1 / 10

Progress on the 2010 WMO/UNEP ozone assessment

Progress on the 2010 WMO/UNEP ozone assessment. Greg Bodeker. Presented at SPARC-SSG meeting, Kyoto, Japan 27 October 2009. 2010 Ozone Assessment Co-chairs. Ayité - Lô Ajavon (Togo ) Paul Newman (USA) John Pyle ( UK) A.R . Ravishankara (USA).

luke
Download Presentation

Progress on the 2010 WMO/UNEP ozone assessment

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Progress on the 2010 WMO/UNEP ozone assessment Greg Bodeker Presented at SPARC-SSG meeting, Kyoto, Japan 27 October 2009

  2. 2010 Ozone Assessment Co-chairs Ayité-LôAjavon (Togo) Paul Newman (USA) John Pyle (UK) A.R. Ravishankara (USA) Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion:2010 Colour? 2006 Assessment 2010 Assessment

  3. The Parties’ Request (Decision XIX/20) • Assess the state of the ozone layer and its future evolution • Evaluate recent Antarctic ozone hole and Arctic ozone depletion behavior • Evaluate trends of ozone-depleting substances in the atmosphere • Assess the impacts of climate change on ozone layer • Analyze atmospheric concentrations of bromine and implications for the ozone-layer • Describe surface ultraviolet radiation observations and future expectations • Assess interaction between tropospheric and stratospheric ozone • Assess approaches to evaluating very short-lived substances

  4. 2010 Ozone Assessment Structure New level of authorship in this assessment: Co-ordinating Lead Authors (CLAs), Lead Authors (LAs), Co-authors (CAs), and contributing authors – some resultant confusion. Chapter 1: Ozone-Depleting Substances and Related Chemicals – Steve Montzka and Stefan Reimann Chapter 2: Stratospheric Ozone and Surface Ultraviolet Radiation – Anne Douglass and VitaliFioletov Chapter 3: Future Ozone and its Impact on Surface UV – SlimaneBekki and Greg Bodeker Chapter 4: Stratospheric Change and Climate – Piers Forster and Dave Thompson Chapter 5: Information and Options for Policymakers – John Daniel and GuusVelders Twenty Questions and Answers About the Ozone Layer: 2010 Update – David Fahey and Michaela Hegglin

  5. Where we are •  Draft outline completed. Comments solicited from scientific community. •  Coordinating Lead Authors & author teams established. Chapter outlines drafted. •  June 24-25, 2009: Lead Authors’ meeting (London) •  13 October: 1st drafts due; circulated for internal review. • November 17-19, 2009: Internal review meeting: Coordinating Lead Authors, Cochairs, and a few others. (Washington, DC) • 18 February 2010: 2nd drafts complete and mail peer review starts. • April: mail reviews due; third draft preparation begins. • Mid-May: Third draft due; distributed to Les Diablerets Panel reviewers. • June 28 - July 2, 2010: Panel Review: (Les Diablerets, Switzerland) • Coodinating Lead Authors & a few Lead Authors. • ~30-40 reviewers. • Final decisions on chapters. • Completed Executive Summary. • Early August: Chapters completed, editing begins. • 30 December: preprint volume to UNEP for government distribution. • ~ March 2011: final printed copies available 2009 2010

  6. Main Issues (1 of 3) • First assessment to consider the effects of stratospheric change on climate. This is a key SPARC connection. • The 2006 ozone assessment had to do CCM validation on the fly. Now the SPARC CCMValReport on the Evaluation of Chemistry-Climate Models is available. •  Advantages: huge amount of work that can be built off. •  Disadvantages: work overload from potential authors, need to define the distinction between the reports. • Report on the resolution of the Pope et al. Cl2O2 UV absorption cross-section measurements. • More refined analysis of the impact of climate change on ozone recovery. • Effects of geoengineering on ozone. • Availability of sensitivity simulations from CCMVal.

  7. The use of sensitivity simulations

  8. Main Issues (2 of 3) • Still plenty of discussion about the role of Very Short Lived Substances (VSLS) on the total halogen burden of the stratosphere. • N2O as a major future chemical influence on ozone. • UV no longer has its own chapter. • Need for incorporation of interactive ocean in CCMs. • Recent increases in stratospheric aerosol burden from large increases in Chinese coal-fired power stations. • Changes in the strength of the Brewer-Dobson circulation. • Fixed volume mixing ratio boundary condition in CCMs. • Reporting on ‘World Avoided’ scenarios. • Effects of changes in stratospheric water vapour on climate.

  9. Main Issues (3 of 3) • Changes in stratospheric volcanic aerosol loading have prolonged effects on surface climate. • Updated reporting on stratospheric temperature trends. • Effects of changes in the SAM on surface climate over southern middle and high latitudes. • Update on ODPs and GWPs for many ODSs. • Discussion of the effects of accelerated phase out of HCFCs. • The role that the Montreal Protocol has played in mitigating climate change – but potential future growth of HFCs may offset any gains.

  10. Lessons for SPARC • Where possible, SPARC special reports feeding ozone or IPCC assessments should be completed before the beginning of the assessment process. • SPARC research is becoming increasingly central to WMO/UNEP ozone assessments. Slow shift in emphasis away from ‘QOS’ and towards ‘SPARC’. • The SPARC special report on CCM validation has been incredibly valuable to the 2010 ozone assessment. Any plans for SPARC’s role in guiding CCMVal-3 and how that will feed the 2014 ozone assessment?

More Related