Future warming exacerbated by aged-soot effect on cloud formation

Abstract

Clouds play a critical role in modulating the Earth’s radiation balance and climate. Anthropogenic aerosol particles that undergo aging processes, such as soot, aid cloud droplet and ice crystal formation and thus influence the microphysical structure of clouds. However, the associated changes in cloud radiative properties and climate effects remain uncertain and are largely omitted in climate models. Here we present global climate simulations of past and future effects of both ozone-aged soot particles acting as cloud condensation nuclei and sulfuric acid-aged soot particles acting as ice-nucleating particles on the structure and radiative effects of clouds. Under pre-industrial conditions, soot aging led to an increase in thick, low-level clouds that reduced negative shortwave effective radiative forcing by 0.2 to 0.3 W m−2. In the simulations of a future, warmer climate under double pre-industrial atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations, soot aging and compensating cloud adjustments led to a reduction in low-level clouds and enhanced high-altitude cirrus cloud thickness, which influenced the longwave radiative balance and exacerbated the global mean surface warming by 0.4 to 0.5 K. Our findings suggest that reducing emissions of soot particles is beneficial for future climate, in addition to air quality and human health.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: The impact of aged soot on anthropogenic aerosol radiative forcing.
Fig. 2: Global-scale abundance and CCN activation time of soot particles.
Fig. 3: Response of clouds to aged soot in 1 × CO2 and 2 × CO2 simulations.
Fig. 4: The impact of aged soot particles acting as CCN and INPs on cloud properties and ECS.

Data availability

Data are available from ref. 75. DARDAR-Nice_L2-PRO.v1.00 data for the years 2006–2016 can be obtained from the AERIS/ICARE data centre76,77. CCN data used in this study are available from ref. 78. Source data are provided with this paper.

Code availability

The ECHAM-HAMMOZ model is made freely available to the scientific community under the HAMMOZ Software License Agreement, which defines the conditions under which the model can be used. More information can be found at the HAMMOZ website (https://redmine.hammoz.ethz.ch/projects/hammoz, last access: 16 June 2020). Scripts are available from ref. 79.

References

  1. 1.

    Bond, T. C. et al. Bounding the role of black carbon in the climate system: a scientific assessment. J. Geophys. Res. 118, 5380–5552 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Ammann, M. et al. Heterogeneous production of nitrous acid on soot in polluted air masses. Nature 395, 157–160 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Ramanathan, V. & Carmichael, G. Global and regional climate changes due to black carbon. Nat. Geosci. 1, 221–227 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Reddy, M. S. & Boucher, O. Climate impact of black carbon emitted from energy consumption in the world’s regions. Geophys. Res. Lett. 34, L11802 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Janssen, N. A. H. et al. Health Effects of Black Carbon (WHO, 2012).

  6. 6.

    Jacobson, M. Z. Strong radiative heating due to the mixing state of black carbon in atmospheric aerosols. Nature 409, 695–697 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Bond, T. C. & Bergstrom, R. W. Light absorption by carbonaceous particles: an investigative review. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 40, 27–67 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Chung, C. E., Ramanathan, V. & Decremer, D. Observationally constrained estimates of carbonaceous aerosol radiative forcing. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 11624–11629 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Koch, D. et al. Soot microphysical effects on liquid clouds, a multi-model investigation. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 11, 1051–1064 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Lohmann, U. A glaciation indirect aerosol effect caused by soot aerosols. Geophys. Res. Lett. 29, 1052 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Seisel, S., Borensen, C., Vogt, R. & Zellner, R. Kinetics and mechanism of the uptake of N2O5 on mineral dust at 298 K. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 5, 3423–3432 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Ogren, J. A. & Charlson, R. J. Elemental carbon in the atmosphere: cycle and lifetime. Tellus B 35, 241–254 (1983).

