4.1 Article

Analysis of dust events in 2008 and 2009 using the lidar network, surface observations and the CFORS model

Journal

ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL OF ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES
Volume 49, Issue 1, Pages 27-39

Publisher

KOREAN METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1007/s13143-013-0004-3

Keywords

Asian dust; lidar; PM10; dust transport model; mixing of aerosols

Funding

  1. Ministry of the Environment, Japan [B-1202]
  2. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan [4003]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [20120006, 20120001] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Asian dust events in 2008 (May 24-June 4 in 2008) and in 2009 (March 12-25, October 13-26, and December 15-28 in 2009) were analyzed with the lidar network observations, surface observations in China, Korea, Japan, and Mongolia, and with the chemical transport model CFORS. Transport of Asian dust and mixing of dust with air pollution aerosols were studied. The event of May 24 to June 4 in 2008 was a significant event unusually late in the spring dust season. The dust event of March 12-25, 2009 was an interesting example of elevated dust layer, and transport of dust from the elevated dust layer to the ground by the boundary layer activity was observed with the lidars and surface observations in Japan. The concentration of air pollution aerosols was relatively high during the dust event, and the results suggest that vertical structure as well as transport path is important for the mixing of dust and air pollution aerosols. The dust events in October and December 2009 were examples of dust events in autumn and winter. The online mode CFORS reproduced the observation data generally well, except for the event of May 24 to June 4 in 2008. The results of the fourdimensional variational assimilation of the lidar network data reproduced the dust concentration in Korea and Japan reasonably in that event.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available