1992
DOI: 10.1029/92jd00622
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Atmospheric chemistry in the Arctic and subarctic: Influence of natural fires, industrial emissions, and stratospheric inputs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

13
81
1

Year Published

1992
1992
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 124 publications
(95 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
13
81
1
Order By: Relevance
“…5. By grouping the data according to the correlation (negative, positive and non-related), an improved positive correlation R 2 = 0.54 with ∆O3/∆CO = 0.560±0.0156 ppbv/ppbv can be calculated, which is slightly higher than other measurements (the order of 0.3 ppbv/ppbv) at Izaña observatory, Tenerife, by Fischer et al [32] and in eastern North American by Parrish et al [33] and by Chin et al [34], but consistent with observations ranging from 0.17-0.62 and 0.20-0.69 reported by Wofsy et al [35] and by Mauzerall et al [36] observed at surface sites in eastern North America, respectively, as well as 0.4 to 1.0 observed over the eastern United States by Zhang et al [37]. The negative correlation observed during the night hours for CO values over 100 ppbv might indicate a downward transport of the polluted air to the measurement site after photochemical processing or the O3 titration by the NO, associated with the freshly emitted CO.…”
Section: Correlation Between Co and O3supporting
confidence: 57%
“…5. By grouping the data according to the correlation (negative, positive and non-related), an improved positive correlation R 2 = 0.54 with ∆O3/∆CO = 0.560±0.0156 ppbv/ppbv can be calculated, which is slightly higher than other measurements (the order of 0.3 ppbv/ppbv) at Izaña observatory, Tenerife, by Fischer et al [32] and in eastern North American by Parrish et al [33] and by Chin et al [34], but consistent with observations ranging from 0.17-0.62 and 0.20-0.69 reported by Wofsy et al [35] and by Mauzerall et al [36] observed at surface sites in eastern North America, respectively, as well as 0.4 to 1.0 observed over the eastern United States by Zhang et al [37]. The negative correlation observed during the night hours for CO values over 100 ppbv might indicate a downward transport of the polluted air to the measurement site after photochemical processing or the O3 titration by the NO, associated with the freshly emitted CO.…”
Section: Correlation Between Co and O3supporting
confidence: 57%
“…Goode et al (2000) sampled a single fresh Alaskan smoke plume and found an enhancement of ozone within the smoke plume of 7.9%±2.4% three hours after emission. Wofsy et al (1992) and Mauzerall et al (1996) found mixed results: only a third of the aged plumes sampled showed a significant correlation between ozone and CO, with Mauzerall et al (1996) finding an average enhancement ratio of 10%±20%. Observations of highly aged boreal smoke plumes over the Azores, 6-15 days downwind of the fires, have shown a wide variation in ozone enhancement (−40%-90%) with an average around 20% (Honrath et al, M. J.…”
Section: Sourcementioning
confidence: 96%
“…Study Type Location Age (h) Enhancement Ratio Nance et al (1993) Aircraft Alaska < 1 NO x / CO = 1.2% Goode et al (2000) Aircraft Alaska < 1 NO/ CO = 1.4%-1.8% Wofsy et al (1992) Aircraft Alaska, Canada 24-48 NO y / CO = 0.56% Val Surface Azores 150-360 NO y / CO = 0.8% McKeen et al (2002) Model SE US 50 NO y / CO ≥ 0.7% Mauzerall et al, 1996;Wotawa and Trainer, 2000;Real et al, 2007;Leung et al, 2007). Quantitative estimates of these emissions are essential to determining the impact of these fires on tropospheric ozone.…”
Section: Sourcementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Chem. Phys., 11, 3611-3629, 2011 www.atmos-chem-phys.net/11/3611/2011/ T. T. van Leeuwen and G. R. van der Werf: Spatio-temporal variability in emission factors (Hurst et al, 1994;Shirai et al, 2003) and tropical deforestation measurements in Brazil , (b) FTC and CH 4 EF for tropical deforestation measurements in Brazil , and (c) precipitation and CH 4 EF for extratropical forest measurements in Alaska (Laursen et al, 1992;Goode et al, 2000;Wofsy et al, 1992;Nance et al, 1993). 2002. These could account for up to about 33% (r = 0.57), 38% (r = 0.62), 19% (r = 0.43), and 34% (r = 0.58) of the variability for respectively CO, CH 4 , CO 2 , and MCE.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%