Episodic Dust Events along Utah’s Wasatch Front
W. JAMES STEENBURGH AND JEFFREY D. MASSEY
Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
THOMAS H. PAINTER
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
In preparation for submittal to
Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology
Draft of Tuesday, February 09, 2016
Corresponding author address: Dr. W. James Steenburgh, Department of Atmospheric Sciences,
University of Utah, 135 South 1460 East Room 819, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112.
E-mail: jim.steenburgh@utah.edu
Abstract
Episodic dust events cause hazardous air quality along Utah’s Wasatch Front and dust
loading of the snowpack in the adjacent Wasatch Mountains. This paper presents a climatology
of episodic Wasatch Front dust events based on surface-weather observations from the Salt Lake
City International Airport (KSLC), GOES satellite imagery, and the North American Regional
Reanalysis. Dust events at KSLC, defined as any day (MST) with at least one report of a dust
storm, blowing dust, and/or dust in suspension (i.e., dust haze) with a visibility of 10 km (6 mi)
or less, average 4.3 per water year (WY, Oct–Sep), with considerable interannual variability
from 1930–2010. The monthly frequency of dust-events is bimodal with primary and secondary
maxima in Apr and Sep, respectively. Dust reports are most common in the late afternoon and
evening.
An analysis of the 33 most recent (2001–2010 WY) events at KSLC indicates that 16
were associated with a cold front or baroclinic trough, 11 with airmass convection and related
outflow, 4 with persistent southwest flow ahead of a stationary trough or cyclone over Nevada,
and 2 with other synoptic patterns. GOES satellite imagery and backtrajectories from these 33
events, as well as 61 additional events from the surrounding region, illustrate that emissions
sources are mostly concentrated in the deserts of southern Utah and western Nevada, including
the Sevier dry lake bed, Escalente Desert, and Carson Sink. Efforts to reduce dust emissions in
these regions may help mitigate the frequency and severity of hazardous air-quality episodes
along the Wasatch Front and dust loading of the snowpack in the adjacent Wasatch Mountains.
2
1. Introduction
Dust storms impact air quality (Gebhart et al. 2001; Pope et al. 1996), precipitation
distribution (Goudie & Middleton, 2001), soil erosion (Gillette 1988; Zobeck 1989), the global
radiation budget (Ramanathan 2001), and regional climate (Nicholson 2000, Goudie &
Middleton 2001). Recent research regarding regional hydrologic and climatic change produced
by dust-radiative forcing of the mountain snowpack of western North America and other regions
of the world has initiated a newfound interest in dust research. (Hansen and Nazarenko 2004;
Painter et al. 2007; Painter et al. 2010). For example, observations from Colorado’s San Juan
Mountains indicate that dust loading increases the snowpack’s absorption of solar radiation, thus
decreasing the duration of snow cover by several weeks (Painter et al. 2007). Modeling studies
further suggest that dust-radiative forcing results in an earlier runoff with less annual volume in
the upper Colorado River Basin (Painter et al. 2010).
Synoptic and mesoscale weather systems are the primary drivers of global dust emissions
and transport. Mesoscale convective systems that propagate eastward from Africa over the
Atlantic Ocean produce half of the dust emissions from the Sahara Desert, the world’s largest
Aeolian dust source (Swap et al. 1996; Goudie & Middleton 2001). Dust plumes generated by
these systems travel for several days in the large-scale easterly flow (Carlson 1979), with human
health and ecological impacts across the tropical Atlantic and Caribbean Sea (Goudie &
Middleton 2001; Prospero & Lamb 2003). In northeast Asia, strong winds in the post-coldfrontal environment of Mongolian Cyclones drive much of the dust emissions (Yasunori and
Masao 2002; Shoa, Wang, 2003; Qian et al., 2001). The highest frequency of Asian dust storms
occurs over the Taklimakan and Gobi Deserts of northern China where dust is observed 200 d yr1
(Qian et al., 2001). Fine dust from these regions can be transported to the United States,
3
producing aerosol concentrations above National Ambient Air Quality Standards (Husar et al.
2001; Jaffe et al., 1999; Fairlie et al., 2007)
The Great Basin, Colorado Plateau, and Mojave and Sonoran Deserts produce most of the
dust emissions in North America (Tanaka and Chiba 2006; see Fig. 1 for geographic and
topographic locations). Most land surfaces in these deserts are naturally resistant to wind erosion
due to the presence of physical, biological, and other crusts (Gillette 1980). However, these
crusts are easily disturbed, leading to increased dust emissions, in some cases long after the
initial disturbance (e.g., Belnap et al. 2009). Based on alpine lake sediments collected over the
interior western United States, Neff et al. (2008) found that dust loading increased 500% during
the 19th century, a likely consequence of land-surface disturbance by livestock grazing, plowing
of agricultural soils, and other activities.
Several studies suggest that the synoptic and mesoscale weather systems that generate
dust emissions and transport over western North America vary geographically and seasonally. In
a dust climatology for the contiguous United States, Orgill and Sehmel (1976) proposed several
including convective systems, warm and cold fronts, cyclones, diurnal winds, and specifically for
the western United States, downslope (their katabatic) winds generated by flow-mountain
interactions. They identified a spring maximum in the frequency of suspended dust for the
contiguous United States as a whole, which they attributed to cyclonic and convective storm
activity, but found that several locations in the Pacific and Rocky Mountain regions have a fall
maximum. However, they made no effort to quantify the importance of the differing synoptic
and mesoscale systems.
In Arizona, Brazel and Nickling (1986, 1987) found that fronts,
thunderstorms, cutoff lows, and tropical disturbances (i.e., decaying tropical depressions and
cyclones originating over the eastern Pacific Ocean) are the primary drivers of dust emissions.
