Person:

Liu, Xiong

We analyze the theoretical basis of three different methods to validate and intercompare satellite measurements of atmospheric composition, and apply them to tropospheric ozone retrievals from the Tropospheric Emission Spectrometer (TES) and the Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI). The first method (in situ method) uses in situ vertical profiles for absolute instrument validation; it is limited by the sparseness of in situ data. The second method (CTM method) uses a chemical transport model (CTM) as an intercomparison platform; it provides a globally complete intercomparison with relatively small noise from model error. The third method (averaging kernel smoothing method) involves smoothing the retrieved profile from one instrument with the averaging kernel matrix of the other; it also provides a global intercomparison but dampens the actual difference between instruments and adds noise from the a priori. We apply the three methods to a full year (2006) of TES and OMI data. Comparison with in situ data from ozonesondes shows mean positive biases of 5.3 parts per billion volume (ppbv) (10%) for TES and 2.8 ppbv (5%) for OMI at 500 hPa. We show that the CTM method (using the GEOS-Chem CTM) closely approximates results from the in situ method while providing global coverage. It reveals that differences between TES and OMI are generally less than 10 ppbv (18%), except at northern mid-latitudes in summer and over tropical continents. The CTM method further allows for CTM evaluation using both satellite observations. We thus find that GEOS-Chem underestimates tropospheric ozone in the tropics due to possible underestimates of biomass burning, soil, and lightning emissions. It overestimates ozone in the northern subtropics and southern mid-latitudes, likely because of excessive stratospheric influx of ozone.

We present the first directly retrieved global distribution of tropospheric column ozone from Global Ozone Monitoring Experiment (GOME) ultraviolet measurements during December 1996 to November 1997. The retrievals clearly show signals due to convection, biomass burning, stratospheric influence, pollution, and transport. They are capable of capturing the spatiotemporal evolution of tropospheric column ozone in response to regional or short time-scale events such as the 1997–1998 El Niño event and a 10–20 DU change within a few days. The global distribution of tropospheric column ozone displays the well-known wave-1 pattern in the tropics, nearly zonal bands of enhanced tropospheric column ozone of 36–48 DU at 20°S–30°S during the austral spring and at 25°N–45°N during the boreal spring and summer, low tropospheric column ozone of <30 DU uniformly distributed south of 35°S during all seasons, and relatively high tropospheric column ozone of >33 DU at some northern high-latitudes during the spring. Simulation from a chemical transport model corroborates most of the above structures, with small biases of <±5 DU and consistent seasonal cycles in most regions, especially in the southern hemisphere. However, significant positive biases of 5–20 DU occur in some northern tropical and subtropical regions such as the Middle East during summer. Comparison of GOME with monthly-averaged Measurement of Ozone and Water Vapor by Airbus in-service Aircraft (MOZAIC) tropospheric column ozone for these regions usually shows good consistency within 1σ standard deviations and retrieval uncertainties. Some biases can be accounted for by inadequate sensitivity to lower tropospheric ozone, the different spatiotemporal sampling and the spatiotemporal variations in tropospheric column ozone.