Xiong Liu, Mike Newchurch Department of Atmospheric Science University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, Alabama, USA

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, UK
Advertisements

Products from the OMPS Limb Profiler (LP) instrument on the Suomi NPP Satellite Pawan K. Bhartia Earth Sciences Division- Atmospheres NASA Goddard Space.
A New A-Train Collocated Product : MODIS and OMI cloud data on the OMI footprint Brad Fisher 1, Joanna Joiner 2, Alexander Vasilkov 1, Pepijn Veefkind.
Using a Radiative Transfer Model in Conjunction with UV-MFRSR Irradiance Data for Studying Aerosols in El Paso-Juarez Airshed by Richard Medina Calderón.
METO621 Lesson 18. Thermal Emission in the Atmosphere – Treatment of clouds Scattering by cloud particles is usually ignored in the longwave spectrum.
GEOS-5 Simulations of Aerosol Index and Aerosol Absorption Optical Depth with Comparison to OMI retrievals. V. Buchard, A. da Silva, P. Colarco, R. Spurr.
By Xiong Liu Advisor: Dr. Mike Newchurch Department of Atmospheric Science The University of Alabama in Huntsville November 15, 2002.
Envisat Symposium, April 23 – 27, 2007, Montreux bremen.de SADDU Meeting, June 2008, IUP-Bremen Cloud sensitivity studies.
METO 621 CHEM Lesson 7. Albedo 200 – 400 nm Solar Backscatter Ultraviolet (SBUV) The previous slide shows the albedo of the earth viewed from the nadir.
DIRECT TROPOSPHERIC OZONE RETRIEVALS FROM SATELLITE ULTRAVIOLET RADIANCES Alexander D. Frolov, University of Maryland Robert D. Hudson, University of.
Atmospheric effect in the solar spectrum
Constraining aerosol sources using MODIS backscattered radiances Easan Drury - G2
CPI International UV/Vis Limb Workshop Bremen, April Development of Generalized Limb Scattering Retrieval Algorithms Jerry Lumpe & Ed Cólon.
Extracting Atmospheric and Surface Information from AVIRIS Spectra Vijay Natraj, Daniel Feldman, Xun Jiang, Jack Margolis and Yuk Yung California Institute.
Atmospheric Emission.
Initial testing of longwave parameterizations for broken water cloud fields - accounting for transmission Ezra E. Takara and Robert G. Ellingson Department.
A 21 F A 21 F Parameterization of Aerosol and Cirrus Cloud Effects on Reflected Sunlight Spectra Measured From Space: Application of the.
Solar Radiation Processes on the East Antarctic Plateau Stephen Hudson General Examination 7 June 2005.
To compute the solar radiation flux density at the surface we need to know effects of atmosphere in filtering and depleting the beam from the top of the.
Page 1 1 of 20, EGU General Assembly, Apr 21, 2009 Vijay Natraj (Caltech), Hartmut Bösch (University of Leicester), Rob Spurr (RT Solutions), Yuk Yung.
METO 621 Lesson 27. Albedo 200 – 400 nm Solar Backscatter Ultraviolet (SBUV) The previous slide shows the albedo of the earth viewed from the nadir.
Reconstructing the Emission Height of Volcanic SO2 from Back Trajectories: Comparison of Explosive and Effusive Eruptions Modeling trace gas transport.
Single-Scattering Stuff + petty chap 12 intro April 27-29, 2015.
Direct Radiative Effect of aerosols over clouds and clear skies determined using CALIPSO and the A-Train Robert Wood with Duli Chand, Tad Anderson, Bob.
Now That I Know That… What Do I Do? (Analyzing your Microtop Solar Radiometry Data)
Effect of NO 2 on Geostationary Satellite Chlorophyll Retrieval In Coastal Water: False Diurnal Variation Jay Herman & Maria Tzortziou Annual Average NO2.
SeaDAS Training ~ NASA Ocean Biology Processing Group 1 Level-2 ocean color data processing basics NASA Ocean Biology Processing Group Goddard Space Flight.
M. Van Roozendael, AMFIC Final Meeting, 23 Oct 2009, Beijing, China1 MAXDOAS measurements in Beijing M. Van Roozendael 1, K. Clémer 1, C. Fayt 1, C. Hermans.
Diagnosing Climate Change from Satellite Sounding Measurements – From Filter Radiometers to Spectrometers William L. Smith Sr 1,2., Elisabeth Weisz 1,
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,
Orbit Characteristics and View Angle Effects on the Global Cloud Field
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.
Measurement Example III Figure 6 presents the ozone and aerosol variations under a light-aerosol sky condition. The intensity and structure of aerosol.
