Standard

Measurements and Modelling of Total Ozone Columns near St. Petersburg, Russia. / Nerobelov, G.; Timofeyev, Yu.; Virolainen, Ya.; Polyakov, A.; Solomatnikova, A.; Poberovskii, A.; Kirner, O.; Al-Subari, O.; Smyshlyaev, S.; Rozanov, E.

In: Remote Sensing, Vol. 14 , No. 16 , 3944, 14.08.2022.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

BibTeX

@article{48c5d9d27a3846638817b26fdd496810,
title = "Measurements and Modelling of Total Ozone Columns near St. Petersburg, Russia",
abstract = "The observed ozone layer depletion is influenced by continuous anthropogenic activity. This fact enforced the regular ozone monitoring globally. Information on spatial-temporal variations in total ozone columns (TOCs) derived by various observational methods and models can differ significantly due to measurement and modelling errors, differences in ozone retrieval algorithms, etc. Therefore, TOC data derived by different means should be validated regularly. In the current study, we compare TOC variations observed by ground-based (Bruker IFS 125 HR, Dobson, and M-124) and satellite (OMI, TROPOMI, and IKFS-2) instruments and simulated by models (ERA5 and EAC4 re-analysis, EMAC and INM RAS—RSHU models) near St. Petersburg (Russia) between 2009 and 2020. We demonstrate that TOC variations near St. Petersburg measured by different methods are in good agreement (with correlation coefficients of 0.95–0.99). Mean differences (MDs) and standard deviations of differences (SDDs) with respect to Dobson measurements constitute 0.0–3.9% and 2.3–3.7%, respectively, which is close to the actual requirements of the quality of TOC measurements. The largest bias is observed for Bruker 125 HR (3.9%) and IKFS-2 (−2.4%) measurements, whereas M-124 filter ozonometer shows no bias. The largest SDDs are observed for satellite measurements (3.3–3.7%), the smallest—for ground-based data (2.3–2.8%). The differences between simulated and Dobson data vary significantly. ERA5 and EAC4 re-analysis data show slight negative bias (0.1–0.2%) with SDDs of 3.7–3.9%. EMAC model overestimates Dobson TOCs by 4.5% with 4.5% SDDs, whereas INM RAS-RSHU model underestimates Dobson by 1.4% with 8.6% SDDs. All datasets demonstrate the pronounced TOC seasonal cycle with the maximum in spring and minimum in autumn. Finally, for 2004–2021 period, we derived a significant positive TOC trend near St. Petersburg (~0.4 ± 0.1 DU per year) from all datasets considered.",
keywords = "EAC4, ERA5, St. Petersburg, chemistry-climate models, ozone total column, remote measurements, validation",
author = "G. Nerobelov and Yu. Timofeyev and Ya. Virolainen and A. Polyakov and A. Solomatnikova and A. Poberovskii and O. Kirner and O. Al-Subari and S. Smyshlyaev and E. Rozanov",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2022 by the authors.",
year = "2022",
month = aug,
day = "14",
doi = "10.3390/rs14163944",
language = "English",
volume = "14 ",
journal = "Remote Sensing",
issn = "2072-4292",
publisher = "MDPI AG",
number = "16 ",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Measurements and Modelling of Total Ozone Columns near St. Petersburg, Russia

AU - Nerobelov, G.

AU - Timofeyev, Yu.

AU - Virolainen, Ya.

AU - Polyakov, A.

AU - Solomatnikova, A.

AU - Poberovskii, A.

AU - Kirner, O.

AU - Al-Subari, O.

AU - Smyshlyaev, S.

AU - Rozanov, E.

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.

