Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-214
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-214
11 Mar 2025
 | 11 Mar 2025
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).

Distinct effects of several ice production processes on thunderstorm electrification and lightning activity

Inès Vongpaseut and Christelle Barthe

Abstract. Ice particles play a crucial role in shaping cloud electrification, affecting the intensity of lightning activity. Previous studies have found a change of electric activity with varying aerosols concentration or active secondary ice production processes (SIP). However, the electric response to those parameters can differ with different cloud conditions and interact between themselves. The Meso-NH model was used with the two-moment microphysics scheme LIMA coupled with an explicit electrical scheme. Three idealized storms with varying warm-phase thicknesses were simulated to examine their response to aerosol concentrations and SIP mechanisms.

Increasing the cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) or the ice nucleating particle (INP) concentration increases ice crystal concentration, non-inductive charging and lightning activity up to a threshold. The main ice production processes (heterogeneous, homogeneous nucleation or Hallett-Mossop mechanism) depend on the cloud base temperature, and the aerosol concentration. CCN concentration thresholds (1000–8000 cm−3) differ across all storms due to cloud base temperature, while the threshold for INP concentration is generally ∼100 L−1. Higher CCN concentrations increase cloud water content, affecting charge polarity, but graupel mass has a smaller impact on electrification.

SIP mechanisms significantly enhance electrical activity by increasing ice crystal concentrations, particularly at low altitudes where primary ice production is inactive. This promotes ice-graupel collisions and amplifies charge exchange in each grid cell. The intensity of SIP processes varies with the thickness of the warm-phase region. Raindrop shattering freezing is the most sensitive and requires a deep warm-phase, while Hallett-Mossop and collisional ice break-up produce abundant ice crystals in all storms.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Share
Inès Vongpaseut and Christelle Barthe

Status: open (until 22 Apr 2025)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Inès Vongpaseut and Christelle Barthe
Inès Vongpaseut and Christelle Barthe

Viewed

Total article views: 46 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
37 6 3 46 1 1
  • HTML: 37
  • PDF: 6
  • XML: 3
  • Total: 46
  • BibTeX: 1
  • EndNote: 1
Views and downloads (calculated since 11 Mar 2025)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 11 Mar 2025)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 46 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 46 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 13 Mar 2025
Download
Short summary
Three idealized storms that differ by their cloud base temperature were simulated in order to assess the impact of ice production on cloud electrical activity. Ice production is impacted by aerosols that either can form cloud droplets or ice crystals and processes that form ice crystals from pre-existing cloud particles. All those processes can interact and affect the electrical activity and differently according to the cloud conditions.
Share