A document by David Nicholas Wagner. Click on the document to view its contents.

The amount of snow on Arctic sea ice impacts the ice mass budget. Wind redistribution of snow into open water in leads is hypothesized to cause significant wintertime snow loss. However, there are no direct measurements of snow loss into Arctic leads. We measured the snow lost in four leads in the Central Arctic in winter 2020. We find, contrary to the general consensus, that under typical winter conditions, minimal snow was lost into leads. However, during a cyclone that delivered warm air temperatures, high winds, and snowfall, 35.0 ± 1.1 cm snow water equivalent (SWE) was lost into a lead (per unit lead area). This corresponded to a removal of 0.7–1.1 cm SWE from the entire surface—∼6–10% of this site’s annual snow precipitation. Warm air temperatures, which increase the length of time that wintertime leads remain unfrozen, may be an underappreciated factor in snow loss into leads.

Natural aerosols and their interactions with clouds remain an important uncertainty within climate models, especially at the poles. Here, we study the behavior of sea salt aerosols (SSaer) in the Arctic and Antarctic within 12 climate models from CMIP6. We investigate the driving factors that control SSaer abundances and show large differences based on the choice of the source function, and the representation of aerosol processes in the atmosphere. Close to the poles, the CMIP6 models do not match observed seasonal cycles of surface concentrations, likely due to the absence of wintertime SSaer sources such as blowing snow. Further away from the poles, simulated concentrations have the correct seasonality, but have a positive mean bias of up to one order of magnitude. SSaer optical depth is derived from the MODIS data and compared to modeled values, revealing good agreement, except for winter months. Better agreement for AOD than surface concentration may indicate a need for improving the vertical distribution, the size distribution and/or hygroscopicity of modeled polar SSaer. Source functions used in CMIP6 emit very different numbers of small SSaer, potentially exacerbating cloud-aerosol interaction uncertainties in these remote regions. For future climate scenarios SSP126 and SSP585, we show that SSaer concentrations increase at both poles at the end of the 21st century, with more than two times mid-20th century values in the Arctic. The pre-industrial climate CMIP6 experiments suggest there is a large uncertainty in the polar radiative budget due to SSaer.

Major tropical volcanic eruptions have emitted large quantities of stratospheric sulphate and are potential sources of stratospheric chlorine although this is less well constrained by observations. This study combines model and ice core analysis to investigate past changes in total column ozone. Historic eruptions are a good analogue for future eruptions as stratospheric chlorine levels have been decreasing since the year 2000. We perturb the pre-industrial atmosphere of a chemistry-climate model with high and low emissions of sulphate and chlorine. The sign of the resulting Antarctic ozone change is highly sensitive to the background stratospheric chlorine loading. In the first year, the response is dynamical, with ozone increases over Antarctica. In the high HCl (10 Tg emission) experiment, the injected chlorine is slowly transported to the polar regions with subsequent chemical ozone depletion. These model results are then compared to measurements of the stable nitrogen isotopic ratio, δ15N(NO−3), from a low snow accumulation Antarctic ice core from Dronning Maud Land (recovered in 2016-17). We expect ozone depletion to lead to increased surface ultraviolet (UV) radiation, enhanced air-snow nitrate photo-chemistry and enrichment in δ15N(NO−3) in the ice core. We focus on the possible ozone depletion event that followed the largest volcanic eruption in the past 1000 years, Samalas in 1257. The characteristic sulphate signal from this volcano is present in the ice-core but the variability in the δ15N(NO−3) dominates any signal arising from changes in UV from ozone depletion. Whether Samalas caused ozone depletion over Antarctica remains an open question.