Pyro‐cumulonimbus injection of smoke to the stratosphere: Observations and impact of a super blowup in northwestern Canada on 3–4 August 1998
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report observations and analysis of a pyro‐cumulonimbus event in the midst of a boreal forest fire blowup in Northwest Territories Canada, near Norman Wells, on 3–4 August 1998. We find that this blowup caused a five‐fold increase in lower stratospheric aerosol burden, as well as multiple reports of anomalous enhancements of tropospheric gases and aerosols across Europe 1 week later. Our observations come from solar occultation satellites (POAM III and SAGE II), nadir imagers (GOES, AVHRR, SeaWiFS, DMSP), TOMS, lidar, and backscattersonde. First, we provide a detailed analysis of the 3 August eruption of extreme pyro‐convection. This includes identifying the specific pyro‐cumulonimbus cells that caused the lower stratospheric aerosol injection, and a meteorological analysis. Next, we characterize the altitude, composition, and opacity of the post‐convection smoke plume on 4–7 August. Finally, the stratospheric impact of this injection is analyzed. Satellite images reveal two noteworthy pyro‐cumulonimbus phenomena: (1) an active‐convection cloud top containing enough smoke to visibly alter the reflectivity of the cloud anvil in the Upper Troposphere Lower Stratosphere (UTLS) and (2) a smoke plume, that endured for at least 2 hours, atop an anvil. The smoke pall deposited by the Norman Wells pyro‐convection was a very large, optically dense, UTLS‐level plume on 4 August that exhibited a mesoscale cyclonic circulation. An analysis of plume color/texture from SeaWiFS data, aerosol index, and brightness temperature establishes the extreme altitude and “pure” smoke composition of this unique plume. We show what we believe to be a first‐ever measurement of strongly enhanced ozone in the lower stratosphere mingled with smoke layers. We conclude that two to four extreme pyro‐thunderstorms near Norman Wells created a smoke injection of hemispheric scope that substantially increased stratospheric optical depth, transported aerosols 7 km above the tropopause (above ∼430 K potential temperature), and also perturbed lower stratospheric ozone.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".