{"id":171,"date":"2019-07-29T11:52:33","date_gmt":"2019-07-29T11:52:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.pa.op.dlr.de\/southtrac\/?page_id=171"},"modified":"2021-02-11T14:12:36","modified_gmt":"2021-02-11T14:12:36","slug":"introduction","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.pa.op.dlr.de\/southtrac\/home\/science\/introduction\/","title":{"rendered":"Introduction"},"content":{"rendered":"

Even small variations in the distributions of trace gases, like water vapor and ozone, and thin cirrus clouds in the UTLS strongly impact radiative forcing of the Earth’s climate and surface temperatures, and are of key importance for understanding climate change (e.g. Riese et al., 2012, Solomon et al., 2010). There is also large uncertainty in future changes of ozone and water vapour in the UTLS, limiting the ability to predict the radiative forcing due to stratospheric ozone recovery and related processes during the 21st century: e.g., Bekki et al. (2013) have shown that different chemistry climate models not even agree on the sign of radiative forcing due to ozone recovery because of large uncertainties in modelled ozone changes in the vicinity of the tropopause. The uncertainty in the future development of ozone is further obvious from the observationthat ozone in the lower stratosphere outside the polar regions has declined since 1998 in spite of the changing halogen loading due to the Montreal protocol (Ball et al., 2018). However, a significant part of this decline is caused by dynamics of the UTLS (Chipperfield et al., 2018).
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

Most of the recent studies on the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere (UTLS) focused on the northern hemisphere (NH) or the tropics (e.g. Gettelman et al., 2011). However, satellite observations and model data indicate significant differences of transport processes and composition between the northern and the southern hemisphere (Hegglin et al., 2009; Konopka et al., 2015, Ploeger et al., 2013, Stiller et al., 2012). In the stratosphere the overturning BrewerDobson circulation (BDC) is weaker in the southern hemisphere (SH), whereas the polar vortex is stronger and more persistent in the SH. Therefore, satellite based observations show asymmetries of e.g. SF6 and thus stratospheric mean age in the corresponding seasons in the UTLS (Stiller et al., 2012). The southern hemisphere UTLS (SH-UTLS) further differs from its northern hemispheric counterpart due to the asymmetry in the monsoon circulations with the Asian summer monsoon being the strongest monsoon circulation on Earth (e.g. Park et al., 2009; Pan et al., 2016). As a consequence hemispheric differences of water vapour have been observed (Randel and Jensen, 2013) which are further related to differences in cross tropopause exchange (Hegglin et al., 2009, Grise et al., 2010, Ploeger et al., 2015). Exchange and coupling processes at the midlatitude tropopause are largely determined by strengths and locations of the jet streams, which are different in both hemispheres, due to the different distribution of wave breaking regions. In addition the hemispheric differences of anthropogenic emission sources such as biomass and fossil fuel burning have an impact on the SH-UTLS which is chemically different from the northern hemisphere.<\/span><\/p>\n

Another important objective with major differences between the northern and southern hemisphere is gravity wave dynamics. Comparisons of stratospheric zonal-mean absolute GW momentum fluxes (GWMFs) from GCM predictions and global satellite data reveal a large variability between currently used GW parametrizations. Some features are reproduced reasonably well in terms of magnitudes and the latitudinal dependence, but there are still large deviations. Particular deviations are the \u201dgap\u201c in simulated zonal mean GWMFs near 60\u00b0S in winter (Geller et al. 2013, their Fig. 8), and the large simulated maxima above mountainous regions which are not observed by satellites such as SABER and HIRDLS (Geller et al. 2013, their Fig. 5).<\/span><\/p>\n

Most GCMs exhibit large systematic biases in the simulation of the SH polar stratospheric circulation. These biases are known as the \u201dcold pole bias\u201d occurring, e.g., in the Canadian Middle Atmosphere Model (CMAM) or the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model (WACCM) (SPARC CCMVal 2010, Butchart et al. 2011) as they underestimate the polar stratospheric temperatures. Due to isolation of the cold stratospheric air and the weak PW activity, there are significant late biases in the simulated spring-time breakups of the SH vortex. <\/span>Most likely, the simplified representations of GWs is a major cause of the biases in the simulation of SH stratospheric climate.<\/span><\/p>\n