AGU 2002 Fall Meeting NASA Langley Research Center / Atmospheric Sciences Validation of GOES-8 Derived Cloud Properties Over the Southeastern Pacific J.
Validation workshop, Frascati, 13 December 2002Page 1 SCIAMACHY products quality and recommendations Based on presentations and discussions during this.
1 Atmospheric Radiation – Lecture 9 PHY Lecture 10 Infrared radiation in a cloudy atmosphere: approximations.
Physics of the Atmosphere II
DMRT-ML Studies on Remote Sensing of Ice Sheet Subsurface Temperatures Mustafa Aksoy and Joel T. Johnson 02/25/2014.
1 Mike3/papers/tropoz/aguf98 12/2/98 16:30 M. Newchurch 1,2, X. Liu 3, J. H. Kim 4, P. K. Bhartia 5 1. U. Alabama in Huntsville, NSSTC 320 Sparkman Dr.,Huntsville,
Identifying 3D Radiative Cloud Effects Using MODIS Visible Reflectance Measurements Amanda Gumber Department of Atmospherics and Oceanic Sciences/CIMSS.
Characterization of Aerosols using Airborne Lidar, MODIS, and GOCART Data during the TRACE-P (2001) Mission Rich Ferrare 1, Ed Browell 1, Syed Ismail 1,
Hyperspectral Infrared Alone Cloudy Sounding Algorithm Development Objective and Summary To prepare for the synergistic use of data from the high-temporal.
Satellite group MPI Mainz Investigating Global Long-term Data Sets of the Atmospheric H 2 O VCD and of Cloud Properties.
Testing LW fingerprinting with simulated spectra using MERRA Seiji Kato 1, Fred G. Rose 2, Xu Liu 1, Martin Mlynczak 1, and Bruce A. Wielicki 1 1 NASA.
Intercomparison of OMI NO 2 and HCHO air mass factor calculations: recommendations and best practices A. Lorente, S. Döerner, A. Hilboll, H. Yu and K.
Investigations of Artifacts in the ISCCP Datasets William B. Rossow July 2006.
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.
Use of Solar Reflectance Hyperspectral Data for Cloud Base Retrieval Andrew Heidinger, NOAA/NESDIS/ORA Washington D.C, USA Outline " Physical basis for.
S5P cloud products Sebastián Gimeno García, Ronny Lutz, Diego Loyola German S5P Verification Meeting 1 Bremen, November Chart 1>
Sub-hourly Variation of Tropospheric Ozone Profiles Measured by the Huntsville DIAL Shi Kuang 1*, John Burris 2, M. J. Newchurch 1*, Steve Johnson 3, and.
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.
Radiative transfer in the thermal infrared and the surface source term
Comparisons of LER/MLER Cloud Pressures with a Model of Mie Scattering Plane-Parallel Cloud Alexander Vasilkov 1, Joanna Joiner 2, Pawan K. Bhartia 2,
OMI Soft Calibration P. K. Bhartia, Glen Jaross, Steve Taylor, Xiong Liu, Tom Kelly, Changwoo Ahn, Dave Haffner NASA GSFC, Maryland, USA.
Validation of OMPS-LP Radiances P. K. Bhartia, Leslie Moy, Zhong Chen, Steve Taylor NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, Maryland, USA.
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.
UCLA Vector Radiative Transfer Models for Application to Satellite Data Assimilation K. N. Liou, S. C. Ou, Y. Takano and Q. Yue Department of Atmospheric.
Sea Ice, Solar Radiation, and SH High-latitude Climate Sensitivity Alex Hall UCLA Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences SOWG meeting January 13-14,
- 1 - Satellite Remote Sensing of Small Ice Crystal Concentrations in Cirrus Clouds David L. Mitchell Desert Research Institute, Reno, Nevada Robert P.
NASA, CGMS-44, 7 June 2016 Coordination Group for Meteorological Satellites - CGMS LIMB CORRECTION OF POLAR- ORBITING IMAGERY FOR THE IMPROVED INTERPRETATION.
Challenge the future Corresponding author: Delft University of Technology Collocated OMI DOMINO and MODIS Aqua aerosol products.
1 Synthetic Hyperspectral Radiances for Retrieval Algorithm Development J. E. Davies, J. A. Otkin, E. R. Olson, X. Wang, H-L. Huang, Ping Yang # and Jianguo.
ECMWF The ECMWF Radiation Transfer schemes 1 Photon path distribution method originally developed by Fouquart and Bonnel (1980). [see lecture notes for.
Assumption of Lambertian Cloud Surface (I)
Timor Wienrib Itai Friedland
Entrapment An important mechanism for shortwave 3D cloud radiative effects and its inclusion in the SPARTACUS radiative transfer model Robin Hogan, Mark.
Presentation transcript:

