Jacek Piskozub

Institute of Oceanology PAS
Sopot, Poland
Ho Chi Minh City, December 2007
Lecture 2:
Marine aerosol source function:
approaching the consensus
Jacek Piskozub
Hi Chi Minh City lectures, December 2007
 Ecosystem approach to valuation of marine coasts: examples from
Baltic Sea (authored by J. M. Węsławski)
 Marine aerosol source function: approaching the consensus
 Ocean as the sink and source of climatically important gases
 Air sea interaction in the global scale: from multidecadal variability to
Arctic Oscillation
 Climate change threats, Part I: Changes in the climate of the tropic
 Climate change threats, Part II: Arctic climate and global sea level
Air-Sea Interaction Laboratory, IOPAS, Sopot
Assoc Prof. Jacek Piskozub, D.Sc. - Head of the Laboratory
Dr. Violetta Drozdowska
Dr. Tomasz Petelski
Dr. Tymon Zieliński
M. Sc. Agniesznka Ponczkowska (graduate student)
M. Sc. Magda Dynakowska (graduate student)‏
Eng. Mirosław Irczuk
Longin Stojek
Andreas “A review of sea spray generation function for the open ocean”
Mechanisms of marine aerosol generation
Motivation: How far we are from consensus on aerosol fluxes...
Andreas “A review of sea spray generation function for the open ocean”, Skipton, 2004
Andreas “A review of sea spray generation function for the open ocean”
A proposition of getting closer to consensus:
let's delete the outliers and all function that are not U
3
dependant
Anguelova et al. (NRL) “Effects of Environmental Variables in Sea Spray Generation
Function via Whitecap Coverage”
dF
dr
=f U
10
f r W U
10
f r
Various whitecap coverage parametrizations
0.0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Wind speed, U
10
(m s
-1
)
W
h
i
t
e
c
a
p

c
o
v
e
r
a
g
e
,
W
(
%
)
Monahan '71
Wilheit '79
M&O'M '80 RBF
M&O'M '80 OLS
Bondur&Sharkov'82 A
Bondur&Sharkov'82 B
Pandey&Kakar 82
Monahan et al. '83
Spillane et al'86 cold
Spillane et al'86 moder.
Spillane et al'86 warm
M&O'M 86 dT=0 (neutral)
Bortk'87, A+B, cold
Bortk'87, A+B, moder
Bortk'87, A+B, warm
Wu '88
Mon&Woolf'89, A
Monhan'93 visc., A
Monhan'93 visc., B
Asher&Wann'98, A
Hanson&Phillips'99, no <<
Hanson&Phillips'99, all meas
Asher et al.'02
Reising et al. '02, A
Wentz '02 Hpol
Wentz '02 Vpol
Stram&Petel'03 tot
Stram&Petel'03 dev.
Stram&Petel'03 undev.
Villarino et al '03, stable
Villarino et al '03, unst.
R/V Oceania
Foto: Adam Blok
Gradient method: calculating aerosol fluxes
from measured vertical profiles of concentration
using Monin-Obukhov similarity theory
Foto: Adam Blok

)] / ( ) / ( [ ) ( ) (
1 2 * 1 2
L z f L z f N z N z N ÷ = ÷
07 . 0 /
0 / 07 . 0
/ 0
) / ( 2 . 1 25 . 0
/ ln
/ 10 / ln
) / (
3 / 1
÷ <
< < ÷
<
¦
¹
¦
´
¦
+
+
=
÷
L z
L z
L z
L z
L z
L z L z
L z f
C z N z N + = ) ln( ) (
*
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
x 10
6
2
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3
N[1/m
3
]
l o
g
(
z
)
all sizes
N*log(z)+C
0.5-1.0
1.0-1.5
1.5-2.0
2.0-2.5
0 5 10 15
x 10
6
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3
N[1/m
3
]
l
o
g
(
z
)
all sizes
N*log(z)+C
0.5-1.0
1.0-1.5
1.5-2.0
2.0-2.5
10
2
10
4
10
6
10
8
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3
N [1/m
3
]
l
o
g
(
z
)
all sizes
N*log(z)+C
0.5-1.0
1.0-1.5
1.5-2.0
2.0-2.5
2.5-3.0
3.0-3.5
3.5-4.0
4.0-4.5
4.5-5.0
5.0-5.5
5.5-6.0
6.0-6.5
6.5-7.0
7.0-7.5
7.5-8.0
8.5-9.0
F
E
= A < dE >
o
+ B
< dE > ~ M ~ U
3
F
E
=A< U
3
>
o
+B
0 = ÷
u
E M
V
0
2
* 0
u u u M
V
p t = · =
Correlation between U
3
and F
E
for data limited by condition C
0
/U
*
>a
F
E
= A < dE >
o
+ B
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
0.72
0.74
0.76
0.78
0.8
0.82
0.84
0.86
0.88
0.9
r (0.65) = 0.873447
max
r(2/3) = 0.873444
exponent
r
o
3 / 2
5
3
4
2
3
dE a N
h a dE
h a N
d
d
~ ¬
)
`
¹
A ~
A ~
( )
3 / 2
2
0 ` 1
2 / 1 3 / 1
4 / 1
U aH
g
s
w
p
o
p
|
|
.
|

