scholarly journals Mesoscale modelling of water vapour in the tropical UTLS: two case studies from the HIBISCUS campaign

2007 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 1471-1489 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Marécal ◽  
G. Durry ◽  
K. Longo ◽  
S. Freitas ◽  
E. D. Rivière ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Water Vapour ◽  
Lower Stratosphere ◽  
Mesoscale Model ◽  
Global Analysis ◽  
Atmospheric Modeling ◽  
Tunable Diode Laser ◽  
Fine Scale ◽  
Vertical Resolution ◽  
Upper Troposphere ◽  
Vertical Variations

Abstract. In this study, we evaluate the ability of the BRAMS (Brazilian Regional Atmospheric Modeling System) mesoscale model compared to ECMWF global analysis to simulate the observed vertical variations of water vapour in the tropical upper troposphere and lower stratosphere (UTLS). The observations are balloon-borne measurements of water vapour mixing ratio and temperature from micro-SDLA (Tunable Diode Laser Spectrometer) instrument. Data from two balloon flights performed during the 2004 HIBISCUS field campaign are used to compare with the mesoscale simulations and to the ECMWF analysis. The observations exhibit fine scale vertical structures of water vapour of a few hundred meters height. The ECMWF vertical resolution (~1 km) is too coarse to capture these vertical structures in the UTLS. With a vertical resolution similar to ECMWF, the mesoscale model performs better than ECMWF analysis for water vapour in the upper troposphere and similarly or slightly worse for temperature. The BRAMS model with 250 m vertical resolution is able to capture more of the observed fine scale vertical variations of water vapour compared to runs with a coarser vertical resolution. This is mainly related to: (i) the enhanced vertical resolution in the UTLS and (ii) to the more detailed microphysical parameterization providing ice supersaturations as in the observations. In near saturated or supersaturated layers, the mesoscale model predicted relative humidity with respect to ice saturation is close to observations provided that the temperature profile is realistic. For temperature, the ECMWF analysis gives good results partly attributed to data assimilation. The analysis of the mesoscale model results showed that the vertical variations of the water vapour profile depends on the dynamics in unsaturated layer while the microphysical processes play a major role in saturated/supersaturated layers. In the lower stratosphere, the ECMWF model and the BRAMS model give very similar water vapour profiles that are significantly drier than micro-SDLA measurements. This similarity comes from the fact that BRAMS is initialised using ECMWF analysis and that no mesoscale process acts in the stratosphere leading to no modification of the BRAMS results with respect to ECMWF analysis.

scholarly journals Mesoscale modelling of water vapour in the tropical UTLS: two case studies from the HIBISCUS campaign

2006 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 8241-8284 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Marécal ◽  
G. Durry ◽  
K. Longo ◽  
S. Freitas ◽  
E. D. Rivière ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Water Vapour ◽  
Lower Stratosphere ◽  
Mesoscale Model ◽  
Global Analysis ◽  
Tunable Diode Laser ◽  
Vertical Resolution ◽  
Upper Troposphere ◽  
Diode Laser Spectrometer ◽  
Vertical Variations ◽  
Ecmwf Model

Abstract. In this study, we evaluate the ability of the BRAMS mesoscale model compared to ECMWF global analysis to simulate the observed vertical variations of water vapour in the tropical upper troposphere and lower stratosphere (UTLS). The observations are balloon-borne measurements of water vapour mixing ratio and temperature from micro-SDLA (Tunable Diode Laser Spectrometer) instrument. Data from two balloon flights performed during the 2004 HIBISCUS field campaign are used to compare with the mesoscale simulations and to ECMWF analysis. The mesoscale model performs significantly better than ECMWF analysis for water vapour in the upper troposphere and similarly or slightly worse for temperature. The improvement provided by the mesoscale model for water vapour comes mainly from (i) the enhanced vertical resolution in the UTLS (250 m for BRAMS and ~1 km for ECMWF model) and (ii) the more detailed microphysical parameterization providing ice supersaturations as in the observations. The ECMWF vertical resolution (~1 km) is too coarse to capture the observed fine scale vertical variations of water vapour in the UTLS. In near saturated or supersaturated layers, the mesoscale model relative humidity with respect to ice saturation is close to observations provided that the temperature profile is realistic. For temperature, ECMWF analysis gives good results partly thanks to data assimilation. The analysis of the mesoscale model results showed that in undersaturated layers, the water vapour profile depends mainly on the dynamics. In saturated/supersaturated layers, microphysical processes play an important role and have to be taken into account on top of the dynamical processes to understand the water vapour profiles. In the lower stratosphere, the ECMWF model and the BRAMS model give very similar water vapour profiles that are significantly dryer than micro-SDLA measurements. This similarity comes from the fact that BRAMS is initialised using ECMWF analysis and that no mesoscale process acts in the stratosphere leading to no modification of the BRAMS results with respect to ECMWF analysis.

scholarly journals Evaluation of balloon and satellite water vapour measurements in the Southern tropical and subtropical UTLS during the HIBISCUS campaign

2009 ◽  
Vol 9 (14) ◽  
pp. 5299-5319 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Montoux ◽  
A. Hauchecorne ◽  
J.-P. Pommereau ◽  
F. Lefèvre ◽  
G. Durry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Water Vapour ◽  
Lower Stratosphere ◽  
Tunable Diode Laser ◽  
Absorption Bands ◽  
Upper Troposphere ◽  
Mixing Ratios ◽  
Water Vapour Concentration ◽  
Vapour Concentration ◽  
Remote Measurements

Abstract. Balloon water vapour in situ and remote measurements in the tropical upper troposphere and lower stratosphere (UTLS) obtained during the HIBISCUS campaign around 20° S in Brazil in February–March 2004 using a tunable diode laser (μSDLA), a surface acoustic wave (SAW) and a Vis-NIR solar occultation spectrometer (SAOZ) on a long duration balloon, have been used for evaluating the performances of satellite borne remote water vapour instruments available at the same latitude and measurement period. In the stratosphere, HALOE displays the best precision (2.5%), followed by SAGE II (7%), MIPAS (10%), SAOZ (20–25%) and SCIAMACHY (35%), all of which show approximately constant H2O mixing ratios between 20–25 km. Compared to HALOE of ±10% accuracy between 0.1–100 hPa, SAGE II and SAOZ show insignificant biases, MIPAS is wetter by 10% and SCIAMACHY dryer by 20%. The currently available GOMOS profiles of 25% precision show a positive vertical gradient in error for identified reasons. Compared to these, the water vapour of the Reprobus Chemistry Transport Model, forced at pressures higher than 95 hPa by the ECMWF analyses, is dryer by about 1 ppmv (20%). In the lower stratosphere between 16–20 km, most notable features are the steep degradation of MIPAS precision below 18 km, and the appearance of biases between instruments far larger than their quoted total uncertainty. HALOE and SAGE II (after spectral adjustment for reducing the bias with HALOE at northern mid-latitudes) both show decreases of water vapour with a minimum at the tropopause not seen by other instruments or the model, possibly attributable to an increasing error in the HALOE altitude registration. Between 16–18 km where the water vapour concentration shows little horizontal variability, and where the μSDLA balloon measurements are not perturbed by outgassing, the average mixing ratios reported by the remote sensing instruments are substantially lower than the 4–5 ppmv observed by the μSDLA. Differences between μSDLA and HALOE and SAGE II (of the order of −2 ppmv), SCIAMACHY, MIPAS and GOMOS (−1 ppmv) and SAOZ (−0.5 ppmv), exceed the 10% uncertainty of μSDLA, implying larger systematic errors than estimated for the various instruments. In the upper troposphere, where the water vapour concentration is highly variable, AIRS v5 appears to be the most consistent within its 25% uncertainty with balloon in-situ measurements as well as ECMWF. Most of the remote measurements show less reliability in the upper troposphere, losing sensitivity possibly because of absorption line saturation in their spectral ranges (HALOE, SAGE II and SCIAMACHY), instrument noise exceeding 100% (MIPAS) or imperfect refraction correction (GOMOS). An exception is the SAOZ-balloon, employing smaller H2O absorption bands in the troposphere.

scholarly journals Evaluation of water vapour assimilation in the tropical upper troposphere and lower stratosphere by a chemical transport model

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 4355-4373 ◽  
Author(s):  
Swagata Payra ◽  
Philippe Ricaud ◽  
Rachid Abida ◽  
Laaziz El Amraoui ◽  
Jean-Luc Attié ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Water Vapour ◽  
Lower Stratosphere ◽  
Transport Model ◽  
Michelson Interferometer ◽  
Model Space ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
Chemical Transport Model ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Upper Troposphere ◽  
Sensitivity Studies