4
The frequency of dust emissions from fronts is highest from late Fall–Spring, thunderstorms
during the summer, and cutoff lows from May–Jun and Sep–Nov. Dust emissions produced by
tropical disturbances are infrequent, but are likely confined to Jun–Oct when tropical cyclone
remnants move across the southwest United States (Ritchie et al. 2011). For dust events in
nearby California and southern Nevada, Changery (1983) and Brazel and Nickling (1987) also
established linkages with frontal passages and cyclone activity, respectively.
In addition to
synoptic and mesoscale systems, these studies also cite the importance of land-surface conditions
(e.g. soil moisture, vegetation) for the seasonality and spatial distribution of dust events.
None of these studies, however, have specifically examined the Wasatch Front of
northern Utah, where episodic dust events produce hazardous air quality in the Salt Lake City
metropolitan area and contribute to dust loading of the snowpack in the nearby Wasatch
Mountains (Fig. 2). From 2002–2010, wind-blown dust events contributed to 13 exceedances of
the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for PM2.5 or PM10 in Utah (T. Cruickshank, Utah
Division of Air Quality, Personal Communication). Dust loading in the Wasatch Mountains
affects a snowpack that serves as the primary water resource for approximately 400,000 people
and enables a $1.2 billion winter sports industry, known internationally for the “Greatest Snow
on Earth” (Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities 1999; Steenburgh and Alcott 2008; Salt
Lake Tribune 2011).
This paper examines the climatological characteristics and emissions sources during
Wasatch Front dust events. We find that Wasatch Front dust-events occur throughout the
historical (1930–2010 water year1) record, with considerable interannual variability. Events are
driven primarily by strong winds associated with cold fronts or airmass convection, with the
1
Hereafter, all years in this paper are water years (Oct–Sep).
5
deserts and dry lake beds of southern Utah, as well as the Carson Sink of Nevada, serving as
primary regional emission sources. Dust emission mitigation efforts in these regions may reduce
the frequency and severity of related hazardous air quality events along the Wasatch Front and
dust loading of the Wasatch Mountain snowpack.
2. Data and methods
a. Long-term climatology
Our long-term dust-event climatology derives from hourly surface weather observations
from the Salt Lake City International Airport (KSLC), which we obtained from the Global
Integrated Surface Hourly Database (DS-3505) at the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC).
KSLC is located in the Salt Lake Valley just west of downtown Salt Lake City and the Wasatch
Mountains (Fig. 1) and provides the longest quasi-continuous record of hourly weather
observations in northern Utah. The analysis covers 1930–2010 when 97.9% of all possible
hourly observations are available.
The hourly weather observations included in DS-3505 derive from multiple sources, with
decoding and processing occurring at either operational weather centers or the Federal Climate
Complex in Asheville, NC (NCDC 2001, 2008). Studies of dust events frequently use similar
datasets (e.g., Nickling and Brazel 1984; Brazel and Nickling 1986; Brazel and Nickling 1987;
Brazel 1989; Hall 1981; Orgill and Sehmel 1976; Changery 1983; Weihong 2002; Kurosaki and
Masao 2002; Shao et al. 2003; Song et al. 2007; Shao and Wang 2003). Nevertheless, while
hourly weather observations are useful for examining the general climatological and
meteorological characteristics of dust events, they do not quantify dust concentrations, making
the identification and classification of dust somewhat subjective. Inconsistencies arise from
observer biases, changes in instrumentation, reporting guidelines, and processing algorithms.
6
These inconsistencies result in the misreporting of some events (e.g., dust erroneously reported
as haze) and preclude confident assessment and interpretation of long-term trends and variability.
Consistent with World Meteorological Organization (WMO) guidelines (WMO 2009),
the present weather record in DS-3505 includes 11 dust categories (Table 1). During the study
period, there were 916 blowing dust (category 7), 178 dust-in-suspension (category 6), 7 dust
storm (categories 9, 30–32, and 98) and one dust or sand whirl report (category 8) at KSLC.
There were no severe dust storm reports (categories 33–35). Amongst the blowing dust, dust-insuspension, and dust storm reports, there were 69 with a visibility > 6 statute miles (10 km), the
threshold currently used by the WMO and national weather agencies for reporting blowing dust
or dust-in-suspension (Shao et al. 2003; Federal Meteorological Handbook, 2005). Since these
events are weak, or may be erroneous, they were removed from the analysis. This includes all
but one of the 7 dust storm reports. The dust or sand whirl report was also removed since we are
interested in widespread events rather than localized dust whirl(s) (a.k.a. dust devils). The
resulting long-term dust-event climatology is based on the remaining 1033 reports. A dust event
is any day (MST) with at least one such dust report.
b. Characteristics of recent dust events
The analysis of the synoptic, meteorological, and land-surface conditions contributing to
Wasatch Front dust events concentrates on events at KSLC during most recent ten-year period
(2001–2010). This enables the use of modern satellite and reanalysis data, and limits the number
of events, making the synoptic analysis of each event tractable.
