Recent Unusual Arctic-Boreal Zone Meteorology & GMAO Arctic Mission Support
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
G Partyka↗
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “Arctic”
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Improving Earth System Models: What Can Be Learned from the Arctic-Boreal Region? As Part of the Arctic-Boreal Vulnerability Experiment
No abstract provided
Braghiere, Renato↗
Is the High Droplet Number Density of Late Spring Arctic Water Clouds an Indication of Snow/Ice Algae – Cloud – Arctic Melting Feedback?
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Yongxiang Hu↗
Reviews and syntheses: Arctic fire regimes and emissions in the 21st century
In recent years, the pan-Arctic region has experienced increasingly extreme fire seasons. Fires in the northern high latitudes are driven by current and future climate change, lightning, fuel conditions, and human activity. In this context, conceptualizing and parameterizing current and future Arctic fire regimes will be important for fire and land management as well as understanding current and predicting future fire emissions. The objectives of this review were driven by policy questions identified by the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) Working Group and posed to its Expert Group on Short-Lived Climate Forcers. This review synthesizes current understanding of the changing Arctic and boreal fire regimes, particularly as fire activity and its response to future climate change in the pan-Arctic have consequences for Arctic Council states aiming to mitigate and adapt to climate change in the north. The conclusions from our synthesis are the following. (1) Current and future Arctic fires, and the adjacent boreal region, are driven by natural (i.e. lightning) and human-caused ignition sources, including fires caused by timber and energy extraction, prescribed burning for landscape management, and tourism activities. Little is published in the scientific literature about cultural burning by Indigenous populations across the pan-Arctic, and questions remain on the source of ignitions above 70_ N in Arctic Russia. (2) Climate change is expected to make Arctic fires more likely by increasing the likelihood of extreme fire weather, increased lightning activity, and drier vegetative and ground fuel conditions. (3) To some extent, shifting agricultural land use and forest transitions from forest–steppe to steppe, tundra to taiga, and coniferous to deciduous in a warmer climate may increase and decrease open biomass burning, depending on land use in addition to climate-driven biome shifts. However, at the country and landscape scales, these relationships are not well established. (4) Current black carbon and PM2:5 emissions from wildfires above 50 and 65_ N are larger than emissions from heanthropogenic sectors of residential combustion, transportation, and flaring. Wildfire emissions have increased from 2010 to 2020, particularly above 60_ N, with 56% of black carbon emissions above 65_ N in 2020 attributed to open biomass burning – indicating how extreme the 2020 wildfire season was and how severe future Arctic wildfire seasons can potentially be. (5) What works in the boreal zones to prevent and fight wildfires may not work in the Arctic. Fire management will need to adapt to a changing climate, economic development, the Indigenous and local communities, and fragile northern ecosystems, including permafrost and peatlands. (6) Factors contributing to the uncertainty of predicting and quantifying future Arctic fire regimes include underestimation of Arctic fires by satellite systems, lack of agreement between Earth observations and official statistics, and still needed refinements of location, conditions, and previous fire return intervals on peat and permafrost landscapes. This review highlights that much research is needed in order to understand the local and regional impacts of the changing Arctic fire regime on emissions and the global climate, ecosystems, and pan-Arctic communities.
