The potential role of methanesulfonic acid (MSA) in aerosol formation and growth and the associated radiative forcings

Journal Article · Tue Mar 12 00:00:00 EDT 2019 · Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (Online)

DOI:https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-3137-2019· OSTI ID:1499057

Hodshire, Anna L. ; Campuzano-Jost, Pedro ; Kodros, John K.; Croft, Betty ; Nault, Benjamin A. ; Schroder, Jason C.; Jimenez, Jose L. ; Pierce, Jeffrey R.

Atmospheric marine aerosol particles impact Earth's albedo and climate. These particles can be primary or secondary and come from a variety of sources, including sea salt, dissolved organic matter, volatile organic compounds, and sulfur-containing compounds. Dimethylsulfide (DMS) marine emissions contribute greatly to the global biogenic sulfur budget, and its oxidation products can contribute to aerosol mass, specifically as sulfuric acid and methanesulfonic acid (MSA). Further, sulfuric acid is a known nucleating compound, and MSA may be able to participate in nucleation when bases are available. As DMS emissions, and thus MSA and sulfuric acid from DMS oxidation, may have changed since pre-industrial times and may change in a warming climate, it is important to characterize and constrain the climate impacts of both species. Currently, global models that simulate aerosol size distributions include contributions of sulfate and sulfuric acid from DMS oxidation, but to our knowledge, global models typically neglect the impact of MSA on size distributions. In this study, we use the GEOS-Chem-TOMAS (GC-TOMAS) global aerosol microphysics model to determine the impact on aerosol size distributions and subsequent aerosol radiative effects from including MSA in the size-resolved portion of the model. The effective equilibrium vapor pressure of MSA is currently uncertain, and we use the Extended Aerosol Inorganics Model (E-AIM) to build a parameterization for GC-TOMAS of MSA's effective volatility as a function of temperature, relative humidity, and available gas-phase bases, allowing MSA to condense as an ideally nonvolatile or semivolatile species or too volatile to condense. We also present two limiting cases for MSA's volatility, assuming that MSA is always ideally nonvolatile (irreversible condensation) or that MSA is always ideally semivolatile (quasi-equilibrium condensation but still irreversible condensation). We further present simulations in which MSA participates in binary and ternary nucleation with the same efficacy as sulfuric acid whenever MSA is treated as ideally nonvolatile. When using the volatility parameterization described above (both with and without nucleation), including MSA in the model changes the global annual averages at 900 hPa of submicron aerosol mass by 1.2 %, N3 (number concentration of particles greater than 3 nm in diameter) by -3.9 % (non-nucleating) or 112.5 % (nucleating), N80 by 0.8 % (non-nucleating) or 2.1 % (nucleating), the cloud-albedo aerosol indirect effect (AIE) by -8.6 mW m^-2 (non-nucleating) or -26 mW m^-2 (nucleating), and the direct radiative effect (DRE) by -15 mW m^-2 (non-nucleating) or -14 mW m^-2 (nucleating). The sulfate and sulfuric acid from DMS oxidation produces 4–6 times more submicron mass than MSA does, leading to an ~10 times stronger cooling effect in the DRE. But the changes in N80 are comparable between the contributions from MSA and from DMS-derived sulfate/sulfuric acid, leading to comparable changes in the cloud-albedo AIE. Model–measurement comparisons with the Heintzenberg et al. (2000) dataset over the Southern Ocean indicate that the default model has a missing source or sources of ultrafine particles: the cases in which MSA participates in nucleation (thus increasing ultrafine number) most closely match the Heintzenberg distributions, but we cannot conclude nucleation from MSA is the correct reason for improvement. Model–measurement comparisons with particle-phase MSA observed with a customized Aerodyne high-resolution time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometer (AMS) from the ATom campaign show that cases with the MSA volatility parameterizations (both with and without nucleation) tend to fit the measurements the best (as this is the first use of MSA measurements from ATom, we provide a detailed description of these measurements and their calibration). However, no one model sensitivity case shows the best model–measurement agreement for both Heintzenberg and the ATom campaigns. As there are uncertainties in both MSA's behavior (nucleation and condensation) and the DMS emissions inventory, further studies on both fronts are needed to better constrain MSA's past, current, and future impacts upon the global aerosol size distribution and radiative forcing.

• Research Organization: Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, CO (United States)
• Sponsoring Organization: USDOE Office of Science (SC); National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA); National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
• Grant/Contract Number: SC0011780
• OSTI ID: 1499057
• Alternate ID(s): OSTI ID: 1611664
• Journal Information: Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (Online), Journal Name: Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (Online) Vol. 19 Journal Issue: 5; ISSN 1680-7324
• Publisher: Copernicus Publications, EGU
• Country of Publication: Germany
• Language: English

Related Subjects

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
Environmental Sciences & Ecology
Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences