TY - JOUR
T1 - Source-Specific Mass Absorption Efficiencies of Char-EC and Soot-EC Improve Accuracy in Black Carbon Radiative Effect Estimation
AU - Liu, Huikun
AU - Wang, Qiyuan
AU - Tian, Jie
AU - Wang, Jin
AU - Tian, Ruixia
AU - Zhang, Yong
AU - Zhang, Qian
AU - Xue, Yonggang
AU - Xu, Hongmei
AU - Ran, Weikang
AU - Su, Hui
AU - Han, Yongming
AU - Cao, Junji
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.
PY - 2025/4/28
Y1 - 2025/4/28
N2 - Optical properties of elemental carbon (EC) are critical for climate modeling due to its strong light absorption. Elemental carbon consists of char-EC and soot-EC, which differ in mass absorption efficiency (MAE). However, the MAEs of these forms remain underexplored primarily due to the limited methods available for measurement, limiting the accuracy of EC climate impact assessments and leading distortions of EC radiative effect in the temporal and spatial distribution. In this study, we derived MAEs for char-EC and soot-EC using combined modeling methods based on observational data, revealing key differences. Soot-EC generally has higher MAEs than char-EC, except from biomass burning. Meteorological factors, such as relative humidity, also influence the MAEs of char-EC and soot-EC differently. The differences in sources and aging process lead to changes in the mass concentration and MAE of char-EC and soot-EC over time. Ignoring these differences can lead to discrepancies in the radiative effect from −9.1% to 18.7%. This study underscores the importance of considering the char-EC and soot-EC in accurate EC radiative effect estimates, and implies that optimizing the management of different black carbon emission sources would mitigate global warming to varying extents due to the divergence of the char/soot emission ratio and their MAE.
AB - Optical properties of elemental carbon (EC) are critical for climate modeling due to its strong light absorption. Elemental carbon consists of char-EC and soot-EC, which differ in mass absorption efficiency (MAE). However, the MAEs of these forms remain underexplored primarily due to the limited methods available for measurement, limiting the accuracy of EC climate impact assessments and leading distortions of EC radiative effect in the temporal and spatial distribution. In this study, we derived MAEs for char-EC and soot-EC using combined modeling methods based on observational data, revealing key differences. Soot-EC generally has higher MAEs than char-EC, except from biomass burning. Meteorological factors, such as relative humidity, also influence the MAEs of char-EC and soot-EC differently. The differences in sources and aging process lead to changes in the mass concentration and MAE of char-EC and soot-EC over time. Ignoring these differences can lead to discrepancies in the radiative effect from −9.1% to 18.7%. This study underscores the importance of considering the char-EC and soot-EC in accurate EC radiative effect estimates, and implies that optimizing the management of different black carbon emission sources would mitigate global warming to varying extents due to the divergence of the char/soot emission ratio and their MAE.
KW - black carbon
KW - char-EC
KW - direct radiative effect
KW - mass absorption efficiency
KW - soot-EC
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105003150784
U2 - 10.1029/2024JD043079
DO - 10.1029/2024JD043079
M3 - 文章
AN - SCOPUS:105003150784
SN - 2169-897X
VL - 130
JO - Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
JF - Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
IS - 8
M1 - e2024JD043079
ER -