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    He, C. et al. Microphysics-based black carbon aging in a global CTM: constraints from HIPPO observations and implications for global black carbon budget. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 16, 3077–3098 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Zhang, R. et al. Variability in morphology, hygroscopicity, and optical properties of soot aerosols during atmospheric processing. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 10291–10296 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Cappa, C. D. et al. Radiative absorption enhancements due to the mixing state of atmospheric black carbon. Science 337, 1078–1081 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Peng, J. F. et al. Markedly enhanced absorption and direct radiative forcing of black carbon under polluted urban environments. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 4266–4271 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Wu, Y., Cheng, T., Zheng, L. & Chen, H. Black carbon radiative forcing at TOA decreased during aging. Sci. Rep. 6, 38592 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Tritscher, T. et al. Changes of hygroscopicity and morphology during ageing of diesel soot. Environ. Res. Lett. 6, 034026 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Pagels, J., Khalizov, A. F., McMurry, P. H. & Zhang, R. Y. Processing of soot by controlled sulphuric acid and water condensation mass and mobility relationship. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 43, 629–640 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Friebel, F. et al. Impact of isolated atmospheric aging processes on the cloud condensation nuclei activation of soot particles. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 19, 15545–15567 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Grimonprez, S. et al. Cloud condensation nuclei from the activation with ozone of soot particles sampled from a kerosene diffusion flame. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 52, 814–827 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Kirpes, R. M. et al. Secondary sulfate is internally mixed with sea spray aerosol and organic aerosol in the winter Arctic. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 18, 3937–3949 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Zelenyuk, A. et al. Airborne single particle mass spectrometers (SPLAT II & miniSPLAT) and new software for data visualization and analysis in a geo-spatial context. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 26, 257–270 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Rosen, H., Novakov, T. & Bodhaine, B. A. Soot in the Arctic. Atmos. Environ. 15, 1371–1374 (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Wendisch, M. et al. The arctic cloud puzzle: using ACLOUD/PASCAL multiplatform observations to unravel the role of clouds and aerosol particles in Arctic amplification. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 100, 841–871 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Hiranuma, N. et al. Chemical characterization of individual particles and residuals of cloud droplets and ice crystals collected on board research aircraft in the ISDAC 2008 study. J. Geophys. Res. 118, 6564–6579 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Hara, K. et al. Mixing states of individual aerosol particles in spring Arctic troposphere during ASTAR 2000 campaign. J. Geophys. Res. 108, 4209 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Zhang, X., Chen, X. & Wang, J. A number-based inventory of size-resolved black carbon particle emissions by global civil aviation. Nat. Commun. 10, 534 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Penner, J. E., Zhou, C., Garnier, A. & Mitchell, D. L. Anthropogenic aerosol indirect effects in cirrus clouds. J. Geophys. Res. 123, 11652–11677 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Kärcher, B. Formation and radiative forcing of contrail cirrus. Nat. Commun. 9, 1824 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Moore, R. H. et al. Biofuel blending reduces particle emissions from aircraft engines at cruise conditions. Nature 543, 411–415 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Mahrt, F. et al. Ice nucleation abilities of soot particles determined with the Horizontal Ice Nucleation Chamber. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 18, 13363–13392 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Bhandari, J. et al. Extensive soot compaction by cloud processing from laboratory and field observations. Sci. Rep. 9, 11824 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Ding, S. et al. Observed interactions between black carbon and hydrometeor during wet scavenging in mixed-phase clouds. Geophys. Res. Lett. 46, 8453–8463 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    China, S., Mazzoleni, C., Gorkowski, K., Aiken, A. C. & Dubey, M. K. Morphology and mixing state of individual freshly emitted wildfire carbonaceous particles. Nat. Commun. 4, 2122 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Mahrt, F. et al. The impact of cloud processing on the ice nucleation abilities of soot particles at cirrus temperatures. J. Geophys. Res. 125, e2019JD030922 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Mahrt, F. et al. Aging induced changes in ice nucleation activity of combustion aerosol as determined by near edge X-ray absorption fine structure (NEXAFS) spectroscopy. Environ. Sci. Process. Impacts 22, 895–907 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Zhao, B. et al. Ice nucleation by aerosols from anthropogenic pollution. Nat. Geosci. 12, 602–607 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Neubauer, D. et al. The global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3—part 2: cloud evaluation, aerosol radiative forcing, and climate sensitivity. Geosci. Model Dev. 12, 3609–3639 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Friebel, F. & Mensah, A. A. Ozone concentration versus temperature: atmospheric aging of soot particles. Langmuir 35, 14437–14450 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Ikhenazene, R. et al. Ice nucleation activities of carbon-bearing materials in deposition mode: from graphite to airplane soot surrogates. J. Phys. Chem. C. 124, 489–503 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Boucher, O. et al. in Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis (eds T. F. Stocker et al.) Ch. 7 (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).

  43. 43.

    Carslaw, K. S. et al. Large contribution of natural aerosols to uncertainty in indirect forcing. Nature 503, 67–71 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Bellouin, N. et al. Bounding global aerosol radiative forcing of climate change. Rev. Geophys. 58, e2019RG000660 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Hamilton, D. S. et al. Reassessment of pre-industrial fire emissions strongly affects anthropogenic aerosol forcing. Nat. Commun. 9, 3182 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Zhu, J. et al. Decrease in radiative forcing by organic aerosol nucleation, climate, and land use change. Nat. Commun. 10, 423 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Carslaw, K. S. et al. Aerosols in the pre-industrial atmosphere. Curr. Clim. Change Rep. 3, 1–15 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Collins, M. et al. in Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis (eds T. F. Stocker et al.) Ch. 12 (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).

