Xiong Liu Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Kelly Chance, Thomas Kurosu, Christopher Sioris, Robert.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
WP 5 : Clouds & Aerosols L.G. Tilstra and P. Stammes Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (KNMI) SCIAvisie Meeting, KNMI, De Bilt, Absorbing.
Advertisements

Harmonisation of stratospheric NO 2 /O 3 column data products NORS/NDACC UV-VIS meeting, Brussels, 3-4 July F. Hendrick and M. Van Roozendael Belgian.
DIRECT TROPOSPHERIC OZONE RETRIEVALS FROM SATELLITE ULTRAVIOLET RADIANCES Alexander D. Frolov, University of Maryland Robert D. Hudson, University of.
GEO-CAPE COMMUNITY WORKSHOP MAY Vijay Natraj 1, Xiong Liu 2, Susan Kulawik 1, Kelly Chance 2, Robert Chatfield 3, David P. Edwards 4, Annmarie.
Institut für Umweltphysik/Fernerkundung Physik/Elektrotechnik Fachbereich 1 Retrieval of SCIAMACHY limb measurements: First Results A. Rozanov, V. Rozanov,
Xiong Liu ( Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Collaborators: Kelly Chance, Christopher Sioris, Robert.
1 Ozone Profile Retrieval from SBUV/2 Sweep Mode Data---Preliminary Results Xiong Liu, Kelly Chance Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Matthew.
CPI International UV/Vis Limb Workshop Bremen, April Development of Generalized Limb Scattering Retrieval Algorithms Jerry Lumpe & Ed Cólon.
Tangent height verification algorithm Chris Sioris, Kelly Chance, and Thomas Kurosu Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory.
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,
Extracting Atmospheric and Surface Information from AVIRIS Spectra Vijay Natraj, Daniel Feldman, Xun Jiang, Jack Margolis and Yuk Yung California Institute.
Xiong Liu, Kelly Chance, and Thomas Kurosu Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Cambridge, MA, USA The 36 th COSPAR Scientific Assembly Beijing,
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.
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.
WP 3: Absorbing Aerosol Index (AAI) WP 10: Level-1 validation L.G. Tilstra 1, I. Aben 2, and P. Stammes 1 1 Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute.
Quality of the official SCIAMACHY Absorbing Aerosol Index (AAI) level-2 product L.G. Tilstra and P. Stammes Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute.
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.
Intercomparison methods for satellite sensors: application to tropospheric ozone and CO measurements from Aura Daniel J. Jacob, Lin Zhang, Monika Kopacz.
Elena Spinei and George Mount Washington State University 1 CINDI workshop March 2010.
Xiong Liu, Mike Newchurch Department of Atmospheric Science University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, Alabama, USA
SO 2 Retrievals in the UV from Space Caroline Nowlan Atomic and Molecular Physics Division Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Collaborators: Kelly.
Tropospheric NO2 Ronald van der A, Michel Van Roozendael, Isabelle De Smedt, Ruud Dirksen, Folkert Boersma KNMI and BIRA-IASB Beijing, October 2008.
ARCTAS BrO Measurements from the OMI and GOME-2 Satellite Instruments
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,
Validation workshop, Frascati, 13 December 2002Page 1 SCIAMACHY products quality and recommendations Based on presentations and discussions during this.
S5P Ozone Profile (including Troposphere) verification: RAL Algorithm R.Siddans, G.Miles, B.Latter S5P Verification Workshop, MPIC, Mainz th May.
TEMPO Simulation and Retrieval Tools and Algorithm Testing at SAO Xiong Liu 3 rd TEMPO Science Team Meeting Huntsville, Al, May 27,
Assessment of SBUV Profile Algorithm Using High Vertical Resolution Sensors Assessment of SBUV Profile Algorithm Using High Vertical Resolution Sensors.
Retrieval of Ozone Profiles from GOME (and SCIAMACHY, and OMI, and GOME2 ) Roeland van Oss Ronald van der A and Johan de Haan, Robert Voors, Robert Spurr.
