Abstract We intercompare Stratospheric Column Ozone (SCO) and ozone profiles retrieved from GOME data with ozonesonde and SAGE-II data for 1996-1999. GOME.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Simultaneous profile measurements of BrO, OClO and NO 2 in the polar vortex Chris Sioris and Kelly Chance Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory.
Advertisements

DIRECT TROPOSPHERIC OZONE RETRIEVALS FROM SATELLITE ULTRAVIOLET RADIANCES Alexander D. Frolov, University of Maryland Robert D. Hudson, University of.
15% 1. ABSTRACT We show results from joint TES-OMI retrievals for May, We combine TES and OMI data by linear updates from the spectral residuals.
Variability in Ozone Profiles at TexAQS within the Context of an US Ozone Climatology Mohammed Ayoub 1, Mike Newchurch 1 2, Brian Vasel 3 Bryan Johnson.
Validation of Tropospheric Emission Spectrometer (TES) nadir stare ozone profiles using ozonesonde measurements during Arctic Research on the Composition.
Interpreting MLS Observations of the Variabilities of Tropical Upper Tropospheric O 3 and CO Chenxia Cai, Qinbin Li, Nathaniel Livesey and Jonathan Jiang.
Tangent height offsets estimated by correlation analysis of ground-based data with O 3 limb profiles J.A.E. van Gijsel Y.J. Meijer.
Assimilation of TES O 3 data in GEOS-Chem Mark Parrington, Dylan Jones, Dave MacKenzie University of Toronto Kevin Bowman Jet Propulsion Laboratory California.
1 Ozone Profile Retrieval from SBUV/2 Sweep Mode Data---Preliminary Results Xiong Liu, Kelly Chance Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Matthew.
Xiong Liu Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics December 20, 2004 Direct Tropospheric Ozone Retrieval from GOME.
Xiong Liu Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Kelly Chance, Christopher Sioris, Robert Spurr, Thomas Kurosu, Randall Martin,
On average TES exhibits a small positive bias in the middle and lower troposphere of less than 15% and a larger negative bias of up to 30% in the upper.
Xiong Liu, Kelly Chance, and Thomas Kurosu Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Cambridge, MA, USA The 36 th COSPAR Scientific Assembly Beijing,
Xiong Liu Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Kelly Chance, Thomas Kurosu, Christopher Sioris, Robert.
1 Global Observations of Sulfur Dioxide from GOME Xiong Liu 1, Kelly Chance 1, Neil Moore 2, Randall V. Martin 1,2, and Dylan Jones 3 1 Harvard-Smithsonian.
1 Cross Evaluation of OMI, TES, and GEOS-Chem Tropospheric Ozone Xiong Liu 1, Lin Zhang 2, Kelly Chance 1, John R. Worden 3, Kevin W. Bowman 3, Thomas.
Ground-based validation of SCIAMACHY OL 3.0 Ozone Profile Data and Estimation of Altitude Shift.
Assimilation of EOS-Aura Data in GEOS-5: Evaluation of ozone in the Upper Troposphere - Lower Stratosphere K. Wargan, S. Pawson, M. Olsen, J. Witte, A.
Introduction A new methodology is developed for integrating complementary ground-based data sources to provide consistent ozone vertical distribution time.
Explore. Discover. Understand. AIR-BROADENED LINE WIDTHS AND SHIFTS IN THE ν 3 BAND OF 16 O 3 AT TEMPERATURES BETWEEN 160 AND 300 K M. A. H. SMITH and.
Irion et al., May 3, 2005 Page 1 Ozone validation for AIRS V4 Fredrick W. Irion, Michael R. Gunson Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology.
The ozone vertical structure determining from ground-based Fourier spectrometer solar IR radiation measurements Ya.A. Virolainen, Yu.M. Timofeyev, D.V.
Intercomparison methods for satellite sensors: application to tropospheric ozone and CO measurements from Aura Daniel J. Jacob, Lin Zhang, Monika Kopacz.
Occurrence of TOMS V7 Level-2 Ozone Anomalies over Cloudy Areas Xiong Liu, 1 Mike Newchurch, 1,2 and Jae Kim 1,3 1. Department of Atmospheric Science,
Xiong Liu, Mike Newchurch Department of Atmospheric Science University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, Alabama, USA
TRENDS IN ATMOSPHERIC OZONE FROM A LONG-TERM OZONE CLIMATOLOGY Jane Liu 1,2, D. W. Tarasick 3, V. E. Fioletov 3, C. McLinden 3, J. H. Y. Jung 1, T. Zhao.