  49. 49.

    Gryspeerdt, E. et al. Constraining the aerosol influence on cloud liquid water path. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 19, 5331–5347 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Gettelman, A. & Sherwood, S. C. Processes responsible for cloud feedback. Curr. Clim. Change Rep. 2, 179–189 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Feichter, J., Roeckner, E., Lohmann, U. & Liepert, B. Nonlinear aspects of the climate response to greenhouse gas and aerosol forcing. J. Clim. 17, 2384–2398 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  52. 52.

    Zelinka, M. D., Klein, S. A. & Hartmann, D. L. Computing and partitioning cloud feedbacks using cloud property histograms. Part II: attribution to changes in cloud amount, altitude, and optical depth. J. Clim. 25, 3736–3754 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  53. 53.

    Zhang, D. & Zhang, R. Laboratory investigation of heterogeneous interaction of sulfuric acid with soot. Environ. Sci. Technol. 39, 5722–5728 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  54. 54.

    Marhaba, I. et al. Aircraft and MiniCAST soot at the nanoscale. Combust. Flame 204, 278–289 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Moore, R. H. et al. Mapping the operation of the miniature combustion aerosol standard (Mini-CAST) soot generator. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 48, 467–479 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  56. 56.

    Schill, G. P. et al. Widespread biomass burning smoke throughout the remote troposphere. Nat. Geosci. 13, 422–427 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Shindell, D. et al. Simultaneously mitigating near-term climate change and improving human health and food security. Science 335, 183–189 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  58. 58.

    Ghan, S. J. Technical note: estimating aerosol effects on cloud radiative forcing. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 13, 9971–9974 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  59. 59.

    Kuebbeler, M., Lohmann, U., Hendricks, J. & Kaercher, B. Dust ice nuclei effects on cirrus clouds. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 14, 3027–3046 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  60. 60.

    Joos, H., Spichtinger, P. & Lohmann, U. Influence of a future climate on the microphysical and optical properties of orographic cirrus clouds in ECHAM5. J. Geophys. Res. 115, D19129 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  61. 61.

    Mamakos, A., Khalek, I., Giannelli, R. & Spears, M. Characterization of combustion aerosol produced by a Mini-CAST and treated in a catalytic stripper. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 47, 927–936 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  62. 62.

    Yon, J., Bescond, A. & Ouf, F. X. A simple semi-empirical model for effective density measurements of fractal aggregates. J. Aerosol Sci. 87, 28–37 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  63. 63.

    Popovicheva, O. et al. Ship particulate pollutants: characterization in terms of environmental implication. J. Environ. Monit. 11, 2077–2086 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  64. 64.

    Rau, J. A. Composition and size distribution of residential wood smoke particles. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 10, 181–192 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  65. 65.

    Hudson, P. K. et al. Biomass-burning particle measurements: characteristic composition and chemical processing. J. Geophys. Res. 109, D23S27 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  66. 66.

    Posfai, M., Simonics, R., Li, J., Hobbs, P. V. & Buseck, P. R. Individual aerosol particles from biomass burning in southern Africa: 1. Compositions and size distributions of carbonaceous particles. J. Geophys. Res. 108, 8483 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  67. 67.

    Abegglen, M. et al. Chemical characterization of freshly emitted particulate matter from aircraft exhaust using single particle mass spectrometry. Atmos. Environ. 134, 181–197 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  68. 68.

    Uy, D. et al. Characterization of gasoline soot and comparison to diesel soot: morphology, chemistry, and wear. Tribol. Int. 80, 198–209 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  69. 69.

    Stier, P. et al. The aerosol–climate model ECHAM5-HAM. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 5, 1125–1156 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  70. 70.

    Tegen, I. et al. The global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6.3-HAM2.3—part 1: aerosol evaluation. Geosci. Model Dev. 12, 1643–1677 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  71. 71.

    Khalizov, A. F. et al. Formation of highly hygroscopic soot aerosols upon internal mixing with sulfuric acid vapor. J. Geophys. Res. 114, D05208 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  72. 72.

    Lammel, G. & Novakov, T. Water nucleation properties of carbon-black and diesel soot particles. Atmos. Environ. 29, 813–823 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  73. 73.