Combining Simultaneously Measured UV and IR Radiances from OMI and TES to Improve Tropospheric Ozone Profile Retrievals Dejian Fu 1, John Worden 1, Susan.
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,
IASI CH 4 Operational Retrieval Feasibility - Optimal Estimation Method Task 1+3: Updates Richard Siddans, Jane Hurley PM2, webex 10 October 2014.
SATELLITE OBSERVATIONS OF ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY Daniel J. Jacob.
A Long Term Data Record of the Ozone Vertical Distribution IN43B-1150 by Richard McPeters 1, Stacey Frith 2, and Val Soika 3 1) NASA GSFC
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.
Trace gas algorithms for TEMPO G. Gonzalez Abad 1, X. Liu 1, C. Miller 1, H. Wang 1, C. Nowlan 2 and K. Chance 1 1 Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.
Retrieval of Vertical Columns of Sulfur Dioxide from SCIAMACHY and OMI: Air Mass Factor Algorithm Development, Validation, and Error Analysis Chulkyu Lee.
C. Lerot 1, M. Koukouli 2, T. Danckaert 1, D. Balis 2, and M. Van Roozendael 1 1 BIRA-IASB, Belgium 2 LAP/AUTH, Greece S5P L2 Verification Meeting – 19-20/05/2015.
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.
Evaluation of model simulations with satellite observed NO 2 columns and surface observations & Some new results from OMI N. Blond, LISA/KNMI P. van Velthoven,
Validation of OMPS-LP Radiances P. K. Bhartia, Leslie Moy, Zhong Chen, Steve Taylor NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, Maryland, USA.
Ozone PEATE 2/20/20161 OMPS LP Release 2 - Status Matt DeLand (for the PEATE team) SSAI 5 December 2013.
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.
March 21, ‘06 comp. May 5, ‘06 comp Summary ~4% swath angle dependent difference Up to 9% difference over clouds Differences correlate with snow/ice.
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Requirements Consolidation of the Near-Infrared Channel of the GMES-Sentinel-5 UVNS Instrument: Initial trade-off: Height-resolved.
Abstract We intercompare Stratospheric Column Ozone (SCO) and ozone profiles retrieved from GOME data with ozonesonde and SAGE-II data for GOME.
1 SBUV/2 Calibration Lessons Over 30 Years: Liang-Kang Huang, Matthew DeLand, Steve Taylor Science Systems and Applications, Inc. (SSAI) / NASA.
SADDU Meeting, March 2009, SRON, Utrecht1 Recent progress on nadir UV-Vis retrievals at BIRA M. Van Roozendael 1 C. Lerot 1, I. De Smedt 1, N. Theys.
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Requirements Consolidation of the Near-Infrared Channel of the GMES-Sentinel-5 UVNS Instrument: FP, 25 April 2014, ESTEC.
1 Deriving cloud parameters for O 3 profile retrieval Zhaonan Cai 1, Xiong Liu 1, Kai Yang 2, Kelly Chance 1 1 SAO 2 UMD 4 th TEMPO Science Team Meeting,
Other Trace Gases (a.k.a. HCHO, BrO, and OClO) Status & Outlook
Deriving the Instrument Transfer Function from OMI Solar Observations and Its Implications for Ozone Retrievals Kang Sun, Xiong Liu, Zhaonan Cai, Guanyu.
V2.0 minus V2.5 RSAS Tangent Height Difference Orbit 3761
Intercomparison of SCIAMACHY NO2, the Chimère air-quality model and
Requirements Consolidation of the Near-Infrared Channel of the GMES-Sentinel-5 UVNS Instrument: FP, 25 April 2014, ESTEC Height-resolved aerosol R.Siddans.
X. Liu1, C.E. Sioris1,2, K. 11/14/2018 Ozone Profile and Tropospheric Ozone Retrieval from SCIAMACHY Nadir Measurements:
Randall Martin, Daniel Jacob, Jennifer Logan, Paul Palmer
An Improved Retrieval of Tropospheric Nitrogen Dioxide from GOME
Intercomparison of SCIAMACHY NO2, the Chimère air-quality model and
SATELLITE OBSERVATIONS OF OZONE PRECURSORS FROM GOME
Retrieval of SO2 Vertical Columns from SCIAMACHY and OMI: Air Mass Factor Algorithm Development and Validation Chulkyu Lee, Aaron van Dokelaar, Gray O’Byrne:
MEASUREMENT OF TROPOSPHERIC COMPOSITION FROM SPACE IS DIFFICULT!
Presentation transcript:

