1 / 16

Assessing the oxidation capacity in Arctic spring

Assessing the oxidation capacity in Arctic spring. Jingqiu Mao, Daniel Jacob, Jenny Fisher, Bob Yantosca, Philippe Le Sager, Claire Carouge Harvard University

zelig
Download Presentation

Assessing the oxidation capacity in Arctic spring

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Assessing the oxidation capacity in Arctic spring Jingqiu Mao, Daniel Jacob, Jenny Fisher, Bob Yantosca, Philippe Le Sager, Claire Carouge Harvard University Xinrong Ren(U Miami), Bill Brune(Penn State), Paul Wennberg(Caltech), Mike Cubison(U Colorado), Jose Jimenez(U Colorado), Ron Cohen(UC Berkeley), Andy Weinheimer(NCAR), Jennifer Olson(NASA Langley), Alan Fried(NCAR), Greg Huey (Gatech)

  2. HOx chemistry in Arctic spring • We are trying to answer these questions: • How important is the heterogeneous processes? • How does the acidity of aerosol phase affect the aqueous chemistry? • What are the major HOx sources and sinks here? • Are transport and wet scavenging affecting the oxidation capacity of Arctic spring?

  3. Arctic Research of the Composition of the Troposphere from Aircraft and Satellites (ARCTAS) Phase I: April 1st ~ April 20th NO,O3: Andy Weinheimer(NCAR) NO2, PAN: Ron Cohen(UC Berkeley) OH & HO2: Bill Brune(Penn State) H2O2 & MHP: Paul Wennberg(Caltech) Aerosol composition: Jose Jimenez(CU) HCHO: Alan Fried(NCAR) Box modeling: Jennifer Olson (Langley) BrO: Greg Huey(Georgia Tech) ARCTAS

  4. GEOS-Chem • V8-01-04 • GEOS-5 assimilated met field with reprocessed cloud OD • FLAMBE emission • Updated reaction rates with JPL06 and IUPAC06 • Updated photolysis cross sections and quantum yield with Fast-JX • 1 year spin up at 2x2.5 degree • Use daily OMI ozone column to calculate photolysis module

  5. Vertical Profile(Observation vs. GEOSChem)

  6. Reconciling the discrepancy for HO2 Calculated impact of BrO on OH and HO2 • 1. BrO? (No) • ~5 ppt only changes OH.HO2 is highly buffered. • 2. NOx? (No) • 1 molecule BrO = 3 molecule NO, 10ppt NO is not enough. • 3. HO2 uptake to aerosol? • Mass accommodation coefficient is unity at low PH condition. • Henry’s law constant exponentially increases with decreasing temperature. HO2 OH Altitude, km 1.46 (Huey) 0.5 1.0 2. With/Without BrO (Courtesy of J. Olson) HO2 aerosol Limiting step: aqueous reaction HO2 (aq)->????

  7. SO4 is as H2SO4 Aerosol composition in Arctic spring SO4 is as NH4HSO4 • HAER+ =2*SO42-+NO3-+Cl--NH4+ • The main form on average for SO4 should be HSO4- (pKa(HSO4-)=2, pH<2). • It could also be another scenario: • Half of aerosols are (NH4)2SO4, half of aerosols are H2SO4. SO4 is as (NH4)2SO4

  8. Fate of HO2 in the aerosol phase HO2(aq) HO2(aq)+O2-(aq)→ H2O2 (g) Fe2+/Cu2++O2-(aq) →H2O2 (g) γ~0.4 in UT HO2(aq)+HSO4-(aq) →SO5- (Cooper and Abbatt, 1996) SO5-+HCOOH/HSO3- → H SO5-(Caro’s acid, stable) H SO5- +HSO3- → SO42- (Jacob, 1986) HO2(aq)+HO2(aq)→ H2O2(aq) H2O2(aq)+H+ → HOOH2+ (Protonated Hydrogen Peroxides, extremely oxidative) HOOH2++RH →ROH2+ (Oiestad, 2001) Surprisingly stable HO2-H2SO4 complex HO2(aq)+H2SO4(aq) → HO2-H2SO4 complex (Miller and Francisco, 2001)

  9. Why do we care H2O2? H2O2+hv • The photolysis of H2O2 is the dominating HOx source in Upper Troposphere of polar spring. How much transport? How much local cycling? • O1D+H2O and the photolysis of HCHO dominates the lower troposphere.

  10. Budget of peroxides(H2O2+CH3OOH) • Are they in steady state in polar region? • Processes to be taken into account: • Chemical Production(HO2+HO2/CH3O2) • Chemical Loss(gas phase, photolysis, reacting with OH) • Chemical Loss(aqueous phase, H2O2+SO2=>SO4) • Transport • Wet scavenging • Dry Deposition

  11. Chemical budget of H2O2 in gas phase PH2O2(g)=k*[HO2]*[HO2] LH2O2(g)=k*[H2O2]*[OH]+J*[H2O2] Does not seem balanced either in observation or in model. What are we missing here?

  12. Circumpolar budget in the model • Design regional domain 60˚N~90˚N, 30 vertical layers(~11km) • Includes gas phase and aqueous chemical production and loss • Transport is calculated by northward fluxes from mid-lat, up-down net fluxes, convective fluxes, turbulence mixing fluxes. • Wet scavenging is calculated by large scale and convective precipitation fluxes for the specified species (co-condensation for H2O2). • Dry deposition is calculated by dry deposition fluxes for the specified species.

  13. Circumpolar budget from April 1st to 20th Chemical lifetime: H2O2:1~2 days MHP: 1~2 days HCHO: 3~6 hrs They are in steady state!

  14. Vertical distribution of each term • Deficit for both H2O2 and MHP in upper troposphere could be compensated by transport if they are in steady state for the whole domain and in lower troposphere. • Negative value for wet deposition could be due to the reevaporation.

  15. Conclusions • Cold temperature and highly acidic aerosols in Arctic spring leads to a totally different HOx chemistry. • A new pathway for HO2 uptake is proposed. • H2O2 becomes the major HOx source in UT of arctic spring. • The aqueous loss of H2O2 becomes very important in lower troposphere. • Transport plays an important role in balancing H2O2 and MHP budget in UT, and thus affecting the oxidation capacity in Arctic spring.

More Related