\
|
Summary
-Aerosol emission from open sea areas my be parameterised
with a linear function of dissipation energy in power 2/3
( ) B U aH
g
A F
s
w
E
+
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
3 / 2
2
0 ` 1
2 / 1 3 / 1
4 / 1
p
o
p
-Aerosol emission from Baltic sea surface
may be described as:
were: A=1.52 ; B=1.6 10
-7
Problems to solve:
-Finding a parameterisation of emission
flux for different wave ages
-Verifying the parameterisation using
experimental wave data
Measurement stations of r/v "Oceania" in the Norwegian and
Greenland Seas in recent summers
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
10
1
10
2
10
3
10
4
10
5
10
6
Particle radius r [µm]
F
l
u
x
[
m
-
2
s
-
1
µ
m
-
1
]
U = 10 m/s
dry dep.
Andreas
Smith
Monahan method
gradient aprox.
gradient data
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
10
1
10
2
10
3
10
4
10
5
10
6
Particle radius r [µm]
F
l
u
x
[
m
-
2
s
-
1
µ
m
-
1
]
U = 10 m/s
dry dep.
Andreas
Smith
Monahan method
gradient aprox.
gradient data
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
10
1
10
2
10
3
10
4
10
5
10
6
Particle radius r [µm]
F
l
u
x
[
m
-
2
s
-
1
µ
m
-
1
]
U = 10 m/s
dry dep.
Andreas
Smith
Monahan method
gradient aprox.
gradient data
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
10
1
10
2
10
3
10
4
10
5
10
6
U = 8 m/s
Particle radius r [µm]
F
l
u
x
[
m
-
2
s
-
1
µ
m
-
1
]
dry dep.
Andreas
Smith
Monahan method
gradient aprox.
gradient data
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
10
0
10
1
10
2
10
3
10
4
10
5
10
6
U = 7 m/s
Particle radius r [µm]
F
l
u
x
[
m
-
2
s
-
1
µ
m
-
1
]
dry dep.
Andreas
Smith
Monahan method
gradient aprox.
gradient data
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
10
-1
10
0
10
1
10
2
10
3
10
4
10
5
10
6
10
7
U = 6 m/s
Particle radius r [µm]
F
l
u
x
[
m
-
2
s
-
1
µ
m
-
1
]
dry dep.
Andreas
Smith
Monahan method
gradient aprox.
gradient data
SGF for different win speed: comparison of our North Atlantic
data (stars) and calculated functions to literature functions
Comparison different SGF for 10 m/s wind speed.
Literature results on flux as a function of particle size compared to ours:
Eq. 5.1 are the gradient derived flux results
Eq. 5.7 are results calculated with dry deposition method (used by other authors)
Andreas 2007 (submitted to JGR)
How do we fit? 1/2
Andreas 2007 (submitted to JGR)
How do we fit? 2/2
-180 -120 -60 0 60 120 180
90
60
30
0
-30
-60
-90

Open ocean?



 