Xiong Liu Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Kelly Chance, Thomas Kurosu, Christopher Sioris, Robert Spurr, Randall Martin, Mike Newchurch SSAI, Lanham, Maryland April 11, 2006 Ozone Profile and Tropospheric Ozone Retrievals from GOME

2 Outline n Introduction n Examples of Retrievals n Algorithm Description u Instrument Model u Forward Model u Inverse Model n Retrieval Characterization u Information Content u Error Analysis n Intercomparison with TOMS, Dobson/Brewer, SAGE, and Ozonesonde Measurements n Summary and Future Outlook

3 Introduction nSinger and Wentworth [1957] first proposed to derive stratospheric ozone profiles from backscattered UV radiation. nThe idea has been successfully applied by the BUV, SBUV, SBUV/2 instruments to derive a ~35-year record of ozone profiles. nHowever, SBUV-like instruments provide reliable ozone profile information mainly between 1-20 mb. Between 20 mb and surface, ozone profile could not be resolved, although column ozone amount is reliably derived (Bhartia et al., 1996). nCan we do better especially in the troposphere??? nChance et al. (1997) performed a theoretical study to demonstrate that ozone profiles including tropospheric ozone can be derived from UV/Visible spectra (e.g., GOME and SCIAMACHY).

4 Introduction nGOME: launched in April 1995, measures radiances in nm with a moderate resolution of nm and high SNR nFour physically-based ozone profile algorithms: u Munro et al., 1998: nm & nm (2-step, empirical corr.)  Hoogen et al., 1999: nm (empirical Chebyshev poly.) u Hasekamp and Landgraf, 2001: nm u van der A et al., 2002: nm (empirical correction) u Indicates calibration problems and the importance of calibrations nTropospheric O 3 data have not yet been published from these algorithms. Three challenges to get good tropospheric ozone: u Consistent and accurate calibration u High fitting precision u 90% total ozone above nWe recently developed our own ozone profile algorithm for GOME data and demonstrated that valuable tropospheric ozone can be derived from GOME (Liu et al., 2005, 2006a, 2006b, in press, 2006c submitted to ACP).

5 Examples of Retrievals (Ozone Profile) Ozone hole Biomass burning over Indonesia

6 Examples of Tropospheric Column Ozone (TCO) Biomass burning over Indonesia Zonal contrast in the tropics

7 GOME Tropospheric Column Ozone ( )

8 Algorithm Description n Measurements: nm, nm, nm, coadd 8 channel 2 pixels to channel 1 resolutions (960 x 80 km 2 ) n Results: u Partial Column O 3 at 11 layers (each ~5km thick except for the top layer) u Now at 24 layers (each ~2.5-km thick) u NCEP tropopause to separate stratosphere & troposphere (2-3/4-6 layers) n Spectral fitting + Optimal Estimation + LIDORT n Three Keys:  Accurate calibration of the measurements  Accurate forward modeling (LIDORT with additional corrections)  Good knowledge of climatological a priori information (mean and standard deviation) and measurement errors Liu et al., 2005, JGR

9 High Resolution Solar Reference Spectrum

10 Instrument Model n Use GDP extraction software with all standard corrections n Instrument slit function characterization (Chance, 1998) u Assume Gaussian, use non-linear least squares fitting u High resolution solar reference spectrum (Caspar and Chance, 1998) u Variable slit widths (21 spectral pixels in 5-pixel increments)

11 Instrument Model n Wavelength calibration (Caspar and Chance, 1997) u Similarly determined except with variable slit widths (15 spectral pixels in 3-pixel increments) u Include wavelength shifts among radiances, irradiances and trace gas cross sections in the spectral fitting.

12 Instrument Model n Undersampling correction (Chance, 1998) u GOME significantly undersamples the spectrum u Use the high-resolution solar spectrum to simulate the sampling process and determine two basis functions for undersampling correction u Include a scaling factor for each basis function in the fitting n Radiometric Calibration and Degradation Correction u Wavelength-dependent bias in Channel 1 (van der A et al, 2002) u Degradation in reflectance since 1998 due to the build-up of a thin ice layer on scan mirror (Tanzi et al., 2001) u Include a wavelength-dependent correction (2 nd -order polynomial) in the fitting in nm, constrained by the total ozone derived from the Huggins bands and the a priori profiles. u Degradation since 2000 largely affects the retrieved tropospheric ozone u External degradation correction is necessary. u Degradation correction derived using ozone profile climatology or observations [van der A et al., 2002; Landgraf et al., 2005] shows significant variation with latitude and station.