    Lohmann, U. et al. Cloud microphysics and aerosol indirect effects in the global climate model ECHAM5-HAM. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 7, 3425–3446 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  74. 74.

    Schultz, M. G. et al. The chemistry–climate model ECHAM6.3-HAM2.3-MOZ1.0. Geosci. Model Dev. 11, 1695–1723 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  75. 75.

    Lohmann, U. et al. Data for the publication “Future warming exacerbated by aged soot effect on cloud formation” (version 1.4). Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3969360 (2020).

  76. 76.

    Sourdeval, O. et al. Ice crystal number concentration estimates from lidar–radar satellite remote sensing—part 1: method and evaluation. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 18, 14327–14350 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  77. 77.

    Sourdeval, O. et al. Ice crystal number concentration estimates from satellite lidar-radar observations (DARDAR-Nice). AERIS https://doi.org/10.25326/09 (2018).

  78. 78.

    Fanourgakis, G. S. et al. Data for the ‘Evaluation of global simulations of aerosol particle and cloud condensation nuclei number, with implications for cloud droplet formation’. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3265866 (2019).

  79. 79.

    Lohmann, U. et al. Scripts for the publication “Future warming exacerbated by aged soot effect on cloud formation” (version 1.4). Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3970436 (2020).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank A. Ekman for her valuable input and feedback, S. Münch for providing his implementation of the cirrus scheme applied in this study and O. Sourdeval for providing multi-annual mean DARDAR NICE data. Funding was provided by the SNSF Ambizione Grant #PZ00P2_161343 (A.A.M. and F.F.), the ETH research grant ETH-25-15-1 (Z.A.K. and F.M.), the SNSF Early Postdoc Mobility Grant No. P2EZP2_191837 (F.M.) and the EU’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme FORCeS Grant No. 821205 (D.N.). The ECHAM-HAMMOZ model is developed by a consortium composed of ETH Zurich, the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Research Center Jülich, the University of Oxford, the Finnish Meteorological Institute and the Leibniz Institute for Tropospheric Research and managed by the Center for Climate Systems Modeling (C2SM) at ETH Zurich. The computing time for this work was supported by the Swiss National Supercomputing Centre (CSCS) under project ID s903 (U.L. and D.N.).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

U.L., Z.A.K. and A.A.M. conceived the idea for the study. U.L. wrote the manuscript with contributions from all authors. F.F. and F.M. developed the parameterizations on which the simulations are based. D.N. and U.L. performed the analysis of the data. U.L. and D.N. discussed the set-up of the simulations with contributions from all authors. D.N. conducted the simulations and prepared all figures, except Fig. 4, which was prepared by F.M. All authors were involved in discussions of results and data interpretation.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ulrike Lohmann.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review information Primary Handling Editors: Clare Davis; Heike Langenberg.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1 Soot aging and warming impact on ICNC.

Simulated ICNC in the 1 x CO2 climate and its modelled change in the future. Zonal, annual mean ICNC per liter of air in the 1xCO2 for the simulations REF (a), and Soot-CCN+INP (b), and their difference (c). Changes in zonal, annual mean ICNC between 2 x CO2 and 1 x CO2 for simulations REF (d), and Soot-CCN+INP (e), and their difference (f). Statistically insignificant changes are marked by dots. Source data

Extended Data Table 1 Climate impact of soot aging.

Shortwave (SW) and longwave (LW) effective radiative forcing (ERF) including both aerosol-radiation (ari) and aerosol-cloud interactions (aci) between present-day (2008) and pre-industrial (1850) times and their interannual standard deviations multiplied by 1.96 for the different simulations performed with ECHAM-HAM (see Fig. 4b). IRFari and cloud effects are computed following Ghan9, using an additional call to the radiation routine for aerosol-free conditions. “Cloud” is the sum of cloud adjustments (semi-direct aerosol effect) and ERFaci. The bottom three rows denote the equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS), the change in precipitation rate and the hydrological sensitivity between the 2 x CO2 and 1 x CO2 simulations (see Fig. 4a) and their interannual standard deviations. Source data

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary text, Figs. 1–4 and Tables 1 and 2.

Supplementary Data 1

Scatterplot Source Data for Supplementary Fig. 1.

Supplementary Data 2

Lineplot Source Data for Supplementary Fig. 2.

Supplementary Data 3

Scatterplot Source Data for Supplementary Fig. 3.

Source data

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lohmann, U., Friebel, F., Kanji, Z.A. et al. Future warming exacerbated by aged-soot effect on cloud formation. Nat. Geosci. 13, 674–680 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-020-0631-0

Download citation

Search

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