PY - 2022/8/14

Y1 - 2022/8/14

N2 - The observed ozone layer depletion is influenced by continuous anthropogenic activity. This fact enforced the regular ozone monitoring globally. Information on spatial-temporal variations in total ozone columns (TOCs) derived by various observational methods and models can differ significantly due to measurement and modelling errors, differences in ozone retrieval algorithms, etc. Therefore, TOC data derived by different means should be validated regularly. In the current study, we compare TOC variations observed by ground-based (Bruker IFS 125 HR, Dobson, and M-124) and satellite (OMI, TROPOMI, and IKFS-2) instruments and simulated by models (ERA5 and EAC4 re-analysis, EMAC and INM RAS—RSHU models) near St. Petersburg (Russia) between 2009 and 2020. We demonstrate that TOC variations near St. Petersburg measured by different methods are in good agreement (with correlation coefficients of 0.95–0.99). Mean differences (MDs) and standard deviations of differences (SDDs) with respect to Dobson measurements constitute 0.0–3.9% and 2.3–3.7%, respectively, which is close to the actual requirements of the quality of TOC measurements. The largest bias is observed for Bruker 125 HR (3.9%) and IKFS-2 (−2.4%) measurements, whereas M-124 filter ozonometer shows no bias. The largest SDDs are observed for satellite measurements (3.3–3.7%), the smallest—for ground-based data (2.3–2.8%). The differences between simulated and Dobson data vary significantly. ERA5 and EAC4 re-analysis data show slight negative bias (0.1–0.2%) with SDDs of 3.7–3.9%. EMAC model overestimates Dobson TOCs by 4.5% with 4.5% SDDs, whereas INM RAS-RSHU model underestimates Dobson by 1.4% with 8.6% SDDs. All datasets demonstrate the pronounced TOC seasonal cycle with the maximum in spring and minimum in autumn. Finally, for 2004–2021 period, we derived a significant positive TOC trend near St. Petersburg (~0.4 ± 0.1 DU per year) from all datasets considered.

AB - The observed ozone layer depletion is influenced by continuous anthropogenic activity. This fact enforced the regular ozone monitoring globally. Information on spatial-temporal variations in total ozone columns (TOCs) derived by various observational methods and models can differ significantly due to measurement and modelling errors, differences in ozone retrieval algorithms, etc. Therefore, TOC data derived by different means should be validated regularly. In the current study, we compare TOC variations observed by ground-based (Bruker IFS 125 HR, Dobson, and M-124) and satellite (OMI, TROPOMI, and IKFS-2) instruments and simulated by models (ERA5 and EAC4 re-analysis, EMAC and INM RAS—RSHU models) near St. Petersburg (Russia) between 2009 and 2020. We demonstrate that TOC variations near St. Petersburg measured by different methods are in good agreement (with correlation coefficients of 0.95–0.99). Mean differences (MDs) and standard deviations of differences (SDDs) with respect to Dobson measurements constitute 0.0–3.9% and 2.3–3.7%, respectively, which is close to the actual requirements of the quality of TOC measurements. The largest bias is observed for Bruker 125 HR (3.9%) and IKFS-2 (−2.4%) measurements, whereas M-124 filter ozonometer shows no bias. The largest SDDs are observed for satellite measurements (3.3–3.7%), the smallest—for ground-based data (2.3–2.8%). The differences between simulated and Dobson data vary significantly. ERA5 and EAC4 re-analysis data show slight negative bias (0.1–0.2%) with SDDs of 3.7–3.9%. EMAC model overestimates Dobson TOCs by 4.5% with 4.5% SDDs, whereas INM RAS-RSHU model underestimates Dobson by 1.4% with 8.6% SDDs. All datasets demonstrate the pronounced TOC seasonal cycle with the maximum in spring and minimum in autumn. Finally, for 2004–2021 period, we derived a significant positive TOC trend near St. Petersburg (~0.4 ± 0.1 DU per year) from all datasets considered.

KW - EAC4

KW - ERA5

KW - St. Petersburg

KW - chemistry-climate models

KW - ozone total column

KW - remote measurements

KW - validation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85137829391&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/2ebe2aa5-e372-3218-87ff-d6e1bb0aedd7/

U2 - 10.3390/rs14163944

DO - 10.3390/rs14163944

M3 - Article

VL - 14

JO - Remote Sensing

JF - Remote Sensing

SN - 2072-4292

IS - 16

M1 - 3944

ER -

ID: 99148174