Articles | Volume 22, issue 9
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5743-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5743-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
03 May 2022
Research article |
| 03 May 2022
| 03 May 2022
Stability-dependent increases in liquid water with droplet number in the Arctic
Rebecca J. Murray-Watson
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Space and Atmospheric Physics Group, Imperial College London, London, UK
Edward Gryspeerdt
Space and Atmospheric Physics Group, Imperial College London, London, UK
Related authors
Rebecca J. Murray-Watson and Edward Gryspeerdt
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 11115–11132, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-11115-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-11115-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The formation of mixed-phase clouds during marine cold-air outbreaks is not well understood. Our study, using satellite data and Lagrangian trajectories, reveals that the occurrence of these clouds depends on both time and temperature, influenced partly by the presence of biological ice-nucleating particles. This highlights the importance of comprehending local aerosol dynamics for precise modelling of cloud-phase transitions in the Arctic.
Rebecca J. Murray-Watson, Edward Gryspeerdt, and Tom Goren
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 9365–9383, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-9365-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-9365-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Clouds formed in Arctic marine cold air outbreaks undergo a distinct evolution, but the factors controlling their transition from high-coverage to broken cloud fields are poorly understood. We use satellite and reanalysis data to study how these clouds develop in time and the different influences on their evolution. The aerosol concentration is correlated with cloud break-up; more aerosol is linked to prolonged coverage and a stronger cooling effect, with implications for a more polluted Arctic.
Edward Gryspeerdt, Franziska Glassmeier, Graham Feingold, Fabian Hoffmann, and Rebecca J. Murray-Watson
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 11727–11738, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11727-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11727-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The response of clouds to changes in aerosol remains a large uncertainty in our understanding of the climate. Studies typically look at aerosol and cloud processes in snapshot images, measuring all properties at the same time. Here we use multiple images to characterise how cloud temporal development responds to aerosol. We find a reduction in liquid water path with increasing aerosol, party due to feedbacks. This suggests the aerosol impact on cloud water may be weaker than in previous studies.
Anna Tippett, Paul R. Field, and Edward Gryspeerdt
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3877, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3877, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
Short summary
Clouds and their interactions with tiny particles in the air (aerosols) are a large source of uncertainty in climate models. To study Marine Cloud Brightening (MCB), we use ship tracks (changes to clouds from ship pollution). Comparing real ship track data with model results, we find the model struggles under rainy conditions and overestimates effects at high pollution levels, suggesting it needs improvement for reliable MCB simulations.
Oliver G. A. Driver, Marc E. J. Stettler, and Edward Gryspeerdt
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2737, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2737, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Contrails are ice clouds caused by planes. In humid (ice supersaturated) regions ice crystals are stable, and clouds persist. Contrails have a warming effect, so it is important to model them. However, weather model data is unable to represent ice supersaturated regions well enough. We demonstrate that ice supersaturation modelling is structured by North Atlantic storm systems. We link the bias to underling processes being modelled, and gain insight into how the existing data could be used.
George Horner and Edward Gryspeerdt
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 5617–5631, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-5617-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-5617-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This work tracks the life cycle of thin cirrus clouds that flow out of tropical convective storms. These cirrus clouds are found to have a warming effect on the atmosphere over their whole lifetime. Thin cirrus that originate from land origin convection warm more than those of ocean origin. Moreover, if the lifetime of these cirrus clouds increase, the warming they exert over their whole lifetime also increases. These results help us understand how these clouds might change in a future climate.
Oliver G. A. Driver, Marc E. J. Stettler, and Edward Gryspeerdt
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 18, 1115–1134, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-1115-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-1115-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Contrails (clouds caused by planes) play a large role in the climate warming caused by aviation. Satellites are a good tool to validate modelled impact estimates. Many contrails are either too narrow or too disperse to detect. This work shows that only around half of contrails are observable but that the most climatically important are easier to detect. It supports the use of satellites for contrail observation but highlights the need for observability considerations for specific applications.
Harri Kokkola, Juha Tonttila, Silvia M. Calderón, Sami Romakkaniemi, Antti Lipponen, Aapo Peräkorpi, Tero Mielonen, Edward Gryspeerdt, Timo Henrik Virtanen, Pekka Kolmonen, and Antti Arola
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 1533–1543, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1533-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1533-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Understanding how atmospheric aerosols affect clouds is a scientific challenge. One question is how aerosols affects the amount of cloud water. We used a cloud-scale model to study these effects on marine clouds. The study showed that variations in cloud properties and instrument noise can cause bias in satellite-derived cloud water content. However, our results suggest that for similar weather conditions with well-defined aerosol concentrations, satellite data can reliably track these effects.
Jade Low, Roger Teoh, Joel Ponsonby, Edward Gryspeerdt, Marc Shapiro, and Marc E. J. Stettler
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 18, 37–56, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-37-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-37-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The radiative forcing due to contrails is of the same order of magnitude as aviation CO2 emissions but has a higher uncertainty. Observations are vital to improve our understanding of the contrail lifecycle, improve models, and measure the effect of mitigation action. Here, we use ground-based cameras combined with flight telemetry to track visible contrails and measure their lifetime and width. We evaluate model predictions and demonstrate the capability of this approach.
Anna Tippett, Edward Gryspeerdt, Peter Manshausen, Philip Stier, and Tristan W. P. Smith
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 13269–13283, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13269-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13269-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Ship emissions can form artificially brightened clouds, known as ship tracks, and provide us with an opportunity to investigate how aerosols interact with clouds. Previous studies that used ship tracks suggest that clouds can experience large increases in the amount of water (LWP) from aerosols. Here, we show that there is a bias in previous research and that, when we account for this bias, the LWP response to aerosols is much weaker than previously reported.
Rebecca J. Murray-Watson and Edward Gryspeerdt
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 11115–11132, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-11115-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-11115-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The formation of mixed-phase clouds during marine cold-air outbreaks is not well understood. Our study, using satellite data and Lagrangian trajectories, reveals that the occurrence of these clouds depends on both time and temperature, influenced partly by the presence of biological ice-nucleating particles. This highlights the importance of comprehending local aerosol dynamics for precise modelling of cloud-phase transitions in the Arctic.
Johannes Mülmenstädt, Edward Gryspeerdt, Sudhakar Dipu, Johannes Quaas, Andrew S. Ackerman, Ann M. Fridlind, Florian Tornow, Susanne E. Bauer, Andrew Gettelman, Yi Ming, Youtong Zheng, Po-Lun Ma, Hailong Wang, Kai Zhang, Matthew W. Christensen, Adam C. Varble, L. Ruby Leung, Xiaohong Liu, David Neubauer, Daniel G. Partridge, Philip Stier, and Toshihiko Takemura
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 7331–7345, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7331-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7331-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Human activities release copious amounts of small particles called aerosols into the atmosphere. These particles change how much sunlight clouds reflect to space, an important human perturbation of the climate, whose magnitude is highly uncertain. We found that the latest climate models show a negative correlation but a positive causal relationship between aerosols and cloud water. This means we need to be very careful when we interpret observational studies that can only see correlation.
George Horner and Edward Gryspeerdt
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 14239–14253, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14239-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14239-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Tropical deep convective clouds, and the thin cirrus (ice) clouds that flow out from them, are important for modulating the energy budget of the tropical atmosphere. This work uses a new method to track the evolution of the properties of these clouds across their entire lifetimes. We find these clouds cool the atmosphere in the first 6 h before switching to a warming regime after the deep convective core has dissipated, which is sustained beyond 120 h from the initial convective event.
Rebecca J. Murray-Watson, Edward Gryspeerdt, and Tom Goren
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 9365–9383, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-9365-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-9365-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Clouds formed in Arctic marine cold air outbreaks undergo a distinct evolution, but the factors controlling their transition from high-coverage to broken cloud fields are poorly understood. We use satellite and reanalysis data to study how these clouds develop in time and the different influences on their evolution. The aerosol concentration is correlated with cloud break-up; more aerosol is linked to prolonged coverage and a stronger cooling effect, with implications for a more polluted Arctic.
