Authors
E. C. Apel, Atmospheric Chemistry Division, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, ColoradoFollow
R. S. Hornbrook, Atmospheric Chemistry Division, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado
A. J. Hills, Atmospheric Chemistry Division, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado
N. J. Blake, University of California, Irvine
M. C. Barth, Atmospheric Chemistry Division, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado
A. Weinheimer, Atmospheric Chemistry Division, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado
C. Cantrell, University of Colorado Boulder
S. A. Rutledge, Colorado State University
B. Basarab, Colorado State University
J. Crawford, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia
G. Diskin, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia
C. R. Homeyer, Atmospheric Chemistry Division, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado
T. Campos, Atmospheric Chemistry Division, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado,
F. Flocke, Atmospheric Chemistry Division, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado,
A. Fried, University of Colorado Boulder
D. R. Blake, University of California, IrvineFollow
W. Brune, Pennsylvania State University - Main Campus
I. Pollack, Chemical Sciences Division, Earth System Research Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, Colorado
J. Peischl, Chemical Sciences Division, Earth System Research Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, Colorado
T. Ryerson, Chemical Sciences Division, Earth System Research Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, Colorado
P. O. Wennberg, Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California,
J. D. Crounse, Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California
A. Wisthaler, University of Oslo
T. Mikoviny, University of Oslo
G. Huey, School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia
B. Heikes, University of Rhode Island
D. O'Sullivan, United States Naval Academy, Annapolis, Maryland
D. D. Riemer, University of Miami
Date of this Version
2015
Citation
Apel, E. C., et al. (2015), Upper tropospheric ozone production from lightning NOx-impacted convection: Smoke ingestion case study from the DC3 campaign, J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 120, 2505–2523
Abstract
As part of the Deep Convective Cloud and Chemistry (DC3) experiment, the National Science Foundation/National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) Gulfstream-V (GV) and NASA DC-8 research aircraft probed the chemical composition of the inflow and outflow of two convective storms (north storm, NS, south storm, SS) originating in the Colorado region on 22 June 2012, a time when the High Park wildfire was active in the area. A wide range of trace species were measured on board both aircraft including biomass burning (BB) tracers hydrogen cyanide (HCN) and acetonitrile (ACN). Acrolein, a much shorter lived tracer for BB, was also quantified on the GV. The data demonstrated that the NS had ingested fresh smoke from the High Park fire and as a consequence had a higher VOC OH reactivity than the SS. The SS lofted aged fire tracers along with other boundary layer ozone precursors and was more impacted by lightning NOx (LNOx) than the NS. The NCAR master mechanism box model was initialized with measurements made in the outflow of the two storms. The NS and SS were predicted to produce 11 and 14 ppbv of O3, respectively, downwind of the storm over 2 days. Sensitivity tests revealed that the ozone production potential of the SS was highly dependent on LNOx. Normalized excess mixing ratios, ΔX/ΔCO, for HCN and ACN were determined in both the fire plume and the storm outflow and found to be 7.0 ± 0.5 and 2.3 ± 0.5 pptv ppbv-1, respectively, and 1.4 ± 0.3 pptv ppbv-1 for acrolein in the outflow only.
Comments
U.S. Government Work