90. The separation of ozone from other gases

Edgar, Justin; Paneth, F. A.

doi:10.1039/jr9410000511

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…KI-arsenite/UV (A) 0.78 n/a Dauvillier (1935) KI-arsenite/UV (L) 1 ±0.02 Volz and Kley (1988) Ehmert/UV (A) 0.98 ±0.09 Galbally (1979) Ehmert/UV (A) 0.947 ±0.009 Grasso (2011) KI/UV (A) 0.93 ±0.04 Vassy (1958) ECC/Ehmert (A) 1.02 ±0.12 WMO (1972), Galbally (1979) MPI-Pruch/Ehmert (A) 1 ±0.05 Pruchniewicz (1973) NBKI Colorimetric/Ehmert (L) 1.1 n/a Renzetti (1959) NBKI colorimetric/Ehmert (A) 1.22 ±0.15 Galbally (1979) Mast Brewer ozonesonde/Ehmert (A) 0.88 ±0.10 Galbally (1979) Cauer/Ehmert (A) 0.66 n/a Warmbt (1964) Cauer/Ehmert (corrected) (A) 0.9 n/a Warmbt (1964) Cryotrapping O 3 /KI-thiosulfate 1 ±0.05 Edgar and Paneth (1941a) ECC/UV (A) Cherniack and Bryan (1965) NBKI colorimetric/UV (A) 1.02 n/a Cherniack and Bryan (1965) 1% NBKI/UV (L) 1.09 ±0.02 Schnadt Poberaj et al (2007) 2% NBKI colorimetric/UV (L and A) 1.23 ±0.06 Pitts et al (1976a, b) 2% unbuffered KI titration/UV (L and A) 0.9 n/a Pitts et al (1976b) Pressure/Volume/UV (L) 1.03 n/a Watanabe and Stephens (1979) Regener chemiluminescent/UV (L) 1 n/a Regener (1964) Ethylene-Chemiluminescent/UV (A) 0.94 ±0.16 Attmannspacher and Hartmannsgruber (1982) Ozonograph-KI/UV (A) 1.09 ±0.20 Attmannspacher and Hartmannsgruber (1982) Mast Ozone Meter/Pressure/Volume (L) 1.04 n/a Watanabe and Stephens (1979) Mast Ozone Meter/NBKI colorimetric (L and A) 0.86 n/a Cherniack and Bryan (1965) Mast Ozone Meter/NBKI colorimetric (L) 0.71 n/a Gudiksen et al (1966) Regener chemiluminescent/Mast Ozone Meter (A)…”

Section: Methods Comparison Ratio Uncertainty Referencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…An unusual technique that was used by only one group was the cryotrapping of ozone on silica gel, with subsequent distillation to remove NO 2 and analysis for ozone by KI and UV methods (Edgar and Paneth, 1941a). This provided a sound measurement method and atmospheric ozone concentrations were obtained over the UK for multiple days (Edgar and Paneth, 1941b).…”

Section: Cryotrappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Edgar and Paneth (1941b) present measurements of ozone in the air in a street of South Kensington, London, UK, from the rooftop of the Royal College of Science building in South Kensington, at the Kew Observatory outside London and at Southport on the northwest coast of England, made from February 1938 to July 1939. They used a cryogenic trapping and purification method followed by both UV and KI analysis (Edgar and Paneth, 1941a;1941b). Considering only the non-urban observations at Kew and Southport, the mean and range are 24 (17-29) nmol mol -1 .…”

Section: -1941mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Tropospheric Ozone Assessment Report: Tropospheric ozone from 1877 to 2016, observed levels, trends and uncertainties

Tarasick

Galbally

Cooper

et al. 2019

Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene

164

168

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From the earliest observations of ozone in the lower atmosphere in the 19th century, both measurement methods and the portion of the globe observed have evolved and changed. These methods have different uncertainties and biases, and the data records differ with respect to coverage (space and time), information content, and representativeness. In this study, various ozone measurement methods and ozone datasets are reviewed and selected for inclusion in the historical record of background ozone levels, based on relationship of the measurement technique to the modern UV absorption standard, absence of interfering pollutants, representativeness of the well-mixed boundary layer and expert judgement of their credibility. There are significant uncertainties with the 19th and early 20th-century measurements related to interference of other gases. Spectroscopic methods applied before 1960 have likely underestimated ozone by as much as 11% at the surface and by about 24% in the free troposphere, due to the use of differing ozone absorption coefficients.There is no unambiguous evidence in the measurement record back to 1896 that typical mid-latitude background surface ozone values were below about 20 nmol mol -1 , but there is robust evidence for increases in the temperate and polar regions of the northern hemisphere of 30-70%, with large uncertainty, between the period of historic observations, 1896-1975, and the modern period (1990-2014). Independent historical observations from balloons and aircraft indicate similar changes in the free troposphere. Changes in the southern hemisphere are much less. Regional representativeness of the available observations remains a potential source of large errors, which are difficult to quantify.The great majority of validation and intercomparison studies of free tropospheric ozone measurement methods use ECC ozonesondes as reference. Compared to UV-absorption measurements they show a modest (~1-5% ±5%) high bias in the troposphere, but no evidence of a change with time. Umkehr, lidar, and FTIR methods all show modest low biases relative to ECCs, and so, using ECC sondes as a transfer standard, all appear to agree to within one standard deviation with the modern UV-absorption standard. Other sonde types show an increase of 5-20% in sensitivity to tropospheric ozone from 1970-1995. Biases and standard deviations of satellite retrieval comparisons are often 2-3 times larger than those of other free tropospheric measurements. The lack of information on temporal changes of bias for satellite measurements of tropospheric ozone is an area of concern for long-term trend studies.

show abstract