Edward Gryspeerdt, Adam C. Povey, Roy G. Grainger, Otto Hasekamp, N. Christina Hsu, Jane P. Mulcahy, Andrew M. Sayer, and Armin Sorooshian
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 4115–4122, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4115-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4115-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The impact of aerosols on clouds is one of the largest uncertainties in the human forcing of the climate. Aerosol can increase the concentrations of droplets in clouds, but observational and model studies produce widely varying estimates of this effect. We show that these estimates can be reconciled if only polluted clouds are studied, but this is insufficient to constrain the climate impact of aerosol. The uncertainty in aerosol impact on clouds is currently driven by cases with little aerosol.
Edward Gryspeerdt, Franziska Glassmeier, Graham Feingold, Fabian Hoffmann, and Rebecca J. Murray-Watson
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 11727–11738, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11727-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11727-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The response of clouds to changes in aerosol remains a large uncertainty in our understanding of the climate. Studies typically look at aerosol and cloud processes in snapshot images, measuring all properties at the same time. Here we use multiple images to characterise how cloud temporal development responds to aerosol. We find a reduction in liquid water path with increasing aerosol, party due to feedbacks. This suggests the aerosol impact on cloud water may be weaker than in previous studies.
Roger Teoh, Ulrich Schumann, Edward Gryspeerdt, Marc Shapiro, Jarlath Molloy, George Koudis, Christiane Voigt, and Marc E. J. Stettler
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 10919–10935, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-10919-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-10919-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Aircraft condensation trails (contrails) contribute to over half of the climate forcing attributable to aviation. This study uses historical air traffic and weather data to simulate contrails in the North Atlantic over 5 years, from 2016 to 2021. We found large intra- and inter-year variability in contrail radiative forcing and observed a 66 % reduction due to COVID-19. Most warming contrails predominantly result from night-time flights in winter.
Edward Gryspeerdt, Daniel T. McCoy, Ewan Crosbie, Richard H. Moore, Graeme J. Nott, David Painemal, Jennifer Small-Griswold, Armin Sorooshian, and Luke Ziemba
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 3875–3892, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-3875-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-3875-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Droplet number concentration is a key property of clouds, influencing a variety of cloud processes. It is also used for estimating the cloud response to aerosols. The satellite retrieval depends on a number of assumptions – different sampling strategies are used to select cases where these assumptions are most likely to hold. Here we investigate the impact of these strategies on the agreement with in situ data, the droplet number climatology and estimates of the indirect radiative forcing.
Hailing Jia, Johannes Quaas, Edward Gryspeerdt, Christoph Böhm, and Odran Sourdeval
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 7353–7372, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7353-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7353-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Aerosol–cloud interaction is the most uncertain component of the anthropogenic forcing of the climate. By combining satellite and reanalysis data, we show that the strength of the Twomey effect (S) increases remarkably with vertical velocity. Both the confounding effect of aerosol–precipitation interaction and the lack of vertical co-location between aerosol and cloud are found to overestimate S, whereas the retrieval biases in aerosol and cloud appear to underestimate S.
Matthew W. Christensen, Andrew Gettelman, Jan Cermak, Guy Dagan, Michael Diamond, Alyson Douglas, Graham Feingold, Franziska Glassmeier, Tom Goren, Daniel P. Grosvenor, Edward Gryspeerdt, Ralph Kahn, Zhanqing Li, Po-Lun Ma, Florent Malavelle, Isabel L. McCoy, Daniel T. McCoy, Greg McFarquhar, Johannes Mülmenstädt, Sandip Pal, Anna Possner, Adam Povey, Johannes Quaas, Daniel Rosenfeld, Anja Schmidt, Roland Schrödner, Armin Sorooshian, Philip Stier, Velle Toll, Duncan Watson-Parris, Robert Wood, Mingxi Yang, and Tianle Yuan
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 641–674, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-641-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-641-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Trace gases and aerosols (tiny airborne particles) are released from a variety of point sources around the globe. Examples include volcanoes, industrial chimneys, forest fires, and ship stacks. These sources provide opportunistic experiments with which to quantify the role of aerosols in modifying cloud properties. We review the current state of understanding on the influence of aerosol on climate built from the wide range of natural and anthropogenic laboratories investigated in recent decades.
Edward Gryspeerdt, Tom Goren, and Tristan W. P. Smith
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 6093–6109, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6093-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6093-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Cloud responses to aerosol are time-sensitive, but this development is rarely observed. This study uses isolated aerosol perturbations from ships to measure this development and shows that macrophysical (width, cloud fraction, detectability) and microphysical (droplet number) properties of ship tracks vary strongly with time since emission, background cloud and meteorological state. This temporal development should be considered when constraining aerosol–cloud interactions with observations.
Johannes Quaas, Antti Arola, Brian Cairns, Matthew Christensen, Hartwig Deneke, Annica M. L. Ekman, Graham Feingold, Ann Fridlind, Edward Gryspeerdt, Otto Hasekamp, Zhanqing Li, Antti Lipponen, Po-Lun Ma, Johannes Mülmenstädt, Athanasios Nenes, Joyce E. Penner, Daniel Rosenfeld, Roland Schrödner, Kenneth Sinclair, Odran Sourdeval, Philip Stier, Matthias Tesche, Bastiaan van Diedenhoven, and Manfred Wendisch
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 15079–15099, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15079-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15079-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Anthropogenic pollution particles – aerosols – serve as cloud condensation nuclei and thus increase cloud droplet concentration and the clouds' reflection of sunlight (a cooling effect on climate). This Twomey effect is poorly constrained by models and requires satellite data for better quantification. The review summarizes the challenges in properly doing so and outlines avenues for progress towards a better use of aerosol retrievals and better retrievals of droplet concentrations.
Cited articles
Ackerman, A., Kirkpatrick, M., Stevens, D., and Toon, O.: The impact of
humidity above stratiform clouds on indirect aerosol climate forcing, Nature, 432,
1014–1017, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03174, 2004. a, b
Albrecht, B. A.: Aerosols, Cloud Microphys. Fract. Cloud. Sci., 245, 1227–1230, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.245.4923.1227, 1989. a
Bennartz, R.: Global assessment of marine boundary layer cloud droplet number
concentration from satellite, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
112, https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007547, 2007. a
Bennartz, R., Shupe, M., Turner, D., Walden, V., Steffan, K., Cox, C., Kulie,
M., Miller, N., and Pettersen, C.: July 2012 Greenland melt extent enhanced
by low-level liquid clouds, Nature, 496, 83–86, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12002,
2013. a
Boeke, R. C., Taylor, P. C., and Sejas, S. A.: On the Nature of the Arctic's
Positive Lapse-Rate Feedback, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48,
e2020GL091109, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL091109, 2021. a
Brenguier, J.-L., Pawlowska, H., Schüller, L., Preusker, R., Fischer, J., and
Fouquart, Y.: Radiative Properties of Boundary Layer Clouds: Droplet
Effective Radius versus Number Concentration, J. Atmos.
Sci., 57, 803–821,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2000)057<0803:RPOBLC>2.0.CO;2, 2000. a
Cavalieri, D. J., Parkinson, C. L., Gloersen, P., and Zwally, H. J.: Sea Ice
Concentrations from Nimbus-7 SMMR and DMSP SSM/I-SSMIS Passive Microwave
Data, Version 1, Boulder, Colorado USA, NASA National Snow and Ice Data
Center Distributed Active Archive Center, Updated yearly, [data set], https://doi.org/10.5067/8GQ8LZQVL0VL, 1996. a, b
Cesana, G., Kay, J. E., Chepfer, H., English, J. M., and de Boer, G.:
Ubiquitous low-level liquid-containing Arctic clouds: New observations and
climate model constraints from CALIPSO-GOCCP, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
39, L20804, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL053385, 2012. a
Chan, M. A. and Comiso, J. C.: Arctic Cloud Characteristics as Derived from
MODIS, CALIPSO, and CloudSat, J. Climate, 26, 3285–3306,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00204.1, 2013. a
Choi, Y.-S., Kim, B.-M., Hur, S.-K., Kim, S.-J., Kim, J.-H., and Ho, C.-H.:
Connecting early summer cloud-controlled sunlight and late summer sea ice in
the Arctic, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119,
11087–11099, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022013, 2014. a
Coopman, Q., Garrett, T. J., Riedi, J., Eckhardt, S., and Stohl, A.: Effects of long-range aerosol transport on the microphysical properties of low-level liquid clouds in the Arctic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 4661–4674, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-4661-2016, 2016. a, b, c, d