Discrepancies in model climatologies can cause different circulation responses to anthropogenic forcing such as increasing GHG concentrations (Alexander et al. 2010, Sigmond and Scinocca 2010, Sigmond and Shepherd 2014) and ozone-depleting substances (ODSs) (Son et al. 2010, Garcia et al. 2017). For the latter, the inappropriate temperatures in the SH polar vortex influence the length of the period over which heterogeneous chemistry is active in austral spring and lead to unreliable predictions of ozone loss and recovery in a changing polar climate (Austin et al. 2003, McLandress and Shepherd 2009). Therefore, an unrealistic downward coupling of strong ozone depletion in austral spring to tropospheric SH summer climate is simulated. In addition, it was shown that details of vortex dynamics have impact on tropospheric responses (Arblaster and Meehl 2006, McLandress et al. 2011, Lin et al. 2016). Thus, changes in stratospheric and tropospheric circulations and chemical ozone depletion might not be correctly projected into a future climate, if the effects of GWs on the model climatology are not captured, that is, parametrized properly in GCMs.<\/span><\/p>\n

McLandress et al. (2012) showed that in a GCM with data assimilation, large analysis increments of zonal winds are found around 60\u00b0S and between 3 and 1 hPa. These increments point to missing GWD in this altitude region. They performed numerical experiments with the free-running model, where GWD was added artificially by uniform subgrid-scale topography centred around 60\u00b0S and obtained more realistic stratospheric winds and higher polar temperatures. In the same spirit, Garcia et al. (2017) enhanced the OGW forcing in the SH by doubling the magnitude of sources. Again, more realistic climatologies of tropospheric and stratospheric winds and temperatures are found. However, Garcia et al. (2017) also showed that instead of modifying the OGWD, a modified parametrization for NOGWs by fronts leads to similar improvements of wind and temperature climatologies. Thus, OGWs likely play an important role, but also other sources could be the origin of the \u201dmissing drag at 60\u00b0S\u201c (de la Camara et al. 2016). Observations show a zonal feature of enhanced GW activity that is often called the GW belt: In the stratospheric PNJ of the SH, satellite and balloon-borne observations indicate high values of GWMFs at around 60\u00b0S (e.g. Ern et al. 2006, Hertzog et al. 2008, Alexander et al. 2010).<\/span><\/p>\n

Generally, the physical origin of the observed belt of enhanced GWMF around 60\u00b0S can be explained by different mechanisms:<\/span><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. The downwind advection and meridional refraction of OGWD from the Southern Andes and the Antarctic Peninsula into the PNJ (Sato et al. 2009).<\/span><\/li>\n
  2. Unresolved OGWs from small islands (Alexander et al. 2009, Alexander and Grimsdell 2013).<\/span><\/li>\n
  3. The generation of secondary GWs generated locally in the breaking region of these primary orographic waves.<\/span><\/li>\n
  4. NOGWs from sources associated with winter storm tracks over the southern oceans (Hendricks et al. 2014).<\/span><\/li>\n
  5. A zonally uniform distribution of small amplitude waves from non-orographic mechanisms such as spontaneous adjustment and jet instability around the edge of the stratospheric PNJ (Hindley et al. 2015).<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    The horizontal propagation of OGWs redistributes the associated fluxes over a broader region and is one of the least studied processes so far. Supporting this idea, Amemiya and Sato (2016), allowing a 3D distribution of the GW forcing, found an enhancement of the westward GW forcing in the SH winter mesosphere above the core of the PNJ. In their study, this enhancement results from the significant latitudinal propagation of parameterized OGWs toward the jet axis which leads to a much smoother distribution of GWMFs. They showed that GWs located at 60\u00b0 S at 1 hPa originate from a broad range of latitudes between 90\u00b0S and 30\u00b0S at the source level. Interestingly, the maximum in the source distribution is located around 60\u00b0 S, though, emphasizing the role of a yet unidentified source.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Summarizing, the problem of parameterizing unresolved GWs and their sensitive interaction with large-scale dynamics is among the most uncertain aspects of climate modelling (Shepherd 2014, and references therein).<\/span><\/p>\n

