the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Measurement report: Optical properties of carbonaceous aerosols modulated by source variations of spring haze
Abstract. Carbonaceous aerosols exert unique impacts on earth energy balance, but are not well constrained in air quality and climate models yet. In this study, a field campaign was conducted in Northeast China during a spring season to explore the optical properties of carbonaceous aerosols modulated by dramatic variations of particulate matter sources. We first integrated the light absorption results derived from different methods, including both on-line and off-line approaches. Then by synthesizing a series of source-relevant signatures, three types of haze episodes were identified. In general, agricultural fire emissions exerted strong influences on brown carbon (BrC), by effectively increasing the mass absorption efficiency (MAE) of bulk BrC, and emitting chromophores with a characteristic absorption peak at ~365 nm. Specifically, fires with low combustion efficiencies were more capable of enhancing the impacts of BrC on bulk aerosol absorption, and were more favorable for the emissions of organic compounds with relatively high molecular weights and aromatic contents. In addition, the agricultural fires, especially those with relatively low efficiencies, resulted in overestimations of black carbon (BC) mass by thermal-optical method due to unique emitted species. By excluding the impacts from agricultural fires and dusts, we unfolded the influence of secondary aerosol formation on the MAE of BC (MAEBC). With the enhancement of secondary aerosols, MAEBC was found to exhibit a clear increasing trend, which could be translated into the light absorption enhancement (Eabs) factors of up to ~2.3.
- Preprint
(2600 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(1098 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 20 Apr 2026)
- RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-1064', Anonymous Referee #1, 15 Mar 2026 reply
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-1064', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Apr 2026
reply
The manuscript by Cheng et al. investigated the optical properties of carbonaceous aerosols under changeable conditions of haze pollution in Northeast China. For this purpose, the authors combined on-line data (from a PAX, an AE33 and analyzers for several gaseous pollutants) and off-line results (from a high-volume PM2.5 sampler) measured during April, 2023, when different types of haze episodes were encountered. They first explained the discrepancies between the light absorption results from different methods, and then discussed the influences of agricultural fire emissions and secondary aerosol formation on the optical properties of carbonaceous aerosols. In general, the results and discussions were scientifically sound. Given that the studied region is distinct (especially regarding the agricultural fires) but largely overlooked by previous studies, the manuscript is suitable for a measurement-report paper in ACP. My overall assessment is that it could be considered for publication after the following concerns were properly addressed.
Major points.
- Lines 22-25. The two sentences were not well connected. It is completely unclear why the dust episodes need to be excluded.
- Lines 56-62. The new standard has been released. The statements need to be revised correspondingly.
- Table 1. Fractions in total data points should also be given for the SSA bins.
Minor points
- Lines 12-13. Suggest replacing “Northeast China” by a more specific term, e.g., the site type (urban, suburban, rural, etc.) would be more useful.
- Lines 37-41. The sentence is difficult to follow. Revise it.
- Line 70. I guess the average temperature was for winter. Clarify it.
- Line 75. It is better to use “emission system”.
- Line 84. It should be “secondary”.
- Line 119. Suggest using “over” instead of “in”.
- Line 169. It should be “obtained”.
- Line 217. Suggest using “different types of filters”.
- Line 219. Move “heavily loaded” to the next sentence, as the detailed carbon loadings had been given here.
- Lines 220-221. I think PM2.5 concentrations were not highly relevant to the statement here, i.e., in addition to PM2.5 concentration, filter loading also depends on the sampling volume or, more precisely, face velocity.
- Lines 444-445. It is better to explain (babs)@370 first, which is the basis for the calculation of (babs)BrC@370.
- Line 453. Change “used” to “considered as”.
- Line 462. It is unnecessary to define the ratio again.
- Lines 545-546. “Eabs” should be introduced, as it was mentioned in the abstract. Accordingly, it is unnecessary to define it again in Line 596.
- Line 561. To my understanding, the C* factor was used to correct for the overall effect of the multiple scattering by the filter media and the scattering by the collected particles. Clarify it.
- Line 600. Remove the comma before “and effectively”.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1064-RC2
Data sets
Optical properties of carbonaceous aerosols modulated by source variations of spring haze Y. Cheng https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18898994
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 140 | 53 | 18 | 211 | 31 | 11 | 11 |
- HTML: 140
- PDF: 53
- XML: 18
- Total: 211
- Supplement: 31
- BibTeX: 11
- EndNote: 11
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
This study used the results of three black carbon instruments, AE33, PAX, and OCEC, combined with offline component analysis, to analyze the optical properties of black carbon and brown carbon. Some of the results are very interesting and important (i.e., Lines 252-265), and it is recommended to publish them after minor revisions: