Arctic winter climate by −2.3 Wm−2, or a ∼16% reduction over the infrared warming effect of all clouds during winter. Based on satellite observations, low‐level clouds residing in surface‐based temperature inversions emit more longwave radiation to space than would occur in cloudless skies. While these clouds are known to significantly warm the surface, they cool the Arctic climate system overall. Our results imply that accurately representing the cloud radiative effects unique to the Arctic could help to constrain the regional energy budget. Plain Language Summary The Arctic has become emblematic of climate change, with rapid warming that is at least twice as fast as the rest of the planet. However, major uncertainties in our confidence to understand and predict Arctic climate persist, particularly regarding the radiative effects of clouds. Here we use satellite data to quantify the radiative effects of Arctic low‐level clouds, and find approximately 40% of low‐level clouds over sea ice tend to radiatively cool the Arctic climate system (Earth's surface and the atmosphere) in winter, rather than warm the climate system as is typical for most clouds in the thermal infrared regime. This cooling effect is governed by the widespread surface temperature inversions (layers in which temperature increases with altitude), which cap these low‐level clouds and allow more longwave radiation to escape from the Earth to space compared to clear skies. This finding reveals a fundamental, but overlooked, characteristic of cloud radiative effects in the wintertime Arctic and establishes a new perspective for understanding Arctic climate change. Key Points A full range of radiative effects for Arctic wintertime low clouds over sea ice is investigated About 40% of low clouds over sea ice tends to cool the Arctic at the top of the atmosphere in the polar night These low clouds with a cooling effect at the top of the atmosphere reside within frequent surface‐based temperature inversions

Leads are a key feature of the Arctic ice pack during the winter owing to their substantial contribution to the surface energy balance. According to the present understanding, enhanced heat and moisture fluxes from high lead concentrations tend to produce more boundary layer clouds. However, described here in our composite analyses of diverse surface- and satellite-based observations, we find that abundant boundary layer clouds are associated with low lead flux periods, while fewer boundary layer clouds are observed for high lead flux periods. Motivated by these counterintuitive results, we conducted three-dimensional cloud-resolving simulations to investigate the underlying physics. We find that newly frozen leads with large sensible heat flux but low latent heat flux tend to dissipate low clouds. This finding indicates that the observed high lead fractions likely consist of mostly newly frozen leads that reduce any pre-existing low-level cloudiness, which in turn decreases downwelling infrared flux and accelerates the freezing of sea ice. Cracks in Arctic sea ice (leads) are becoming more prevalent and widespread, yet studies regarding their impacts on clouds are limited. Here, contrary to the present understanding, diverse observations and modelling simulations show that higher leads concentrations do not necessarily result in more low clouds.

Over the past decade a new type of global climate model (GCM) has emerged, which is known as a multiscale modeling framework (MMF). Colorado State University's MMF represents a coupling between the Community Atmosphere Model and the System for Atmospheric Modeling (SAM) to serve as the cloud‐resolving model (CRM) that replaces traditionally parameterized convection in GCMs. However, due to the high computational expense of the MMF, the grid size of the embedded CRM is typically limited to 4 km for long‐term climate simulations. With grid sizes this coarse, shallow convective processes and turbulence cannot be resolved and must still be parameterized within the context of the embedded CRM. This paper describes a computationally efficient closure that aims to better represent turbulence and shallow convective processes in coarse‐grid CRMs. The closure is based on the assumed probability density function (PDF) technique to serve as the subgrid‐scale (SGS) condensation scheme and turbulence closure that employs a diagnostic method to determine the needed input moments. This paper describes the scheme, as well as the formulation of the eddy length which is empirically determined from large eddy simulation (LES) data. CRM tests utilizing the closure yields good results when compared to LESs for two trade‐wind cumulus cases, a transition from stratocumulus to cumulus, and continental cumulus. This new closure improves the representation of clouds through the use of SGS condensation scheme and turbulence due to better representation of the buoyancy flux and dissipation rates. In addition, the scheme reduces the sensitivity of CRM simulations to horizontal grid spacing. The improvement when compared to the standard low‐order closure configuration of the SAM is especially striking. Key Points Simplified PDF parameter just as good as predictive New turbulence length scale functions well for boundary layer clouds Better representation of boundary layer clouds