Resources used to synoptically classify dust events, composite events, and prepare case
studies include the North American Regional Reanalysis (NARR), GOES satellite imagery, Salt
7
Lake City (KMTX) radar imagery, and hourly KSLC surface weather observations and remarks
from DS-3505. The NARR is a 32-km, 45-layer reanalysis for North America based on the
National Centers for Environmental Predication (NCEP) Eta model and data assimilation system
(Mesinger et al. 2006). Compared to the ERA-Interim and NCEP-NCAR reanalysis, the NARR
better resolves the complex terrain of the Intermountain West, but still has a poor representation
of the basin and range topography over Nevada (see Jeglum et al. 2010). We obtained the
NARR data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Operational
Model Archive Distribution System (NOMADS) at the National Climatic Data Center web site
(http://nomads.ncdc.noaa.gov/#narr_datasets), the level-II KMTX radar data from NCDC
(website: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/nexradinv/, and the GOES data from the NOAA
Comprehensive
Large
Array-Data
Stewardship
System
(CLASS,
http://www.class.ncdc.noaa.gov).
c. Dust emission sources
We identify dust emission sources during from 2001–2010 using a dust-retrieval
algorithm applied to GOES satellite data. Because the algorithm only works in cloud-free areas
and many dust events occur in conjunction with cloud cover, we expand the number of events to
include those identified in: (1) DS-3505 reports from stations in the surrounding region with at
least 5 years of hourly data (Fig. 1), (2) the authors’ personal notes, and (3) Utah Avalanche
Center annual reports. This analysis is thus not specific to KSLC, but does identify emissions
sources that contribute to dust events in the region.
Our dust-retrieval algorithm is a modified version of that described by Zhoa et al. (2010)
for MODIS. First, we substitute the GOES 10.7 μm channel for the MODIS 11.02 μm channel.
8
Then the two reflectance condition thresholds used to identify the presence of clouds from the
MODIS .47, .64, and .86 μm channels are replaced by a single threshold (.35) that uses the only
visible channel on GOES. Finally, the maximum threshold for the brightness temperature
difference between the 3.9 and 11 μm (11 and 12 μm) bands was changed from -.5 ºC to 0 ºC (25
ºC to 10 ºC). These adjustments enable the identification of visible dust over Utah using GOES
data, although uncertainties arise near cloud edges, when the sun angle is low, or when the dust
concentrations are low or near the surface. The algorithm is applied every 15 min during the
daylight hours (0700–1900 MST), with plume origin and orientation identified subjectively.
3. Results
a. Long-term climatology
Dust events at KSLC occur throughout the historical record, with an average of 4.3 per
water year (Fig. 3). Considerable interannual variability exists, with no events reported in seven
years (1941, 1957, 1981, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2007) and a maximum of 15 in 1934. No effort was
made to quantify or assess long-term trends or interdecadal/interannual variability given the
subjective nature of the reports and changes in observers, observing methods, and
instrumentation during the study period.
Based on current weather observing practices (Glossary of Meteorology 2000; Shao and
Wang 2003), the minimum visibility when dust is reported meets the criteria for blowing dust [1
km (5/8 statute mi) < visibility ≤ 10 km (6 statute mi)], a dust storm [0.5 km (5/16 statute mi) <
visibility ≤ 1km (5/8 statute mi)], or a severe dust storm [visibility ≤ 0.5 km (5/16 statute mi)] in
9
95.40%, 2.59%, and 2.01% of the dust events, respectively (Fig. 4)2. Therefore, only a small
fraction of the dust events and observations meet dust storm or severe dust storm criteria.
To integrate the effects of event severity, frequency, and duration into an estimate of the
annual near-surface dust flux, we first estimate the dust concentration, C (µg m-3), for each dust
report following eq. 9.81 of Shao (2008, p. 334):
C = 2802.29VIS-0.84)
VIS < 3.5 km
C = exp(-0.11VIS + 7.62))
VIS ≥ 3.5 km
where VIS is the visibility. Multiplying by the wind speed and integrating across all observation
intervals yields an estimated mean annual near-surface dust flux of 399.4 g m-2, with a maximum
of 2810.2 g m-2 in 1935 (Fig. 5). Because it integrates event severity, frequency, and duration,
the annual near-surface dust flux provides a somewhat different perspective from the annual
number of dust events (cf. Figs. 3 and 5). For example, 1934 featured the most dust events, but
the greatest near-surface dust flux occurred in 1935. In 2010, there were only 2 dust events, but
also a pronounced decadal-scale maximum in annual near-surface dust flux.
The monthly distribution of dust events is bimodal, with primary and secondary peaks in
Apr and Sep, respectively (Fig. 6). Similar peaks are observed in the near-surface dust flux, but
with an additional peak in Jan (Fig. 7). This Jan peak is surprising, but careful examination of
the data revealed two unusually strong events spanning consecutive days in January of 1943 that
contributed to 83% of the Jan monthly mean. In the summer, the dust flux minimum is distinctly
lower compared to the dust-event frequency (cf. Figs. 6 and 7), suggesting that summer dust
events are shorter and weaker. From Mar–May, which usually encompasses the climatological
2
The visibility observations are taken and stored in statute miles, but approximate metric thresholds are
used hereafter.
10
snowpack snow water equivalent maximum and beginning of the spring runoff, the mean threemonth dust flux is 237 g m-2, 59% of the annual flux.
Similar bimodal or modal distributions with a primary or single spring dust peak have
been identified in the Taklimakan desert of China, southern Great Plains of the United States,
Mexico City, and the Canadian Prairies (Yasunori and Masao 2002; Stout 2001; Jauregui 1989;
Wheaton and Chakravarti 1990). The spring peak appears to be the result of erodible landsurfaces combined with a high frequency of wind events driven by cyclones and fronts. In fact,
the bimodal distributions of dust-events and dust-flux at KSLC is very similar to that of
Intermountain cold fronts and cyclones, which are strongest and most frequent in the spring, and
have a secondary peak in the fall (e.g., Shafer and Steenburgh 2008; Jeglum et al. 2010). These
Intermountain cold fronts and cyclones produce persistently strong winds capable of generating
dust emissions and transport during favorable land-surface conditions. Interestingly, dust was
reported at KSLC within 3 h of the passage of 12 of the 25 strongest cold fronts identified by
Schafer and Steenburgh (2008).