    Despite the importance of the global UTLS (including the southern hemisphere) field campaigns investigating comprehensively the dynamical and chemical processes relevant for the structure of the SH-UTLS have not yet been performed. The DEEPWAVE project provided new data on specifically the dynamics aspects of gravity waves. The HIPPO and the ATom projects focused mainly on tropospheric composition and most other campaigns were dedicated to the Antarctic vortex mainly at higher altitudes. Measurements from commercial airliners (IAGOS) rarely extend to latitudes south of 35\u00b0S and cover only the lower part of the extratropical lowermost stratosphere. Therefore, we propose a HALO campaign, which addresses open key aspects regarding the SH-UTLS region.<\/span><\/p>\n

    \n

    References<\/h2>\n

    Alexander, M. J., M. Geller, C. McLandress, S. Polavarapu, P. Preusse, F. Sassi, K. Sato, S. Eckermann, M. Ern, A. Hertzog, Y. Kawatani, M. Pulido, T. A. Shaw, M. Sigmond, R. Vincent, and S. Watanabe (2010). \u201cRecent developments in gravity-wave effects in climate models and the global distribution of gravity-wave momentum flux from observations and models\u201d. In: Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. <\/em>136.650, pp. 1103\u20131124. DOI: 10.1002\/qj.637.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Alexander, M. J. and A. W. Grimsdell (2013). \u201cSeasonal cycle of orographic gravity wave occurrence above small islands in the Southern Hemisphere: Implications for effects on the general circulation\u201d. In: J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. <\/em>118.20, pp. 11, 589\u201311, 599. DOI: 10.1002\/2013jd020526.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Amemiya, Arata and Kaoru Sato (2016). \u201cA New Gravity Wave Parameterization Including Three-Dimensional Propagation\u201d. In: J. Met. Soc. Japan <\/em>94.3, pp. 237\u2013256. DOI: 10.2151\/jmsj.2016-013.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Arblaster, Julie M. and Gerald A. Meehl (2006). \u201cContributions of External Forcings to Southern Annular Mode Trends\u201d. In: J. Clim. <\/em>19.12, pp. 2896\u20132905. DOI: 10.1175\/jcli3774.1.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Austin, J., D. Shindell, S. R. Beagley, C. Br\u00fchl, M. Dameris, E. Manzini, T. Nagashima, P. Newman, S. Pawson, G. Pitari, E. Rozanov, C. Schnadt, and T. G. Shepherd (2003). \u201cUncertainties and assessments of chemistry-climate models of the stratosphere\u201d. In: Atmos. Chem. Phys. <\/em>3.1, pp. 1\u201327. DOI: 10.5194\/acp-3-1-2003.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Ball, William T., Justin Alsing, Daniel J. Mortlock, Johannes Staehelin, Joanna D. Haigh, Thomas Peter, Fiona Tum- mon, Rene St\u00fcbi, Andrea Stenke, John Anderson, Adam Bourassa, Sean M. Davis, Doug Degenstein, Stacey Frith, Lucien Froidevaux, Chris Roth, Viktoria Sofieva, Ray Wang, et al. (2018). \u201cEvidence for a continuous decline in lower stratospheric ozone offsetting ozone layer recovery\u201d. In: Atmos. Chem. Phys. <\/em>18.2, pp. 1379\u20131394. DOI: 10.5194\/acp-18-1379-2018.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Bekki, S., A. Rap, V. Poulain, S. Dhomse, M. Marchand, F. Lefevre, P. M. Forster, S. Szopa, and M. P. Chipperfield (2013). \u201cClimate impact of stratospheric ozone recovery\u201d. In: Geophys. Res. Lett. <\/em>40.11, pp. 2796\u20132800. DOI: 10.1002\/grl.50358.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Butchart, N., A. J. Charlton-Perez, I. Cionni, S. C. Hardiman, P. H. Haynes, K. Kr\u00fcger, P. J. Kushner, P. A. Newman, S. M. Osprey, J. Perlwitz, M. Sigmond, L. Wang, H. Akiyoshi, J. Austin, S. Bekki, A. Baumgaertner, P. Braesicke, C. Br\u00fchl, et al. (2011). \u201cMultimodel climate and variability of the stratosphere\u201d. In: J. Geophys. Res. <\/em>116.D5. DOI: 10.1029\/2010jd014995.<\/a><\/p>\n

    C\u00e1mara, A. de la, F. Lott, and M. Abalos (2016). \u201cClimatology of the middle atmosphere in LMDz: Impact of source- related parameterizations of gravity wave drag\u201d. In: J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst. <\/em>8.4, pp. 1507\u20131525. DOI: 10.1002\/<\/a>2016ms000753.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Chipperfield, Martyn P., Sandip Dhomse, Ryan Hossaini, Wuhu Feng, Michelle L. Santee, Mark Weber, John P. Bur- rows, Jeanette D. Wild, Diego Loyola, and Melanie Coldewey-Egbers (2018). \u201cOn the Cause of Recent Variations in Lower Stratospheric Ozone\u201d. In: Geophys. Res. Lett. <\/em>DOI: 10.1029\/2018gl078071.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Ern, M., P. Preusse, and C. D. Warner (2006). \u201cSome experimental constraints for spectral parameters used in the Warner and McIntyre gravity wave parameterization scheme\u201d. In: Atmos. Chem. Phys. <\/em>6.12, pp. 4361\u20134381. DOI: 10.5194\/acp-6-4361-2006.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Garcia, Rolando R., Anne K. Smith, Douglas E. Kinnison, \u00c1lvaro de la C\u00e1mara, and Damian J. Murphy (2017). \u201cModification of the Gravity Wave Parameterization in the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model: Motivation and Results\u201d. In: J. Atmos. Sci. <\/em>74.1, pp. 275\u2013291. DOI: 10.1175\/jas-d-16-0104.1.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Geller, Marvin A., M. Joan Alexander, Peter T. Love, Julio Bacmeister, Manfred Ern, Albert Hertzog, Elisa Manzini, Peter Preusse, Kaoru Sato, Adam A. Scaife, and Tiehan Zhou (2013). \u201cA Comparison between Gravity Wave Momentum Fluxes in Observations and Climate Models\u201d. In: J. Clim. <\/em>26.17, pp. 6383\u20136405. DOI: 10.1175\/jcli-d-<\/a>12-00545.1.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Gettelman, A., P. Hoor, L. L. Pan, W. J. Randel, M. I. Hegglin, and T. Birner (2011). \u201cThe extratropical upper tropo- sphere and lower stratosphere\u201d. In: Rev. Geophys. <\/em>49.3. DOI: 10.1029\/2011rg000355.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Grise, Kevin M., David W. J. Thompson, and Thomas Birner (2010). \u201cA Global Survey of Static Stability in the Stratosphere and Upper Troposphere\u201d. In: J. Clim. <\/em>23.9, pp. 2275\u20132292. DOI: 10.1175\/2009jcli3369.1.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Hegglin, Michaela I. and Theodore G. Shepherd (2009). \u201cLarge climate-induced changes in ultraviolet index and stratosphere-to-troposphere ozone flux\u201d. In: Nat. Geosci. <\/em>2.10, pp. 687\u2013691. DOI: 10.1038\/ngeo604.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Hendricks, Eric A., James D. Doyle, Stephen D. Eckermann, Qingfang Jiang, and P. Alex Reinecke (2014). \u201cWhat Is the Source of the Stratospheric Gravity Wave Belt in Austral Winter?\u201d In: J. Atmos. Sci. <\/em>71.5, pp. 1583\u20131592. DOI: 10.1175\/jas-d-13-0332.1.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Hertzog, Albert, Gillian Boccara, Robert A. Vincent, Fran\u00e7ois Vial, and Philippe Cocquerez (2008). \u201cEstimation of Gravity Wave Momentum Flux and Phase Speeds from Quasi-Lagrangian Stratospheric Balloon Flights. Part II: Results from the Vorcore Campaign in Antarctica\u201d. In: J. Atmos. Sci. <\/em>65.10, pp. 3056\u20133070. DOI: 10.1175\/<\/a>2008jas2710.1.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Hindley, N. P., C. J. Wright, N. D. Smith, and N. J. Mitchell (2015). \u201cThe southern stratospheric gravity wave hot spot: individual waves and their momentum fluxes measured by COSMIC GPS-RO\u201d. In: Atmos. Chem. Phys. <\/em>15.14, pp. 7797\u20137818. DOI: 10.5194\/acp-15-7797-2015.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Konopka, Paul, Felix Ploeger, Mengchu Tao, Thomas Birner, and Martin Riese (2015). \u201cHemispheric asymmetries and seasonality of mean age of air in the lower stratosphere: Deep versus shallow branch of the Brewer-Dobson circulation\u201d. In: J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. <\/em>120.5, pp. 2053\u20132066. DOI: 10.1002\/2014jd022429.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Lin, P., D. Paynter, L. M. Polvani, G. J. P. Correa, Y. Ming, and V. Ramaswamy (2016). \u201cCirculation response to ozone depletion depends on the zonal wind climatology\u201d. In: American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting 2016, abstract A32F-04<\/em>. URL: http:\/\/adsabs.harvard.edu\/abs\/2016AGUFM.A32F..04L.<\/a><\/p>\n

