Return to search

Which of satellite- or model-based estimates is closer to reality for aerosol indirect forcing?

In their contribution to PNAS, Penner et al. (1) used a climate model to estimate the radiative forcing by the aerosol first indirect effect (cloud albedo effect) in two different ways: first, by deriving a statistical relationship between the logarithm of cloud droplet number concentration, ln Nc, and the logarithm of aerosol optical depth, ln AOD (or the logarithm of the aerosol index, ln AI) for present-day and preindustrial aerosol fields,
a method that was applied earlier to satellite data (2), and, second, by computing the radiative flux perturbation between two simulations with and without anthropogenic aerosol sources. They find a radiative forcing that is a factor of 3 lower in the former approach than in the latter [as Penner et al. (1) correctly noted, only their “inline” results are useful for the comparison].

Identiferoai:union.ndltd.org:DRESDEN/oai:qucosa:de:qucosa:13972
Date January 2011
CreatorsQuaas, Johannes, Boucher, Olivier, Bellouin, Nicolas, Kinne, Stefan
ContributorsUniversität Leipzig, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Met Office Hadley Centre, Max-Planck-Institut für Meteorologie
PublisherNational Acadamy of Sciences
Source SetsHochschulschriftenserver (HSSS) der SLUB Dresden
LanguageEnglish
Detected LanguageEnglish
Typedoc-type:article, info:eu-repo/semantics/article, doc-type:Text
SourceProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (2011), 108, 46, E1099
Rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess

Page generated in 0.0018 seconds