Literature DB >> 32071827

Why Do Antarctic Ozone Recovery Trends Vary?

Susan E Strahan1,2, Anne R Douglass1, Megan R Damon1,3.   

Abstract

We use satellite ozone records and Global Modeling Initiative chemistry transport model simulations integrated with Modern Era Retrospective for Research and Analysis 2 meteorology to identify a metric that accurately captures the trend in Antarctic ozone attributable to the decline in ozone depleting substances (ODSs). The GMI CTM Baseline simulation with realistically varying ODS levels closely matches observed interannual to decadal scale variations in Antarctic September ozone over the past four decades. The expected increase or recovery trend is obtained from the differences between the Baseline simulation and one with identical meteorology and fixed 1995 ODS levels. The differences show that vortex-averaged column O3 has the greatest sensitivity to ODS change from 1 to 20 September. The observed vortex-averaged column O3 during this period produces a trend consistent with the expected recovery attributable to ODS decline. Trends from dates after 20 September have smaller sensitivity to ODS decline and are more uncertain due to transport variability. Simulations show that the greatest decrease in O3 loss (i.e., recovery) occurs inside the vortex near the edge. The polar cap metrics have vortex size-dependent bias and do not consistently sample this region. Because the 60-90°S 220 Dobson unit O3 mass deficit metric does not sample the edge region, its trend is lower than the expected trend; this is improved by area weighting. The 250-Dobson unit O3 mass deficit metric samples more of the edge region, which increases its trend. Approximately 25% of the September Antarctic O3 increase is due to higher O3 levels in June prior to winter depletion.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 32071827      PMCID: PMC7027592          DOI: 10.1029/2019jd030996

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Geophys Res Atmos        ISSN: 2169-897X            Impact factor:   4.261


  8 in total

1.  The dynamics of the stratospheric polar vortex and its relation to springtime ozone depletions.

Authors:  M R Schoeberl; D L Hartmann
Journal:  Science       Date:  1991-01-04       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Chemical and Dynamical Impacts of Stratospheric Sudden Warmings on Arctic Ozone Variability.

Authors:  S E Strahan; A R Douglass; S D Steenrod
Journal:  J Geophys Res Atmos       Date:  2016-09-14       Impact factor: 4.261

3.  Emergence of healing in the Antarctic ozone layer.

Authors:  Susan Solomon; Diane J Ivy; Doug Kinnison; Michael J Mills; Ryan R Neely; Anja Schmidt
Journal:  Science       Date:  2016-06-30       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Detecting recovery of the stratospheric ozone layer.

Authors:  Martyn P Chipperfield; Slimane Bekki; Sandip Dhomse; Neil R P Harris; Birgit Hassler; Ryan Hossaini; Wolfgang Steinbrecht; Rémi Thiéblemont; Mark Weber
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2017-09-13       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  The Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2).

Authors:  Ronald Gelaro; Will McCarty; Max J Suárez; Ricardo Todling; Andrea Molod; Lawrence Takacs; Cynthia Randles; Anton Darmenov; Michael G Bosilovich; Rolf Reichle; Krzysztof Wargan; Lawrence Coy; Richard Cullather; Clara Draper; Santha Akella; Virginie Buchard; Austin Conaty; Arlindo da Silva; Wei Gu; Gi-Kong Kim; Randal Koster; Robert Lucchesi; Dagmar Merkova; Jon Eric Nielsen; Gary Partyka; Steven Pawson; William Putman; Michele Rienecker; Siegfried D Schubert; Meta Sienkiewicz; Bin Zhao
Journal:  J Clim       Date:  2017-06-20       Impact factor: 5.148

6.  An unexpected and persistent increase in global emissions of ozone-depleting CFC-11.

Authors:  Stephen A Montzka; Geoff S Dutton; Pengfei Yu; Eric Ray; Robert W Portmann; John S Daniel; Lambert Kuijpers; Brad D Hall; Debra Mondeel; Carolina Siso; J David Nance; Matt Rigby; Alistair J Manning; Lei Hu; Fred Moore; Ben R Miller; James W Elkins
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2018-05-16       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  The signs of Antarctic ozone hole recovery.

Authors:  Jayanarayanan Kuttippurath; Prijitha J Nair
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-04-03       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Recent Trends in Stratospheric Chlorine From Very Short-Lived Substances.

Authors:  Ryan Hossaini; Elliot Atlas; Sandip S Dhomse; Martyn P Chipperfield; Peter F Bernath; Anton M Fernando; Jens Mühle; Amber A Leeson; Stephen A Montzka; Wuhu Feng; Jeremy J Harrison; Paul Krummel; Martin K Vollmer; Stefan Reimann; Simon O'Doherty; Dickon Young; Michela Maione; Jgor Arduini; Chris R Lunder
Journal:  J Geophys Res Atmos       Date:  2019-02-16       Impact factor: 4.261

  8 in total
  2 in total

1.  COVID-19 Crisis Reduces Free Tropospheric Ozone Across the Northern Hemisphere.

Authors:  Wolfgang Steinbrecht; Dagmar Kubistin; Christian Plass-Dülmer; Jonathan Davies; David W Tarasick; Peter von der Gathen; Holger Deckelmann; Nis Jepsen; Rigel Kivi; Norrie Lyall; Matthias Palm; Justus Notholt; Bogumil Kois; Peter Oelsner; Marc Allaart; Ankie Piters; Michael Gill; Roeland Van Malderen; Andy W Delcloo; Ralf Sussmann; Emmanuel Mahieu; Christian Servais; Gonzague Romanens; Rene Stübi; Gerard Ancellet; Sophie Godin-Beekmann; Shoma Yamanouchi; Kimberly Strong; Bryan Johnson; Patrick Cullis; Irina Petropavlovskikh; James W Hannigan; Jose-Luis Hernandez; Ana Diaz Rodriguez; Tatsumi Nakano; Fernando Chouza; Thierry Leblanc; Carlos Torres; Omaira Garcia; Amelie N Röhling; Matthias Schneider; Thomas Blumenstock; Matt Tully; Clare Paton-Walsh; Nicholas Jones; Richard Querel; Susan Strahan; Ryan M Stauffer; Anne M Thompson; Antje Inness; Richard Engelen; Kai-Lan Chang; Owen R Cooper
Journal:  Geophys Res Lett       Date:  2021-02-26       Impact factor: 4.720

2.  On Recent Large Antarctic Ozone Holes and Ozone Recovery Metrics.

Authors:  K A Stone; S Solomon; D E Kinnison; Michael J Mills
Journal:  Geophys Res Lett       Date:  2021-11-18       Impact factor: 5.576

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.