OMI total-ozone anomaly and its impact on tropospheric ozone retrieval Jae Kim 1, Somyoung Kim 1, K. J. Ha 1, and Mike Newchurch Department of Atmospheric.
A. Bracher, L. N. Lamsal, M. Weber, J. P. Burrows University of Bremen, FB 1, Institute of Environmental Physics, P O Box , D Bremen, Germany.
S5P tropospheric ozone product: Convective Cloud Differential method First German S5P Verification Meeting Bremen, November 2013 Pieter Valks DLR,
AMFIC final meeting LAP/Auth validation activities Dimitris Balis & MariLiza Koukouli Laboratory of Atmospheric Physics Aristotle University of Thessaloniki.
Upper Tropospheric Ozone and Relative Humidity with respect to Ice: Seasonal Inter-comparison between GEOS CCM, MOZAIC and MLS Richard Damoah 1, H. B.
Assessment of SBUV Profile Algorithm Using High Vertical Resolution Sensors Assessment of SBUV Profile Algorithm Using High Vertical Resolution Sensors.
HIRDLS Ozone V003 (v ) Characteristics B. Nardi, C. Randall, V.L. Harvey & HIRDLS Team HIRDLS Science Meeting Boulder, Jan 30, 2008.
NASA Ocean Color Research Team Meeting, Silver Spring, Maryland 5-7 May 2014 II. Objectives Establish a high-quality long-term observational time series.
Validation of SCIAMACHY total ozone: ESA/DLR V5(W) and IUP WFDOAS V2(W) M. Weber, S. Dikty, J. P.Burrows, M. Coldewey-Egbers (1), V. E. Fioletov (2), S.
1 Preliminary Ozone Profile and Tropospheric Ozone Retrievals From OMI Xiong Liu 1,2, Kelly Chance 2, Lin Zhang 3, Thomas P. Kurosu 2, John R. Worden 4,
Validation of OMI NO 2 data using ground-based spectrometric NO 2 measurements at Zvenigorod, Russia A.N. Gruzdev and A.S. Elokhov A.M. Obukhov Institute.
Intercomparison of Ground-based Column Ozone Measurements with Aura Satellite Retrievals over Richland, WA during INTEX-B/IONS-06 Wan Ching Jacquie Hui.
OMI ST meeting KNMI Validation of OMI total ozone using ground-based Brewer and Dobson observations D. Balis 1, E. Brinksma 2, M. Kroon 2,V.
Evaluation of OMI total column ozone with four different algorithms SAO OE, NASA TOMS, KNMI OE/DOAS Juseon Bak 1, Jae H. Kim 1, Xiong Liu 2 1 Pusan National.
Status of the Development of a Tropospheric Ozone Product from OMI Measurements Jack Fishman 1, Jerald R. Ziemke 2,3, Sushil Chandra 2,3, Amy E. Wozniak.
The Influence of loss saturation effects on the assessment of polar ozone changes Derek M. Cunnold 1, Eun-Su Yang 1, Ross J. Salawitch 2, and Michael J.
AIRS science team meeting Camp Springs, February 2003 Holger Vömel University of Colorado and NOAA/CMDL Upper tropospheric humidity validation measurements.
Institute of Atmospheric Physic
Improved understanding of global tropospheric ozone integrating recent model developments Lu Hu With Daniel Jacob, Xiong Liu, Patrick.
TOMS Ozone Retrieval Sensitivity to Assumption of Lambertian Cloud Surface Part 1. Scattering Phase Function Xiong Liu, 1 Mike Newchurch, 1,2 Robert Loughman.
1 Monitoring Tropospheric Ozone from Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) Xiong Liu 1,2,3, Pawan K. Bhartia 3, Kelly Chance 2, Thomas P. Kurosu 2, Robert.
Critical Assessment of TOMS-derived Tropospheric Ozone: Comparisons with Other Measurements and Model Evaluation of Controlling Processes M. Newchurch.
S5P tropical tropospheric ozone product based on convective cloud differential method Klaus-Peter Heue, Pieter Valks, Diego Loyola, Deutsches Zentrum für.
H. Worden Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology J. LoganHarvard University TES ozone profiles compared to ozonesondes ABSTRACT:
Radio Occultation. Temperature [C] at 100 mb (16km) Evolving COSMIC Constellation.
