Comparison of erythemal UV irradiances from Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) and ground‐based data at four Thai stations

Buntoung, S.; Webb, Ann R.

doi:10.1029/2009jd013567

Cited by 19 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In Buntoung et al (2010) the UVI retrieved from OMI observations and measured from broadband instruments at four sites in Thailand were compared. The comparisons show a positive bias for the OMI data with respect to the groundbased measurements.…”

Section: Aura/omimentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity of satellite measurements used for the monitoring of UV radiation risk on health

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In order to test the validity of ultraviolet index (UVI) satellite products and UVI model simulations for general public information, intercomparison involving three satellite instruments (SCIAMACHY, OMI and GOME-2), the Chemistry and Transport Model, Modélisation de la Chimie Atmosphérique Grande Echelle (MOCAGE), and ground-based instruments was performed in 2008 and 2009. The intercomparison highlighted a systematic high bias of ∼1 UVI in the OMI clear-sky products compared to the SCIAMACHY and TUV model clear-sky products. The OMI and GOME-2 all-sky products are close to the groundbased observations with a low 6 % positive bias, comparable to the results found during the satellite validation campaigns. This result shows that OMI and GOME-2 all-sky products are well appropriate to evaluate the UV-risk on health. The study has pointed out the difficulty to take into account either in the retrieval algorithms or in the models, the large spatial and temporal cloud modification effect on UV radiation. This factor is crucial to provide good quality UV information. OMI and GOME-2 show a realistic UV variability as a function of the cloud cover. Nevertheless these satellite products do not sufficiently take into account the radiation reCorrespondence to: F. Jégou (fabrice.jegou@orleans.cnrs.fr) flected by clouds. MOCAGE numerical forecasts show good results during periods with low cloud covers, but are actually not adequate for overcast conditions; this is why Météo-France currently uses human-expertised cloudiness (rather than direct outputs from Numerical Prediction Models) together with MOCAGE clear-sky UV indices for its operational forecasts. From now on, the UV monitoring could be done using free satellite products (OMI, GOME-2) and operational forecast for general public by using modelling, as long as cloud forecasts and the parametrisation of the impact of cloudiness on UV radiation are adequate.

show abstract

Section: Aura/omimentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity of satellite measurements used for the monitoring of UV radiation risk on health

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Those studies dealt with version 1.2, which did not account for the influence of absorbing aerosols, implying a positive bias in OMI product. The OMI product has been tentatively corrected by several methods (Kazadzis et al, 2009a;Arola et al, 2009;Buntoung and Webb, 2010;Antón et al, 2012). From the comparisons against GB measurements, the OMI surface UV index (UVI) at sites with low amounts of absorbing aerosols has been shown to be an overestimation of 0-10 %.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They provide global irradiance spectra in the 280-450 nm wavelength range with a 0.5 nm sampling step and a full width at half maximum (FWHM) of about 0.5 nm. Scans are performed every 15 min (at SDR and OHP in 2009-2010), or 30 min (at VDA and OHP in 2011-2012. Scan duration is about 5 min.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Alternatively, at sites with significant influence from absorbing aerosols, OMI surface UVI show a larger positive bias of up to 50 %. All these OMI validations, apart from Buntoung and Webb (2010), were conducted using data collected at the time of the satellite overpass. Currently, only one validation study is available for GOME-2, but it only concerns daily doses (Kalakoski, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Validation of satellite-based noontime UVI with NDACC ground-based instruments: influence of topography, environment and satellite overpass time

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Spectral solar UV radiation measurements are performed in France using three spectroradiometers located at very different sites. One is installed in Villeneuve d'Ascq, in the north of France (VDA). It is an urban site in a topographically flat region. Another instrument is installed in Observatoire de Haute-Provence, located in the southern French Alps (OHP). It is a rural mountainous site. The third instrument is installed in Saint-Denis, Réunion Island (SDR). It is a coastal urban site on a small mountainous island in the southern tropics. The three instruments are affiliated with the Network for the Detection of Atmospheric Composition Change (NDACC) and carry out routine measurements to monitor the spectral solar UV radiation and enable derivation of UV index (UVI). The ground-based UVI values observed at solar noon are compared to similar quantities derived from the Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI, onboard the Aura satellite) and the second Global Ozone Monitoring Experiment (GOME-2, onboard the Metop-A satellite) measurements for validation of these satellite-based products. The present study concerns the period 2009-September 2012, date of the implementation of a new OMI processing tool. The new version (v1.3) introduces a correction for absorbing aerosols that were not considered in the old version (v1.2).Both versions of the OMI UVI products were available before September 2012 and are used to assess the improvement of the new processing tool. On average, estimates from satellite instruments always overestimate surface UVI at solar noon. Under cloudless conditions, the satellite-derived estimates of UVI compare satisfactorily with ground-based data: the median relative bias is less than 8 % at VDA and 4 % at SDR for both OMI v1.3 and GOME-2, and about 6 % for OMI v1.3 and 2 % for GOME-2 at OHP. The correlation between satellite-based and ground-based data is better at VDA and OHP (about 0.99) than at SDR (0.96) for both space-borne instruments. For all sky conditions, the median relative biases are much larger, with large dispersion for both instruments at all sites (VDA: about 12 %; OHP: 9 %; SDR: 11 %). Correlation between satellite-based and ground-based data is still better at VDA and OHP (about 0.95) than at SDR (about 0.73) for both satellite instruments. These results are explained considering the time of overpass of the two satellites, which is far from solar noon, preventing a good estimation of the cloud cover necessary for a good modelling of the UVI. Site topography and environment are shown to have a non-significant influence. At VDA and OHP, OMI Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union.

show abstract

“…For example, the validation of the daily erythemal UV doses from satellite products [1] and spectral UV radiation [2] were carried out in Europe. For Thailand, the differences of the UV index [3] and also erythemal UV doses [4] were presented. Thus, in this study, spectral UV irradiance at 305, 310, 324 and 380 nm from ground-based measurement and Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) product in a tropical environmental of Thailand were compared.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of spectral ultraviolet irradiance measured from satellite and ground-based instrument at Nakhon Pathom province

Sriwongsa

Buntoung

2017

J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In this study, comparisons of spectral ultraviolet irradiance at 305, 310, 324 and 380 nm at the overpass time retrieved from OMI/AURA satellite with that from ground-based measurements were performed at Nakhon Pathom (13.82ºN,100.04ºE), Thailand. The analyzed data period comprised from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2015. The comparison results clearly showed the overestimation of satellite data with root mean square difference (RMSD) between 22.9 and 48.9%, and mean bias difference (MBD) between 5.3 and 39.8% for all sky conditions, and reduced to 10.6-40.5% and 0.18-34.9% for clear sky conditions. Further results showed that the differences between the two datasets depend on atmospheric aerosol loads and clouds.

show abstract

Comparison of erythemal UV irradiances from Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) and ground‐based data at four Thai stations

Cited by 19 publications

References 44 publications

Validity of satellite measurements used for the monitoring of UV radiation risk on health

Validity of satellite measurements used for the monitoring of UV radiation risk on health

Validation of satellite-based noontime UVI with NDACC ground-based instruments: influence of topography, environment and satellite overpass time

Comparison of spectral ultraviolet irradiance measured from satellite and ground-based instrument at Nakhon Pathom province

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About