In a laboratory cloud chamber that is undergoing Rayleigh–Bénard convection, supersaturation is produced by isobaric mixing. When aerosols (cloud condensation nuclei) are injected into the chamber at a constant rate, and the rate of droplet activation is balanced by the rate of droplet loss, an equilibrium droplet size distribution (DSD) can be achieved. We derived analytic equilibrium DSDs and probability density functions (PDFs) of droplet radius and squared radius for conditions that could occur in such a turbulent cloud chamber when there is uniform supersaturation. We neglected the effects of droplet curvature and solute on the droplet growth rate. The loss rate due to fallout that we used assumes that (1) the droplets are well-mixed by turbulence, (2) when a droplet becomes sufficiently close to the lower boundary, the droplet's terminal velocity determines its probability of fallout per unit time, and (3) a droplet's terminal velocity follows Stokes' law (so it is proportional to its radius squared). Given the chamber height, the analytic PDF is determined by the mean supersaturation alone. From the expression for the PDF of the radius, we obtained analytic expressions for the first five moments of the radius, including moments for truncated DSDs. We used statistics from a set of measured DSDs to check for consistency with the analytic PDF. We found consistency between the theoretical and measured moments, but only when the truncation radius of the measured DSDs was taken into account. This consistency allows us to infer the mean supersaturations that would produce the measured PDFs in the absence of supersaturation fluctuations. We found that accounting for the truncation radius of the measured DSDs is particularly important when comparing the theoretical and measured relative dispersions of the droplet radius. We also included some additional quantities derived from the analytic DSD: droplet sedimentation flux, precipitation flux, and condensation rate.

The Pi Cloud Chamber offers a unique opportunity to study aerosol‐cloud microphysics interactions in a steady‐state, turbulent environment. In this work, an atmospheric large‐eddy simulation (LES) model with spectral bin microphysics is scaled down to simulate these interactions, allowing comparison with experimental results. A simple scalar flux budget model is developed and used to explore the effect of sidewalls on the bulk mixing temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, and supersaturation. The scaled simulation and the simple scalar flux budget model produce comparable bulk mixing scalar values. The LES dynamics results are compared with particle image velocimetry measurements of turbulent kinetic energy, energy dissipation rates, and large‐scale oscillation frequencies from the cloud chamber. These simulated results match quantitatively to experimental results. Finally, with the bin microphysics included the LES is able to simulate steady‐state cloud conditions and broadening of the cloud droplet size distributions with decreasing droplet number concentration, as observed in the experiments. The results further suggest that collision‐coalescence does not contribute significantly to this broadening. This opens a path for further detailed intercomparison of laboratory and simulation results for model validation and exploration of specific physical processes. Key Points A large‐eddy simulation with spectral bin cloud microphysics is scaled to simulate a laboratory convection chamber The simulated mixing state and turbulence properties reasonably compare with a simple flux model and with measurements The simulation replicates published observations from the Pi Chamber, including steady‐state clouds and size distribution broadening.

