| 008 |
|
150601n^^^^^^^^xx^||||^o^^^^^|||^u^eng^d |
| 245 |
00 |
|a Influence of future anthropogenic emissions on climate, natural emissions, and air quality |h [electronic resource]. |
| 260 |
|
|a [S.l.] : |b American Geophysical Union, |c 2009. |
| 490 |
|
|a Journal of Geophysical Research Volume 114. |
| 506 |
|
|a Please contact the owning institution for licensing and permissions. It is the user's responsibility to ensure use does not violate any third party rights. |
| 520 |
3 |
|a This study examines the effects of future anthropogenic emissions on climate, and
the resulting feedback to natural emissions and air quality. Speciated sector- and
region-specific 2030 emission factors were developed to produce gas and particle
emission inventories that followed Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES) A1B and
B1 emission trajectories. Current and future climate model simulations were run, in which
anthropogenic emission changes affected climate, which fed back to natural emissions
from lightning (NO, NO2, HONO, HNO3, N2O, H2O2, HO2, CO), soils (dust, bacteria, NO,
N2O, H2, CH4, H2S, DMS, OCS, CS2), the ocean (bacteria, sea spray, DMS, N2O, H2, CH4),
vegetation (pollen, spores, isoprene, monoterpenes, methanol, other VOCs), and
photosynthesis/respiration. New methods were derived to calculate lightning flash rates as a
function of size-resolved collisions and other physical principles and pollen, spore, and
bacteria emissions. Although the B1 scenario was ‘‘cleaner’’ than the A1B scenario, global
warming increased more in the B1 scenario because much A1B warming was masked by
additional reflective aerosol particles. Thus neither scenario is entirely beneficial from a
climate and health perspective, and the best control measure is to reduce warming gases and
warming/cooling particles together. Lightning emissions declined by [approximately]3% in the B1
scenario and [approximately]12% in the A1B scenario as the number of ice crystals, thus charge-separating
bounceoffs, decreased. Net primary production increased by [approximately]2% in both scenarios.
Emissions of isoprene and monoterpenes increased by [approximately]1% in the A1B scenario and 4–5%
in the B1 scenario. Near-surface ozone increased by [approximately]14% in the A1B scenario and
[approximately]4% in the B1 scenario, reducing ambient isoprene in the latter case. Gases from soils
increased in both scenarios due to higher temperatures. Near-surface PM2.5 mass
increased by [approximately]2% in the A1B scenario and decreased by [approximately]2% in the B1 scenario. The
resulting 1.4% higher aerosol optical depths (AODs) in the A1B scenario decreased ocean
wind speeds and thus ocean sea spray and bacteria emissions; [approximately]5% lower AODs in the B1
scenario had the opposite effect. |
| 533 |
|
|a Electronic reproduction. |c Florida International University, |d 2015. |f (dpSobek) |n Mode of access: World Wide Web. |n System requirements: Internet connectivity; Web browser software. |
| 852 |
|
|a dpSobek |c Sea Level Rise |
| 856 |
40 |
|u http://dpanther.fiu.edu/dpService/dpPurlService/purl/FI15052566/00001 |y Click here for full text |
| 992 |
04 |
|a http://dpanther.fiu.edu/sobek/content/FI/15/05/25/66/00001/FI15052566_thm.jpg |