Coopman, Q., Garrett, T. J., Finch, D. P., and Riedi, J.: High Sensitivity of
Arctic Liquid Clouds to Long-Range Anthropogenic Aerosol Transport,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 372–381,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL075795, 2018. a, b, c
Curry, J. A. and Ebert, E. E.: Annual Cycle of Radiation Fluxes over the Arctic
Ocean: Sensitivity to Cloud Optical Properties, J. Climate, 5, 1267–1280, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1992)005<1267:ACORFO>2.0.CO;2, 1992. a
de Boer, G., Eloranta, E. W., and Shupe, M. D.: Arctic Mixed-Phase Stratiform
Cloud Properties from Multiple Years of Surface-Based Measurements at Two
High-Latitude Locations, J. Atmos. Sci., 66, 2874–2887, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JAS3029.1, 2009. a
Dong, X., Xi, B., Qiu, S., Minnis, P., Sun-Mack, S., and Rose, F.: A radiation
closure study of Arctic stratus cloud microphysical properties using the
collocated satellite-surface data and Fu-Liou radiative transfer model,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 121, 10175–10198,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025255, 2016. a, b
Feingold, G., Remer, L. A., Ramaprasad, J., and Kaufman, Y. J.: Analysis of
smoke impact on clouds in Brazilian biomass burning regions: An extension of
Twomey's approach, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 106,
22907–22922, https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000732, 2001. a
Fletcher, J. K., Mason, S., and Jakob, C.: A Climatology of Clouds in Marine
Cold Air Outbreaks in Both Hemispheres, J. Climate, 29, 6677–6692,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0783.1, 2016. a
Garrett, T. J., Zhao, C., Dong, X., Mace, G. G., and Hobbs, P. V.: Effects of
varying aerosol regimes on low-level Arctic stratus, Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L17105, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL019928, 2004. a, b, c
Graham, R. M., Hudson, S. R., and Maturilli, M.: Improved Performance of ERA5
in Arctic Gateway Relative to Four Global Atmospheric Reanalyses, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 6138–6147,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL082781, 2019. a
Gryspeerdt, E., Quaas, J., and Bellouin, N.: Constraining the aerosol influence
on cloud fraction, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 121,
3566–3583, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023744, 2016. a, b
Gryspeerdt, E., Goren, T., Sourdeval, O., Quaas, J., Mülmenstädt, J., Dipu, S., Unglaub, C., Gettelman, A., and Christensen, M.: Constraining the aerosol influence on cloud liquid water path, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 5331–5347, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-5331-2019, 2019. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i
Han, Q., Rossow, W. B., Zeng, J., and Welch, R.: Three Different Behaviors of
Liquid Water Path of Water Clouds in Aerosol–Cloud Interactions, J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 726–735,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2002)059<0726:TDBOLW>2.0.CO;2, 2002. a
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Hirahara, S., Horányi, A.,
Muñoz-Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Schepers, D., Simmons,
A., Soci, C., Abdalla, S., Abellan, X., Balsamo, G., Bechtold, P., Biavati,
G., Bidlot, J., Bonavita, M., De Chiara, G., Dahlgren, P., Dee, D.,
Diamantakis, M., Dragani, R., Flemming, J., Forbes, R., Fuentes, M., Geer,
A., Haimberger, L., Healy, S., Hogan, R. J., Hólm, E., Janisková, M.,
Keeley, S., Laloyaux, P., Lopez, P., Lupu, C., Radnoti, G., de Rosnay, P.,
Rozum, I., Vamborg, F., Villaume, S., and Thépaut, J.-N.: The ERA5 global