Xiong Liu, Mike Newchurch Department of Atmospheric Science University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, Alabama, USA Robert Loughman Cooperative Center for Atmospheric Science & Technology University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA Pawan K. Bhartia NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA April 18-19, 2002 TOMS Ozone Retrieval Errors Associated with Clouds

2 Outline n Motivation n Cloud Treatment in the TOMS Operational Algorithm and Potential Ozone Retrieval Errors n Methodology n Results and Discussion n Summary and Conclusions

3 Motivation n Driven by deriving accurate tropospheric ozone from TOMS data. u CCD [Ziemke et al., 1998] and CCP [Newchurch et al., 2001] derive tropospheric ozone from TOMS cloudy/clear ozone difference. u Accurate ozone retrieval over cloudy areas is critical to tropospheric ozone derivation. n Significant TOMS total ozone excesses of DU are found over tropical high-reflectivity clouds compared to neighboring clear-sky observations. Approximately 4-9 DU ozone excesses over cloudy scenes remain unexplained [Newchurch et al., 2001]. n The presence of clouds complicates satellite/ground retrieval of ozone as well as other atmospheric components.

4 Cloud Treatment in the TOMS V7 Algorithm n Opaque Lambertian cloudy surfaces. n Cloud-top pressure (P c ) from monthly mean ISCCP. n Lambertian-equivalent reflectivity derived from 380-nm (or 360-nm) radiance (I meas ). n If I meas  I c,calc (R c = 80%, P c ) then Full Cloudy If I meas  I g,calc (R g = 8%, P g ) then Clear Sky n Otherwise, partial cloudy. Determine cloud fraction using the pixel independent approximation. n Adding climatological ozone below clouds to complete the total ozone column.