The mean wind speed during dust reports at KSLC is 11.6 m s-1 (with a standard
deviation of 4.0 m s-1), slightly higher than the 8.5 m s-1 and 9.29 m s-1 found by Holcombe et al.
(1996) for Yuma, AZ and Blythe, CA, respectively. Therefore, we use 10 m s-1 as an
approximate threshold velocity for dust emissions and transport. At KSLC winds ≥ 10 m s-1 are
most common in Mar and Apr, with an additional but relatively weak maxima in Aug and Jan
(Fig. 9). The Mar and Apr peak resembles the springtime peak in dust events and flux, but the
lack of a fall secondary maximum and winter minimum suggests other factors related to seasonal
changes to vegetation, soil conditions, and soil moisture (Neff et al., 2008, Belnap et al., 2009,
Gillette, 1999) contribute to the seasonality of dust events and fluxes.
11
Dust reports exhibit a strong diurnal cycle and are most common in the late afternoon and
evening hours (Fig. 10), as observed in other regions (Jauregui 1989; Mbouro et al. 1997). The
frequency of winds ≥ 10 m s-1 at KSLC is about three times higher in the afternoon than morning
(Fig. 11), which is consistent with the development of the daytime convective boundary layer.
The peak for winds ≥ 10 m s-1 occurs at 1400 MST, roughly four hours earlier than the peak in
dust reports; a likely consequence of the time needed for dust to travel from its source to KSLC.
The frequency distribution of wind directions during dust events is bimodal, with peaks at
southerly and north-northwesterly (Fig. 12). About 50% of the time, the wind is from the southsouthwest through south-southeast and about 28% of the time the wind is northwesterly through
northerly. Dust flux is also greatest for winds from the south-southwest through south-southeast
(Fig. 13).
b.
Recent (2001–2010) events
To characterize and classify dust events, we concentrate on a subset of events from 2001–
2010 enabling the use of modern reanalysis, satellite, and radar data in an effort to synoptically
diagnosis each event. The monthly frequency distribution of these 33 recent dust events
resembles that of the long-term climatology except for a disproportionately high number of
summer events (cf. Figs. 6, 13).
Based on synoptic analysis, we classified these recent dust events into one of four groups
depending on their primary mechanism for dust emissions and transport: (1) airmass convection,
(2) cold fronts or baroclinic troughs, (3) upstream stationary fronts or baroclinic troughs, and (4)
other mechanisms (Table 2). Here we define baroclinic trough as a pressure trough and cyclonic
wind shift, but with an insufficiently strong temperature gradient to be called a front. The 11
(33%) events generated by airmass convection featured a thunderstorm, thunderstorm in the
12
vicinity, or squall comment in the DS-3505 reports within an hour of the dust observation, or
nearby convection evident in satellite or radar imagery without strong nearby 700-hPa
baroclinicity in NARR analyses. These events tended to be shortlived, usually < 2 hr, and they
all occurred between the middle of May and the middle of September. An airmass convection
event on May 19th, 2006 reduced visibilities to 6.4 km and lasted for only 17 minutes. At 16
MST KSLC reported a 5 ms-1 southerly wind, the strongest reported wind thus far that day, but at
16:07 MST, seven minutes later, winds increased to 24.1 ms-1 with a gust to 27.7 ms-1 and dust
was reported along with a squall at or within sight of the station comment. This dramatic wind
shift was associated with an outflow boundary from a convective cell visible on radar imagery at
16:05 MST (Fig. 14a). The weak returns over KSLC are likely associated with the leading edge
of the outflow boundary. Airmass convection events generally have weak large scale forcing
and this was the case for May 19th, 2006. 17 MST NARR analysis shows KSLC centered under
an upper level ridge axis, evident in a dynamic tropopause analysis (Fig. 14b) that is used as a
proxy for the upper level flow. Unfortunately, NARR data only extends to 100 hPa so all levels
of the two potential vorticity unit (PVU) dynamic tropopause > 100 hPa are forced to 100 hPa.
700 hPa winds were weak, generally around 5 ms-1, and were associated with limited 700 hPa
baroclinicity (Fig. 14c) and small 850 hPa height depressions (Fig. 14d) signaling very weak
lower tropospheric large scale forcing. In fact, compared to climatology, all airmass convection
events have only slightly higher 700 hPa winds (Fig. 17a) and a slight affinity for southerly wind
directions (Fig. 17b). The height of the Planetary Boundary Layer (PBL) is similar to
climatology preventing higher wind at higher levels from being fully realized at the surface.
Climatological variables were computed for each of NARR’s eight synoptic time steps (00Z,
13
03Z, 06Z, etc) and event and climatological variables were area-averaged from 37N to 41N and
112W to 114W, roughly corresponding to western Utah south of KSLC.
16 (48%) recent events were produced by cold fronts or baroclinic troughs and they
featured a cold front or baroclinic trough passage at KSLC within 24-h of the dust observation, a
distinct frontal cloud band in visible satellite images, and evidence of a mobile pressure trough
and/or Intermountain cyclone in lower-tropospheric NARR analyses. Dust is usually reported
right around frontal passage. In fact, four (25%) out of 16 events reported dust in the prefrontal
environment, 16 (100%) during frontal passage, and two (13%) in the postfrontal environment,
where prefrontal and postfrontal describe the conditions three hours before and after surface
frontal passage, respectively. Baroclinic trough or cold front events are most often associated
with upper level troughing to the west of KSLC coupled with a low level pressure minimum. On
1700 MST May 10, 2004 dust reduced visibilities to 8 km during a frontal passage that dropped
temperatures 12.8 C in an hour, and produced consistent southerly surface winds > 13.9 ms-1
during the 6 h prior to frontal passage. Dust plumes initiated in the prefrontal environment over
the Escalente Desert and Milford area a few hours earlier and the eastern edge of these plumes
reached KSLC and extended into Idaho at the time dust was first reported (Fig. 15a). Large scale
forcing was impressive during this time. The 1700 MST dynamic tropopause analysis shows the
center of the upper level trough axis over Nevada with winds on that surface exceeding 30 ms-1
over KSLC (Fig. 15b). 700 hPa temperature and wind analysis shows confluent winds along a
strong baroclinic zone just upstream of KSLC (Fig. 15c), with the leading edge of the baroclinic
zone collocated with an 850 hPa height trough directly over KSLC (Fig. 15d). The initial 700
hPa wind speeds for all cold fronts or baroclinic troughs is centered around 15 ms-1 (Figure 17d),
which occurs only 4% of the time climatologically, and wind directions are only in the southwest
14
quadrant of the compass (Fig. 17e), The height of the planetary boundary layer is also much
higher than climatology during dust events (Figure 17f) allowing strong winds aloft to be better
realized at the surface. Shafer and Steenburgh (2008) found PBL heights significantly higher in
prefrontal environments than postfrontal suggesting KSLC dust events are more likely to be
initiated in the prefrontal environments
4 (18%) events were forced by upstream stationary fronts or baroclinic troughs. The
major difference between this group and baroclinic troughs or cold fronts is the trough axis
remains quasi-stationary and to the west of KSLC within 24-hrs of the initial dust observation.
The event on April 1, 2003 was forced by a stationary trough and produced eight observations of
dust at between 1000 MST and 2400 MST that dropped visibilities to as low as 8 km. Winds
remained southerly throughout the day, night, and following morning and averaged 9.8 ms -1 for
all the dust observations. Unfortunately, clouds were present over most of the region during the
event, but Figure 16a shows a small dust plume coming off the Escalente Desert at 1345 MST
and some other activity at nearby areas not covered by clouds. Upper level analysis at 1000
MST reveals a strong southwesterly jet centered over northwestern Nevada ahead of an upper
level trough offshore of California (Fig. 16b). A 700 hPa baroclinic zone is evident over
Nevada, but the flow is only slightly confluent and parallel to the isotherms suggesting the
baroclinic zone will remain stationary (Fig. 16c). A weak trough is also present on 850 hPa
height analysis over the leading edge of the baroclinic zone (Fig. 16d). To summarize, a cold
front or baroclinic trough is present over Nevada, but the lack of upper level support and cross
isotherm flow prevents transient motion leaving Utah positioned under persistent large scale
southerly flow that emits dust. August 30, 2009 is listed as a stationary baroclinic trough or cold
15
front event, but this event may be erroneous because observer comments and satellite imagery
indicate smoke likely reduced visibilities, not dust.
Two (6%) events were associated with other synoptic patterns. On September 16, 2003
KSLC reported dust in northwesterly flow when a surface front developed downstream of the
area putting KSLC in the post-frontal environment. There was no frontal passage or stationary
boundary so this event did not fit in either synoptic category. The other event occurred on March
13, 2005 and was forced by an equatorward travelling arctic front. Although there was frontal
passage at KSLC, the nature and evolution of an arctic front is very different from intermountain
cold fronts and baroclinic troughs so it would be inappropriate to classify it similarly.
Interestingly, soil moisture during dust events does not vary significantly from
climatology (Figure 21a). Past studies suggest soil moisture has a capillary effect on soil grains,
which increases the friction velocity of the soil making it less erodible (Saleh and Fryrear 1995;
Bisal and Hsieh 1966; Chepil and Woodruff, 1963; McKenna-Neuman and Nickling, 1989).
However, Gillette (1999) observed wind erosion 10-30 minutes after a soaking rain because the
eroding layer needs only to be a millimeter thick and strong winds can dry a layer that thin very
quickly. The NARR soil moisture content is calculated from the soil surface down to 200 cm so
it may be an inappropriate proxy for surface dryness.
c.
Dust emission sources and transport
Additional dust days were added to our recent dust day climatology in an effort to locate
as many source regions as possible. Hourly dust observations have been reported in accordance
with our 10 km visibility and present weather (e.g. no dust whirls) constraints at four different
stations across the Intermountain West (IMW) since 2001 (33 at KSLC, 30 at Delta, UT, 18 at
16
Pocatello, ID, 6 at Elko, NV for 87 total, but 79 individual events due to overlap). The dust days
from these stations were further supplemented with personal observations of dust along the
Wasatch Front, and from Utah Avalanche Center annual reports, bringing the total number of
dust days to 94. The characteristics of these events are consistent with the long-term climatology
of KSLC in terms of annual, monthly, and diurnal distribution (not shown). Our GOES satellite
dust retrieval algorithm is applied to all 94 dust days in an effort to locate all visible dust plumes
originating in the IMW. For the 94 dust days, 120 independent plumes were identified during 47
(50%) dust days. The remaining 47 (50%) dust days may not have had any observable plumes
because clouds blocked the dust from the satellite detection, the dust occurred at night or during
a low sun angle, or the dust concentration was too weak for the detection algorithm to pick it up.
Airmass convection events and frontal passages with two or fewer dust observations were the
most common types of dust events without any visible plumes.
GOES data indicates the low topographical ancient depositional environments (e.g.,
ancient lake beds) in southwest Utah and Western Nevada are the primary dust plume emission
sources for the IMW. Figure 22 shows the approximate plume origins are mostly clustered in
certain lowland regions, most notably the Sevier Desert, Milford Flat area, Escalente Desert, and
West Desert in southwest Utah and the Carson Sink in Nevada. Gillette (1999) calls small areas
of frequent dust production “hot spots”, which are depositional environments in transitional arid
regions that have had their biological and physical crust disturbed. The aforementioned areas
receive heavy recreation and agricultural use so the crusts in these areas are likely disturbed.