Arctic↗
Arctic Radiation-Cloud-Aerosol-Surface Interaction eXperiment (ARCSIX)
The Arctic climate system is amidst a transition. Over the last 40 years, the Arctic sea ice pack has transformed from a predominantly thick, multi-year sea ice to a predominantly thin, seasonal sea ice, termed the “New Arctic”. The observed rapid changes in the Arctic sea ice pack are an integral part of the Arctic Amplification phenomenon and represent a response to and a feedback on global climate change. As a result, the role of the Arctic within the global climate system is changing. Substantial uncertainty exists in our understanding of the atmosphere-surface interactions within the Arctic system, limiting our knowledge of the Arctic’s role in the future climate. Advancing our understanding of the Arctic climate system requires (1) measurements of the coupling between radiative processes and sea ice surface properties during summer sea ice melt; (2) measurements of the processes controlling the predominant Arctic cloud regimes and their properties (Fig. 1); and (3) improvements in the ability to monitor Arctic cloud, radiation, and sea ice processes from space. A key challenge is that thin, low clouds that are radiatively important to the Arctic surface energy budget can go undetected (Fig. 1). The Arctic Radiation-Cloud-Aerosol-Surface-Interaction eXperiment (ARCSIX) is an airborne campaign based at the Pituffik Space Base in Greenland from May-August 2024 sponsored by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to address these needs. ARCSIX consists of two airborne measurement campaigns taking place in two 3-week intervals during the early and late sea ice melt season: late May through early June and late July through early August, respectively. ARCSIX science is guided by three broad science questions that encapsulate the key influences of radiation-cloud-aerosol-sea ice coupling and a remote sensing and modeling objective: Science Question 1 (Radiation): What is the impact of the predominant summer Arctic cloud types on the radiative surface energy budget? Science Question 2 (Cloud Life Cycle): What processes control the evolution and maintenance of the predominant cloud regimes in the summertime Arctic? Science Question 3 (Sea Ice): How do the two-way interactions between surface properties and atmospheric forcings affect the sea ice evolution? Remote Sensing and Modeling Objective: Enhance our long-term space-based monitoring and predictive capabilities of Arctic sea ice, clouds, and aerosols.
Patrick Taylor↗
An AeroCom Assessment of Black Carbon in Arctic Snow and Sea Ice
Though many global aerosols models prognose surface deposition, only a few models have been used to directly simulate the radiative effect from black carbon (BC) deposition to snow and sea ice. Here, we apply aerosol deposition fields from 25 models contributing to two phases of the Aerosol Comparisons between Observations and Models (AeroCom) project to simulate and evaluate within-snow BC concentrations and radiative effect in the Arctic. We accomplish this by driving the offline land and sea ice components of the Community Earth System Model with different deposition fields and meteorological conditions from 2004 to 2009, during which an extensive field campaign of BC measurements in Arctic snow occurred. We find that models generally underestimate BC concentrations in snow in northern Russia and Norway, while overestimating BC amounts elsewhere in the Arctic. Although simulated BC distributions in snow are poorly correlated with measurements, mean values are reasonable. The multi-model mean (range) bias in BC concentrations, sampled over the same grid cells, snow depths, and months of measurements, are −4.4 (−13.2 to +10.7) ng/g for an earlier phase of AeroCom models (phase I), and +4.1 (−13.0 to +21.4) ng/g for a more recent phase of AeroCom models (phase II), compared to the observational mean of 19.2 ng/g. Factors determining model BC concentrations in Arctic snow include Arctic BC emissions, transport of extra-Arctic aerosols, precipitation, deposition efficiency of aerosols within the Arctic, and meltwater removal of particles in snow. Sensitivity studies show that the model-measurement evaluation is only weakly affected by meltwater scavenging efficiency because most measurements were conducted in non-melting snow. The Arctic (60-90degN) atmospheric residence time for BC in phase II models ranges from 3.7 to 23.2 days, implying large inter-model variation in local BC deposition efficiency. Combined with the fact that most Arctic BC deposition originates from extra-Arctic emissions, these results suggest that aerosol removal processes are a leading source of variation in model performance. The multi-model mean (full range) of Arctic radiative effect from BC in snow is 0.15 (0.07-0.25) W/sq m and 0.18 (0.06-0.28) W/sq m in phase I and phase II models, respectively. After correcting for model biases relative to observed BC concentrations in different regions of the Arctic, we obtain a multi-model mean Arctic radiative effect of 0.17 W/sq m for the combined AeroCom ensembles. Finally, there is a high correlation between modeled BC concentrations sampled over the observational sites and the Arctic as a whole, indicating that the field campaign provided a reasonable sample of the Arctic.
carbon↗
The Pan-Arctic Vegetation Cover (PAVC) database v1.1
The Pan-Arctic Vegetation Cover (PAVC) database contains synthesized field-data observations of vegetation cover from 978 Arctic Alaska plots with observations from 2010 to 2021. The cover datasets contain plot data at both the plant functional type (PFT) and species-level resolution, with standardized PFT definitions and species names. We synthesized publicly available point-intercept and visual estimate plots from the Arctic Vegetation Archive of Alaska, the Alaska Vegetation Plots Database, the North Slope Science Catalog, and the National Ecological Observatory Network; as well as previously unpublished data from the Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic).Users will find four synthesized datasets, 4 associated data descriptor (dd) files, and 1 metadata file in the PAVC database:synthesized_species_fcover.csv contains fractional cover (fcover) for unique accepted species names, where names include vegetation identified at the family, genus, species, subspecies, and variety levels, as well as general functional types across all 5 data sources. The synthesized_species_fcover_dd.csv accompanies this dataset with header information.synthesized_pft_fcover.csv contains fcover for the following PFTs: non-vascular plants with lichen and bryophyte subcategories, trees with deciduous and evergreen subcategories, shrubs with deciduous and evergreen subcategories, graminoids (grasses), and forbs (herbaceous flowering plants) measured as total cover. Litter and “other” cover are also included as total cover. Additional “types” include water and bare ground, which were measured as top cover. The synthesized_pft_fcover_dd.csv accompanies this dataset with header information.species_pft_checklist.csv is a lookup table containing the translation from a dataset species name to an accepted species name and to a PFT. This table can be used to clarify our species to PFT adjudications, and to aid users in assigning their own PFTs. Any issues found in this checklist should be reported in the Issues tab of our github.survey_unit_information.csv contains auxiliary information about the plots synthesized in this database. It contains useful information for filtering plots of interest based on temporal, geospatial, and contextual information about the plot surveys.flmd.csv contains metadata information about each file in the database.This research was performed as a part of the NGEE Arctic project. The NGEE Arctic project was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research.The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska.Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
Reactive Nitrogen, Ozone and Ozone Production in the Arctic Troposphere and the Impact of Stratosphere-Troposphere Exchange
We analyze the aircraft observations obtained during the Arctic Research of the Composition of the Troposphere from Aircraft and Satellite (ARCTAS) mission together with the GEOS-5 CO simulation to examine O3 and NOy in the Arctic and sub-Arctic region and their source attribution. Using a number of marker tracers and their probability density distributions, we distinguish various air masses from the background troposphere and examine their contribution to NOx, O3, and O3 production in the Arctic troposphere. The background Arctic troposphere has mean O3 of approximately 60 ppbv and NOx of approximately 25 pptv throughout spring and summer with CO decreases from approximately 145 ppbv in spring to approximately 100 ppbv in summer. These observed CO, NOx and O3 mixing ratios are not notably different from the values measured during the 1988 ABLE-3A and the 2002 TOPSE field campaigns despite the significant changes in the past two decades in processes that could have changed the Arctic tropospheric composition. Air masses associated with stratosphere-troposphere exchange are present throughout the mid and upper troposphere during spring and summer. These air masses with mean O3 concentration of 140-160 ppbv are the most important direct sources of O3 in the Arctic troposphere. In addition, air of stratospheric origin is the only notable driver of net O3 formation in the Arctic due to its sustainable high NOx (75 pptv in spring and 110 pptv in summer) and NOy (approximately 800 pptv in spring and approximately 1100 pptv in summer) levels. The ARCTAS measurements present observational evidence suggesting significant conversion of nitrogen from HNO3 to NOx and then to PAN (a net formation of approximately 120 pptv PAN) in summer when air of stratospheric origin is mixed with tropospheric background during stratosphere-to-troposphere transport. These findings imply that an adequate representation of stratospheric O3 and NOy input are essential in accurately simulating O3 and NOx photochemistry as well as the atmospheric budget of PAN in tropospheric chemistry transport models of the Arctic. Anthropogenic and biomass burning pollution plumes observed during ARCTAS show highly elevated hydrocarbons and NOy (mostly in the form of NOx and PAN), but do not contribute significantly to O3 in the Arctic troposphere except in some of the aged biomass burning plumes sampled during spring. Convection and/or lightning influences are negligible sources of O3 in the Arctic troposphere but can have significant impacts in the upper troposphere in the continental sub-Arctic during summer.
