Puerto Rico African Dust and Clouds Study (PRADACS): Overview of Year 1 Activities

1. Puerto Rico African Dust and Clouds Study (PRADACS): Overview of Year 1 Activities Olga L. Mayol-Bracero Institute for Tropical Ecosystem Studies University of Puerto Rico, Río Piedras Campus Year-1 Summer Intensive Field Phase Project Meeting, Cabezas de San Juan, Fajardo, PR 13.August.2010

2. Outline • Introduction • Summary of Year 1 Activities • Preliminary Results • Participants

3. Summary of Year 1 Activities Test, calibration, and diagnosis year that allowed to begin developing procedures for data analysis and archiving of combined data sets without distractions of a full blown intensive field campaign. Sampling logistics (e.g., shipping, transport, power, and installations). Running things side by side to find out the right sampling times, if we need other measurements,... Train students and technician Short intensive field period (July 22-August 13, 2010) to test and fine tune instruments and methods Y1 was a test run that will allow us to run a much stronger large intensive field period in Y2, ensuring the success of the main intensive field phase (Y2) and of the project.

4. Main Sampling Locations in Puerto Rico CSJ is part of the AERONET, has support from NOAA ESRL, and is a GAW contributing station.

5. CSJ, Puerto Rico (18' 15 N, 66' 30 W)

6. Pico Este (East Peak), Puerto Rico (18o 16' N, 65o 45' W)

7. Participants (Summer 2010) • P. Diaz, M. Rosario – USGS, PR • M. Scholl – USGS, Virginia • P. Formenti – LISA University, France • B. McDowell – Univ of New Hampshire • D. Rosenfeld -Hebrew University, Israel • PI: O. L. Mayol-Bracero - UPR-RP ITES • CoPIs: E. Andrews - UC Boulder and NOAA ESRL, K. Prather - UCSD and Scripps • F. Zurcher – UPR-RP ITES • Andrew McFadden – UPR-RP ITES • M. Zauscher, E. Fitzgerald – UCSD Grad Students • C. Valle, P. Vallejo, G. Santos, H. Rivera, A. Carrion, J. Morales – UPR-RP students (ITES and Chemistry) • R. Capek – Tomas Bata University, Czech Republic • J. Collett, T. Lee, A. Sullivan - CSU, Colorado • W. Eugster – ETH, Switzerland • R. Morales – UPR-RP • F. Scatena – UPenn • I. Matos, S. Rossi, E. Morales, R. Mojica – NWS San Juan, PR

8. Preliminary Results UPR-RP – Mayol-Bracero, Vallejo, Valle UCSD & Scripps – Prather, Fitzgerald (by Mayol-Bracero) ETH - Eugster CSU – Lee (in the afternoon, together with his plans)

9. Preliminary Results: CSJ – Pamela Vallejo – UPR-RP- also see poster to be presented at lunch time

10. Aug/4 Aug/5 C Aug/6

11. Size Distributions: APS SMPS

12. Aerosol optical thickness Ångström Coefficient

13. Preliminary Results: PE – Carlos Valle, UPR-RP- also see poster at lunch time

14. pH

15. LWC – Liquid Water Content

16. LWC-Trends

17. Water Soluble Ions

18. Lost of Data and How to Avoid it: Lost of valuable data because no one looked on a daily basis if system was working properly (e.g., aethalometer, sunphotometer) Possible Solutions (Betsy): whoever is responsible for the instrument needs to look at the data EVERY day of the field campaign Make 'quicklook'  plots of the data like we NOAA ESRL grou do on their website:http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aero/net/cpr/index.html#plots create a webpage linking to all the researcher's webpages with these types of plots (if the researchers put them on a webpage at their home institution).  In that way everyone can at least look at other peoples raw data plots and see if it makes sense in conjunction with their measurements. create a campaign wiki which allows people to submit daily plots and notes. There are also wiki options for logbooks so people could type in field notes. Example: http://freshmeat.net/projects/elog Example from a 6 month aircraft campaign where they made an entry every flight.  For a 1 month field campaign could make an entry every dayhttp://campaign.arm.gov/racoro/flight?d=20090206 Very IMPORTANT to look at the raw data every day and to do preliminary checks both for individual instruments and across instruments - for example does the integrated number concentration from the SMPS = the number concentration from the CPC?  do the aethalometer and psap track each other?

19. Preliminary Results: PE – Kim’s Group (UCSD)

20. UCSD: Data Summary from PRADACS 2010Prof. Kim Prather Research Group Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry Scripps Institution of Oceanography February 4, 2011

21. UCSD Measurements - PRADACS 2010 Ambient aerosol single-particle size and chemical composition ATOFMS 0.2 – 3 μm size range Aerosol size distributions SMPS APS Aerosol cloud condensation nuclei properties CCN counter Scanning supersaturation 0.1-1% PM2.5 Trace gas species SO2 NOx CO O3 Off-line analysis of collected rain and cloud water ATOFMS SMPS APS CCNc Aerosols, Gases, Precipitation

22. APS Particle Size Distribution, 500 nm – 20 um at Pico Este Large increase in particle size and number concentration observed during ADT event. Presence of large particles (2 – 10 um) corresponds to periods of cloud cover.

23. Supermicron Particle Chemistry at Pico Este 2010 Temporal trends of supermicron particle types observed at PE along with wind speed and PM2.5. Most common types were sea salt and dust (see next slide for sample spectra). There is a large increase in fraction of dust particles during the ADT event as well as a large increase in PM2.5.

24. Common Supermicron Particle Types Observed at Pico Este 2010

25. Preliminary Cloud Water Analysis Note similarities to ambient dust types. Maybe more dust in cloud water than in ambient – ambient has more sea salt. Also cloud water may be enriched in nitrate relative to chloride compared to ambient, but needs further analysis.