reanalysis, [data set], Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 146,
1999–2049, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3803, 2020. a, b
Huang, Y., Dong, X., Xi, B., Dolinar, E. K., and Stanfield, R. E.: The
footprints of 16 year trends of Arctic springtime cloud and radiation
properties on September sea ice retreat, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 122, 2179–2193, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD026020,
2017. a, b
Huang, Y., Dong, X., Bailey, D. A., Holland, M. M., Xi, B., DuVivier, A. K.,
Kay, J. E., Landrum, L. L., and Deng, Y.: Thicker Clouds and Accelerated
Arctic Sea Ice Decline: The Atmosphere-Sea Ice Interactions in Spring,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 6980–6989,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL082791, 2019. a, b, c
Intrieri, J. M., Fairall, C. W., Shupe, M. D., Persson, P. O. G., Andreas,
E. L., Guest, P. S., and Moritz, R. E.: An annual cycle of Arctic surface
cloud forcing at SHEBA, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 107, 13–14, https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JC000439,
2002. a
Kay, J., L'Ecuyer, T., Chepfer, H., Loeb, N., Morrison, A., and Cesana, G.:
Recent Advances in Arctic Cloud and Climate Research, Curr. Clim. Change
Rep., 2, 159–169, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-016-0051-9, 2016. a
Kay, J. E. and Gettelman, A.: Cloud influence on and response to seasonal
Arctic sea ice loss, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 114, D18204,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD011773, 2009. a, b, c, d
Khanal, S. and Wang, Z.: Uncertainties in MODIS-Based Cloud Liquid Water Path
Retrievals at High Latitudes Due to Mixed-Phase Clouds and Cloud Top Height
Inhomogeneity, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123,
11154–11172, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD028558, 2018. a, b
Klein, S. A. and Hartmann, D. L.: The Seasonal Cycle of Low Stratiform Clouds,
J. Climate, 6, 1587–1606,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1993)006<1587:TSCOLS>2.0.CO;2, 1993. a
Kolstad, E. W. and Bracegirdle, T. J.: Marine cold-air outbreaks in the future:
an assessment of IPCC AR4 model results for the Northern Hemisphere, Clim.
Dynam., 30, 871–885, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-007-0331-0, 2008. a
L'Ecuyer, T. S., Hang, Y., Matus, A. V., and Wang, Z.: Reassessing the Effect
of Cloud Type on Earth's Energy Balance in the Age of Active Spaceborne
Observations, Part I: Top of Atmosphere and Surface, J. Climate, 32,
6197–6217, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0753.1, 2019. a
Lubin, D. and Vogelmann, A.: A climatologically significant aerosol longwave
indirect effect in the Arctic, Nature, 449, 453–456,
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04449, 2006. a
Maahn, M., Goren, T., Shupe, M. D., and de Boer, G.: Liquid Containing Clouds
at the North Slope of Alaska Demonstrate Sensitivity to Local Industrial
Aerosol Emissions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2021GL094307,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GL094307, 2021. a
Malavelle, F. F., Haywood, J. M., Jones, A., Gettelman, A., Clarisse, L.,
Bauduin, S., Allan, R. P., Karset, I. H. H., Kristjánsson, J. E.,
Oreopoulos, L., Cho, N., Lee, D., Bellouin, N., Boucher, O., Grosvenor,
D. P., Carslaw, K. S., Dhomse, S., Mann, G. W., Schmidt, A., Coe, H.,
Hartley, M. E., Dalvi, M., Hill, A. A., Johnson, B. T., Johnson, C. E.,
Knight, J. R., O'Connor, F. M., Partridge, D. G., Stier, P., Myhre, G.,
Platnick, S., Stephens, G. L., Takahashi, H., and Thordarson, T.: Strong
constraints on aerosol–cloud interactions from volcanic eruptions, Nature,
546, 485–491, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature22974, 2017. a
Mann, H. B. and Whitney, D. R.: On a Test of Whether one of Two Random
Variables is Stochastically Larger than the Other, Ann.
