4.6 Article

UV index climatology over the United States and Canada from ground-based and satellite estimates

Journal

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-ATMOSPHERES
Volume 109, Issue D22, Pages -

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2004JD004820

Keywords

UV index; Brewer; TOMS; pyranometer; climatology; ozone

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Long-term monthly mean UV index values for Canada and the United States were calculated using information from two sources: from noon erythemal UV estimated from Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer (TOMS) total ozone and reflectivity data and from UV index values derived from observations of global solar radiation, total ozone, dew point, and snow cover. The results are presented as monthly maps of mean noon UV index values. Mean UV index values in summer range from 1.5 in the Arctic to 11.5 over southern Texas. Both climatologies were validated against spectral UV irradiance measurements made by Brewer spectrophotometers. With snow on the ground the TOMS-based data underestimate UV by up to 60% with respect to Brewer measurements and UV derived from global solar radiation and other parameters. In summer, TOMS UV index climatology values are from 10 to 30% higher than those derived from global solar radiation and other parameters. The difference is probably related to aerosol absorption and pollution effects in the lower troposphere that are not currently detected from space. For 21 of 28 midlatitude Brewer sites, long-term mean summer UV measured values and UV derived from global solar radiation and other parameters agree to within +5 to -7%. The remaining seven sites are located in 'clean'' environments where TOMS estimates agree with Brewer measurements while UV derived from global solar radiation and other parameters is 10-13% lower. Brewer data also demonstrate that clean and typical'' sites can be as little as 70-120 km apart.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available