cloud trends from gome, sciamachy and omi ping wang, mark kroon, piet stammes, ronald van der a

25
1 Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon, Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A KNMI, De Bilt, the Netherlands science meeting, Helsinki, 24-27 June 2008

Upload: leo-murphy

Post on 15-Mar-2016

31 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

DESCRIPTION

OMI science meeting, Helsinki, 24-27 June 2008. Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon, Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A KNMI, De Bilt, the Netherlands. Overview. Importance of clouds Satellite instruments Method Global frequency distributions of cloud properties - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

1

Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI

Ping Wang, Mark Kroon, Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

KNMI, De Bilt, the Netherlands

OMI science meeting, Helsinki, 24-27 June 2008

Page 2: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

2

Overview• Importance of clouds• Satellite instruments • Method • Global frequency distributions of cloud properties• Trends in global cloud properties • Conclusions

Page 3: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

3

Importance of clouds for climate

1. Clouds dominate the radiative budget of the atmosphere:

Clouds contribute about 75 % to Earth’s albedo. Height of clouds determines their temperature.

2. Clouds play a central role in the hydrological cycle.

3. Current understanding of clouds is limited:

Global climate models have to be validated with global observations of clouds.

Page 4: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

4

Satellite spectrometersINSTRUMENT /SATELLITE SPECTRAL RANGE PIXEL SIZE

GOME / ERS-2: 240 – 800 nm 320x40

km2

SCIAMACHY / Envisat: 240 – 2380 nm 60x30 km2

GOME-2 / Metop-A: 240 – 800 nm80x40 km2

OMI/AURA: 270 – 500 nm24x13 km2

Spectral resolution: 0.2 - 0.4 nm

SCIAGOME/GOME-2

O2 A

OMI

O2-O2Raman

Page 5: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

5

Spectral resolution: 0.4 nm

Spectral resolution: 1 pm

O2 A-band simulation

O2 A-band measurement

Page 6: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

6

Cloud retrieval algorithm FRESCOReality Retrieval model

ceff1-ceff

•Geometrical cloud fraction•Cloud optical thickness•Cloud top pressure•Cloud bottom pressure•Cloud phase•………

FRESCO algorithm produces:• Effective cloud fraction: ceff• Cloud pressure pc

pcAc = 0.8

ps, As

Page 7: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

7

Simulation of O2 cloud pressure

Sneep et al. JGR 2008

Page 8: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

8

O2 A-band cloud results compared to ISCCP data

Data selection:

GOME (FRESCO): 1996-2003SCIAMACHY (FRESCO): 2003-2005

ISCCP D2 data: 1996-2005

Area: 60° N – 60° STime: 10:OO hr local time

Monthly averages

Page 9: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

9

Comparison between GOME and ISCCP

ISCCP 09:00

land ocean

1997

Page 10: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

10

Time series of global mean cloud pressure

Page 11: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

11

Time series of NH and SH cloud pressure

GOME

Page 12: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

12

OMI global mean cloud pressure

Whole Globe (60S,60N) OMICloud Pressure COL3

660680700720740760780800

Time (months)

Clou

d Pr

essu

re

OMI O2O2OMI Raman

Page 13: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

13

OMI global mean effective cloud fraction

Whole Globe (60S,60N) OMICloud Fraction COL3

0.280

0.290

0.300

0.310

0.320

0.330

0.340

Time (months)

Clou

d Fr

actio

n

OMI O2O2OMI Raman

Page 14: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

14

Global mean cloud pressure 1996-2008

cloud pressure

620

640

660

680

700

720

740

1 10 19 28 37 46 55 64 73 82 91 100 109 118 127 136 145

month from January 1996

Pc [h

Pa]

gome Pcscia PcOMI O2O2 Pc

Page 15: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

15

Global mean effective cloud fraction 1996-2008

effective cloud fraction

0.25

0.26

0.27

0.28

0.29

0.3

0.31

0.32

0.33

0.34

1 12 23 34 45 56 67 78 89 100 111 122 133 144

month from January 1996

c_ef

f gome cscia cOMI O2O2 c

Page 16: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

16

O2-O2 cloud fraction across track

July 2007

The larger ceff at the edges of the swath might contribute to the larger global mean ceff

Page 17: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

17

O2-O2 ceff, Pc vs. lat.

July 2007

Page 18: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

18

Conclusions• O2 absorption provides unique height information

about clouds, since visible light penetrates into clouds.• O2 methods are complementary to IR methods which

give mostly the top of the cloud.• O2 cloud pressure has a clear bimodal distribution

unlike ISCCP. • The global average O2 A-band cloud pressure has a

clear seasonal dependence, which is missing in ISCCP.. OMI O2-O2 global averaged cloud pressure and

effective cloud fraction show less seasonal variation than GOME and SCIA FRESCO cloud products.

Page 19: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

19

Whole Globe (60S,60N) OMICloud Pressure ECS2

600620640660680700720740760780800

Time (months)

Clou

d Pr

essu

re

OMI O2O2OMI Raman

Page 20: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

20

Whole Globe (60S,60N) OMICloud Fraction ECS2

0.1750.1950.2150.2350.2550.2750.2950.3150.335

Oct-04

Dec-04Feb

-05Ap

r-05Jun-0

5

Aug-0

5Oct-

05

Dec-05Feb

-06Ap

r-06Jun-0

6

Aug-0

6Oct-

06

Dec-06Feb

-07Ap

r-07Jun-0

7

Aug-0

7Oct-

07

Time (months)

Clou

d Fr

actio

n

OMI O2O2OMI Raman

Page 21: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

21

Page 22: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

22

Trend in global cloud pressure from GOME and SCIAMACHY

Page 23: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

23

Use of O2 absorption band:direct measure of cloud pressure

Page 24: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

24

oceanland

Cloud pressure distributions from GOME

Global mean, 1997

Page 25: Cloud trends from GOME, SCIAMACHY and OMI Ping Wang, Mark Kroon,  Piet Stammes, Ronald van der A

25

• O2-O2 FRESCO comparison Maarten et al. 2008• FRESCO+ cloud fraction and pressure monthly average,

perhaps not all the data• Differences in the FRESCO and OMI cloud average.• Cloud effect on climate• ISCCP data new version?• How to explain the seasonal variation• Check the SZA dependence?• Make FRESCO cloud trend plot using excel ?