2011
DOI: 10.1029/2011jd015602
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sea-spray aerosol particles generated in the surf zone

Abstract: [1] To assess the properties of aerosol particles generated over the surf zone, two experiments were held at the pier of Scripps Institution of Oceanography (SIO), La Jolla CA, and at the pier of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Field Research Facility (FRF) in Duck NC. On both sites concentrations of surf-generated sea spray particles, wave parameters and meteorological conditions were measured. The surf-aerosol concentrations in the diameter range 0.2-10 microns were obtained from the difference in aerosol s… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
30
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 69 publications
(150 reference statements)
3
30
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Our observed SO 4 2− SS concentrations only showed a weak correlation with the average wind speed ( P > 0.05, R 2 = 0.03, Figure e) similar to other field studies (Ghahremaninezhad et al, ; Jaeglé et al, ; Lewis & Schwartz, ; Rempillo et al, ; Seguin et al, ). In contrast, maximums in wave peak heights usually corresponded to high SO 4 2− SS concentrations at Baring Head (Figure e), supporting the hypothesis that breaking waves increase sea‐salt aerosol formation near the coast (Jensen et al, ; Monahan et al, ; Van Eijk et al, ). Therefore, we suggest that wave height was more important than wind speed, under low median wind speeds (9.9 ± 3.9 m/s), in generating sea‐salt aerosols at Baring Head during the study period.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 75%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Our observed SO 4 2− SS concentrations only showed a weak correlation with the average wind speed ( P > 0.05, R 2 = 0.03, Figure e) similar to other field studies (Ghahremaninezhad et al, ; Jaeglé et al, ; Lewis & Schwartz, ; Rempillo et al, ; Seguin et al, ). In contrast, maximums in wave peak heights usually corresponded to high SO 4 2− SS concentrations at Baring Head (Figure e), supporting the hypothesis that breaking waves increase sea‐salt aerosol formation near the coast (Jensen et al, ; Monahan et al, ; Van Eijk et al, ). Therefore, we suggest that wave height was more important than wind speed, under low median wind speeds (9.9 ± 3.9 m/s), in generating sea‐salt aerosols at Baring Head during the study period.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 75%
“…2À SS concentrations at Baring Head (Figure 2e), supporting the hypothesis that breaking waves increase sea-salt aerosol formation near the coast (Jensen et al, 1997;Monahan et al, 1986;Van Eijk et al, 2011). Therefore, we suggest that wave height was more important than wind speed, under low median wind speeds (9.9 ± 3.9 m/s), in generating sea-salt aerosols at Baring Head during the study period.…”
Section: 1002/2018gl077353supporting
confidence: 83%
“…During different seasons or at other locations (such as the Oregon coast where there are strong waves and cloudy skies), the wave energy flux F wave may be even more important in the surf zone heat budget. Assuming a planar beach slope and normally incident shallow water waves Thornton and Guza, 1983], L sz = h b ∕ , and the ratio F wave ∕(Q sw L sz ), using (4), becomes…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The COARE 2.5 parameterization for Q lat and Q sen used here does not include depth-limited breaking spray effects. Surf zone depth-limited wave breaking generates spray at least an order of magnitude larger than just offshore [van Eijk et al, 2011]. Thus, surf zone latent and sensible heat fluxes may be under-represented, which could result in the best fit slope above one and net cooling.…”
Section: Sinnett and Feddersenmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, a dedicated mode was added to describe the production of aerosols over the surf zone and their subsequent advection out to sea. 7 These improvements have been released in the ANAM5 series (see middle panel of Figure 1). However, these improvements do not address the contribution of non-marine aerosols.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%