4.4 Article

Evolution of Total Atmospheric Ozone from 1900 to 2100 Estimated with Statistical Models

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES
卷 71, 期 6, 页码 1956-1984

出版社

AMER METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1175/JAS-D-13-052.1

关键词

-

资金

  1. NASA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Statistical models that account for the separate influences on total atmospheric ozone of ozone-depleting substances, anthropogenic greenhouse gases, and natural processes are formulated from the Merged Ozone Data (MOD V8 and V8.6) and used to explore scenarios for ozone's evolution from 1900 to 2100. The statistical models based on MOD V8 project larger growth in total ozone during the twenty-first century than do coupled chemistry-climate models globally and in the tropics where the chemistry-climate models indicate persistent ozone depletion. The statistical models based on MOD V8.6 suggest, instead, that total ozone everywhere never (or barely) recovers to 1980 levels. Since the decline in ozone-depleting substances and the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations are both expected to increase ozone in the twenty-first century, these results suggest that downward instrumental drifts may be present in MOD V8.6. Instrumental drifts, of opposite sign, may also be present in MOD V8 since it is possible to reduce the projections of the corresponding statistical models to agree with those of the chemistry-climate models by altering the long-term trends of the MOD V8 data within the estimated long-term uncertainty. Alternatively, the chemistry-climate models may project excess tropical ozone depletion by overestimating trends in the upwelling of tropical (ozone poor) air associated with global warming and the resultant decline in mean age of air. This possibility is consistent with independent observations that the age of stratospheric air has not declined during the past three decades, as the globe has warmed 0.3 degrees C, and that model parameterizations of tropical convection may be inadequate.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据