2 Comments

The paper you are reviewing shows O3 changes from all causes, not just ODSs. The purpose of that paper was to show an atmospheric signature that models should show if they include stratospheric aerosol loading from volcanic activity as well as ODSs. The global recovery you are showing is not statistically significant at the 2-sigma level. Since you start in 1960, I assume you are using ground-based Brewer and Dobson data that are sparse in the Southern Hemisphere, relatively dense in Europe, and zero data over the oceans. Or, is this a mix of satellite and ground-based data.?

Expand full comment

Hi Jay

The ozone data used in the 20Q&A figure is a combination of ground-based and satellite-derived measurements, as described in Morgenstern et al., 2021 and Weber er al., 2022 . My understanding is that the NIWA/Bodeker data described in the first paper were not used in the final SAP analysis. The latter paper focussed on the post-satellite period.

Morgenstern, O., S.M. Frith, G.E. Bodeker, V. Fioletov, and R.J. van der A, Reevaluation

of total-column ozone trends and of the Effective Radiative Forcing of ozone-depleting

substances, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48 (21), doi:10.1029/2021GL095376, 2021.

Weber, M., C. Arosio, M. Coldewey-Egbers, V. Fioletov, S.M. Frith, J.D. Wild, K.

Tourpali, J.P. Burrows, and D. Loyola, Global total ozone recovery trends attributed

to ODS changes derived from five merged ozone datasets, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22

(10), 6843–6859, doi:10.5194/acp-22-6843-2022, 2022.

Expand full comment