Some Long-Standing Issues Arising From Comparisons Between TOMS and The Ground-Based Ozone Network
Data from the series of Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometers (TOMS) have been compared to column ozone measurements taken by ground-based systems (Dobsons, Brewers and Filtermeters). On average, the comparisons show good agreement, with approximately 80% of the ground stations having less than a 2.5% standard deviation when compared to TOMS on a monthly mean basis. There are, however, differences that imply possible errors either in the TOMS ozone retrieval algorithm or in the basic assumptions used by the ground-based instruments. Some of the issues arising from these differences are: What are the relative calibrations of TOMS instruments? Why do the calibrations of the ground-based stations vary as much as they do with respect to TOMS as a transfer standard? Why are the TOMS data so much larger (approximately 6%) than the ground-based data in Antarctica and other ice-covered locations? Why is there seasonality in the difference between TOMS and ground-based stations in the Southern Hemisphere? Why are the differences a function of total ozone? Where and why are the differences a function of reflectivity? Why do some terrain and land-sea boundary features appear in the TOMS ozone data? The above issues will be highlighted by using data from TOMS and the ground stations. Plots of the individual station differences will be available.