5 Potential Ozone Retrieval Errors Associated with Clouds

6 Methodologies n Use Polarized Plane-parallel Gauss-Seidel Radiative Transfer Code [Herman et al., 1980] for forward radiance calculation at six N7 TOMS channels (312, 317, 331, 339, 360, and 380 nm). PPGSRAD treats clouds as scattering medium. n Use the TOMS V7 algorithm for ozone retrieval. The difference between the retrieved ozone and the forward input ozone indicates ozone retrieval errors. n Ozone profiles, ozone absorption and rayleigh scattering coefficients, and other settings are the same between PPGSRAD and TOMRAD (TOMSV7 forward model). The radiance difference is within 0.2% on average for clear sky. The corresponding retrieved ozone difference is 0.6 DU on average. n Clouds are assumed horizontally and vertically homogeneous. Typically, a cloud of optical thickness 40 at 2-12 km is used as a base case to represent tropical-high reflecting clouds. Optical properties are calculated using Mie code for water clouds and Ray tracing code for hexagon column ice crystals and polycrystals. n Viewing geometry: u Solar zenith angle  o : 0°, 15°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 70°, 75°; u Satellite view zenith angle  : 0° to 70° every 5°; u Relative Azimuthal Angle  : 0° to 180° every 30°

7 Methodologies n Separate different effects on ozone retrieval u Lambertian Assumption (Lambertian effect) u Partial Cloud Model (PCM effect) u In-cloud Ozone Absorption Enhancement (ICOAEN effect) u Below-cloud Ozone Absorption (BCOA effect)

8 Lambertian and PCM Effects n Dependent on  o, , and . n Error in total ozone ranges from -4.1 to 4.4 DU. Avg. = 0.7  1.1 DU. n Large error in ozone above cloud occurs at small effective cloud fraction.

9 Lambertian and PCM Effects n Positive errors in ozone above clouds and negative errors in ozone below clouds tend to cancel each other. n Modify the TOMSV7 algorithm to force the effective cloud fraction to be 1 to obtain the Lambertian effect. n Lambertian effect: DU The error in ozone below clouds is almost 0 except at large viewing geometry due to the profile difference between forward calculation and retrieval. n PCM effect: present in both errors in ozone above and below clouds.

10 Lambertian and PCM Effects WC WCHGHEXPOLY n PCM and Lambertian effects vary with phase function n Average Ozone Retrieval Error: DU

11 Lambertian and PCM Effects

12 In-Cloud Ozone Absorption Enhancement n A priori 20.8 DU in cloud in the forward calculation. n Large errors (effective ozone) at small solar zenith angle and view zenith angles. About 19 DU at nadir. n Azimuthally independent.

13 In-Cloud Ozone Absorption Enhancement n Excellent comparison indicates that TOMSV7 retrieves almost all the ozone absorption of reflected radiation in clouds. n Using the triplet methods cannot reduce the errors, because the path enhancement are almost the same at all the channels.

14 In-Cloud Ozone Absorption Enhancement n Photon Path Length decreases with increasing  o and . TOMSV7 takes the geometrical path length into account. The effective ozone in the cloud decreases more with increasing geometrical path. n Solar zenith angle and view zenith angle are exchangeable.

15 In-Cloud Ozone Absorption Enhancement n Slight variation among different cloud types. n WCHG >  WC >  HEX >  POLY ICOAEN Effect vs. Cloud Optical Properties

16 In-Cloud Ozone Absorption Enhancement n Generally, ICOAEN effect decreases with increasing optical thickness. n The increase of ICOAEN effect with optical thickness at smaller optical thickness is due to the imperfect retrieval efficiency at smaller surface reflectivity. ICOAEN Effect vs. Cloud Optical Thickness

17 In-Cloud Ozone Absorption Enhancement n ICOAEN effect is largely dependent on the amount of ozone in the cloud. The ratio of retrieved to actual ozone in cloud slightly decreases with increasing ozone in the cloud. ICOAEN Effect vs. In-Cloud Ozone

18 In-Cloud Ozone Absorption Enhancement ICOAEN Effect vs. Cloud Altitude n The ratio of retrieved O 3 to actual O 3 in the cloud slightly increases with increasing cloud altitude.