Abstract. The present analysis deals with one of the most debated aspects of the studies on the upper troposphere/lower stratosphere (UTLS), namely the budget of water vapour (H2O) at the tropical tropopause. Within the French project “Multiscale water budget in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere in the TROpics” (TRO-pico), a global-scale analysis has been set up based on space-borne observations, models and assimilation techniques. The MOCAGE-VALENTINA assimilation tool has been used to assimilate the Aura Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) version 3.3 H2O measurements within the 316–5 hPa range from August 2011 to March 2013 with an assimilation window of 1 h. Diagnostics based on observations minus analysis and forecast are developed to assess the quality of the assimilated H2O fields. Comparison with an independent source of H2O measurements in the UTLS based on the space-borne Michelson Interferometer for Passive Atmospheric Sounding (MIPAS) observations and with meteorological ARPEGE analyses is also shown. Sensitivity studies of the analysed fields have been performed by (1) considering periods when no MLS measurements are available and (2) using H2O data from another MLS version (4.2). The studies have been performed within three different spaces in time and space coincidences with MLS (hereafter referred to as MLS space) and MIPAS (MIPAS space) observations and with the model (model space) outputs and at three different levels: 121 hPa (upper troposphere), 100 hPa (tropopause) and 68 hPa (lower stratosphere) in January and February 2012. In the MLS space, the analyses behave consistently with the MLS observations from the upper troposphere to the lower stratosphere. In the model space, the analyses are wetter than the reference atmosphere as represented by ARPEGE and MLS in the upper troposphere (121 hPa) and around the tropopause (100 hPa), but are consistent with MLS and MIPAS in the lower stratosphere (68 hPa). In the MIPAS space, the sensitivity and the vertical resolution of the MIPAS data set at 121 and 100 hPa prevent assessment of the behaviour of the analyses at 121 and 100 hPa, particularly over intense convective areas as the South American, the African and the Maritime continents but, in the lower stratosphere (68 hPa), the analyses are very consistent with MIPAS. Sensitivity studies show the improvement on the H2O analyses in the tropical UTLS when assimilating space-borne measurements of better quality, particularly over the convective areas.

Water vapour in the Upper Troposphere and Lower Stratosphere (UTLS): A new vertically resolved dataset from limb and nadir satellite observations

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hao Ye ◽  
Michaela Hegglin ◽  
Martina Krämer ◽  
Christian Rolf ◽  
Alexandra Laeng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Water Vapour ◽  
Radiative Forcing ◽  
Lower Stratosphere ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Chemical Properties ◽  
Upper Troposphere ◽  
Data Record ◽  
Tropopause Region ◽  
Quality Water

<p>Water vapour in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere (UTLS) has a significant impact both on the radiative and chemical properties of the atmosphere. Reliable water vapour observations are essential for the evaluation of the accuracy of UTLS water vapour from model simulations, and thereafter of the contribution to the global radiative forcing and climate change. Limb-viewing and nadir satellites provide high quality water vapour observations above the lower stratosphere and below the upper troposphere, respectively, but show large uncertainties in the tropopause region.<span>  </span>Within the ESA Water Vapour Climate Change Initiative, we have developed a new scheme to optimally estimate water vapour profiles in the UTLS and in particular across the tropopause, by merging observations from a set of limb and nadir satellites from 2010 to 2014. The new data record of vertically resolved water vapour is validated against the aircraft in-situ water vapour observations from the JULIA database and frostpoint hydrometer records from WAVAS. Furthermore, the new data record is used to evaluate the UTLS water vapour distribution and interannual variations from chemistry-climate model (CCM) simulations and the ERA-5 reanalysis.</p>

scholarly journals The impact of orbital sampling, monthly averaging and vertical resolution on climate chemistry model evaluation with satellite observations

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 9705-9742
Author(s):  
A. M. Aghedo ◽  
K. W. Bowman ◽  
D. T. Shindell ◽  
G. Faluvegi
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Boundary Layer ◽  
Carbon Monoxide ◽  
Water Vapour ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Atmospheric Temperature ◽  
Satellite Observations ◽  
Vertical Resolution ◽  
Upper Troposphere ◽  
The Impact

