No abstract

Climate change, air quality, and environmental degradation are important societal challenges for the Twenty-first Century. These challenges require an intelligent response from society, which in turn requires access to information about the Earth System. This information comes from observations and prior knowledge, the latter typically embodied in a model describing relationships between variables of the Earth System. Data assimilation provides an objective methodology to combine observational and model information to provide an estimate of the most likely state and its uncertainty for the whole Earth System. This approach adds value to the observations-by filling in the spatio-temporal gaps in observations; and to the model-by constraining it with the observations. In this review paper we motivate data assimilation as a methodology to fill in the gaps in observational information; illustrate the data assimilation approach with examples that span a broad range of features of the Earth System (atmosphere, including chemistry; ocean; land surface); and discuss the outlook for data assimilation, including the novel application of data assimilation ideas to observational information obtained using Citizen Science. Ultimately, a strong motivation of data assimilation is the many benefits it provides to users. These include: providing the initial state for weather and air quality forecasts; providing analyses and reanalyses for studying the Earth System; evaluating observations, instruments, and models; assessing the relative value of elements of the Global Observing System (GOS); and assessing the added value of future additions to the GOS.

The recent emergence of low-cost microsensors measuring various air pollutants has significant potential for carrying out high-resolution mapping of air quality in the urban environment. However, the data obtained by such sensors are generally less reliable than that from standard equipment and they are subject to significant data gaps in both space and time. In order to overcome this issue, we present here a data fusion method based on geostatistics that allows for merging observations of air quality from a network of low-cost sensors with spatial information from an urban-scale air quality model. The performance of the methodology is evaluated for nitrogen dioxide in Oslo, Norway, using both simulated datasets and real-world measurements from a low-cost sensor network for January 2016. The results indicate that the method is capable of producing realistic hourly concentration fields of urban nitrogen dioxide that inherit the spatial patterns from the model and adjust the prior values using the information from the sensor network. The accuracy of the data fusion method is dependent on various factors including the total number of observations, their spatial distribution, their uncertainty (both in terms of systematic biases and random errors), as well as the ability of the model to provide realistic spatial patterns of urban air pollution. A validation against official data from air quality monitoring stations equipped with reference instrumentation indicates that the data fusion method is capable of reproducing city-wide averaged official values with an R of 0.89 and a root mean squared error of 14.3 μg m. It is further capable of reproducing the typical daily cycles of nitrogen dioxide. Overall, the results indicate that the method provides a robust way of extracting useful information from uncertain sensor data using only a time-invariant model dataset and the knowledge contained within an entire sensor network.

Abstract. This paper aims to summarise the current performance of ozone data assimilation (DA) systems, to show where they can be improved, and to quantify their errors. It examines 11 sets of ozone analyses from 7 different DA systems. Two are numerical weather prediction (NWP) systems based on general circulation models (GCMs); the other five use chemistry transport models (CTMs). The systems examined contain either linearised or detailed ozone chemistry, or no chemistry at all. In most analyses, MIPAS (Michelson Interferometer for Passive Atmospheric Sounding) ozone data are assimilated; two assimilate SCIAMACHY (Scanning Imaging Absorption Spectrometer for Atmospheric Chartography) observations instead. Analyses are compared to independent ozone observations covering the troposphere, stratosphere and lower mesosphere during the period July to November 2003.Biases and standard deviations are largest, and show the largest divergence between systems, in the troposphere, in the upper-troposphere/lower-stratosphere, in the upperstratosphere and mesosphere, and the Antarctic ozone hole region. However, in any particular area, apart from the troposphere, at least one system can be found that agrees well with independent data. In general, none of the differences can be linked to the assimilation technique (Kalman filter, three or four dimensional variational methods, direct inversion) orCorrespondence to: A. J. Geer (alan.geer@ecmwf.int) the system (CTM or NWP system). Where results diverge, a main explanation is the way ozone is modelled. It is important to correctly model transport at the tropical tropopause, to avoid positive biases and excessive structure in the ozone field. In the southern hemisphere ozone hole, only the analyses which correctly model heterogeneous ozone depletion are able to reproduce the near-complete ozone destruction over the pole. In the upper-stratosphere and mesosphere (above 5 hPa), some ozone photochemistry schemes caused large but easily remedied biases. The diurnal cycle of ozone in the mesosphere is not captured, except by the one system that includes a detailed treatment of mesospheric chemistry. These results indicate that when good observations are available for assimilation, the first priority for improving ozone DA systems is to improve the models.The analyses benefit strongly from the good quality of the MIPAS ozone observations. Using the analyses as a transfer standard, it is seen that MIPAS is ∼5% higher than HALOE (Halogen Occultation Experiment) in the mid and upper stratosphere and mesosphere (above 30 hPa), and of order 10% higher than ozonesonde and HALOE in the lower stratosphere (100 hPa to 30 hPa). Analyses based on SCIA-MACHY total column are almost as good as the MIPAS analyses; analyses based on SCIAMACHY limb profiles are worse in some areas, due to problems in the SCIAMACHY retrievals.

No abstract