Critical Assessment of TOMS-derived Tropospheric Ozone: Comparisons with Other Measurements and Model Evaluation of Controlling Processes M. Newchurch.
Validation of OMPS-LP Radiances P. K. Bhartia, Leslie Moy, Zhong Chen, Steve Taylor NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, Maryland, USA.
Influence of Lightning-produced NOx on upper tropospheric ozone Using TES/O3&CO, OMI/NO2&HCHO in CMAQ modeling study M. J. Newchurch 1, A. P. Biazar.
Kelly Chance Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Xiong Liu, Christopher Sioris, Robert Spurr, Thomas Kurosu, Randall Martin,
1 Xiong Liu Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics K.V. Chance, C.E. Sioris, R.J.D. Spurr, T.P. Kurosu, R.V. Martin, M.J. Newchurch,
TOMS Ozone Retrieval Sensitivity to Assumption of Lambertian Cloud Surface Part 2. In-cloud Multiple Scattering Xiong Liu, 1 Mike Newchurch, 1,2 Robert.
Upgrade from SGP V5.02 to V6.00: Conclusions from delta-validation of Diagnostic Data Set D. Hubert, A. Keppens, J. Granville, F. Hendrick, J.-C. Lambert.
J. Kar (UT), H. Bremer (UB), James R. Drummond (UT), F
On instrumental errors and related correction strategies of ozonesondes: possible effect on calculated ozone trends for the nearby sites Uccle and De Bilt.
Quadrennial Ozone Symposium
X. Liu1, C.E. Sioris1,2, K. 11/14/2018 Ozone Profile and Tropospheric Ozone Retrieval from SCIAMACHY Nadir Measurements:
Using dynamic aerosol optical properties from a chemical transport model (CTM) to retrieve aerosol optical depths from MODIS reflectances over land Fall.
Evaluation of the MERRA-2 Assimilated Ozone Product
Intercomparison of tropospheric ozone measurements from TES and OMI –
Validation of TES version 2 ozone profiles
Intercomparison of tropospheric ozone measurements from TES and OMI
Achievements and Future CHALLENGES FOR THE WCCOS Ozonesondes in the Global Observing System and their long term Quality Assurance Herman Smit Institute.
History of 50 years ozone soundings:
Presentation transcript:

Abstract We intercompare Stratospheric Column Ozone (SCO) and ozone profiles retrieved from GOME data with ozonesonde and SAGE-II data for GOME SCO over the altitude range ~15-35 km usually agrees with SAGE-II SCO to within 2.5 DU (1.5%), without significant spatiotemporal dependence, but is systematically larger than ozonesonde SCO by 8-20 DU (5-10%) over all stations using the carbon iodine method and most stations between 30ºN-30ºS. Evaluation with SAGE-II, TOMS and Dobson data illustrates that those biases mainly originate from ozonesonde underestimates in the stratosphere. GOME retrievals also show large positive biases of 30-60% at carbon iodine stations (except for Syowa) and of 20-55% for all the stations between 30ºN-30ºS except for Paramaribo and Easter Island (<10%) over ~10-20 km, while biases relative to SAGE-II data over ~15-20 km are usually 10-20%. The discrepancies over this altitude region reflect biases in GOME retrievals as well as ozonesonde measurements. In addition, GOME/ozonesonde biases vary from station to station and depend on ozonesonde technique, instrument type, sensor solution, and data processing, demonstrating the need to homogenize available ozonesonde datasets and standardize future operational procedures for reliable satellite validation. Conclusions   GOME Stratospheric Column Ozone (SCO) over the altitude range ~15-35 km usually agrees with SAGE-II SCO to within 2.5 DU (1.5%) without significant spatiotemporal dependence.   GOME SCO is systematically larger than ozonesonde SCO by 8-20 DU (5-10%) over Carbon Iodine (CI) stations and most stations within 30ºN-30ºS.   The large biases of DU mainly originates from sonde underestimates in the stratosphere.   GOME shows large positive biases of 30-60% over CI stations (except Syowa) and of 20-55% for all the stations in 30ºN-30ºS (except Eastern Island and Paramaribo) over km   The discrepancies over this altitude regions reflect biases in both GOME and ozonesonde data.   