HR: 1340h
AN: A13D-0984    [Abstracts]
TI: Polar Ozone Loss Rates: Comparison Of Match Observations With Simulations Of 3-D Chemical Transport Model And Box Model
AU: * Tripathi, O P
EM: tripathi@tmf.jpl.nasa.gov
AF: NASA - Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Table Mountain Facility, 24490 Table Mountain Road, P.O. Box: 367, Wrightwood, CA 92397 United States
AU: Godin-Beekmann, S
EM: sophie.godin@aero.jussieu.fr
AF: Service d'AŠronomie - IPSL du CNRS, UniversitŠ Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, 75252 France
AU: LefŠvre, F
EM: franck.lefevre@aero.jussieu.fr
AF: Service d'AŠronomie - IPSL du CNRS, UniversitŠ Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, 75252 France
AU: Marchand, M
EM: marion.marchand@aero.jussieu.fr
AF: Service d'AŠronomie - IPSL du CNRS, UniversitŠ Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, 75252 France
AU: Pazmi¤o, A
EM: andrea.pazmino@aero.jussieu.fr
AF: Service d'AŠronomie - IPSL du CNRS, UniversitŠ Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, 75252 France
AU: Hauchecorne, A
EM: Alain.Hauchecorne@aerov.jussieu.fr
AF: Service d'AŠronomie - IPSL du CNRS, UniversitŠ Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, 75252 France
AB: Model simulations of ozone loss rates during recent arctic and Antarctic winters are compared with the observed ozone loss rates from the match technique. Arctic winters 1994/1995, 1999/2000, 2002/2003 and the Antarctic winter 2003 were considered for the analysis. We use a high resolution chemical transport model MIMOSA-CHIM and REPROBUS box model for the calculation of ozone loss rates. Trajectory model calculations show that the ozone loss rates are dependent on the initialization fields. On the one hand when chemical fields are initialized by UCAM (University of Cambridge SLIMCAT model simulated fields) the loss rates were underestimated by a factor of two whereas on the other hand when it is initialized by UL (University of Leeds) fields the model loss rates are in a very good agreement with match loss rates at lower levels. The study shows a very good agreement between MIMOSA-CHIM simulation and match observation in 1999/2000 winter at both levels, 450 and 500 K, except slight underestimation in March at 500 K. But in January we have a very good agreement. This is also true for 1994/1995 when we consider simulated ozone loss rate in view of the ECMWF wind deficiency assuming that match observations were not made on isolated trajectories. Sensitivity tests, by changing JCl2O2 value, particle number density and heating rates, performed for the arctic winter 1999/2000 shows that we need to improve our understanding of particle number density and heating rate calculation mechanism. Burkholder JCl2O2 has improved the comparison of MIMOSA-CHIM model results with observations (Tripathi et al., 2005). In the same study the comparison results were shown to improved by changing heating rates and number density through NAT particle sedimentation.
DE: 0340 Middle atmosphere: composition and chemistry
DE: 0341 Middle atmosphere: constituent transport and chemistry (3334)
DE: 3334 Middle atmosphere dynamics (0341, 0342)
SC: Atmospheric Sciences [A]
MN: Fall Meeting 2005