Liang, Q.↗
The Arctic Sea Ice Cover of 2016: A Year of Record-Low Highs and High-Than-Expected Lows
The Arctic sea ice cover of 2016 was highly noteworthy, as it featured record low monthly sea ice extents at the start of the year but a summer (September) extent that was higher than expected by most seasonal forecasts. Here we explore the 2016 Arctic sea ice state in terms of its monthly sea ice cover, placing this in the context of the sea ice conditions observed since 2000. We demonstrate the sensitivity of monthly Arctic sea ice extent and area estimates, in terms of their magnitude and annual rankings, to the ice concentration input data (using two widely used datasets) and to the averaging methodology used to convert concentration to extent (daily or monthly extent calculations). We use estimates of sea ice area over sea ice extent to analyse the relative “compactness†of the Arctic sea ice cover, highlighting anomalously low compactness in the summer of 2016 which contributed to the higher-than-expected September ice extent. Two cyclones that entered the Arctic Ocean during August appear to have driven this low-concentration/compactness ice cover but were not sufficient to cause more widespread melt-out and a new record-low September ice extent. We use concentration budgets to explore the regions and processes (thermodynamics/ dynamics) contributing to the monthly 2016 extent/area estimates highlighting, amongst other things, rapid ice intensification across the central eastern Arctic through September. Two different products show significant early melt onset across the Arctic Ocean in 2016, including record-early melt onset in the North Atlantic sector of the Arctic. Our results also show record-late 2016 freeze-up in the central Arctic, North Atlantic and the Alaskan Arctic sector in particular, associated with strong sea surface temperature anomalies that appeared shortly after the 2016 minimum (October onwards). We explore the implications of this low summer ice compactness for seasonal forecasting, suggesting that sea ice area could be a more reliable metric to forecast in this more seasonal, "New Arctic", sea ice regime.
sea ice↗
Observations of high-time-resolution and size-resolved aerosol chemical composition and microphysics in the central Arctic: implications for climate-relevant particle properties
Abstract. Aerosols play a critical role in the Arctic's radiative balance, influencing solar radiation and cloud formation. Limited observations in the central Arctic leave gaps in understanding aerosol dynamics year-round, affecting model predictions of climate-relevant aerosol properties. Here, we present the first annual high-time-resolution observations of submicron aerosol chemical composition in the central Arctic during the Arctic Ocean 2018 (AO2018) and the 2019–2020 Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expeditions. Seasonal variations in the aerosol mass concentrations and chemical composition in the central Arctic were found to be driven by typical Arctic seasonal regimes and resemble those of pan-Arctic land-based stations. Organic aerosols dominated the pristine summer, while anthropogenic sulfate prevailed in autumn and spring under haze conditions. Ammonium, which impacts aerosol acidity, was consistently less abundant, relative to sulfate, in the central Arctic compared to lower latitudes of the Arctic. Cyclonic (storm) activity was found to have a significant influence on aerosol variability by enhancing emissions from local sources and the transport of remote aerosol. Local wind-generated particles contributed up to 80 % (20 %) of the cloud condensation nuclei population in autumn (spring). While the analysis presented herein provides the current central Arctic aerosol baseline, which will serve to improve climate model predictions in the region, it also underscores the importance of integrating short-timescale processes, such as seasonal wind-driven aerosol sources from blowing snow and open leads/ocean in model simulations. This is particularly important, given the decline in mid-latitude anthropogenic emissions and the increase in local ones.
