Supplementary material to "Characterization of Organic Aerosol across the Global Remote Troposphere: A comparison of ATom measurements and global chemistry models"

Abstract. The spatial distribution and properties of submicron organic aerosol (OA) are among the key sources of uncertainty in our understanding of aerosol effects on climate. Uncertainties are particularly large over remote regions of the free troposphere and Southern Ocean, where very few data have been available and where OA predictions from AeroCom Phase II global models span 2 to 3 orders of magnitude, greatly exceeding the model spread over source regions. The (nearly) pole-to-pole vertical distribution of non-refractory aerosols was measured with an aerosol mass spectrometer onboard the NASA DC-8 aircraft as part of the Atmospheric Tomography (ATom) mission during the Northern Hemisphere summer (August 2016) and winter (February 2017). This study presents the first extensive characterization of OA mass concentrations and their level of oxidation in the remote atmosphere. OA and sulfate are the major contributors by mass to submicron aerosols in the remote troposphere, together with sea salt in the marine boundary layer. Sulfate was dominant in the lower stratosphere. OA concentrations have a strong seasonal and zonal variability, with the highest levels measured in the lower troposphere in the summer and over the regions influenced by biomass burning from Africa (up to 10 µg sm−3). Lower concentrations (∼0.1–0.3 µg sm−3) are observed in the northern middle and high latitudes and very low concentrations (<0.1 µg sm−3) in the southern middle and high latitudes. The ATom dataset is used to evaluate predictions of eight current global chemistry models that implement a variety of commonly used representations of OA sources and chemistry, as well as of the AeroCom-II ensemble. The current model ensemble captures the average vertical and spatial distribution of measured OA concentrations, and the spread of the individual models remains within a factor of 5. These results are significantly improved over the AeroCom-II model ensemble, which shows large overestimations over these regions. However, some of the improved agreement with observations occurs for the wrong reasons, as models have the tendency to greatly overestimate the primary OA fraction and underestimate the secondary fraction. Measured OA in the remote free troposphere is highly oxygenated, with organic aerosol to organic carbon (OA ∕ OC) ratios of ∼2.2–2.8, and is 30 %–60 % more oxygenated than in current models, which can lead to significant errors in OA concentrations. The model–measurement comparisons presented here support the concept of a more dynamic OA system as proposed by Hodzic et al. (2016), with enhanced removal of primary OA and a stronger production of secondary OA in global models needed to provide better agreement with observations.

[1]  Guofeng Shen,et al.  Comparison of carbonaceous particulate matter emission factors among different solid fuels burned in residential stoves , 2014 .

[2]  M. Razinger,et al.  Biomass burning emissions estimated with a global fire assimilation system based on observed fire radiative power , 2011 .

[3]  M. Haeffelin,et al.  Formation of organic aerosol in the Paris region during the MEGAPOLI summer campaign: evaluation of the volatility-basis-set approach within the CHIMERE model , 2012 .

[4]  Richard Neale,et al.  Toward a Minimal Representation of Aerosols in Climate Models: Description and Evaluation in the Community Atmosphere Model CAM5 , 2012 .

[5]  P. Rasch,et al.  Recent advances in understanding secondary organic aerosol: Implications for global climate forcing , 2017 .

[6]  Allen L Robinson,et al.  Rethinking Organic Aerosols: Semivolatile Emissions and Photochemical Aging , 2007, Science.

[7]  Qi Zhang,et al.  Influence of intense secondary aerosol formation and long-range transport on aerosol chemistry and properties in the Seoul Metropolitan Area during spring time: results from KORUS-AQ , 2017 .

[8]  C. Wiedinmyer,et al.  The aerosol radiative effects of uncontrolled combustion of domestic waste , 2016 .

[9]  M. Petters,et al.  Chemical aging and the hydrophobic‐to‐hydrophilic conversion of carbonaceous aerosol , 2006 .

[10]  J. Lelieveld,et al.  Aerosol Health Effects from Molecular to Global Scales. , 2017, Environmental science & technology.

[11]  T. Onasch,et al.  Mixing state of carbonaceous aerosol in an urban environment: single particle characterization using the soot particle aerosol mass spectrometer (SP-AMS) , 2015 .

[12]  D. Murphy,et al.  Observations of organic material in individual marine particles at Cape Grim during the First Aerosol Characterization Experiment (ACE 1) , 1998 .

[13]  Qi Zhang,et al.  Organic Aerosol Particle Chemical Properties Associated With Residential Burning and Fog in Wintertime San Joaquin Valley (Fresno) and With Vehicle and Firework Emissions in Summertime South Coast Air Basin (Fontana) , 2018, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres.