The plumes are mostly oriented from the SSW and SW, indicating that the plumes are mainly
transported in southwesterly flow. Only 8.3% of the plumes had a southerly component and they
all originated in Nevada. The length of the plume lines only represents the length of the plume at
17
one particular time step and the lines are not related to plume strength or to the distance the
plume traveled. 40 (33%) plumes occurred on Delta, UT dust days, 29 (24%) on KSLC dust
days, 10 (8%) on personal notes and UAC annual report dust days, 9 (8%) on Pocatello, ID dust
days, 6 (5%) on Elko dust days, and 26 (22%) on dust days reported at multiple stations.
Interestingly, many observed plumes are not oriented towards their respective station, and days
with visible plumes have an average of 2.55 plumes, meaning there are multiple dust sources
throughout the IMW on any given dust day. Not all of the dust we observed on satellite started
as a point source. There are 11 cases when large areas of dust showed up on the satellite with no
clear origin and then were transported with the flow. The majority of these cases occurred over
western Nevada and moved southeast during the day, but a couple of these cases also occurred
over central Utah, and one over the Snake River Plain of Idaho.
It is important to note that the postfrontal environment of an intermountain cold front is
usually cloudy, which blocks satellite detection of dust plumes. In an effort to avoid a bias
towards southwest transport we computed backtrajectories for all KSLC dust events since 2004.
Using the web version of the Hybrid Single-Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory
(HYSPLIT) model (Draxler and Rolph, 2011; Rolph, 2011), we computed 6 hr backtrajectories
ending at 1000 m above KSLC using 40km Eta Data Assimilation System (EDAS) data.
Previous studies have used lagrangian transport models to trace atmospheric aerosols back to
their source (Haller et al., 2011; Gebhart et al., 2001), but they have employed different
durations, ending heights, and used ensembles. The 25 KSLC backtrajectories computed since
2004 reveal the majority of dust comes from the south-southwest and southwest (Fig. 23) making
the starting locations found from GOES imagery a good proxy for the primary emission sources.
Only the airmass convection event on July 26, 2006 and the arctic frontal passage on March 13,
18
2005 have backtrajectories starting north of KSLC. The airmass convection event did not have a
visible dust plume, but the arctic front did have a diffuse area of dust show up over the Snake
River Plain in Idaho and move south towards KSLC. Since this was a diffuse area and not a
plume it was not recorded on the plume plot (Fig. 22). The rest of the events all point towards
source regions identified by GOES imagery.
4. Conclusions
Dust events at KSLC occurred throughout the historical record, with considerable interannual
variability. The vast majority of these events have visibilities above dust storm or severe dust
storm criteria and blowing dust is the most common observer comment.
Dust events have a
bimodal monthly distribution with a primary peak in the spring and a secondary peak in the fall.
Climatological winds have a local maximum during the spring months as well, but are fairly
consistent for the remainder of the year demonstrating that winds alone cannot explain the dust
day monthly frequency. Annual and monthly dust flux calculations offer a different perspective
than the frequency distributions, but results are very similar with the exception of a more
dramatic local minimum during the summer in the monthly dust flux distribution.
This
difference is from shorter and less intense airmass convection events primarily occurring in the
summer. A third of all recent events at KSLC are forced by mesoscale airmass convection and
the rest are synoptically forced.
Almost three quarters of synoptically forced events are
baroclinic troughs or cold fronts and 25% reported dust in the prefrontal environment, 100%
during frontal passage, and two (13%) in the postfrontal environment. The other synoptically
forced events are associated with stationary baroclinic zones upstream of KSLC that produce
persistently strong southwesterly winds and events with atypical synoptically forced mechanisms
suchas arctic fronts and downstream frontal development.
19
NARR analysis suggests upper level troughing upstream of KSLC coupled with strong
anomalous southwest 700 hPa winds and a low level pressure minimum are commonly
associated with KSLC dust events. These composites are skewed towards the synoptic events
since airmass convection events have 700 hPa wind speeds and directions closer to climatology.
Planetary boundary layer heights are higher than climatology for all dust events. Surprisingly,
soil moisture in the NARR analysis does not appear to effect dust emission.
GOES data and HYSPLIT back trajectories indicate the ancient depositional
environments (e.g., ancient lake beds) in southwest Utah and Western Nevada are the primary
dust emission sources for the Intermountain West. Specifically Sevier Desert, Carson Sink,
Escalente Desert, and the Milford Flat area are common emitters. These areas experience high
agricultural and recreational use, which are dust disturbing practices that lead to increased dust
emission. Mitigating crust disturbing practices in these areas will help decrease dust flux over
the IMW, which will improve air quality and decrease dust loading in the mountain snowpack
5. Acknowledgments
6. References
Belnap, J., R. L. Reynolds, M. C. Reheis, S. L. Phillips, F. E. Urban, H. L. Goldstein, 2009:
Sediment losses and gains across a gradient of livestock grazing and plant invasion in a
cool, semi-arid grassland, Colorado Plateau, USA, Aeolian Research, 1, 27-43
20
Bisal, F. and J. Hsieh (1966) Influence of soil moisture on erodibility of soil by wind. Soil Sci.,
102, 143–14
Carlson, T.N., 1979. Atmospheric turbidity in Saharan dust outbreaks as determined by analyses
of satellite brightness data. Monthly Weather Review 107, 322–33
Chepil and Woodruff, N.P. 1963. The physics of Wind Erosion and its Controls. Advances in
Agronomy; Vol. 15, pg. 211-302
Christopher, A. S., T. A. Jones. 2010. Satellite and surface-based remote sensing of Saharan dust
aerosols. Remote Sensing of Environment 114, 1002-1007
Draxler, R.R. and Rolph, G.D., 2011. HYSPLIT (HYbrid Single-Particle Lagrangian Integrated
Trajectory) Model access via NOAA ARL READY Website
(http://ready.arl.noaa.gov/HYSPLIT.php). NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Silver
Spring, MD.
