English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

. Stratospheric ozone lossinside the Arctic polar vortex for the winters between 2004–2005 and2012–2013 has been quantified using measurements from the space-borneAtmospheric Chemistry Experiment Fourier Transform Spectrometer (ACE-FTS).For the first time, an evaluation has been performed of six different ozoneloss estimation methods based on the same single observational dataset todetermine the Arctic ozone loss (mixing ratio loss profiles and thepartial-column ozone losses between 380 and 550 K). The methods used are thetracer-tracer correlation, the artificial tracer correlation, the averagevortex profile descent, and the passive subtraction with model output fromboth Lagrangian and Eulerian chemical transport models (CTMs). For thetracer-tracer, the artificial tracer, and the average vortex profile descentapproaches, various tracers have been used that are also measured by ACE-FTS.From these seven tracers investigated (CH4, N2O, HF,OCS, CFC-11, CFC-12, and CFC-113), we found that CH4,N2O, HF, and CFC-12 are the most suitable tracers forinvestigating polar stratospheric ozone depletion with ACE-FTS v3.5. Theozone loss estimates (in terms of the mixing ratio as well as total columnozone) are generally in good agreement between the different methods andamong the different tracers. However, using the average vortex profiledescent technique typically leads to smaller maximum losses (by approximately15–30 DU) compared to all other methods. The passive subtraction methodusing output from CTMs generally results in slightly larger losses comparedto the techniques that use ACE-FTS measurements only. The ozone losscomputed, using both measurements and models, shows the greatest loss duringthe 2010–2011 Arctic winter. For that year, our results show that maximumozone loss (2.1–2.7 ppmv) occurred at 460 K. The estimated partial-columnozone loss inside the polar vortex (between 380 and 550 K) using thedifferent methods is 66–103, 61–95, 59–96, 41–89, and 85–122 DU forMarch 2005, 2007, 2008, 2010, and 2011, respectively. Ozone loss is difficultto diagnose for the Arctic winters during 2005–2006, 2008–2009, 2011–2012,and 2012–2013, because strong polar vortex disturbance or major suddenstratospheric warming events significantly perturbed the polar vortex,thereby limiting the number of measurements available for the analysis ofozone loss.

Stratospheric ozone loss in the Arctic winters between 2005 and 2013 derived with ACE-FTS measurements