    McLandress, Charles and Theodore G. Shepherd (2009). \u201cSimulated Anthropogenic Changes in the Brewer\u2013Dobson Circulation, Including Its Extension to High Latitudes\u201d. In: J. Clim. <\/em>22.6, pp. 1516\u20131540. DOI: 10.1175\/2008jcli2679.<\/a>1.<\/a><\/p>\n

    McLandress, Charles, Theodore G. Shepherd, Saroja Polavarapu, and Stephen R. Beagley (2012). \u201cIs Missing Oro- graphic Gravity Wave Drag near 60\u25e6<\/em>S the Cause of the Stratospheric Zonal Wind Biases in Chemistry\u2013Climate Models?\u201d In: J. Atmos. Sci. <\/em>69.3, pp. 802\u2013818. DOI: 10.1175\/jas-d-11-0159.1.<\/a><\/p>\n

    McLandress, Charles, Theodore G. Shepherd, John F. Scinocca, David A. Plummer, Michael Sigmond, Andreas I. Jonsson, and M. Catherine Reader (2011). \u201cSeparating the Dynamical Effects of Climate Change and Ozone Depletion. Part II: Southern Hemisphere Troposphere\u201d. In: J. Clim. <\/em>24.6, pp. 1850\u20131868. DOI: 10.1175\/2010jcli3958.1.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Pan, Laura L., Shawn B. Honomichl, Douglas E. Kinnison, Marta Abalos, William J. Randel, John W. Bergman, and Jianchun Bian (2016). \u201cTransport of chemical tracers from the boundary layer to stratosphere associated with the dynamics of the Asian summer monsoon\u201d. In: J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. <\/em>121.23, pp. 14, 159\u201314, 174. DOI: 10.1002\/2016jd025616.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Park, Mijeong, William J. Randel, Louisa K. Emmons, and Nathaniel J. Livesey (2009). \u201cTransport pathways of car- bon monoxide in the Asian summer monsoon diagnosed from Model of Ozone and Related Tracers (MOZART)\u201d. In: J. Geophys. Res. <\/em>114.D8. DOI: 10.1029\/2008jd010621.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Ploeger, F., M. Abalos, T. Birner, P. Konopka, B. Legras, R. M\u00fcller, and M. Riese (2015). \u201cQuantifying the effects of mixing and residual circulation on trends of stratospheric mean age of air\u201d. In: Geophys. Res. Lett. <\/em>42.6, pp. 2047\u2013 2054. DOI: 10.1002\/2014gl062927.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Ploeger, F., G. G\u00fcnther, P. Konopka, S. Fueglistaler, R. M\u00fcller, C. Hoppe, A. Kunz, R. Spang, J.-U. Groo\u00df, and M. Riese (2013). \u201cHorizontal water vapor transport in the lower stratosphere from subtropics to high latitudes during boreal summer\u201d. In: J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. <\/em>118.14, pp. 8111\u20138127. DOI: 10.1002\/jgrd.50636.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Randel, William J. and Eric J. Jensen (2013). \u201cPhysical processes in the tropical tropopause layer and their roles in a changing climate\u201d. In: Nat. Geosci. <\/em>6.3, pp. 169\u2013176. DOI: 10.1038\/ngeo1733.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Riese, M., F. Ploeger, A. Rap, B. Vogel, P. Konopka, M. Dameris, and P. Forster (2012). \u201cImpact of uncertainties in atmospheric mixing on simulated UTLS composition and related radiative effects\u201d. In: J. Geophy. Res. Atmos. <\/em>117.D16. DOI: 10.1029\/2012jd017751.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Sato, K., S. Watanabe, Y. Kawatani, Y. Tomikawa, K. Miyazaki, and M. Takahashi (2009). \u201cOn the origins of mesospheric gravity waves\u201d. In: Geophys. Res. Lett. <\/em>36.19. DOI: 10.1029\/2009gl039908.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Shepherd, Theodore G. (2014). \u201cAtmospheric circulation as a source of uncertainty in climate change projections\u201d. In: Nat. Geosci. <\/em>7.10, pp. 703\u2013708. DOI: 10.1038\/ngeo2253.