Fairlie T. D., D. J. Jacob, R. J. Park, 2007, The impact of transpacific transport of mineral dust in
the United States. Atmospheric Environment 41, 1251-1266
Federal Meteorological Handbook ,FMH, 2005 September. Surface Weather Observations and
Reports. Retreived from: http://www.ofcm.gov/fmh-1/fmh1.htm
Gebhart, K.A., Kreidenweis, S.M. and Malm, W.C. 200. Back Trajectory Analyses of fine
particulate matter measured at Big Bend National Park in the historical database and the
1996 scoping study. The Science of the Total Environment; Vol. 276, no. 1-3, pp. 185204
Gillette, D. A., 1999: A Qualitative geophysical explanation for hot spot dust emitting source
regions. Contr. Atmos. Phys., 72,1,67-77
21
Gillette, D. A., 1988: Threshold Friction Velocities for Dust Production for Agricultural Soils.
Journal of Geophysical Research, 93, D10, 12,645-12,662
Gillette, D.A., Adams, J., Endo, A., and Smith, D. 1980. Threshold Velocities for Input of Soil
Particulates into the Air by Desert Soils. Journal of Geophysical Research; Vol 87, no.
C11, pp. 9003-9016
Gorrell, M., 2011, Aug 22: Big Fourth of July weekend boosts Utah resorts. The Salt Lake
Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.sltrib.com
Goudie, A. S., and N. J. Middleton, 2001: Saharan dust storms: nature and consequences. EarthScience Reviews, 56, 197-204
Hansen, J., and L. Nazarenko, 2004: Soot climate forcing via snow and ice albedos. Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 101, 423-428.
Helgren, D.M., and J.M. Prospero. 1987. Wind velocities associated with dust deflation events in
the western Sahara. J. Clim. Appl. Meteorol. 26:1147–115
Holcombe, T. L., Ley, T. and Gillette, D.A. 1996. Effects of Prior Precipitation and Source Area
Characteristics on Threshold Wind Velocities for Blowing Dust Episodes, Sonoran
Desert 1948 – 78. Journal of Applied Meteorology; vol. 36, no. 9, pp. 1160-1175.
Husar, R.B., et al., 2001. Asian dust events of April 1998. Journal of Geophysical Research 106
(D16), 18317–1833
Jaffe, D., et al., 1999. Transport of Asian air pollution to North America. Geophysical Research
Letters 26 (6), 711–714
Mbouro, G., Bertrand J., and S. Nicholson, 1997: The Diurmal and Seasonal Cycles if WindBorne Dust Over Africa North of the Equator. J. Appl. Meteor., 36, 868–882
22
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/15200450(1997)036%3C0868:TDASCO%3E2.0.CO;2
Mc Kenna-Neuman C. and Nickling W.G., 1989: A theoretical and wind tunnel investigation of
the effect of capillary water on the entrainment of sediment by wind. Canadian Journal
of Soil Science. Vol 69, 79-96
Mesinger, F., and Coauthors, 2006: North American Regional Reanalysis. Bull. Amer. Meteor.
Soc., 87, 343–360
Morales, C., 1979. The use of Meteorological Observations for Studies of the Mobilization,
Transport and Deposition of Saharan Soil Dust. In Saharan Dust. John Wiley and Sons
Ltd. Pp. 119-131.
Nakata, J.K., Wilshire, H.G. and Barnes, G.G. 1979. Origin of Mojave Desert dust plumes
photographed from space. Geology; Vol. 4, pp. 644-648.
NCDC, 2001: http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/inventories/ish-tech-report.pdf
NCDC, 2008: Data documentation for data set 3505 (DSI-3505) Integrated Surface Data.
[Available
from
http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/documentlibrary/tddoc/td3505.pdf].
Neff, J. C., and Coauthors, 2008: Increasing eolian dust deposition in the western United States
linked to human activity. Nature Geosci., 1, 189-195.
Nicholson, S. (2000) Land surface processes and Sahel climate. Rev. Geophys., 38, 117–13
Painter, T. H., J. S. Deems, J. Belnap, A. F. Hamlet, C. C. Landry, and B. Udall, 2010: Response
of Colorado River runoff to dust radiative forcing in snow. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S.
A., NEED FINAL VOLUME AND PAGES.
23
Painter, T. H., and Coauthors, 2007: Impact of disturbed desert soils on duration of mountain
snow cover. Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L12502, doi:10.1029/2007GL030284.
Pope, C.A., Jr, Bates, D.V. and Raizenne, M.E. (1996) Health effects of particulate air pollution:
time for reassessment?. Env. Health Perspect., 103, 472–48
Prospero, J. M. 2003. African Droughts and Dust Transport to the Caribbean: Climate Change
Implications. Science 302, 1024
Qian, Weihong, Lingshen Quan, Shaoyin Shi, 2002: Variations of the dust storm in china and its
climatic control. J. Climate, 15, 1216–1229
Ramanathan, V., Crutzen, P.J., Kiehl, J.T. and Rosenfeld, D. (2001) Aerosols, climate, and the
hydrological cycle. Science, 294, 2119–2124
Reid, J. S., Kinney, J. E., Westphal, D. L, Holben, B. N., Welton, E. J., Tsay, S. -C., et al.