[14]  Weiwei Hu,et al.  Organic aerosol composition and sources in Pasadena, California, during the 2010 CalNex campaign , 2013 .

[15]  C. Bretherton,et al.  Clouds and Aerosols , 2013 .

[16]  Piers M. Forster,et al.  The direct and indirect radiative effects of biogenic secondary organic aerosol , 2013 .

[17]  G. Diskin,et al.  The distribution of sea-salt aerosol in the global troposphere , 2018, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[18]  Zhang Yanyan,et al.  Emission factors, size distributions, and emission inventories of carbonaceous particulate matter from residential wood combustion in rural China. , 2012, Environmental science & technology.

[19]  G. Mann,et al.  Aerosol mass spectrometer constraint on the global secondary organic aerosol budget , 2011 .

[20]  J. Peñuelas,et al.  Fossil versus contemporary sources of fine elemental and organic carbonaceous particulate matter during the DAURE campaign in Northeast Spain , 2011 .

[21]  David S. Thomson,et al.  Particle Analysis by Laser Mass Spectrometry WB-57F Instrument Overview , 2000 .

[22]  K. Mortimer,et al.  In-Use Emissions and Estimated Impacts of Traditional, Natural- and Forced-Draft Cookstoves in Rural Malawi , 2017, Environmental science & technology.

[23]  J. M. Reeves,et al.  Widespread Pollution From Secondary Sources of Organic Aerosols During Winter in the Northeastern United States , 2019, Geophysical Research Letters.

[24]  J. M. Reeves,et al.  Sources and Secondary Production of Organic Aerosols in the Northeastern United States during WINTER , 2018, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres.

[25]  Erik Swietlicki,et al.  Organic aerosol and global climate modelling: a review , 2004 .

[26]  D. Ceburnis,et al.  On the effect of wind speed on submicron sea salt mass concentrations and source fluxes , 2012 .

[27]  Yan-lin Zhang,et al.  Fossil vs. non-fossil sources of fine carbonaceous aerosols in four Chinese cities during the extreme winter haze episode of 2013 , 2014 .

[28]  Min Hu,et al.  Highly time-resolved carbonaceous aerosol characterization in Yangtze River Delta of China: Composition, mixing state and secondary formation , 2013 .

[29]  M. Chin,et al.  ATom: Merged Atmospheric Chemistry, Trace Gases, and Aerosols , 2018 .

[30]  Jens Borken-Kleefeld,et al.  Global anthropogenic emissions of particulate matter including black carbon , 2016 .

[31]  J. Seinfeld,et al.  Global modeling of organic aerosol: the importance of reactive nitrogen , 2010 .

[32]  B. Huebert,et al.  Air‐Sea exchange of biogenic volatile organic compounds and the impact on aerosol particle size distributions , 2017 .

[33]  M. Mills,et al.  Climate Forcing and Trends of Organic Aerosols in the Community Earth System Model (CESM2) , 2019, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems.

[34]  Carbon oxidation state as a metric for describing the chemistry of atmospheric organic aerosol. , 2011, Nature chemistry.

[35]  J. D. de Gouw,et al.  Secondary organic aerosol production from local emissions dominates the organic aerosol budget over Seoul, South Korea, during KORUS-AQ , 2018, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[36]  C. Liousse,et al.  Highly controlled, reproducible measurements of aerosol emissions from combustion of a common African biofuel source , 2018 .

[37]  Qi Zhang,et al.  Sources and atmospheric processing of winter aerosols in Seoul, Korea: insights from real-time measurements using a high-resolution aerosol mass spectrometer , 2016 .

[38]  M. Andreae Emission of trace gases and aerosols from biomass burning – an updated assessment , 2019, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[39]  Edward Charles Fortner,et al.  Mexico City Aerosol Analysis during MILAGRO using High Resolution Aerosol Mass Spectrometry , 2009 .

[40]  A. Laskin,et al.  Chemistry of atmospheric brown carbon. , 2015, Chemical reviews.

[41]  A. Piazzalunga,et al.  High secondary aerosol contribution to particulate pollution during haze events in China , 2014, Nature.

[42]  L. Molina,et al.  Trace gas and particle emissions from domestic and industrial biofuel use and garbage burning in central Mexico , 2009 .

[43]  B. Samset,et al.  Strong Contrast in Remote Black Carbon Aerosol Loadings Between the Atlantic and Pacific Basins , 2018, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres.