Search

Here we apply new analysis methods and approaches to existing long-term measurement series that provide additional insights into the atmospheric processes that control black carbon (BC) in the Arctic. Based on clustering size distribution data from Zeppelin Observatory for the years 2002–2010, observations classified as 'Polluted' were further investigated based on BC properties. The data were split into two subgroups, and while the microphysical and chemical fingerprints of the two subgroups are very similar, they show larger differences in BC concentration and correlation with the particle size distribution. Therefore, a source–receptor analysis was performed with HYSPLIT 10-days backward trajectories for both subsets. We demonstrate that within this 'Polluted' category, the airmasses that contributed to the largest BC signal at the Zeppelin station are not necessarily associated with traditional transport pathways from Eurasia. Instead, the strongest signal is from a region east of the Ural Mountains across the continent to the Kamchatka Peninsula. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Black carbon (BC), organic carbon (OC), and total carbon (TC) in snow are important for their climatic and cryospheric effects. They are also part of the global carbon cycle. Atmospheric black and organic carbon (including brown carbon) may deposit and darken snow surfaces. Currently, there are no standardized methods for sampling, filtering, and analysis protocols to detect carbon in snow. Here, we describe our current methods and protocols to detect carbon in seasonal snow using the OCEC thermal optical method, a European standard for atmospheric elemental carbon (EC). We analyzed snow collected within and around the urban background SMEARIII (Station for Measuring Ecosystem-Atmosphere Relations) at Kumpula (60° N) and the Arctic GAW (Global Atmospheric Watch) station at Sodankylä (67° N). The median BC, OC, and TC in snow samples (ntot = 30) in Kumpula were 1118, 5279, and 6396 ppb, and in Sodankylä, they were 19, 1751, and 629 ppb. Laboratory experiments showed that error due to carbon attached to a sampling bag (n = 11) was <0.01%. Sonication slightly increased the measured EC, while wetting the filter or filtering the wrong side up indicated a possible sample loss. Finally, we discuss the benefits and drawbacks of OCEC to detect carbon in snow. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]