[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: <none>
- From: email@example.com (Ray Najjar)
- Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 10:21:35 -0400 (EDT)
Ernst et al.,
There are (at least) two runs of interest with regard to the carbon chemistry:
the solubility pump and the biological model.
For the solubility pump run, we discussed at the recent US OCMIP meeting how
to specify surface chemistry. We agreed that mean surface alkalinity,
salinity-normalized, would be best. For consistency, we would do the same
for phosphate and silicate. What do you think?
For the common biological (nutrient-restoring) model, alkalinity and phosphate
are in the model, and can therefore be used in the carbon chemistry
calculation. Silicate is not in the model, but Ferial produced a monthly
silicate climatology that could be used.
> From firstname.lastname@example.org Wed Jun 24 05:55 EDT 1998
> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 98 11:54:19 +0200
> From: email@example.com (E.Maier-Reimer)
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: <none>
> Obviously, my request for KSi is fulfilled by co2calc.f.
> I apologize having it overlooked.
> Assuming total silica of 50 mikromoles/kg (only in Antarctic surface waters
> realistic) its contribution to storage of additional CO2 is appr. 5 %
> of that of the boron system at pH=8, and one % at pH=7.
> Everybody has silica as model variable?