A comparative study of two extreme dust events in the deserts and gobi regions in the arid regions of northwest China

doi:10.11755/j.issn.1006-7639(2024)-02-0197

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to deeply understand the evolution and driving factors of extreme dust events, two dust storm events that erupted in the deserts and gobi regions in the arid regions of northwest China on 31 March 2007 (“3·31” dust event) and 14 March 2021 (“3·14” dust event) were selected, and their temporal and spatial evolution, high and low altitude circulation configuration, and changes in near-surface meteorological elements were compared and analyzed based on multi-source satellite remote sensing and reanalysis data. The results are as follows: (1) Both extreme events occurred in the Taklimakan Desert and the Gobi Desert, respectively, and they were influenced by upper-and-lower weather systems. The“3·31” dust event was influenced by a surface cold front and a ridge at high altitude. The northwesterly winds in front of the ridge, in cooperation with the vertical motion caused by the cold front, transported dust downstream. The “3·14” dust event, on the other hand, was influenced by a Mongolian cyclone and an upper-air trough. The northwesterly winds following the cyclone, along with the vertical motion induced by the cyclone, swept up dust and transported it downstream through the northwesterly winds following the trough. (2) Both extreme dust events exhibited prolonged durations. The “3·31” dust event was influenced by the high-pressure ridge, a sea level pressure field with little variation and the surrounding topography. This configuration resulted in a stable atmosphere, preventing the deposition and transport of dust. Different from the event above, the “3·14” dust event was caused by the persistent high pressure over northern China, which led to southerly and easterly winds that prevented dust spreading downstream. (3) Before occurrence of the extreme dust events, both the Taklimakan Desert and Gobi Desert experienced high temperature, less precipitation, and depleted soil moisture, which formed favorable dynamic conditions and material foundations, such as strong winds and dry soils, for the outbreak of the two dust events.

Key words: deserts and gobi regions in the arid regions of northwest China, extreme dust events, weather system configuration, near-surface meteorological factors

摘要：

为深入理解极端沙尘暴事件的演变过程和驱动因子，结合多源卫星遥感及再分析数据，挑选2007年3月31日（“3·31”事件）和2021年3月14日（“3·14”事件）爆发于西北干旱区荒漠戈壁的两次沙尘暴事件，对比分析了其时空演变、高低空环流配置、近地面气象要素的变化。结果表明：（1）两次极端事件分别爆发于塔克拉玛干沙漠及戈壁荒漠，均受高低层天气系统影响。其中，“3·31”事件受地面冷锋和高空脊控制，脊前西北冷空气与地面冷锋引起的垂直运动配合，将沙尘往下游输送；而“3·14”事件则受蒙古气旋和高空槽影响，气旋后的偏北风和气旋引发的垂直运动将沙尘卷起至高层大气，并通过槽后西北风将其往下游输送；（2）两次极端沙尘事件均有持续时间长的特点，区别在于“3·31”事件主要受高压脊、均压场和周边地形影响，大气层结稳定，沙尘不易沉降和输送，而“3·14”事件则因中国北部持续性高压导致的偏南风和偏东风阻止了沙尘向下游扩散；（3）两次极端沙尘事件爆发前，塔克拉玛干和戈壁荒漠均出现了高温、降水减少及土壤水分枯竭现象，即强风和干燥土壤。为极端沙尘事件的爆发创造了有利的动力条件和物质基础。

关键词: 西北干旱区荒漠戈壁, 极端沙尘事件, 天气系统配置, 近地面气象要素

CLC Number:

P429

DONG Yuanzhu, WANG Tianhe, TAN Ruiqi, WANG Sichen, JIAO Yingzi, TANG Jingyi. A comparative study of two extreme dust events in the deserts and gobi regions in the arid regions of northwest China[J]. Journal of Arid Meteorology, 2024, 42(2): 197-208.

董元柱, 王天河, 谭睿琦, 王思晨, 焦英姿, 唐靖宜. 西北干旱区荒漠戈壁两次极端沙尘事件的对比研究[J]. 干旱气象, 2024, 42(2): 197-208.

Figures/Tables 10

Fig.1 The location of the Taklamakan Desert （black solid line frame）， the Gobi Desert （black dotted frame） and the meteorological stations

Fig.2 The inter-annual variations of the maximum comprehensive intensity of extreme dust events in the Taklamakan Desert and the Gobi Desert from 2005 to 2021 （The black circles represent the two extreme dust events with the strongest comprehensive intensity）

Fig.3 The inter-annual variation of minimum visibility observed at different stations during the extreme dust events in the Taklimakan Desert （a） and the Gobi Desert （b） from 2005 to 2021 （The black circle represents the minimum visibility during the two extreme dust events with the strongest comprehensive intensity）

Fig.4 Evolution of MODIS daily mean aerosol optical depth （AOD） during the “3·31” dust event period in the Taklimakan Desert and the “3·14” dust event period in the Gobi Desert （the black lines denote the track of CALIPSO）

Fig.5 The vertical profiles of the 532 nm total attenuated backscatter coefficient （the left）， the 532 nm aerosol extinction coefficient （the middle）， and the aerosol types （the right） observed by CALIPSO during the “3·31” dust event period in the Taklimakan Desert and the “3·14” dust event period in the Gobi Desert along the black solid line in fig.4， respectively （For the color bar of the right pictures， the number 1 represents undetermined aerosol， 2 is for clean marine aerosol， 3 is for dust aerosol， 4 is for polluted continental/smoke aerosol， 5 is for clean continental aerosol， 6 is for polluted dust aerosol， 7 is for elevated smoke aerosol， 8 is for marine dust aerosol， and 9 is for cloud）

Fig.6 The geopotential height field （color shaded， Unit： gpm） and temperature field （black isolines， Unit： ℃） at 500 hPa （a， b）， sea level pressure field （color shaded， Unit： hPa） and 10 m wind field （arrow vectors， Unit： m·s-1）（c， d）， 10 m wind field anomalies （Unit： m·s-1）（e， f） and 2 m temperature field anomalies （Unit： ℃）（g， h） on the day before （on 30 March 2007）（a， c， e， g） and at the outbreak （on 31 March 2007）（b， d， f， h） of the “3·31” dust event in the Taklimakan Desert （The black solid line frame is the Taklamakan Desert area. the same as bellow ）

Fig.7 The geopotential height field （color shaded， Unit： gpm） and temperature field （black isolines， Unit： ℃） at 500 hPa （a， b）， sea level pressure field （color shaded， Unit： hPa） and 10 m wind field （arrow vectors， Unit： m·s-1）（c， d）， 10 m wind field anomalies （Unit： m·s-1）（e， f） and 2 m temperature field anomalies （Unit： ℃）（g， h） on the day before （on 13 March 2021）（a， c， e， g） and at the outbreak （on 14 March 2021）（b， d， f， h） of the “3·14” dust event in the Gobi Desert （The black dotted frame is the Taklamakan Desert area. the same as bellow ）

Fig.8 Sea level pressure field （color shaded， Unit： hPa）， 500 hPa geopotential height field （black contours， Unit： gpm） and 850 hPa wind field （ arrow vectors， Unit： m·s-1） at 12：00 on the first three days of the maintenance period of the “3·31” dust event in the Taklimakan Desert （a， b， c） and the “3·14” dust event in the Gobi Desert （d， e， f）

Fig.9 The 2 m temperature anomaly （Unit： ℃）（a， b）， total precipitation anomaly （Unit： mm）（c， d）， and soil volumetric water anomaly （Unit： m3·m-3）（e， f） in 2 weeks before the “3·31” dust event in the Taklimakan Desert and the “3·14” dust event in the Gobi Desert with reference to the 1992-2021 climatology

Fig.10 The average 2 m temperature （a）， total precipitation （b）， and soil volumetric water content （c） in the dust source area in two weeks before the the “3·31” dust event in the Taklimakan Desert and the “3·14” dust event in the Gobi Desert

References 39

[1]	阿不力米提江·阿布力克木, 李娜, 赵克明, 等, 2019. 塔里木盆地一次“东灌”沙尘暴大气边界层特征[J]. 沙漠与绿洲气象, 13(5): 55-61.
[2]	陈思宇, 黄建平, 李景鑫, 等, 2017. 塔克拉玛干沙漠和戈壁沙尘起沙,传输和沉降的对比研究[J]. 中国科学:地球科学, 47(8): 939-957.
[3]	程红霞, 林粤江, 陈鹏, 等, 2023. 塔里木盆地沙尘天气日数变化及影响因素[J]. 干旱区研究, 40(11): 1 707-1 717.
[4]	黄建平, 陈文, 温之平, 等, 2019. 新中国成立70年以来的中国大气科学研究:气候与气候变化篇[J]. 中国科学:地球科学, 49(10): 1 607-1 640.
[5]	李汉林, 何清, 金莉莉, 2020. 塔克拉玛干沙漠腹地和北缘典型天气近地层风速廓线特征[J]. 干旱气象, 38(6): 965-978.
[6]	廖家艳, 周天, 韩璧森, 等, 2023. 我国西北半干旱区气溶胶类型的地基激光雷达判别[J]. 干旱气象, 41(4): 570-578. DOI
[7]	曼吾拉·卡德尔, 张璐, 刘鑫华, 等, 2023. 塔里木盆地两次沙尘天气过程对比分析[J]. 中国沙漠, 43(4): 76-88. DOI
[8]	齐斐斐, 买买提艾力·买买提依明, 霍文, 等, 2020. 塔克拉玛干沙漠腹地地表辐射和能量平衡及小气候特征[J]. 干旱气象, 38(1): 32-39.
[9]	热孜瓦古·孜比布拉, 阿依谢姆古丽·孜比不拉, 胡素琴, 等, 2021. 喀什地区浮尘天气特征及一次重污染天气成因分析[J]. 沙漠与绿洲气象, 15(1): 69-74.
[10]	吴盈盈, 刘旭阳, 王振亭, 2022. 巴丹吉林沙漠腹地沙尘事件对近地表气温和太阳总辐射的影响[J]. 沙漠与绿洲气象, 16(2): 85-90.
[11]	徐路扬, 翟亮, 王媛媛, 等, 2023. 多源遥感数据在北京春季沙尘天气监测中的应用评估[J]. 干旱气象, 41(2): 318-327. DOI
[12]	杨晓军, 张强, 叶培龙, 等, 2021. 中国北方2021年3月中旬持续性沙尘天气的特征及其成因[J]. 中国沙漠, 41(3): 245-255. DOI
[13]	阴璐璐, 何清, 李京龙, 等, 2023. 基于地基雷达探究和田市一次沙尘污染过程[J]. 中国环境科学, 43(12): 6 290-6 300.
[14]	尹志聪, 霍芊伊, 麻晓晴, 等, 2023. 触发2023年春季中国北方沙尘暴的沙源累积和天气扰动机制[J]. 大气科学学报, 46(3): 321-331.
[15]	ADAMS A M, PROSPERO J M, ZHANG C D, 2012. CALIPSO-derived three-dimensional structure of aerosol over the Atlantic Basin and adjacent continents[J]. Journal of Climate, 25 (19): 6 862-6 879.
[16]	ANDERSON T L, WU Y H, CHU D A, et al, 2005. Testing the MODIS satellite retrieval of aerosol fine-mode fraction[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 110(D18), D18204. DOI: 110.10.1029/2005jd005978.
[17]	CHEN S Y, HUANG J P, LI J X, et al, 2017. Comparison of dust emissions, transport, and deposition between the Taklimakan Desert and Gobi Desert from 2007 to 2011[J]. Science China-Earth Sciences, 60(7): 1 338-1 355.
[18]	CHEN S Y, ZHAO D, HUANG J P, et al, 2023. Mongolia contributed more than 42% of the dust concentrations in Northern China in March and April 2023[J]. Advances in Atmospheric Sciences, 40(9): 1 549-1 557.
[19]	FAN K, WANG H J, 2004. Antarctic oscillation and the dust weather frequency in North China[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 31(10), DOI: 10.1029/2004GL019465.
[20]	GINOUX P, DEROUBAIX A, 2017. Space observations of dust in East Asia[M]// BOUARARI, WANGX, BRASSEURG. Air Pollution in Eastern Asia:An Integrated Perspective. ISSI Scientific Report Series, vol 16. Springer, Cham.
[21]	GUI K, CHE H Z, ZHENG Y, et al, 2021. Three-dimensional climatology, trends, and meteorological drivers of global and regional tropospheric type-dependent aerosols: Insights from 13 years (2007-2019) of CALIOP observations[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 21(19): 15 309-15 336.
[22]	GUO J P, LOU M Y, MIAO Y C, et al, 2017. Trans-Pacific transport of dust aerosols from East Asia: Insights gained from multiple observations and modeling[J]. Environmental Pollution, 230: 1 030-1 039.
[23]	GUPTA P, REMER L A, LEVY R C, et al, 2018. Validation of MODIS 3 km land aerosol optical depth from NASA’s EOS Terra and Aqua missions[J]. Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 11(5): 3 145-3 159.
[24]	HAN Y, WANG T H, TANG J Y, et al, 2022. New insights into the Asian dust cycle derived from CALIPSO lidar measurements[J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 272, 112906. DOI: 10.1016/j.rse.2022.112906.
[25]	HAYWOOD J M, FRANCIS P N, GLEW M D, et al, 2001. Optical properties and direct radiative effect of Saharan dust: A case study of two Saharan dust outbreaks using aircraft data[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 106(D16): 18 417-18 430.
[26]	HERSBACH H, BELL B, BERRISFORD P, et al, 2020. The ERA5 global reanalysis[J]. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 146(730): 1 999-2 049.
[27]	PROSPERO J M, GINOUX P, TORRES O, et al, 2002. Environmental characterization of global sources of atmospheric soil dust identified with the nimbus 7 total ozone mapping spectrometer (TOMS) absorbing aerosol product[J]. Reviews of Geophysics, 40(1), 1002. DOI: 10.1029/2000RG000095
[28]	PU B, GINOUX P, 2018. How reliable are CMIP5 models in simulating dust optical depth?[J] Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 18 (16): 12 491-12 510.
[29]	PU B, JIN Q, 2021. A record-breaking trans-atlantic African dust plume associated with atmospheric circulation extremes in June 2020[J]. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 102(7): E1340-E1356.
[30]	SAVTCHENKO A, OUZOUNOV D, AHMAD S, et al, 2004. Terra and Aqua MODIS products available from NASA GES DAAC[J]. Advances in Space Research, 34(10): 710-714.
[31]	SCHUERGER A C, SMITH D J, GRIFFIN D W, et al, 2018. Science questions and knowledge gaps to study microbial transport and survival in Asian and African dust plumes reaching North America[J]. Aerobiologia, 34 (4): 425-435.
[32]	SONG Q Q, ZHANG Z B, YU H B, et al, 2021. Global dust optical depth climatology derived from CALIOP and MODIS aerosol retrievals on decadal timescales: Regional and interannual variability[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 21(17): 13 369-13 395.
[33]	UNO I, EGUCHI K, YUMIMOTO K, et al, 2011. Large Asian dust layers continuously reached North America in April 2010[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 11(14): 7 333-7 341.
[34]	WANG T, HAN Y, HUANG J, et al, 2020. Climatology of dust-forced radiative heating over the Tibetan Plateau and its surroundings[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 125 (17), e2020JD032942. DOI: 10.1029/2020JD032942.
[35]	WINKER D M, VAUGHAN M A, OMAR A, et al, 2009. Overview of the CALIPSO mission and CALIOP data processing algorithms[J]. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 26 (11): 2 310-2 323.
[36]	WU C L, LIN Z H, SHAO Y P, et al, 2022. Drivers of recent decline in dust activity over East Asia[J]. Nature Communications, 13 (1), 7105. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-34823-3. PMID
[37]	YAO W R, GUI K, WANG Y Q, et al, 2021. Identifying the dominant local factors of 2000-2019 changes in dust loading over East Asia[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 777, 146064. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146064.
[38]	YIN Z C, WAN Y, ZHANG Y J, et al, 2022. Why super sandstorm 2021 in North China?[J]. National Science Review, 9(3), nwab165. DOI: 10.1093/nsr/nwab165.
[39]	YU X N, LÜ R, KUMAR K R, et al, 2016. Dust aerosol properties and radiative forcing observed in spring during 2001-2014 over urban Beijing, China[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23 (15): 15 432-15 442.