19 In-Cloud Ozone Absorption Enhancement 1. Original (20.8 DU) 2. Well-mixed (20.8 DU) 3. Homogeneous (20.8 DU) 4. Linearly increasing (20.8 DU) 5. Linearly decreasing (20.8 DU) 6. Upper 2 km (4.2 DU) 7. Lower 2 km (4.2 DU) n ICOAEN is very dependent on ozone distribution in clouds. n Ozone distributed in the upper part of cloud usually contributes more to ozone absorption in clouds. ICOAEN Effect vs. Ozone Distribution in Clouds

20 In-Cloud Ozone Absorption Enhancement n For upward radiance, ozone absorption peaks in the upper part of clouds. The height of the peak increases with increasing viewing geometry. n For downward radiance, ozone absorption peaks in the middle of the clouds and almost symmetric around the peak location. Vertical Distribution of ICOAEN Effect

21 In-Cloud Ozone Absorption Enhancement n E-folding depth is defined as the depth above which 1/e  36.8% of ozone absorption occurs. n The larger the cloud optical thickness, the smaller the E- folding depth; the larger the asymmetry factor, the larger the depth. Vertical Distribution of ICOAEN Effect vs. Cloud Optical Depth and Cloud Optical Properties

22 Below-Cloud Ozone Absorption n Ozone absorption below clouds depends on the cloud optical thickness and the amount of ozone below clouds

23 Ozone Retrieval Error Associated with Clouds n Comparison of ozone retrieval for two cases: u f c = 1, consistent with forward calculation u TOMSV7 partial cloud model n At smaller cloud optical thickness, using the partial cloud model gives the about correct result due to the compensating errors.

24 Ozone Retrieval Error Associated with Clouds n At larger cloud optical thickness, these two methods start to converge because the effective cloud fraction is either 1 or very close to 1. n Part of the in-cloud ozone can be seen by TOMS and retrieved. However, both methods add almost all the ozone below clouds, leading to positive errors.

25 Ozone Retrieval Error Associated with Clouds n For a cloud of optical thickness of 1 at 2-3 km or km, using the TOMSV7 partial-cloud model leads to the about correct retrieved ozone. n Assuming the full-cloud minimum reflectivity as 100% gives almost the same result as 80% (i.e. the TOMSV7 partial-cloud model) due to the compensating errors.

26 Ozone Retrieval Error Associated with Partial Clouds n Pixel-independent approximation: n Error is approximately proportional to cloud fraction. In Cloud Ozone Absorption Enhancement Lambertian and PCM effects tauc = 1 tauc = 40

27 Ozone Retrieval Error Associated with Partial Clouds n At smaller cloud optical thickness, using the TOMS partial cloud model retrieves the about correct results for different forward cloud fractions. n The good result occurs because of the compensating errors so that the positive error due to ozone absorption in clouds and the negative error due to using the partial-cloud model almost cancel.

28 Summary and Conclusions n The assumption of Lambertian cloud surface is good in ozone retrieval for cloud optical thickness  20, with average ozone retrieval errors within 3 DU. n Ozone retrieval error due to using the partial-cloud model is usually negative if the derived effective cloud fraction is < 1, and the magnitude increases with decreasing cloud optical thickness due primarily to the cloud fraction being underestimated and with less ozone added below clouds. n Because the TOMS instrument can see ozone absorption in and below clouds, the algorithm assumption of a Opaque cloudy surface results in positive errors. Ozone absorption in clouds is largely dependent on ozone distribution in clouds, ozone amount in clouds, and geometrical path length, cloud thickness, and slightly dependent on cloud optical properties and cloud optical thickness. n At small cloud optical thickness, using the partial-cloud model leads to the about correct total ozone due to the compensating errors. The negative errors due to using the partial-cloud model tend to cancel the positive errors due to ozone absorption in and below clouds. n With increasing cloud optical thickness, positive errors due to ozone absorption in and below clouds slowly decrease in magnitude, while negative errors due to using the partial cloud model decrease more dramatically, leading to increasing positive errors.

29