GOME/sonde biases in SCO and profiles depends on sonde technique, instrument type, sensor solution, and data processing, demonstrating the need to homogenize available ozonesonde datasets and standardize future operational procedures for reliable satellite validation. Acknowledgements This study is supported by NASA and by the Smithsonian Institution. We thank the ESA for providing GOME level-1 data. We acknowledge WOUDC, NASA LRAB, SHADOZ, and CMDL for the ozonesonde and SAGE-II data. We acknowledge Dr. B.J. Johnson, Dr. S.J. Otlmans, and Dr. J.A. Logan for helpful discussion on the comparisons with ozonesondes. Intercomparison of GOME, Ozonesonde, and SAGE-II Measurements of Ozone: Demonstration of the Need to Homogenize Available Ozonesonde Datasets K. Chance 1, X. Liu 1, C.E. Sioris 1,2, T.P. Kurosu 1, M.J. Newchurch 3 1 Atomic and Molecular Physics Division, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Cambridge, MA, USA 2 Sioris Atmospheric Consulting, Brampton, ON, Canada 3 Atmospheric Science Department, University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, Alabama, USA A33B Fall 1. Motivation   Validate retrieved ozone profiles (especially in the stratosphere) and stratospheric column ozone from GOME [Liu et al., 2005, JGR]   Investigate the sources of large and systematic biases in the stratosphere between GOME and sonde observations at some stations   Approach: GOME vs. ozonesonde/SAGE-II Fig. 1 Locations of ozonesonde stations 2. GOME, Ozonesonde, SAGE-II   GOME: retrieved from UV spectra using optimal estimation   11 layers (~5-km thick, 2-3 layers in the troposphere)   Vertical resolution: 7-12 km in the stratosphere, 9-16 km in the troposphere   Estimated uncertainties (random-noise errors and smoothing): 3-10% in the middle and upper stratosphere, 15-25% in the troposphere, ~1.2% in SCO   Spatial resolution: normally 960  80 km Comparison Methodology   GOME vs. SAGE-II   Coincidence: same day, ±1.5º lat., ±5.0º lon.   SAGE-II data: integrated to GOME retrieval altitude grids, convolved with GOME retrieval AKs.   SCO 4-7 /SCO 8-11 : stratospheric column ozone within layers 4-7/8-11 or ~15-35 km/35-60 km are summed up from transformed profiles   GOME/SAGE-II comparison over a station: use all coincidences within ±5.0º lat., ±40.0º lon   Ozonesonde: 33 stations as shown in Fig. 1   Sources: WOUDC, CMDL, SHADOZ   Types: ECC, Carbon Iodine (CI), Brewer Mast (BM)   Precision: 3-5% for ECC, 5-15% for CI & BM   Accuracy: depends on techniques, sensor solution, ozonesonde model, and processing   SAGE-II (version 6.2): use O 3 profiles down to 15 km   ~1 km vertical resolution   Accuracy: ~5% over km   10% mean agreement with ozonesonde measurements down to 15 km [Wang et al., 2002, JGR]   GOME vs. ozonesonde   Use profiles extending above layer 6 (~30 km)   Coincidence: same day, ±1.5º lat, ±600 km in lon. (relaxed to 12º at a few tropical stations to obtain enough collocations)   Ozonesonde profiles are similarly integrated and convolved.   Sonde SCO (ozone from tropopause to layer 6/7 or ~30/35 km)/SCO 4-7 : similarly summed up. Table 1. GOME/SAGE-II SCO comparison statistics (#, mean, 1 , R). 4. GOME/SAGE-II SCO Comparison   SCO 8-11 : -3–6 DU with poor correl. (Table 1):   wavelength-dependent calibration error   no measurements below 289 nm are used   SCO 4-7 : biases <2.5 DU (1.5%) (Table 1)   good correlation:   1  : varies from 4.5 DU (2.4%) in the tropics to 12 DU (5.6%) at higher latitudes   negligible latitude dependence   SCO 4-7 : over ozonesonde stations (Fig. 2)   Mean biases: ±2.5 DU (1.5%) except over three Northern Europe Stations (- 6-7 DU). Fig. 5. Absolute (columns 1-2) and relative (columns 3-4) mean biases and 1  between GOME and ozonesonde. Row (e) shows comparisons for 1%-buffered, 2%- unbuffered, and 200 m downward shift at American Samoa and Tahiti and corrected data at American Samoa. Fig. 6. Mean biases and 1  for comparisons of column ozone over GOME layer 4 (~15-20 km) and 5 (~20-25 km) between GOME and SAGE-II/sonde in 1996-May GOME/Ozonesonde Profile Comparison (Fig. 5)   GOME retrievals show similar altitude-dependent biases, due to radiometric calibration error: usually within 3 DU in the bottom two layers (~0-10 km), positive at layers 4-5 (~ km), and negative from layers 6 or 7 on upward.   