Anguelova et al. (NRL) “Effects of Environmental Variables in Sea Spray Generation Function via
Whitecap Coverage”
Range of conditions
307 points
477 points
Anguelova et al. (NRL) “Effects of Environmental Variables in Sea Spray Generation Function via
Whitecap Coverage”
Lewis E. (Brookhaven) “Methods of Determining Sea Salt Aerosol Production Flux
and Their Applicability to Different Size Classes”
Temperature effect?
Sea Spray Source Functions: influence of
temperature
5
o
C
-2
o
C
15
o
C
23
o
C
Lab experiments, Mårtensson et al., JGR 2003
The effect of salinity change on the
number, and size of bubbles
produced from a bucket spill
Note: The ordinate on the
“High Salinity” plot is
compressed by a factor
of 10 compared to the
ordinate on the fresh-
water plot.
See Monahan, Q. Wang,
X. Wang, and Wilson
(1994).See also Carey,
Fitzgerald, Monahan,
and Q. Wang (1993), and
Q. Wang and Monahan
(1995).
Monahan E. C. (Univ. of Connecticut) “Assessing Global Sea Spray Aerosol Production from
Estimates of Global Oceanic Whitecap Coverage”
Circumstantial Evidence that
Organics on the Sea Surface can
Markedly Affect Aerosol Production
Note in this figure from
Woolf and Monahan
(1987, in Aerosols and
Climate, P.V. Hobbs
and M.P. McCormick,
eds) the change in
aerosol production with
time, and with the
presumed development
of a surface slick in the
tank.
• 0.25um < r < 2.5 um
 r > 2.5 um
Monahan E. C. (Univ. of Connecticut) “Assessing Global Sea Spray Aerosol Production from
Estimates of Global Oceanic Whitecap Coverage”
W
A
1/3
and W
B
1/3
vs U
10
 The distinction
between W
A
and
W
B
is quite
apparent from this
plot of Monahan
and Lu (1990)
Distinctions between Spilling Wave Crests (Stage A
Whitecaps) and Decaying Foam Patches (Stage B
Whitecaps)
Monahan E. C. (Univ. of Connecticut) “Assessing Global Sea Spray Aerosol Production from
Estimates of Global Oceanic Whitecap Coverage”
Power Law Expressions for the
Dependence of W
A
and W
B
upon U
10
W
B
= o U
ì
o ì Citation
0.00044 2 Blanchard (1963)
0.0000135 3.4 ECM (1971)
0.000012* 3.3 ECM (1969)
0.00000775 3.23 Tang (1974)
0.00000200 3.75* Wu (1979)
0.00000155 3.75* Wu (1979)
0.0000017 3.75* Wu (1979)
0.00000295 3.52 ECM&IO‟M (1980)
0.00000384 3.41 ECM&IO‟M (1980)
0.0000195 2.55 w.∆T term M&O‟M
(„86)
xxxxxxxx 3.08 IO‟M&ECM (1986)
0.00000637 3.12 Wang (unpub.)
0.0000458 2.47* Wang (unpub.)
W
A
= o U
ì
o ì Citation
0.000000452 3.31 Wang (unpub)
0.00000263 2.90* Wang (unpub.)
0.000000458 3.09 ECM et al
(1988)
0.000000316 3.2 ECM (2001)
Monahan E. C. (Univ. of Connecticut) “Assessing Global Sea Spray Aerosol Production from
Estimates of Global Oceanic Whitecap Coverage”
Subjective analysis
 Intensity threshold;
 A and B stages in oblique view
 High uncertainty:
÷ Up to 30%;
÷ Higher
Stramska and Petelski, 2003
Anguelova et al. (NRL) “Effects of Environmental Variables in Sea Spray Generation Function via
Whitecap Coverage”
Anguelova et al. (NRL) “Effects of Environmental Variables in Sea Spray Generation Function via
Whitecap Coverage”
Alternative method: remote sensing of sea surface
emissivity.
 Same magnitude;
 Different spatial
features:
-180 -120 -60 0 60 120 180
90
60
30
0
-30
-60
-90
Longitude
L
a
t
i
t
u
d
e
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10
Whitecap coverage, W
March 1998
 W ~ U
10
3
-180 -120 -60 0 60 120 180
90
60
30
0
-30
-60
-90
Longitude
L
a
t
i
t
u
d
e
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10
Whitecap coverage, W
Anguelova et al. (NRL) “Effects of Environmental Variables in Sea Spray Generation Function via
Whitecap Coverage”
 Magnitude;
 Trend:
÷ Suppressio
n at high
winds;
÷ Enhanceme
nt at
moderate
winds.
 Variability!
Alternative method: remote sensing of sea surface
emissivity. Validation with previous data
Turbulent fluxes: correlation eddy method (sonic anemometer)
O'Dowd C.E. et al. (Galway) “Primary Marine Aerosol Turbulent Flux Measurements at
Mace Head”
0
1 2 3 4
z

(
c
m
)
0
1
2
3
4
5
5
x(cm)
100 200300 500 1000 200030005000
r(µm)
10
-4
10
-3
10
-2
10
-1
10
0
10
1
u

(
#

µ
m
-
1
)
u
M
(
µ
M
o
l

µ
m
-
1
)
10
-4
10
-3
10
-2
10
-1
u
u
M
Fit
3
u

~

r

-
2
.
8
u

~

r

-
2
.
4

-
0
.
9
u
~
r
Plume bubbles: image and
distribution
Ira Leifer (Marine Science Institute, Goleta, CA) “Bubble Plumes from Breaking
Waves during LUMINY”
The next iteration: Whitecaps and
Bubble Plumes – “the gateleg table”
Rather like the blind-
folded person sizing
up the elephant: The
acoustician grasps
the large, old,
“microbubble”
plumes, while the
camera sees the new
“alpha” plumes
Monahan E. C. (Univ. of Connecticut) “Assessing Global Sea Spray Aerosol Production
from Estimates of Global Oceanic Whitecap Coverage”
Thank you
for attention

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.