This study presents the first model intercomparison of aerosol‐cloud‐turbulence interactions in a controlled cloudy Rayleigh‐Bénard Convection chamber environment, utilizing the Pi Chamber at Michigan Technological University. We analyzed simulated cloud chamber‐averaged statistics of microphysics and thermodynamics in a warm‐phase, cloudy environment under steady‐state conditions at varying aerosol injection rates. Simulation results from seven distinct models (DNS, LES, and a 1D turbulence model) were compared. Our findings demonstrate that while all models qualitatively capture observed trends in droplet number concentration, mean radius, and droplet size distributions at both high and low aerosol injection rates, significant quantitative differences were observed. Notably, droplet number concentrations varied by over two orders of magnitude between models for the same injection rates, indicating sensitivities to the model treatments in droplet activation and removal and wall fluxes. Furthermore, inconsistencies in vertical relative humidity profiles and in achieving steady‐state liquid water content suggest the need for further investigation into the mechanisms driving these variations. Despite these discrepancies, the models generally reproduced consistent power‐law relationships between the microphysical variables. This model intercomparison underscores the importance of controlled cloud chamber experiments for validating and improving cloud microphysical parameterizations. Recommendations for future modeling studies are also highlighted, including constraining wall conditions and processes, investigating droplet/aerosol removal (including sidewall losses), and conducting simplified experiments to isolate specific processes contributing to model divergence and reduce model uncertainties. Plain Language Summary Understanding how tiny particles (aerosols) interact with clouds and turbulence is essential for improving weather forecasts and climate predictions, as these interactions play a crucial role in determining the properties and evolution of clouds. In this study, we compared different numerical cloud models that simulate these interactions within a controlled laboratory environment, the Pi Chamber at Michigan Technological University. We examined how these models simulated the formation and growth of cloud droplets when aerosols were injected at different rates into the chamber. Our findings show that while all models generally captured the expected trends in cloud droplet size and number concentrations, there were significant quantitative differences. These differences suggest that model results are sensitive to the different model treatments on how droplets are formed and removed, as well as how fluxes from the chamber walls are represented. Despite these differences, the models generally agreed on the overall relationships between aerosol amounts and cloud properties, matching laboratory observations. This study highlights the value of using cloud chamber experiments to test and improve these models. We suggest that to reduce model uncertainties, future research should focus on better defining the conditions at the chamber walls and investigating how particles are removed from the chamber. Key Points This study presents the first model intercomparison to study aerosol‐cloud‐turbulence interactions in a convection‐cloud chamber All models capture the observed microphysical response to varying aerosol injection rates, but large inter‐model discrepancies are present The study underscores the importance of laboratory experiments for validating and improving microphysical representation in cloud models

Cloud water sedimentation and drizzle in a stratocumulus-topped boundary layer are the focus of an intercomparison of large-eddy simulations. The context is an idealized case study of nocturnal stratocumulus under a dry inversion, with embedded pockets of heavily drizzling open cellular convection. Results from 11 groups are used. Two models resolve the size distributions of cloud particles, and the others parameterize cloud water sedimentation and drizzle. For the ensemble of simulations with drizzle and cloud water sedimentation, the mean liquid water path (LWP) is remarkably steady and consistent with the measurements, the mean entrainment rate is at the low end of the measured range, and the ensemble-average maximum vertical wind variance is roughly half that measured. On average, precipitation at the surface and at cloud base is smaller, and the rate of precipitation evaporation greater, than measured. Including drizzle in the simulations reduces convective intensity, increases boundary layer stratification, and decreases LWP for nearly all models. Including cloud water sedimentation substantially decreases entrainment, decreases convective intensity, and increases LWP for most models. In nearly all cases, LWP responds more strongly to cloud water sedimentation than to drizzle. The omission of cloud water sedimentation in simulations is strongly discouraged, regardless of whether or not precipitation is present below cloud base.

Forecasting fire growth, plume rise and smoke impacts on air quality remains a challenging task. Wildland fires dynamically interact with the atmosphere, which can impact fire behavior, plume rises, and smoke dispersion. For understory fires, the fire propagation is driven by winds attenuated by the forest canopy. However, most numerical weather prediction models providing meteorological forcing for fire models are unable to resolve canopy winds. In this study, an improved canopy model parameterization was implemented within a coupled fire-atmosphere model (WRF-SFIRE) to simulate a prescribed burn within a forested plot. Simulations with and without a canopy wind model were generated to determine the sensitivity of fire growth, plume rise, and smoke dispersion to canopy effects on near-surface wind flow. Results presented here found strong linkages between the simulated fire rate of spread, heat release and smoke plume evolution. The standard WRF-SFIRE configuration, which uses a logarithmic interpolation to estimate sub-canopy winds, overestimated wind speeds (by a factor 2), fire growth rates and plume rise heights. WRF-SFIRE simulations that implemented a canopy model based on a non-dimensional wind profile, saw significant improvements in sub-canopy winds, fire growth rates and smoke dispersion when evaluated with observations.

