c © Author(s) 2007. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions
General comment. This paper is a useful review. I recommend that it be published after revisions. The ratio of words to figures seems unbalanced; there are only 10 figures in a long paper. Major comments. Regarding the UV absorption coefficient of ice (page 5964 line 19). Perovich and Govoni 1991 (P...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Text |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2007
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.534.5884 http://www.cosis.net/copernicus/EGU/acpd/7/S2607/acpd-7-S2607_p.pdf?PHPSESSID=11984d305fdec8c32c5f532058346656 |
| Summary: | General comment. This paper is a useful review. I recommend that it be published after revisions. The ratio of words to figures seems unbalanced; there are only 10 figures in a long paper. Major comments. Regarding the UV absorption coefficient of ice (page 5964 line 19). Perovich and Govoni 1991 (PG) has been superseded by Ackermann et al. 2006 and Warren et al. 2006. Figure 5 of Warren et al. shows that the UV absorption coefficients are a factor of 100 smaller than reported by PG. The consequence is that extinction coefficients in snow computed using PG’s values will be a factor of 10 too large (square-root of 100). S2607 The section on remote sensing (Section 3) seems out of place in this paper, given the title of the paper. That section could be removed. Specific comments. page 5943 line 6. For comparison, it would be interesting also to give the SAI for the dry-snow zone of Greenland (i.e., integrated down to the close-off depth). page 5950 eq. 1.4-4. What are the units of C: g per cubic cm of snow, or g per cubic cm of interstitial air? Should phi be in the numerator instead of the denominator? |
|---|