cc: "francis.zwiers@ec.gc.ca" <francis.zwiers@ec.gc.ca>
date: Mon Apr 18 08:01:43 2005
from: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>
subject: RE: Global warming
to: Francis Zwiers <Francis.Zwiers@ec.gc.ca>, "Fudge, Dennis  WLAP:EX" <Dennis.Fudge@gov.bc.ca>

    Dennis,
       Hopefully Francis' colleague will be able to answer.
    I am also not qualified to answer.
    Cheers
    Phil
   At 21:16 15/04/2005, Francis Zwiers wrote:

     Hi Dennis,
     I do not have the expertise to respond to this question, but I will pass it onto a
     colleague (an expert on aerosols) who may be able to respond.
     Cheers, Francis
     At 14:07 14/04/2005, Fudge, Dennis  WLAP:EX wrote:

     Sorry to bother you, considering your positions, but I thought if anyone had an answer
     for this, you two would be the best bet.
     The following web pages are articles on the transport of black soot to the arctic which
     melts the snow and causes global warming, in which I assume you are already aware of
     this event.
     [1]http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environment/arctic_soot.html
     [2]http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-59690.html

     Now the question of the day.....
     Does this black soot increase or decrease the rate of fresh snow melting?
     Based on what you were learn in school this answer is quite obvious. But, the albedo of
     the ultraviolet light on fresh snow is high, and low for infrared/microwaves. Based on
     Oke, 1987, a reverse exist for soil and vegetation. Which is responsible for melting
     snow, short waves or long waves? Also, the top portion of soot on top of the snow only
     heats up (I believe soot has a low conductivity) and that heat may rise into the air
     rather than being transfer to the snow. I am not certain how efficient that would be
     when dealing with very fine particles. During the spring, I have seen black particles on
     snow but the clean snow surrounding it seem to be melting faster. Polar bears, arctic
     foxes and many other resident arctic and Antarctic animals have white coats. They
     actually absorb more heat from the sun and surrounding environment than darker-colored
     objects. Which could be due to microwaves generating more heat than ultraviolet
     wavelengths. Oke also stated that the maximum absorption of radiation is just below the
     surface during the day which would be the site of maximum heating and highest
     temperature. Coating the surface with fine soot may interfere with this heating.
     Most people don't question this because it seems too obvious to question (Black surface
     in the summer is hotter than a white surface). Perhaps at high solar radiation intensity
     the short waves are the dominant factor and at low solar radiation the infrared is the
     dominant factor. I am not saying that this theory is correct but it may be worth looking
     at further, if it have not already been examined.

     Dennis Fudge
     Air Pollution Meteorologist
     Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection
     250-565-4210
     If you woke up breathing, congratulations! You have another chance!

     ___________________________________________________________
     Francis Zwiers, Chief
     Canadian Ctr for Climate Modelling and Analysis
     Meteorological Service of Canada
     c/o University of Victoria
     PO Box 1700, STN CSC
     Victoria, BC   V8W 2Y2
     Phone: (250)363-8229
     Fax: (250)363-8247
     Web: [3]http://www.cccma.bc.ec.gc.ca

   Prof. Phil Jones
   Climatic Research Unit        Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
   School of Environmental Sciences    Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
   University of East Anglia
   Norwich                          Email    p.jones@uea.ac.uk
   NR4 7TJ
   UK
   ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

