Global Solar Radiation Transfer and Its Loss in the Atmosphere

Bai, J. M.; Zong, Xuemei

doi:10.3390/app11062651

Cited by 22 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 84 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Solar radiation interacts with atmospheric GLPs through two key processes, i.e., (1) absorbing and (2) scattering. They are taken into consideration in our parametric model as follows [ 17 ]: (1) in the photochemical term, the effective absorption of G by GLPs is calculated by means of an extinction term such as e −kWm × cos(Z), where k is the mean absorption coefficient of water vapor, W is the water vapor content in the atmospheric column (cm), m is the optical air mass and Z is the solar zenith angle. The water vapor content is estimated following [ 44 ], with W = 0.02 × E × 30, where E is the water vapor pressure at the surface (hPa).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The water vapor content is estimated following [ 44 ], with W = 0.02 × E × 30, where E is the water vapor pressure at the surface (hPa). The meaning and mechanism of this term in the short wavelength region (i.e., UV, VIS and near infrared, NIR) are fully reported in [ 17 ], emphasizing GLP absorption and their indirect use in CPRs thorough OH radicals and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). (2) In the scattering term, the total scattering of G induced by GLPs is evaluated by an extinction term dependent on the diffuse ratio (S/G) being e −S/G .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is consequently beneficial to investigate solar radiation at typical sites in polar regions. Solar energy triggers changes in many atmospheric gases, liquids and particles (GLPs), especially those involving chemical and photochemical reactions (CPRs) in UV and visible (VIS) spectral regions [ 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerous radiative transfer models and empirical models, extensively used in estimating global, direct and diffuse solar radiation at the ground, are briefly reported in [ 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 ]. Satellite-retrieved upward and downward surface global irradiances were found to be underestimated by 74.0% in 2000–2018, and need to be validated by using surface measurements [ 27 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An empirical model of global solar irradiance (EMGSI) was parametrized to estimate global solar irradiance at Dome C based on solar radiation and meteorological measurements [ 17 , 27 ]. This model was used to fulfill the above aims, and the results at Dome C were compared with those at Sodankylä (67.367° N, 26.630° E, 184 m) in the Arctic and a site at mid-latitude in the northern hemisphere, Qianyanzhou (26°44′48″ N, 115°04′13″ E, 110.8 m, a subtropical Pinus forest, China) ( Section 3 and Section 4 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Long-Term Variations of Global Solar Radiation and Its Potential Effects at Dome C (Antarctica)

Bai

Zong

Lanconelli

et al. 2022

IJERPH

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An empirical model to predict hourly global solar irradiance under all-sky conditions as a function of absorbing and scattering factors has been applied at the Dome C station in the Antarctic, using measured solar radiation and meteorological variables. The calculated hourly global solar irradiance agrees well with measurements at the ground in 2008–2011 (the model development period) and at the top of the atmosphere (TOA). This model is applied to compute global solar irradiance at the ground and its extinction in the atmosphere caused by absorbing and scattering substances during the 2006–2016 period. A sensitivity study shows that the responses of global solar irradiance to changes in water vapor and scattering factors (expressed by water vapor pressure and S/G, respectively; S and G are diffuse and global solar irradiance, respectively) are nonlinear and negative, and that global solar irradiance is more sensitive to changes in scattering than to changes in water vapor. Applying this empirical model, the albedos at the TOA and the surface in 2006–2016 are estimated and found to agree with the satellite-based retrievals. During 2006–2016, the annual mean observed and estimated global solar exposures decreased by 0.05% and 0.09%, respectively, and the diffuse exposure increased by 0.68% per year, associated with the yearly increase of the S/G ratio by 0.57% and the water vapor pressure by 1.46%. The annual mean air temperature increased by about 1.80 °C over the ten years, and agrees with the warming trends for all of Antarctica. The annual averages were 316.49 Wm−2 for the calculated global solar radiation, 0.332 for S/G, −46.23 °C for the air temperature and 0.10 hPa for the water vapor pressure. The annual mean losses of solar exposure due to absorbing and scattering substances and the total loss were 4.02, 0.19 and 4.21 MJ m−2, respectively. The annual mean absorbing loss was much larger than the scattering loss; their contributions to the total loss were 95.49% and 4.51%, respectively, indicating that absorbing substances are dominant and play essential roles. The annual absorbing, scattering and total losses increased by 0.01%, 0.39% and 0.28% per year, respectively. The estimated and satellite-retrieved annual albedos increased at the surface. The mechanisms of air-temperature change at two pole sites, as well as a mid-latitude site, are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%