Absolute 1  s mainly a function of lat.   At mid- to high-latitudes (>30ºN/S), relative mean biases and 1  are typically within 20% except for layers 3-4 (~10-20 km) over carbon iodine (CI) stations.   Over CI stations, mean biases and 1  are within 30-60%, usually larger than other stations at similar latitudes.   In the tropics, large positive biases of 20-55% over ~10-20 km, where ozone concentration is low except for Paramaribo and Easter Island   In the tropical and CI stations GOME/SAGE-II biases at ~15-25 km are relatively homogeneous: 0-5% for layer 5 and 8-20% for layer 4; GOME/sonde shows larger and varying biases: 5-20% for layer 5 and 20-55% for layer 4 (Fig. 6)   At American Samoa and Tahiti, biases increases by 11-15% over 0-25 km and 6-8% over ~25-35 km after switching to 2%-unbuffered sensor solution (Fig 5, row e).   The altitude-dependent correction and total ozone normalization at American Samoa reduces the GOME/sonde biases mainly in 2%- unbuffered data.   Uncorrected altitude hysteresis in ozonesonde data introduces an error of 5-15% over ~10-20km (Fig 5, row e)   Inhomogeneity exists in ozonesonde datasets, making it difficult to perform a reliable and consistent satellite validation without considering ozonesonde operational characteristics. m Fig. 3 Comparison of GOME, a priori, ozonesonde SCO (tropopause to ~30/35 km): (left) Time series. (b) differences. The black symbols in (d) show the ozonesonde data with altitude-dependent correction and total ozone normalization at American Samoa. Table 2. GOME/sonde SCO comp. at 4 CMDL stations before & after switching sensor solution from 1%-bufferred (blue) to 2%-unbuffered (red). Fig. 2 Mean biases for GOME/SAGE-II SCO 4-7 (~15-35 km) GOME/ozonesonde SCO 4-7 and SCO (tropopause-~30/35 km) at ozonesonde stations during GOME/Sonde SCO Comparison   GOME/sonde SCO 4-7 or SCO biases (Fig. 2)   Usually similar to GOME/SAGE-II biases at mid- to high-latitudes, except:   Large biases (10-15 DU) at Tateno & Kagoshima (CI stations), opposite biases at Hohenpei  enberg and Payerne   In the tropics: large and varying biases (8-20 DU), 1 , and poorer correlation, except at Hilo and Paramaribo (within 1-2 DU)   Time series (Fig. 3)   At Hohenpei  enberg(a) and Lauder(e): good agreement with no significant temporal drift   Systematic positive biases at Naha (b), similarly at Tateno and Kagoshima   Transition at Ascension Island (c) in early 1998: corresponding to switch from EnSci to mostly SPC, a bias increase of 7.5 DU   Large bias change at American Samoa (d) and Tahiti (Table 2) in early 1998, corresponding to sensor solution change from 1%-bufferred to 2%-unbufferred. The bias changes are ~16 and ~11 DU, respectively.   Smaller bias changes (3-5 DU) at Boulder and Hilo (Table 2) due to altitude-dependent correction and total ozone normalization.   At Samoa, the bias change is reduced to 4 DU with a similar correction Table 2. Fig. 4 GOME/other mean biases and 1  at 11 tropical stations in SCO: tropopause to ~30/35 km; SCO 4-7 : ~15 to 35 km; ICO: surface to ~30/35 km; TCO: tropospheric column ozone; TO: total column ozone. Shaded area shows ±1  GOME/SAGE-II spread.   Comparison at 11 SHADOZ stations during (Fig. 4).   Positive SCO biases from 4 DU(2.7%) to 16 DU(8-13%) at Ascension Island, Tahiti, American Samoa except at Paramaribo (-2 DU).   Similar biases in TCO + SCO   Generally consistent with the TOMS / SHADOZ biases seen in Thompson et al. [2003, JGR]   Usually consistent with TOMS, Dobson, and SAGE-II to within 3 DU.   Those large SCO biases of DU, significant relative to 1  of various differences, mainly due to ozonesonde stratospheric underestimates.