% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{vonHobe:57412,
      author       = {von Hobe, M. and Salawitch, R. J. and Canty, T. and
                      Keller-Rudek, H. and Moortgat, G. K. and Grooß, J.-U. and
                      Müller, R. and Stroh, F.},
      title        = {{U}nderstanding the kinetics of the {CIO} dimer cycle},
      journal      = {Atmospheric chemistry and physics},
      volume       = {7},
      issn         = {1680-7316},
      address      = {Katlenburg-Lindau},
      publisher    = {EGU},
      reportid     = {PreJuSER-57412},
      pages        = {3055 - 3069},
      year         = {2007},
      note         = {Record converted from VDB: 12.11.2012},
      abstract     = {Among the major factors controlling ozone loss in the polar
                      vortices in winter/spring is the kinetics of the ClO dimer
                      catalytic cycle. Here, we propose a strategy to test and
                      improve our understanding of these kinetics by comparing and
                      combining information on the thermal equilibrium between ClO
                      and Cl2O2, the rate of Cl2O2 formation, and the Cl2O2
                      photolysis rate from laboratory experiments, theoretical
                      studies and field observations. Concordant with a number of
                      earlier studies, we find considerable inconsistencies of
                      some recent laboratory results with rate theory calculations
                      and stratospheric observations of ClO and Cl2O2. The set of
                      parameters for which we find the best overall consistency -
                      namely the ClO/Cl2O2 equilibrium constant suggested by
                      Plenge et al. ( 2005), the Cl2O2 recombination rate constant
                      reported by Nickolaisen et al. ( 1994) and Cl2O2 photolysis
                      rates based on absorption cross sections in the range
                      between the JPL 2006 assessment and the laboratory study by
                      Burkholder et al. ( 1990) - is not congruent with the latest
                      recommendations given by the JPL and IUPAC panels and does
                      not represent the laboratory studies currently regarded as
                      the most reliable experimental values. We show that the
                      incorporation of new Pope et al. ( 2007) Cl2O2 absorption
                      cross sections into several models, combined with best
                      estimates for other key parameters ( based on either JPL and
                      IUPAC evaluations or on our study), results in severe model
                      underestimates of observed ClO and observed ozone loss
                      rates. This finding suggests either the existence of an
                      unknown process that drives the partitioning of ClO and
                      Cl2O2, or else some unidentified problem with either the
                      laboratory study or numerous measurements of atmospheric
                      ClO. Our mechanistic understanding of the ClO/Cl2O2 system
                      is grossly lacking, with severe implications for our ability
                      to simulate both present and future polar ozone depletion.},
      keywords     = {J (WoSType)},
      cin          = {ICG-1},
      ddc          = {550},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)VDB790},
      pnm          = {Atmosphäre und Klima},
      pid          = {G:(DE-Juel1)FUEK406},
      shelfmark    = {Meteorology $\&$ Atmospheric Sciences},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:000247572500001},
      doi          = {10.5194/acp-7-3055-2007},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/57412},
}