Skip to main content
Log in

Predicting concentrations in plumes subject to dry deposition

  • Letter
  • Published:

From Nature

View current issue Submit your manuscript

Abstract

THE source depletion1 estimation of dry deposition from the atmosphere is less accurate than the physically more correct surface depletion method2,3. Several surface depletion models2–9 have been developed but the source depletion method is still used1,10. The errors introduced by using the latter might have important consequences for assessing the impact of deposition from anthropogen sources. Only the recent4–6 studies discussed here quantify the descrepancy between the two deposition methods We suggest that a ratio R, based on a representative measure of the eddy diffusivity, plume height, and the deposition velocity, should be used to discriminate between cases where the source depletion method introduces significant errors and those where the difference between the two methods is negligible.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Van der Hoven, I. in Meteorology and Atomic Energy (ed. Slade, D.) 202–208 (USAEC, TID 24190, 1968).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gotaas, Y. Lecture Note no. 39/76, 1–18 (Norwegian Institute for Air Research, Kjeller, Norway, 1976).

  3. Bolin, B. & Persson, C. Tellus 27, 281–309 (1975).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  4. Berkowicz, R. & Prahm, L. P. Atm. Environ. 12 (in the press).

  5. Horst, T. W. Atm. Environ. 11, 41–46 (1977).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Draxler, R. R. & Elliott, W. P. Atm. Environ. 11, 35–40 (1977).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Scriven, R. A. & Fisher, B. E. A. Atm. Environ. 9, 49–68 (1975).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Monin, A. S. Adv. Geophys. 6, 435–436 (1958).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  9. Smith, F. B. J. atm. Sci. 19, 429–434 (1962).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  10. Reactor Safety Study (Nucl. Regul. Comm., Germantown, Md. WASH-1400, App. VI, 1975).

  11. Pasquill, F. Atmospheric Diffusion (Wiley, New York, 1974).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Calder, K. L. J. Meteor. 18, 413–416 (1961).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Garland, J. A. Atm. Environ. 12 (in the press).

  14. Belot, Y., Baille, A. & Delmas, J. L. Atm. Environ. 10, 89–98 (1976).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Nieuwstadt, F. T. M. in 8th Proc. Int. Tech. Mtg Air Poll. Modelling Appl. (NATO/CCMS, 1977, in the press).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

PRAHM, L., BERKOWICZ, R. Predicting concentrations in plumes subject to dry deposition. Nature 271, 232–234 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1038/271232a0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/271232a0

  • Springer Nature Limited

This article is cited by

Navigation