Math. Stat., 18, 50–60, https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177730491, 1947. a
McCoy, I. L., Wood, R., and Fletcher, J. K.: Identifying Meteorological
Controls on Open and Closed Mesoscale Cellular Convection Associated with
Marine Cold Air Outbreaks, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 122,
11678–11702, https://doi.org/0.1002/2017JD027031, 2017. a
Merk, D., Deneke, H., Pospichal, B., and Seifert, P.: Investigation of the adiabatic assumption for estimating cloud micro- and macrophysical properties from satellite and ground observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 933–952, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-933-2016, 2016. a
Michibata, T., Suzuki, K., Sato, Y., and Takemura, T.: The source of discrepancies in aerosol–cloud–precipitation interactions between GCM and A-Train retrievals, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 15413–15424, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-15413-2016, 2016. a, b, c
Morrison, A. L., Kay, J. E., Chepfer, H., Guzman, R., and Yettella, V.:
Isolating the Liquid Cloud Response to Recent Arctic Sea Ice Variability
Using Spaceborne Lidar Observations, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 473–490, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027248, 2018. a, b
Painemal, D. and Zuidema, P.: Assessment of MODIS cloud effective radius and
optical thickness retrievals over the Southeast Pacific with VOCALS-REx in
situ measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 116, D24206,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016155, 2011. a, b
Persson, P.: Onset and end of the summer melt season over sea ice: thermal
structure and surface energy perspective from SHEBA, Clim. Dynam., 39,
1349–1371, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-011-1196-9, 2012. a
Peters, G. P., Nilssen, T. B., Lindholt, L., Eide, M. S., Glomsrød, S., Eide, L. I., and Fuglestvedt, J. S.: Future emissions from shipping and petroleum activities in the Arctic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 5305–5320, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-5305-2011, 2011. a
Pithan, F. and Mauritsen, T.: Arctic amplification dominated by temperature
feedbacks in contemporary climate models, Nat. Geosci., 7, 181–184,
https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2071, 2014. a
Pithan, F., Svensson, G., Caballero, R., Chechin, D., Cronin, T., Ekman, A.,
Neggers, R., Shupe, M., Solomon, A., Tjernström, M., and Wendisch, M.: Role
of air-mass transformations in exchange between the Arctic and mid-latitudes,
Nat. Geosci., 11, 805–812, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0234-1, 2018. a
Platnick, S. and Twomey, S.: Remote sensing the susceptibility of cloud albedo
to changes in drop concentration, Atmos. Res., 34, 85–98,
https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-8095(94)90082-5, 1994. a
Platnick, S., Meyer, K. G., King, M. D., Wind, G., Amarasinghe, N., Marchant,
B., Arnold, G. T., Zhang, Z., Hubanks, P. A., Holz, R. E., Yang, P., Ridgway,
W. L., and Riedi, J.: The MODIS Cloud Optical and Microphysical Products:
Collection 6 Updates and Examples From Terra and Aqua, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, [data set], 55, 502–525, https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2016.2610522,
2017. a, b
Quaas, J., Boucher, O., and Lohmann, U.: Constraining the total aerosol indirect effect in the LMDZ and ECHAM4 GCMs using MODIS satellite data, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 947–955, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-947-2006, 2006. a, b
Quaas, J., Boucher, O., Bellouin, N., and Kinne, S.: Satellite-based estimate
of the direct and indirect aerosol climate forcing, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, D05204,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008962, 2008. a
Quaas, J., Stevens, B., Stier, P., and Lohmann, U.: Interpreting the cloud cover – aerosol optical depth relationship found in satellite data using a general circulation model, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 6129–6135, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-6129-2010, 2010. a
Renfrew, I. A., Barrell, C., Elvidge, A. D., Brooke, J. K., Duscha, C., King,
J. C., Kristiansen, J., Cope, T. L., Moore, G. W. K., Pickart, R. S., Reuder,
J., Sandu, I., Sergeev, D., Terpstra, A., Våge, K., and Weiss, A.: An
evaluation of surface meteorology and fluxes over the Iceland and Greenland
Seas in ERA5 reanalysis: The impact of sea ice distribution, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 147, 691–712,
https://doi.org/0.1002/qj.3941, 2021. a
Rosenfeld, D. and Gutman, G.: Retrieving microphysical properties near the tops
of potential rain clouds by multispectral analysis of AVHRR data, Atmos.