13 Instrument Model Liu et al., 2006, submitted to ACP n We derive an simpler scheme by comparing global-averaged reflectance over 60ºN- 60ºS to that in the first six months with additional steps to remove SZA and seasonal dependent components. n Degradation largely depends on scan-angle and wavelength.

14 Forward Model n LIDORT with pseudo-spherical approximation and 6 streams n Polarization correction with a look-up table: wavelength, total ozone, surface albedo and pressure, viewing geometry (courtesy of Roeland F. van Oss) n Ring effect: directly model the 1 st -oder RRS of the direct beam u Account for dependence on ozone profile and SZA (Sioris & Evans, 2002) u Use actual GOME solar irradiance u Ring spectra are updated when the total ozone change is > 20 DU u Scaling parameters are fitted in retrieval. n Clouds/Surface: Lambertian surface, Independent pixel approx. u Cloud-top pressure from GOMECAT (Kurosu et al., 1999) u Initial surface albedo from an albedo database (Koelemeijer et al., 2003) u Cloud fraction is derived from 370 nm and fixed by assuming a cloud albedo of 80% unless it is overcast, when we derive cloud albedo. u Surface albedo is varied in the retrievals u A wavelength-dependent albedo (2 nd polynomial) is used for channel 2

15 Forward Model n Aerosols n Monthly mean SAGE-II stratospheric aerosols (extinction & effective radius) (Bauman et al., 2003) n Monthly mean GOCART tropospheric aerosols (dust, sulfate, black & organic carbon, coarse and fine sea salt) (Chin et al., 2002) as described in Martin et al. (2003), optical properties (using Mie ) are externally mixed. n Wavelength-dependent surface albedo accounts for residual aerosol effects.

16 Forward Model n Trace Gases: u Only O 3 is modeled in LIDORT with ozone cross sections by Daumont et al. (1992), Brion et al. (1993), Malicet et al. (1995) u Previous version: fit cross sections of NO 2, SO 2, BrO u Now fit weighting functions of NO 2, SO 2, BrO, and HCHO weighted by profile shapes from models due to large AMF variation with wavelength  NO 2 : PRATMO + GEOS-CHEM  BrO: PRATMO + well mixed in the troposphere  SO 2 /HCHO: GEOS-CHEM model simulations, no stratospheric n NCEP surface & tropopause pressure, ECMWF temperature n Effective viewing geometry (integrate and average geometric path lengths from west to east edge) n Weighting functions other than ozone, albedo, and shift parameters are derived with the finite difference approach.

17 Inverse Model n Measurement vector: n State vector: ozone variables + auxiliary parameters (albedo, shifts, trace gas, Ring effect, undersampling, degradation etc.) n Measurement error: GOME random-noise error (RSS of I + F, uncorrelated) n A priori information: n 3-D (month, latitude, altitude) ozone climatology by McPeters et al. [2003]: mean and standard deviations at 61 levels (0-60 km) (from 15 years of SAGE, ozonesonde and MLS) n Use a correlation length of 6 km to construct a priori covariance matrix n Other parameters: assumed empirically or based on retrieval statistics and are uncorrelated with the rest

18 Inverse Model n Convergence criteria: ozone/cost function change <1% n Convergence: 3-5 iterations, usually 2-3 iterations if initialized with a previous retrieval n One orbit: 36 mins on a 3.2-GHz processor (LIDORT, variable slit/wavelength calibrations), process 1-day GOME data in 8.7 hrs and process GOME-2 data daily with 3 such CPUs n Fitting residuals:

19 Informational Analysis --- Averaging Kernels VR: 7-12 km (at km) 7-12 km (at 7-37 km) 8-12 km (at km)

20 Informational Analysis --- DFS and A Priori Influence DFS: 1.2 DFS in the tropics, 0.5 at high latitudes A Priori influence in TCO: 15% in the tropics, 50% at high-latitudes

21 Error Analysis Precision: 2-8% (< 2DU) in the strat., <12%(5DU) in the troposphere Smoothing: 40 km, and 30% at <10 km TO: <2 DU(0.5%); 3 DU (1.0%) SCO: <2 DU(1%); 2-5 DU (1-2%) TCO: DU(6-10%); 3-6 DU(12-20%)