This study evaluates the performance of the National Centers for Environmental Prediction Global Forecast System (GFS) against observations made by the U.S. Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Program at the southern Great Plains site for the years 2001–04. The spatial and temporal scales of the observations are examined to search for an optimum approach for comparing grid-mean model forecasts with single-point observations. A single-column model (SCM) based upon the GFS was also used to aid in understanding certain forecast errors. The investigation is focused on the surface energy fluxes and clouds. Results show that the overall performance of the GFS model has been improving, although certain forecast errors remain. The model overestimated the daily maximum latent heat flux by 76 W m−2 and the daily maximum surface downward solar flux by 44 W m−2, and underestimated the daily maximum sensible heat flux by 44 W m−2. The model’s surface energy balance was reached by a cancellation of errors. For clouds, the GFS was able to capture the observed evolutions of cloud systems during major synoptic events. However, on average, the model largely underestimated cloud fraction in the lower and midtroposphere, especially for daytime nonprecipitating low clouds because shallow convection in the GFS does not produce clouds. Analyses of surface radiative fluxes revealed that the diurnal cycle of the model’s surface downward longwave flux (SDLW) was not in phase with that of the ARM-observed SDLW. SCM experiments showed that this error was caused by an inaccurate scaling factor, which was a function of ground skin temperature and was used to adjust the SDLW at each model time step to that computed by the model’s longwave radiative transfer routine once every 3 h. A method has been proposed to correct this error in the operational forecast model. It was also noticed that the SDLW biases changed from mostly negative in 2003 to slightly positive in 2004. This change was traced back to errors in the near-surface air temperature. In addition, the SDLW simulated with the newly implemented Rapid Radiative Transfer Model longwave routine in the GFS is usually 5–10 W m−2 larger than that simulated with the previous routine. The forecasts of surface downward shortwave flux (SDSW) were relatively accurate under clear-sky conditions. The errors in SDSW were primarily caused by inaccurate forecasts of cloud properties. Results from this study can be used as guidance for the further development of the GFS.

Cloud area distributions are a defining feature of Earth's radiative exchanges with outer space. Cloud perimeter distributions n(p) are also interesting because the shared interface between clouds and clear sky determines exchanges of buoyant energy and air. Here, we test using detailed model output and a wide range of satellite datasets a first-principles prediction that perimeter distributions follow a scale-invariant power law n(p) ∝ p-(1+β), where the exponent β = 1 is evaluated for perimeters within moist isentropic atmospheric layers. In model analyses, the value of β is closely reproduced. In satellite data, β is remarkably robust to latitude, season, and land–ocean contrasts, which suggests that, at least statistically speaking, cloud perimeter distributions are determined more by atmospheric stability than Coriolis forces, surface temperature, or contrasts in aerosol loading between continental and marine environments. However, the satellite-measured value of β is found to be 1.26 ± 0.06 rather than β = 1. The reason for the discrepancy is unclear, but comparison with a model reproduction of the satellite perspective suggests that it may owe to cloud overlap. Satellite observations also show that scale invariance governs cloud areas for a range at least as large as ∼ 3 to ∼ 3 × 105 km2, and notably with a corresponding power law exponent close to unity. Many prior studies observed a much smaller range for power law behavior, and we argue this difference is due to inappropriate treatments of the statistics of clouds that are truncated by the edge of the measurement domain.