Searching for the Beginning of the Ozone Turnaround Using a 22-Year Merged Satellite Data Set
We have used the data from six satellite instruments that measure the total column amount of ozone to construct a consistent merged data set extending from late 1978 into 2000. The keys to constructing a merged data set are to minimize potential drift of individual instruments and to accurately establish instrument-to-instrument offsets. We have used the short-wavelength D-pair measurements (306nm-313nm) of the SBUV and SBUV/2 instruments near the equator to establish a relatively drift-free record for these instruments. We have then used their overlap with the Nimbus 7 and EP TOMS instruments to establish the relative calibration of the various instruments. We have evaluated the drift uncertainty in our merged ozone data (MOD) set by examining both the individual instrument drift uncertainty and the uncertainty in establishing the instrument- to-instrument differences. We conclude that the instrumental drift uncertainty over the 22-year data record is 0.9 %/decade (2-sigma). We have compared our MOD record with 37 ground stations that have a continuous record over that time period. We have a mean drift with respect to the stations of +0.3 %/decade which is within 1-sigma of our uncertainty estimate. Using the satellite record as a transfer standard, we can estimate the capability of the ground instruments to establish satellite calibration. Adding the statistical variability of the station drifts with respect to the satellite to an estimate of the overall drift uncertainty of the world standard instrument, we conclude that the stations should be able to be used to establish the drift of the satellite data record to within and uncertainty of 0.6 %/decade (2-sigma). Adding to this an uncertainty due to the-incomplete global coverage of the stations, we conclude that the station data should be able to establish the global trend with an uncertainty of about 0.7 %/decade, slightly better than for the satellite record. We conclude that merging the two records together gives only a slight improvement in the uncertainty. Keeping them separate gives the greater confidence of two independent measures of the ozone trend and potential recovery. We fit the trend in our MOD record through May of 1991 and then extrapolated forward to see if the data at the end of the record was above the statistical model as a measure of ozone recovery as was done in the last WMO/UNEP assessment report. Because our data set drifts with respect to the ground-stations through May of 1991, we calculated a smaller global trend (-1.1 %/decade) than in the WMO/UNEP report. Our data in 1998 and 1999 was, on average 2 DU above the extrapolated statistical model with a 2-sigma uncertainty of 6 DU. For the combined mid-latitudes of the northern and southern hemispheres, the data was 5 DU above the extrapolated statistical model with a 2-sigma uncertainty of 10 DU. These may be signs of recovery, but they are still statistically insignificant.