Res., 34, 259–283, https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-8095(94)90096-5, 1994. a
Schmale, J., Arnold, S. R., Law, K. S., Thorp, T., Anenberg, S., Simpson,
W. R., Mao, J., and Pratt, K. A.: Local Arctic Air Pollution: A Neglected but
Serious Problem, Earth's Future, 6, 1385–1412,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2018EF000952, 2018. a, b
Schmale, J., Zieger, P., and Ekman, A.: Aerosols in current and future Arctic
climate, Nat. Clim. Change, 11, 95–105,
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-00969-5, 2021. a
Serreze, M. C. and Barry, R. G.: Processes and impacts of Arctic amplification:
A research synthesis, Glob. Planet. Change, 77, 85–96,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2011.03.004, 2011. a
Shupe, M. D.: Clouds at Arctic Atmospheric Observatories, Part II:
Thermodynamic Phase Characteristics, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 50, 64–661, https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JAMC2468.1, 2011. a
Shupe, M. D. and Intrieri, J. M.: Cloud Radiative Forcing of the Arctic
Surface: The Influence of Cloud Properties, Surface Albedo, and Solar Zenith
Angle, J. Climate, 17, 616–628,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2004)017<0616:CRFOTA>2.0.CO;2, 2004. a, b
Sourdeval, O., C.-Labonnote, L., Baran, A. J., Mülmenstädt, J., and Brogniez,
G.: A methodology for simultaneous retrieval of ice and liquid water cloud
properties, Part 2: Near-global retrievals and evaluation against A-Train
products, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 142,
3063–3081, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2889, 2016. a
Stevens, B. and Feingold, G.: Untangling aerosol effects on clouds and
precipitation in a buffered system, Nature, 461, 607–613,
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08281, 2009. a
Tietze, K., Riedi, J., Stohl, A., and Garrett, T. J.: Space-based evaluation of interactions between aerosols and low-level Arctic clouds during the Spring and Summer of 2008, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 3359–3373, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-3359-2011, 2011. a
Toll, V., Christensen, M., Gassó, S., and Bellouin, N.: Volcano and Ship
Tracks Indicate Excessive Aerosol-Induced Cloud Water Increases in a Climate
Model, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 12492–12500,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL075280, 2017. a
Toll, V., Christensen, M., Quaas, J., and Bellouin, N.: Weak average
liquid-cloud-water response to anthropogenic aerosols, Nature, 572, 51–55,
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1423-9, 2019. a, b, c
Twomey, S.: The Influence of Pollution on the Shortwave Albedo of Clouds,
J. Atmos. Sci., 34, 1149–1152,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1977)034<1149:TIOPOT>2.0.CO;2, 1977. a
Wentz, F. J. and Meissner, T.: AMSR-E/Aqua L2B Global Swath Ocean Products
derived from Wentz Algorithm, Version 2.7, Boulder, Colorado USA, NASA
National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center, [data set],
https://doi.org/10.5067/AMSR-E/AE_OCEAN.002, 2004. a, b
Williams, A. S. and Igel, A. L.: Cloud Top Radiative Cooling Rate Drives
Non-Precipitating Stratiform Cloud Responses to Aerosol Concentration,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2021GL094740,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GL094740, 2021. a
Wood, R. and Hartmann, D. L.: Spatial Variability of Liquid Water Path in
Marine Low Cloud: The Importance of Mesoscale Cellular Convection, J. Climate, 19, 1748–1764, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3702.1, 2006. a
Xue, H. and Feingold, G.: Large-Eddy Simulations of Trade Wind Cumuli:
Investigation of Aerosol Indirect Effects, J. Atmos.
Sci., 63, 1605–1622, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS3706.1, 2006.
a
Zamora, L. M., Kahn, R. A., Huebert, K. B., Stohl, A., and Eckhardt, S.: A satellite-based estimate of combustion aerosol cloud microphysical effects over the Arctic Ocean, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 14949–14964, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-14949-2018, 2018. a
Zhang, Z. and Platnick, S.: An assessment of differences between cloud
effective particle radius retrievals for marine water clouds from three MODIS
spectral bands, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 116, D20215,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016216, 2011. a
Zhao, C. and Garrett, T. J.: Effects of Arctic haze on surface cloud radiative
forcing, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 557–564,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL062015, 2015. a
Zuidema, P., Westwater, E. R., Fairall, C., and Hazen, D.: Ship-based liquid
water path estimates in marine stratocumulus, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 110, D20206,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD005833, 2005. a
Short summary
Clouds are important to the Arctic surface energy budget, but the impact of aerosols on their properties is largely uncertain. This work shows that the response of liquid water path to cloud droplet number increases is strongly dependent on lower tropospheric stability (LTS), with weaker cooling effects in polluted clouds and at high LTS. LTS is projected to decrease in a warmer Arctic, reducing the cooling effect of aerosols and producing a positive, aerosol-dependent cloud feedback.
Clouds are important to the Arctic surface energy budget, but the impact of aerosols on their...
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint