Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Droplet nucleation: Physically‐based parameterizations and comparative evaluation
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Droplet nucleation: Physically‐based parameterizations and comparative evaluation
Do you wish to request the book?
Droplet nucleation: Physically‐based parameterizations and comparative evaluation
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Droplet nucleation: Physically‐based parameterizations and comparative evaluation
2011
Overview
One of the greatest sources of uncertainty in simulations of climate and climate change is the influence of aerosols on the optical properties of clouds. The root of this influence is the droplet nucleation process, which involves the spontaneous growth of aerosol into cloud droplets at cloud edges, during the early stages of cloud formation, and in some cases within the interior of mature clouds. Numerical models of droplet nucleation represent much of the complexity of the process, but at a computational cost that limits their application to simulations of hours or days. Physically‐based parameterizations of droplet nucleation are designed to quickly estimate the number nucleated as a function of the primary controlling parameters: the aerosol number size distribution, hygroscopicity and cooling rate. Here we compare and contrast the key assumptions used in developing each of the most popular parameterizations and compare their performances under a variety of conditions. We find that the more complex parameterizations perform well under a wider variety of nucleation conditions, but all parameterizations perform well under the most common conditions. We then discuss the various applications of the parameterizations to cloud‐resolving, regional and global models to study aerosol effects on clouds at a wide range of spatial and temporal scales. We compare estimates of anthropogenic aerosol indirect effects using two different parameterizations applied to the same global climate model, and find that the estimates of indirect effects differ by only 10%. We conclude with a summary of the outstanding challenges remaining for further development and application.