Heutte, Benjamin (ORCID:0000000173727460)↗
The Distribution of Snow Black Carbon observed in the Arctic and Compared to the GISS-PUCCINI Model
In this study, we evaluate the ability of the latest NASA GISS composition-climate model, GISS-E2- PUCCINI, to simulate the spatial distribution of snow BC (sBC) in the Arctic relative to present-day observations. Radiative forcing due to BC deposition onto Arctic snow and sea ice is also estimated. Two sets of model simulations are analyzed, where meteorology is linearly relaxed towards National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) and towards NASA Modern Era Reanalysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) reanalyses. Results indicate that the modeled concentrations of sBC are comparable with presentday observations in and around the Arctic Ocean, except for apparent underestimation at a few sites in the Russian Arctic. That said, the model has some biases in its simulated spatial distribution of BC deposition to the Arctic. The simulations from the two model runs are roughly equal, indicating that discrepancies between model and observations come from other sources. Underestimation of biomass burning emissions in Northern Eurasia may be the main cause of the low biases in the Russian Arctic. Comparisons of modeled aerosol BC (aBC) with long-term surface observations at Barrow, Alert, Zeppelin and Nord stations show significant underestimation in winter and spring concentrations in the Arctic (most significant in Alaska), although the simulated seasonality of aBC has been greatly improved relative to earlier model versions. This is consistent with simulated biases in vertical profiles of aBC, with underestimation in the lower and middle troposphere but overestimation in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere, suggesting that the wet removal processes in the current model may be too weak or that vertical transport is too rapid, although the simulated BC lifetime seems reasonable. The combination of observations and modeling provides a comprehensive distribution of sBC over the Arctic. On the basis of this distribution, we estimate the decrease in snow and sea ice albedo and the resulting radiative forcing. We suggest that the albedo reduction due to BC deposition presents significant space-time variations, with highest mean reductions of 1.25% in the Russian Arctic, which are much larger than those in other Arctic regions (0.39% to 0.64 %). The averaged value over the Arctic north of 66degN is 0.4-0.6% during spring, leading to regional surface radiative forcings of 0.7, 1.1 and 1.0Wm(exp−2) in spring 2007, 2008 and 2009, respectively.
Dou, T.↗
On the Increasing Importance of Air-Sea Exchanges in a Thawing Arctic: A Review
Forty years ago, climate scientists predicted the Arctic to be on of Earth’s most sensitive climate regions and thus extremely vulnerable to increased CO2. The rapid and unprecedented changes observed in the Arctic confirm this prediction, which has consequences that ripple through the global climate system. Especially significant, sea ice loss is altering the exchange of mass, energy, and momentum between the atmosphere and Arctic Ocean. A thick, extensive, and multiyear ice cover has historically limited such exchanges, however, the summertime Arctic Ocean is expected to be nearly ice‐free within 15 years increasing the potential for air‐sea exchange. Changes in surface turbulent fluxes can alter the Arctic surface energy budget, sea ice, clouds, boundary layer temperature and humidity, and atmospheric and oceanic circulations. This paper reviews current knowledge of surface turbulent fluxes across the Arctic Ocean and the known effects on climate. We conclude that Arctic air‐sea energy exchanges are becoming an increasingly consequential factor driving Arctic climate. Arctic Ocean surface turbulent energy exchanges are not smooth and steady but rather irregular and episodic, considering this nature of air‐sea energy exchanges is essential for improving Arctic climate projections. New field data focusing on the episodic nature of air‐sea exchange will accelerate our understanding of Arctic climate change.
Taylor, Patrick C.↗
Clouds in the Arctic Climate System: A Force for Change?
Clouds play a central role in the global climate system through the modulation of Earth’s energy flows and as a mediator of precipitation. In the Arctic, clouds are also a major player; however, the processes that govern cloud evolution in the Arctic differ from most of the other regions of the globe. Thus, clouds are a key “wildcard” within the Arctic climate system that could have a substantial influence on the Arctic climate system response to anthropogenic forcing. What is the role of clouds within the phenomenon known as Arctic Amplification? This is question does not have a clear answer. Clouds seem to be a center to the important processes driving Arctic Amplification (e.g., the atmospheric response to sea ice loss and airmass transformation), however feedback analysis studies indicate that net cloud feedback in the Arctic is small. This seminar discusses the role of clouds within the Arctic Amplification processes reviewing aspects of what we know about Arctic clouds and the uncertainties that limit our ability to model them. Results from recently published and ongoing work are presented that provide an observationally-based estimate of the cloud-sea ice feedback and evaluate cloud properties within models. The goal of this presentation is to ignite a discussion and new collaborations around the best approaches to resolving uncertainties related to the role of clouds with the Arctic system and how to better represent Arctic clouds in models.