22 Error Analysis Liu et al., 2005, JGR

23 Total Column Ozone Comparison Liu et al., 2005, 2006a, 2006b (in press) n Comparisons with total ozone /ozonesonde at 33 sonde stations n TOMS: avg. points within GOME, mean biases are <6 DU (2%) at most stations with 1  <1.5% in tropics and <2.4% at high latitudes n Dobson: ±8hrs, ±1.5ºlat, ±500km lon, mean biases are mostly <5 DU (2%) with 1  < 3% in the tropics and <5% at high latitudes

24 Intercomparison with SAGE-II Liu et al., 2005, JGR; Liu et al., 2006, in press n Comparisons with SAGE-II in down to ~15 km: same day, ±1.5ºlat, ±5ºlon n Apply GOME averaging kernels n Systematic biases: usually <15% with 1  <10% at ~20-60 km and <15% at ~15-20 km n Column ozone: negative biases of 3-6 DU at km, <2.5 DU at ~15-35 km

25 Comparison with OzonesondeTropospheric Column Ozone

26 Comparison with Ozonesonde Tropospheric Column Ozone

27 Comparison with Ozonesonde Tropospheric Column Ozone n GOME tropospheric column ozone captures most of the temporal variability in ozonesonde TCO.

28 n Mean biases: <3.3 DU (15%) at 30 stations; 1  : 3-8 DU (12-27%) n Improvements over a priori at most stations: either reduces MBs or 1  or increases the correlation Comparison with Ozonesonde Tropospheric Column Ozone

29 Comparison with Ozonesonde and SAGE-II SCO n Stratospheric column ozone between layer 4 and 7 (15~35 km) or between tropopause and layer 7 n GOME/SONDE SCO (15-35 km): usually higher by 8-20 DU (5-8%) at CI & most tropical stations n GOME/SAGE-II SCO (~15-35 km): usually within ±2.5 DU (1.5%) except for 3 Northern European stations

30 Comparison with Ozonesonde SCO n GOME SCO compares better with 1%-KI buffered than 2%-KI unbuffered by DU. n Altitude-dependent total ozone normalization reduces the bias contrast and GOME/sonde biases mainly with 2%-KI unbuffered.

31 Profile Comparison with Ozonesonde n Systematic biases n Large positive biases of (30-70%) at Carbon Iodine and most tropical stations

32 Profile Comparison with Ozonesonde n The biases relative to 1%-buffered is usually smaller by 5-15%. n Altitude-dependent homogenization reduces the bias with 2%-unbuffered. n Uncorrected altitude hysteresis can account for 5-15% biases.

33 Profile Comparison with Ozonesonde and SAGE-II n GOME/SAGE-II: usually <5% at layer 5 and 8-20% for layer 4 n GOME/Sonde: mostly 5-20% for layer 5 and 20-60% for layer 4

34 Summary and Future Outlook nOzone profiles and tropospheric column ozone are retrieved from GOME spectra ( nm, nm) using the optimal estimation after extensive treatments of wavelength and radiometric calibrations and forward modeling. nRetrieved TO compares well with TOMS and Dobson/Brewer measurements to within 2% at most locations. nThe mean biases and 1  with SAGE are usually within 15% down to ~15 km. nThe retrieved TCO captures most of the temporal variability in ozonesonde TCO; the mean biases are usually within 15% and 1  are within 13-27%. nThe large biases between GOME and ozonesonde in the stratosphere and upper troposphere at carbon iodine stations and most stations in the tropics, reflect biases in ozone retrievals as well as ozonesonde measurements. nThe biases depend on sonde technique, sensor solution and data processing, therefore demonstrating the need to homogenize available ozonesonde datasets and standardize future operational procedures for reliable satellite validation. n Derive ozone profiles from GOME data during July 1995 to May n Continue to improve and speed up the retrievals and apply this algorithm to SCIMACHY, GOME-2, and OMI data.

35 Acknowledgements nSupported by NASA and the Smithsonian Institution nESA and DLR nTOMS, SAGE, WOUDC, SHADOZ, CMDL nNCEP, ECMWF, GEOS-CHEM, GOCART, PRATMO nG. Labow for providing ozone profile climatology.