Abstract. Ensemble climate model simulations used for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessments have become important tools for exploring the response of the Earth System to changes in anthropogenic and natural forcings. The systematic evaluation of these models through global satellite observations is a critical step in assessing the uncertainty of climate change projections. This paper presents the technical steps required for using nadir sun-synchronous infrared satellite observations for multi-model evaluation and the uncertainties associated with each step. This is motivated by need to use satellite observations to evaluate climate models. We quantified the implications of the effect of satellite orbit and spatial coverage, the effect of variations in vertical sensitivity as quantified by the observation operator and the impact of averaging the operators for use with monthly-mean model output. We calculated these biases in ozone, carbon monoxide, atmospheric temperature and water vapour by using the output from two global chemistry climate models (ECHAM5-MOZ and GISS-PUCCINI) and the observations from the Tropospheric Emission Spectrometer (TES) satellite from January 2005 to December 2008. The results show that sampling and monthly averaging of the observation operators produce biases of less than ±3% for ozone and carbon monoxide throughout the entire troposphere in both models. Water vapour sampling biases were also within the insignificant range of ±3% (that is ±0.14 g kg−1) in both models. Sampling led to a temperature bias of ±0.3 K over the tropical and mid-latitudes in both models, and up to −1.4 K over the boundary layer in the higher latitudes. Using the monthly average of temperature and water vapour operators lead to large biases over the boundary layer in the southern-hemispheric higher latitudes and in the upper troposphere, respectively. Up to 8% bias was calculated in the upper troposphere water vapour due to monthly-mean operators, which may impact the detection of water vapour feedback in response to global warming. Our results reveal the importance of using the averaging kernel and the a priori profiles to account for the limited vertical resolution of a nadir observation during model application. Neglecting the observation operators resulted in large biases, which are more than 60% for ozone, ±30% for carbon monoxide, and range between −1.5 K and 5 K for atmospheric temperature, and between −60% and 100% for water vapour.

scholarly journals Evaluation of balloon and satellite water vapour measurements in the Southern tropical UTLS during the HIBISCUS campaign

2007 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 6037-6075 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Montoux ◽  
A. Hauchecorne ◽  
J.-P. Pommereau ◽  
G. Durry ◽  
B. Morel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Remote Sensing ◽  
Water Vapour ◽  
Transport Model ◽  
Tunable Diode Laser ◽  
Upper Troposphere ◽  
Satellite Systems ◽  
Mixing Ratios ◽  
Tropical Tropopause ◽  
Dry Bias

Abstract. Among the objectives of the HIBISCUS campaign was the study of water vapour in the tropical upper troposphere and lower stratosphere (UTLS) by balloon borne in situ and remote sensing, offering a unique opportunity for evaluating the performances of balloon and satellite water vapour data available at the southern tropics in February-April 2004. Instruments evaluated include balloon borne in situ tunable diode laser spectrometer (μ SDLA) and surface acoustic wave hygrometer (SAW), and remote sensing with a near IR spectrometer (SAOZ) flown on a circumnavigating long duration balloon. The satellite systems available are those of AIRS/AMSU (v4), SAGE-II (v6.2), HALOE (v19), MIPAS (v4.62) and GOMOS (v6.0). In the stratosphere between 20–25 km, three satellite instruments, HALOE, SAGE-II and MIPAS, are showing very consistent results (nearly constant mixing ratios), while AIRS, GOMOS and the SAOZ balloon are displaying a slight increase with altitude. Considering the previous studies, the first three appear the most precise at this level, HALOE being the less variable (5%), close to the atmospheric variability shown by the REPROBUS/ECMWF Chemistry-Transport model. The three others are showing significantly larger variability, AIRS being the most variable (35%), followed by GOMOS (25%) and SAOZ (20%). Lower down in the Tropical Tropopause Layer between 14–20 km, HALOE and SAGE-II are showing marked minimum mixing ratios around 17–19 km, not seen by all others. For HALOE, this might be related to an altitude registration error already identified on ozone, while for SAGE-II, a possible explanation could be the persistence of the dry bias displayed by previous retrieval versions, not completely removed in version 6.2. On average, MIPAS is consistent with AIRS, GOMOS and SAOZ, not displaying the dry bias observed in past versions, but a fast degradation of precision below 20 km. Compared to satellites, the μ SDLA measurements shows systematically larger humidity although this conclusion may be biased by the fact that the balloon flights were carried out intentionally next or above strong convective systems where remote observations from space are difficult. In the upper troposphere below 14 km, all remote sensing measurements (except MIPAS of limited precision, and AIRS/AMSU) become rare, dry biased and less variable compared to ECMWF, but particularly HALOE and SAGE-II. The main reason for that is the frequent masking by clouds within which no remote measurements could be performed except by the AMSU microwave. Water vapour remote sensing profiles are representative of cloud free conditions only and thus dryer and less variable on average than ECMWF and AIRS/AMSU. Always in the upper troposphere, two in-situ instruments, μ SDLA and SAW, flown on the same balloon agree each other, displaying water vapour mixing ratios 100–200% larger than that of HALOE and MIPAS, which could be explained by the large ice supersaturation of the layer up to the tropopause, hardly detectable from the orbit.