Patrick C Taylor↗
Arctic Warming in Response to Regional Aerosol Emissions Reductions
This study examines the Arctic surface air temperature response to regional aerosol emissions reductions using three fully coupled chemistry–climate models: National Center for Atmospheric Research-Community Earth System Model version 1, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory-Coupled Climate Model version 3 (GFDL-CM3) and Goddard Institute for Space Studies-ModelE version 2. Each of these models was used to perform a series of aerosol perturbation experiments, in which emissions of different aerosol types (sulfate, black carbon (BC), and organic carbon) in different northern mid-latitude source regions, and of biomass burning aerosol over South America and Africa, were substantially reduced or eliminated. We find that the Arctic warms in nearly every experiment, the only exceptions being the U.S. and Europe BC experiments in GFDL-CM3 in which there is a weak and insignificant cooling. The Arctic warming is generally larger than the global mean warming (i.e. Arctic amplification occurs), particularly during non-summer months. The models agree that changes in the poleward atmospheric moisture transport are the most important factor explaining the spread in Arctic warming across experiments: the largest warming tends to coincide with the largest increases in moisture transport into the Arctic. In contrast, there is an inconsistent relationship (correlation) across experiments between the local radiative forcing over the Arctic and the simulated Arctic warming, with this relationship being positive in one model (GFDL-CM3) and negative in the other two. Our results thus highlight the prominent role of poleward energy transport in driving Arctic warming and amplification, and suggest that the relative importance of poleward energy transport and local forcing/feedbacks is likely to be model dependent.
Arctic↗
Summertime Transport Pathways from Different Northern Hemisphere Regions into the Arctic
Trace gases and aerosols play an important role in Arctic chemistry and climate. As most Arctic tracers and aerosols are transported from midlatitude source regions, long-range transport into the Arctic is one of the key factors to understand the current and future states of Arctic climate. While previous studies have investigated the airmass fraction and transit time distribution in the Arctic, the actual transport pathways and their underlying dynamics and efficiencies are yet to be understood. In this study, we implement a large ensemble of idealized tagged pulse passive tracers in the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model version 5 to identify and analyze summertime transport pathways from different Northern Hemisphere surface regions into the Arctic. Three different transport pathways are identified as those associated with fast, intermediate and slow time scales. Midlatitude tracers can be transported into the Arctic in the troposphere via the fast transport pathway (~8 days), which moves tracers northward from the source region mainly through transient eddies. For the intermediate transport pathway, which happens on 1~3 weeks’ time scales, midlatitude tracers are first zonally transported by the jet stream, and then advected northward into the Arctic over Alaska and northern North Atlantic. Tropical and subtropical tracers are transported into the Arctic lower stratosphere via the slow transport pathway (1~3 months), as the tracers are lifted upward into the tropical and subtropical lower stratosphere, and then transported into the Arctic following the isentropic surfaces.
Trace gases↗
Process drivers, inter-model spread, and a path forward: What do we know about Arctic Amplification?
Over the recent decades, rapid changes have been observed in the Arctic resulting from enhanced surface warming in the Arctic relative to the rest of the globe, a phenomenon called Arctic Amplification. While surface-based amplification of Arctic warming in response to increased CO2 has been established. The driving mechanisms, relevant processes, and the relative roles of local and remote mechanisms to Arctic Amplification remain unclear. Research over the last decade has made it clear that coupling between the atmosphere, sea ice, and ocean play a key role in Arctic Amplification. This presentation summarizes recent research on the fundamental role that atmosphere-sea ice-ocean interactions and energy exchanges play in driving Arctic Amplification, how these interactions manifest as radiative climate feedbacks, and how these processes influence the differences in the projected Arctic climate change across CMIP5 and 6. We hypothesize that models that simulate larger warming do so by generating a larger local atmospheric circulation response that more effectively redistributes energy drawn from the ocean in sea ice retreat regions Arctic-wide and contributing to a larger increase in downwelling long wave radiation. This process is also fundamentally tied to the Arctic lapse rate feedback.