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Sigmond, Michael and John F. Scinocca (2010). \u201cThe Influence of the Basic State on the Northern Hemisphere Circulation Response to Climate Change\u201d. In: J. Clim. <\/em>23.6, pp. 1434\u20131446. DOI: 10.1175\/2009jcli3167.1.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Sigmond, Michael and Theodore G. Shepherd (2014). \u201cCompensation between Resolved Wave Driving and Parameterized Orographic Gravity Wave Driving of the Brewer\u2013Dobson Circulation and Its Response to Climate Change\u201d. In: J. Clim. <\/em>27.14, pp. 5601\u20135610. DOI: 10.1175\/jcli-d-13-00644.1.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Solomon, S., K. H. Rosenlof, R. W. Portmann, J. S. Daniel, S. M. Davis, T. J. Sanford, and G.-K. Plattner (2010). \u201cContributions of Stratospheric Water Vapor to Decadal Changes in the Rate of Global Warming\u201d. In: Science <\/em>327.5970, pp. 1219\u20131223. DOI: 10.1126\/science.1182488.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Son, S.-W., E. P. Gerber, J. Perlwitz, L. M. Polvani, N. P. Gillett, K.-H. Seo, V. Eyring, T. G. Shepherd, D. Waugh, H. Akiyoshi, J. Austin, A. Baumgaertner, S. Bekki, P. Braesicke, C. Br\u00fchl, N. Butchart, M. P. Chipperfield, D. Cugnet, et al. (2010). \u201cImpact of stratospheric ozone on Southern Hemisphere circulation change: A multimodel assessment\u201d. In: J. Geophys. Res. <\/em>115. DOI: 10.1029\/2010jd014271.<\/a><\/p>\n

    Stiller, G. P., T. von Clarmann, F. Haenel, B. Funke, N. Glatthor, U. Grabowski, S. Kellmann, M. Kiefer, A. Linden, S. Lossow, and M. L\u00f3pez-Puertas (2012). \u201cObserved temporal evolution of global mean age of stratospheric air for the 2002 to 2010 period\u201d. In: Atmos. Chem. Phys. <\/em>12.7, pp. 3311\u20133331. DOI: 10.5194\/acp-12-3311-2012.<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Even small variations in the distributions of trace gases, like water vapor and ozone, and thin cirrus clouds in the UTLS strongly impact radiative forcing of the Earth’s climate and surface temperatures, and are of key importance for understanding climate change (e.g. Riese et al., 2012, Solomon et al., 2010). There is also large uncertainty … Continue reading Introduction<\/span> →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"parent":185,"menu_order":1,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-171","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.pa.op.dlr.de\/southtrac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/171","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.pa.op.dlr.de\/southtrac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.pa.op.dlr.de\/southtrac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.pa.op.dlr.de\/southtrac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.pa.op.dlr.de\/southtrac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=171"}],"version-history":[{"count":22,"href":"https:\/\/www.pa.op.dlr.de\/southtrac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/171\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1121,"href":"https:\/\/www.pa.op.dlr.de\/southtrac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/171\/revisions\/1121"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.pa.op.dlr.de\/southtrac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/185"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.pa.op.dlr.de\/southtrac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=171"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}