(2003). Analysis of measurements of Saharan dust by airborne and ground-based remote
sensing methods during the Puerto Rico Dust Experiment (PRIDE). Journal of
Geophysical Research, 108(D19), 8586. doi:10.1029/2002JD002493.
Rolph, G.D., 2011. Real-time Environmental Applications and Display sYstem (READY).
Website (http://ready.arl.noaa.gov). NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Silver Spring,
MD.
Saleh, A. and Fryrear, D.W. (1995) Threshold wind velocities of wet soils as affected by wind
blown sand. Soil Sci., 160, 304–309
Salt Lake City Department of Public Utilities, 1999: Salt Lake City Watershed Management
Plan.
Bear
West
Consulting
Team,
129
pp.
www.slcgov.com/utilities/PDF%20Files/slcwatershedmgtplan.pdf].
24
[Available
from
Shao, Y., and J. Wang, 2003: A climatology of northeast Asian dust events. Meteor. Zeitschrift,
12, 187-196.
Schwartz J, Norris G, Larson T, Sheppard L, Claiborne C, Koenig J. 1999. Episodes of high
coarse particle concentrations are not associated with increased mortality. Environ Health
Perspect.107:339–34
Steenburgh, W. J., and T. I. Alcott, 2009: Secrets of the "Greatest Snow on Earth". Bull. Amer.
Meteor. Soc., 89, 1285-1293.
Swap, R., Ulanski, S., Cobbett, M., Garstang, M., 1996. Temporal and spatial characteristics of
Saharan dust outbreaks. Journal of Geophysical Research 101 D2 , 4205–4220
Tanaka, T. Y., and M. Chiba, 2006: A numerical study of the contributions of dust source
regions to the global dust budget. Glob. Planet. Change, 52, 88-104.
Tanré, D., Haywood, J., Pelon, J., Léon, J. F., Chatenet, B., Formenti, P., et al. (2003).
Measurement and modeling of the Saharan dust radiative impact: Overview of the
Saharan Dust Experiment (SHADE). Journal of Geophysical Research, 108(D18), 8574.
doi:10.1029/2002JD003273
WMO, 2009: Manual on Codes. See WMO (2009b) in my directory. We'll need to do full
reference eventually.
Yasunori, K., and M. Masao, 2002: Seaonsla and Regional Characteristics of Dust Event in the
Taklimakan Desert. Journal of Arid Land Studies, 11-4, 245-252
Zhoa, T., S. Ackerman, W. Guo, 2010: Dust and smoke detection for multi-channel imagers.
Remote Sensing, 2, 2347-2368
25
Zobeck, T.M., Fryrear, D.W. and Pettit, R.D. (1989) Management effects on wind-eroded
sediment and plant nutrients. J. Soil Water Cons., 44, 160–16
Figure Captions
Fig. 1. Topography and geography of the study region.
Fig. 2. Examples of dust layering in the late-season Wasatch Mountain snowpack. (a) Ben
Lomond Peak (XXXX m), April 2005. (b) Alta 2009, (b) Alta 2010.
Table 1: DS-3505 dust-related present-weather categories, including full and abbreviated (i.e.,
used in the text) descriptions and the number of total and used reports at Salt Lake City.
Category
06
07
08
09
Full Description
Widespread dust in suspension in the air, not raised by wind at or near
the station at the time of observation
Dust or sand raised by wind at or near the station at the time of
observation, but no well-developed dust whirl(s) or sand whirl(s), and
no duststorm or sandstorm seen
Well developed dust whirl(s) or sand whirl(s) seen at or near the
station during the preceding hour or at the time of observation, but no
duststorm or sandstorm
Duststorm or sandstorm within sight at the time of observation, or at
the station during the preceding hour
26
Abbreviated Description
Dust in suspension
Reports
178 (155)
Blowing dust
905 (867)
Dust whirl(s)
1 (0)
Duststorm
2(1)
30
31
32
33
34
35
98
Slight or moderate duststorm or sandstorm has decreased during the
preceding hour
Slight or moderate duststorm or sandstorm no appreciable change
during the preceding hour
Slight or moderate duststorm or sandstorm has begun or has increased
during the preceding hour
Severe duststorm or sandstorm has decreased during the preceding
hour
Severe duststorm or sandstorm no appreciable change during the
preceding hour
Severe duststorm or sandstorm has begun or has increased during the
preceding hour
Thunderstorm combined with duststorm or sandstorm at time of
observation, thunderstorm at time of observation
Duststorm
1 (0)
Duststorm
1 (0)
Duststorm
1 (0)
Duststorm
0 (0)
Duststorm
0 (0)
Duststorm
0 (0)
Duststorm
2 (0)
Table 2
Date
Airmass
Convection
Upstream Stationary
baroclinic trough or
cold front
Baroclinic trough or cold
front
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
3/23/2002
4/15/2002
6/1/2002
X
9/16/2002
X
2/1/2003
4/1/2003
X
4/2/2003
27
X
X
X
X
X
Other Synoptic
Patterns
Notes
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
9/16/2003
4/28/2004
5/10/2004
7/9/2004
X
10/17/2004
X
3/13/2005
4/13/2005
5/16/2005
7/22/2005
X
7/30/2005
X
5/19/2006
X
7/19/2006
X
7/26/2006
X
4/29/2008
5/20/2008
7/27/2008
X
28
X
Trough forms to
the south
X
X
Arctic front
X
X
X
X
X
X
Stationary
8/31/2008
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
Prefrontal
Frontal
Postfrontal
3/4/2009
3/21/2009
X
6/30/2009
X
8/5/2009
X
8/6/2009
8/30/2009
X
9/30/2009
3/30/2010
4/27/2010
29
X
trough at first
X
Stationary
trough at first
X
X
Many Smoke
Obs
X
X
X
X
X
X