Arctic amplification↗
Tussock tundra surface temperatures, ambient air and incoming photosynthetically active radiation measured at the NGEE Arctic Council site, 2021 - 2023
This dataset contains temperature measurements carried out along two fiber optics cables/lines (150 m each) laid out along the ground at the Next Generation Ecosystem Experiment (NGEE) Arctic site near Council, Alaska. The lines traverse an heterogeneous part of the tussock tundra site including thermokarst features and lichen dominated sections of the tundra. Measurements were done using a Sensornet Oryx DTS, a Distributed Temperature sensor that was installed in September 2021 and taken down in August 2023. The sensor was powered by solar power with data being collected every 30 minutes at 1 m resolution. In addition to these measurements air temperature and incoming photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) are provided. These measurements are co-located with the NGEE Arctic Council eddy flux and meteorological station (AmeriFlux ID US-NGC). Included are six *.csv files (four data files and two reporting format files) and two *.kml files. The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska. Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).
Air temperature↗
Elucidating Processes Controlling Arctic Atmospheric Aerosol Sources, Aging, and Mixing States (Final Report)
Atmospheric aerosols play critical roles in the Earth’s energy budget, directly by scattering or absorbing solar and terrestrial radiation and indirectly by serving as seeds (nuclei) for cloud droplet and ice crystal formation and by depositing on snow and ice surface, thereby changing the surface albedo. These effects are dependent on aerosol particle size and chemical composition and impact the hydrological cycle as well. This project provided single-particle size and chemical composition measurements across the entire annual cycle in the high Arctic and in the Alaskan Arctic during fall – winter, addressing the most significant gaps in Arctic aerosol observational data. These needs were based on recent rapid sea ice loss across the entire Arctic, as well as the major annual delays in sea ice freeze-up during fall in the Chukchi Sea and increased wintertime sea ice fracturing in the Beaufort Sea, both off the North Slope of Alaska. Two DOE Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) field campaigns were conducted for atmospheric aerosol sampling. The Aerosols during the Polar Utqiagvik Night (APUN – ‘snow on ground’ in Iñupiaq) ARM field campaign at Utqagivik, Alaska was conducted from Oct. 28 – Dec. 22, 2018. Aerosol sizing instrumentation and a single-particle mass spectrometer were successfully deployed for size-resolved number concentration measurements and measurements of individual particle size and chemical composition, respectively. These results show the influence of locally-produced sea spray aerosol, with high cloud-forming potential, due to delayed sea ice freeze-up in the fall. During the 2019‐2020 international Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition, daily atmospheric aerosol particles were collected aboard the German icebreaker Polarstern in the Central Arctic from Nov. 2019 – Oct. 2020. Sea salt aerosol and marine organics were observed year-round during MOSAiC with varying morphologies and sources. These findings are important because most Arctic models do not include a sea spray aerosol source, despite this source increasing with declining sea ice extent. In addition to collecting new samples and data, this project also conducted further analysis of previously collected single-particle chemical composition measurements within the North Slope of Alaska oil fields and at Utqiaġvik, AK, during Aug. – Sep. 2015 and 2016 field campaigns. This work resulted in the discovery of chemical reactions of oil field combustion emissions occurring within fog droplets across the North Slope of Alaska and forming secondary aerosol, showing the impact of Arctic oil field emissions beyond black carbon aerosol and greenhouse gases. In addition, the distribution of chemical species across the aerosol population within the oil fields was quantified, using these data and a previously development framework. We also presented the first ambient evidence of the collision of two atmospheric particles resulting in formation of an organic-coated ammonium sulfate particle of marine origin, which has implications for cloud formation with declining sea ice extent. Overall, this project has elucidated connections between seawater biogeochemistry, resource extraction activities, atmospheric composition, clouds, and the energy budget of the Arctic region. The results of this project are expected to improve weather and sea ice forecasting for security and development in the Arctic and beyond.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