Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Predicting concentrations in plumes subject to dry deposition

Abstract

THE source depletion1 estimation of dry deposition from the atmosphere is less accurate than the physically more correct surface depletion method2,3. Several surface depletion models2–9 have been developed but the source depletion method is still used1,10. The errors introduced by using the latter might have important consequences for assessing the impact of deposition from anthropogen sources. Only the recent4–6 studies discussed here quantify the descrepancy between the two deposition methods We suggest that a ratio R, based on a representative measure of the eddy diffusivity, plume height, and the deposition velocity, should be used to discriminate between cases where the source depletion method introduces significant errors and those where the difference between the two methods is negligible.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Van der Hoven, I. in Meteorology and Atomic Energy (ed. Slade, D.) 202–208 (USAEC, TID 24190, 1968).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gotaas, Y. Lecture Note no. 39/76, 1–18 (Norwegian Institute for Air Research, Kjeller, Norway, 1976).

  3. Bolin, B. & Persson, C. Tellus 27, 281–309 (1975).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  4. Berkowicz, R. & Prahm, L. P. Atm. Environ. 12 (in the press).

  5. Horst, T. W. Atm. Environ. 11, 41–46 (1977).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Draxler, R. R. & Elliott, W. P. Atm. Environ. 11, 35–40 (1977).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Scriven, R. A. & Fisher, B. E. A. Atm. Environ. 9, 49–68 (1975).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Monin, A. S. Adv. Geophys. 6, 435–436 (1958).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  9. Smith, F. B. J. atm. Sci. 19, 429–434 (1962).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  10. Reactor Safety Study (Nucl. Regul. Comm., Germantown, Md. WASH-1400, App. VI, 1975).

  11. Pasquill, F. Atmospheric Diffusion (Wiley, New York, 1974).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Calder, K. L. J. Meteor. 18, 413–416 (1961).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Garland, J. A. Atm. Environ. 12 (in the press).

  14. Belot, Y., Baille, A. & Delmas, J. L. Atm. Environ. 10, 89–98 (1976).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Nieuwstadt, F. T. M. in 8th Proc. Int. Tech. Mtg Air Poll. Modelling Appl. (NATO/CCMS, 1977, in the press).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

PRAHM, L., BERKOWICZ, R. Predicting concentrations in plumes subject to dry deposition. Nature 271, 232–234 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1038/271232a0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/271232a0

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing