4.6 Article

Projected changes in solar UV radiation in the Arctic and sub-Arctic Oceans: Effects from changes in reflectivity, ice transmittance, clouds, and ozone

期刊

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/2014JD021918

关键词

-

资金

  1. Scientific Computing Center at A.U. Th.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ultraviolet-B (UV-B), UV-A, and erythemal solar irradiance over ocean-covered areas north of 55 degrees N are simulated for the past (1950-1960), present (2005-2015), and future (2090-2100) using a radiative transfer model. The simulations focus mainly on the effects of changes in ocean surface reflectivity, cloudiness, and stratospheric ozone. Based on projected changes in sea ice cover and thickness, changes in irradiance transmitted into the ocean are also derived. The input parameters of the radiative transfer model were obtained from four Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 Earth System Models driven by the emission scenarios Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5 and RCP 8.5. Over a large fraction of the area under study, the overall effect from the projected changes in the factors considered is a reduction in the ultraviolet solar irradiance by the end of the 21st century relative to the levels in the 1950s. Increases were projected only for all skies during August for locations below 65 degrees N due to the projected decrease in cloudiness. The reduction in clear-sky UV-A irradiance (on average 4-7% depending on scenario and season) is entirely driven by the reduction in surface reflectivity, while the projected ozone recovery is responsible for a great portion of the reduction in clear-sky UV-B irradiance (10-18% on average). Under all skies, the changes in the monthly mean noontime erythemal irradiance range from +15% to -38%, depending on the location and season. Compared to the 1950s, up to 10 times higher levels of UV-B irradiance are projected to enter large parts of the Arctic Ocean by 2100, mainly because of the partial disappearance of sea ice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据