Remote Sensing of Droplet Number Concentration in Warm Clouds

A Review of the Current State of Knowledge and Perspectives

Journal Article (2018)
Authors

Reinout Boers (Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (KNMI))

Christine Knist (Deutscher Wetterdienst)

HWJ Russchenberg (TU Delft - Geoscience and Remote Sensing)

Frank Werner (Joint Center for Earth Systems Technology)

Robert Wood (University of Washington)

Zhibo Zhang (CRESST and University of Maryland)

Johannes Quaas (University of Leipzig)

G.B. Cavadini (External organisation)

Department
Geoscience and Remote Sensing
Copyright
© 2018 Reinout Boers, Christine Knist, H.W.J. Russchenberg, Frank Werner, Robert Wood, Zhibo Zhang, Johannes Quaas, More Authors
To reference this document use:
https://doi.org/10.1029/2017RG000593
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2018
Language
English
Copyright
© 2018 Reinout Boers, Christine Knist, H.W.J. Russchenberg, Frank Werner, Robert Wood, Zhibo Zhang, Johannes Quaas, More Authors
Department
Geoscience and Remote Sensing
Issue number
2
Volume number
56
Pages (from-to)
409-453
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1029/2017RG000593
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

The cloud droplet number concentration (Nd) is of central interest to improve the understanding of cloud physics and for quantifying the effective radiative forcing by aerosol-cloud interactions. Current standard satellite retrievals do not operationally provide Nd, but it can be inferred from retrievals of cloud optical depth (τc) cloud droplet effective radius (re) and cloud top temperature. This review summarizes issues with this approach and quantifies uncertainties. A total relative uncertainty of 78% is inferred for pixel-level retrievals for relatively homogeneous, optically thick and unobscured stratiform clouds with favorable viewing geometry. The uncertainty is even greater if these conditions are not met. For averages over 1° ×1° regions the uncertainty is reduced to 54% assuming random errors for instrument uncertainties. In contrast, the few evaluation studies against reference in situ observations suggest much better accuracy with little variability in the bias. More such studies are required for a better error characterization. Nd uncertainty is dominated by errors in re, and therefore, improvements in re retrievals would greatly improve the quality of the Nd retrievals. Recommendations are made for how this might be achieved. Some existing Nd data sets are compared and discussed, and best practices for the use of Nd data from current passive instruments (e.g., filtering criteria) are recommended. Emerging alternative Nd estimates are also considered. First, new ideas to use additional information from existing and upcoming spaceborne instruments are discussed, and second, approaches using high-quality ground-based observations are examined.