scholarly journals The SPARC water vapour assessment II: profile-to-profile and climatological comparisons of stratospheric <i>δ</i>D(H<sub>2</sub>O) observations from satellite

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 2497-2526 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotta Högberg ◽  
Stefan Lossow ◽  
Farahnaz Khosrawi ◽  
Ralf Bauer ◽  
Kaley A. Walker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Water Vapour ◽  
Atmospheric Chemistry ◽  
Lower Stratosphere ◽  
Isotopic Ratio ◽  
Michelson Interferometer ◽  
Data Sets ◽  
Comprehensive Overview ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Upper Troposphere ◽  
Modelling Studies

Abstract. Within the framework of the second SPARC (Stratosphere-troposphere Processes And their Role in Climate) water vapour assessment (WAVAS-II), we evaluated five data sets of δD(H2O) obtained from observations by Odin/SMR (Sub-Millimetre Radiometer), Envisat/MIPAS (Environmental Satellite/Michelson Interferometer for Passive Atmospheric Sounding), and SCISAT/ACE-FTS (Science Satellite/Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment – Fourier Transform Spectrometer) using profile-to-profile and climatological comparisons. These comparisons aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of typical uncertainties in the observational database that could be considered in the future in observational and modelling studies. Our primary focus is on stratospheric altitudes, but results for the upper troposphere and lower mesosphere are also shown. There are clear quantitative differences in the measurements of the isotopic ratio, mainly with regard to comparisons between the SMR data set and both the MIPAS and ACE-FTS data sets. In the lower stratosphere, the SMR data set shows a higher depletion in δD than the MIPAS and ACE-FTS data sets. The differences maximise close to 50 hPa and exceed 200 ‰. With increasing altitude, the biases decrease. Above 4 hPa, the SMR data set shows a lower δD depletion than the MIPAS data sets, occasionally exceeding 100 ‰. Overall, the δD biases of the SMR data set are driven by HDO biases in the lower stratosphere and by H2O biases in the upper stratosphere and lower mesosphere. In between, in the middle stratosphere, the biases in δD are the result of deviations in both HDO and H2O. These biases are attributed to issues with the calibration, in particular in terms of the sideband filtering, and uncertainties in spectroscopic parameters. The MIPAS and ACE-FTS data sets agree rather well between about 100 and 10 hPa. The MIPAS data sets show less depletion below approximately 15 hPa (up to about 30 ‰), due to differences in both HDO and H2O. Higher up this behaviour is reversed, and towards the upper stratosphere the biases increase. This is driven by increasing biases in H2O, and on occasion the differences in δD exceed 80 ‰. Below 100 hPa, the differences between the MIPAS and ACE-FTS data sets are even larger. In the climatological comparisons, the MIPAS data sets continue to show less depletion in δD than the ACE-FTS data sets below 15 hPa during all seasons, with some variations in magnitude. The differences between the MIPAS and ACE-FTS data have multiple causes, such as differences in the temporal and spatial sampling (except for the profile-to-profile comparisons), cloud influence, vertical resolution, and the microwindows and spectroscopic database chosen. Differences between data sets from the same instrument are typically small in the stratosphere. Overall, if the data sets are considered together, the differences in δD among them in key areas of scientific interest (e.g. tropical and polar lower stratosphere, lower mesosphere, and upper troposphere) are too large to draw robust conclusions on atmospheric processes affecting the water vapour budget and distribution, e.g. the relative importance of different mechanisms transporting water vapour into the stratosphere.

Ozone variability and trends in the UTLS derived from the IAGOS- CARIBIC observatory using JETPAC

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harald Boenisch ◽  
Andreas Zahn ◽  
Luis Millan
Keyword(s):  
Water Vapour ◽  
Lower Stratosphere ◽  
In Situ Measurements ◽  
Research Infrastructure ◽  
European Research ◽  
Coordinate Systems ◽  
Upper Troposphere ◽  
Work In Progress

&lt;p&gt;The CARIBIC (Civil &amp;#160;Aircraft &amp;#160;for &amp;#160;the &amp;#160;Regular &amp;#160;Investigation &amp;#160;of the atmosphere Based on an&amp;#160;&lt;br&gt;Instrumented Container) project is part of the a European research infrastructure IAGOS (In-&lt;br&gt;Service Aircraft for a Global Observing System) making regular in-situ measurements of more&amp;#160;&lt;br&gt;than 100 atmospheric constituents, include ozone and water vapour, on-board of an in-service&amp;#160;&lt;br&gt;passenger &amp;#160;aircraft &amp;#160;operated &amp;#160;by &amp;#160;Lufthansa. &amp;#160;The &amp;#160;dataset &amp;#160;of &amp;#160;the &amp;#160;IAGOS-CARIBIC &amp;#160;is &amp;#160;therefore&amp;#160;&lt;br&gt;ideally suited as a testbed for the SPARC (Stratosphere-troposphere Processes And their Role&amp;#160;&lt;br&gt;in Climate) activity OCTAV-UTLS (Observed Composition Trends And Variability in the Upper&amp;#160;&lt;br&gt;Troposphere and Lower Stratosphere). One key aspect, shown here as work in progress, is to&amp;#160;&lt;br&gt;develop, define and apply common metrics for the comparison of different UTLS datasets&amp;#160;&lt;br&gt;using a variety of meteorological coordinate systems derived from reanalysis datasets. The&amp;#160;&lt;br&gt;focus here is on the variability of ozone in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere&amp;#160;&lt;br&gt;(UTLS) on interannual and seasonal timescales and the observed trends. The in-situ ozone&amp;#160;&lt;br&gt;measurements by IAGOS-CARIBIC are analysed relative to different tropopause definitions&amp;#160;&lt;br&gt;and coordinate systems. All these meteorological information applied here are produced with&amp;#160;&lt;br&gt;the JETPAC tool &amp;#8210; Jet and Tropopause Products for Analysis and Characterization (Manney et&amp;#160;&lt;br&gt;al., 2011).&lt;/p&gt;

scholarly journals The impact of orbital sampling, monthly averaging and vertical resolution on climate chemistry model evaluation with satellite observations

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (13) ◽  
pp. 6493-6514 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. M. Aghedo ◽  
K. W. Bowman ◽  
D. T. Shindell ◽  
G. Faluvegi
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Boundary Layer ◽  
Carbon Monoxide ◽  
Water Vapour ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Atmospheric Temperature ◽  
Satellite Observations ◽  
Vertical Resolution ◽  
Upper Troposphere ◽  
The Impact

Abstract. Ensemble climate model simulations used for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessments have become important tools for exploring the response of the Earth System to changes in anthropogenic and natural forcings. The systematic evaluation of these models through global satellite observations is a critical step in assessing the uncertainty of climate change projections. This paper presents the technical steps required for using nadir sun-synchronous infrared satellite observations for multi-model evaluation and the uncertainties associated with each step. This is motivated by need to use satellite observations to evaluate climate models. We quantified the implications of the effect of satellite orbit and spatial coverage, the effect of variations in vertical sensitivity as quantified by the observation operator and the impact of averaging the operators for use with monthly-mean model output. We calculated these biases in ozone, carbon monoxide, atmospheric temperature and water vapour by using the output from two global chemistry climate models (ECHAM5-MOZ and GISS-PUCCINI) and the observations from the Tropospheric Emission Spectrometer (TES) instrument on board the NASA-Aura satellite from January 2005 to December 2008. The results show that sampling and monthly averaging of the observation operators produce zonal-mean biases of less than ±3 % for ozone and carbon monoxide throughout the entire troposphere in both models. Water vapour sampling zonal-mean biases were also within the insignificant range of ±3 % (that is ±0.14 g kg−1) in both models. Sampling led to a temperature zonal-mean bias of ±0.3 K over the tropical and mid-latitudes in both models, and up to −1.4 K over the boundary layer in the higher latitudes. Using the monthly average of temperature and water vapour operators lead to large biases over the boundary layer in the southern-hemispheric higher latitudes and in the upper troposphere, respectively. Up to 8 % bias was calculated in the upper troposphere water vapour due to monthly-mean operators, which may impact the detection of water vapour feedback in response to global warming. Our results reveal the importance of using the averaging kernel and the a priori profiles to account for the limited vertical resolution and clouds of a nadir observation during model application. Neglecting the observation operators resulted in large biases, which are more than 60 % for ozone, ±30 % for carbon monoxide, and range between −1.5 K and 5 K for atmospheric temperature, and between −60 % and 100 % for water vapour.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document