Harry Slaper

SUSPEN intercomparison of ultraviolet spectroradiometers

Results from an intercomparison campaign of ultraviolet spectroradiometers that was organized at Nea Michaniona, Greece July, 1–13 1997, are presented. Nineteen instrument systems from 15 different countries took part and provided spectra of global solar UV irradiance for two consecutive days from sunrise to sunset every half hour. No data exchange was allowed between participants in order to achieve absolutely independent results among the instruments. The data analysis procedure included the determination of wavelength shifts and the application of suitable corrections to the measured spectra, their standardization to common spectral resolution of 1 nm full width at half maximum and the application of cosine corrections. Reference spectra were calculated for each observational time, derived for a set of instruments which were objectively selected and used as comparison norms for the assessment of the relative agreement among the various instruments. With regard to the absolute irradiance measurements, the range of the deviations from the reference for all spectra was within ±20%. About half of the instruments agreed to within ±5%, while only three fell outside the ±10% agreement limit. As for the accuracy of the wave-length registration of the recorded spectra, for most of the spectroradiometers (14) the calculated wavelength shifts were smaller than 0.2 nm. The overall outcome of the campaign was very encouraging, as it was proven that the agreement among the majority of the instruments was good and comparable to the commonly accepted uncertainties of spectral UV measurements. In addition, many of the instruments provided consistent results relative to at least the previous two intercomparison campaigns, held in 1995 in Ispra, Italy and in 1993 in Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany. As a result of this series of intercomparison campaigns, several of the currently operating spectroradiometers operating may be regarded as a core group of instruments, which with the employment of proper operational procedures are capable of providing quality spectral solar UV measurements.

Validation of daily erythemal doses from Ozone Monitoring Instrument with ground‐based UV measurement data

[1] The Dutch-Finnish Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) on board the NASA EOS Aura spacecraft is a nadir viewing spectrometer that measures solar reflected and backscattered light in a selected range of the ultraviolet and visible spectrum. The instrument has a 2600 km wide viewing swath and it is capable of daily, global contiguous mapping. The Finnish Meteorological Institute and NASA Goddard Space Flight Center have developed a surface ultraviolet irradiance algorithm for OMI that produces noontime surface spectral UV irradiance estimates at four wavelengths, noontime erythemal dose rate (UV index), and the erythemal daily dose. The overpass erythemal daily doses derived from OMI data were compared with the daily doses calculated from the ground-based spectral UV measurements from 18 reference instruments. Two alternative methods for the OMI UV algorithm cloud correction were compared: the plane-parallel cloud model method and the method based on Lambertian equivalent reflectivity. The validation results for the two methods showed some differences, but the results do not imply that one method is categorically superior to the other. For flat, snow-free regions with modest loadings of absorbing aerosols or trace gases, the OMI-derived daily erythemal doses have a median overestimation of 0–10%, and some 60 to 80% of the doses are within ±20% from the ground reference. For sites significantly affected by absorbing aerosols or trace gases one expects, and observes, bigger positive bias up to 50%. For high-latitude sites the satellite-derived doses are occasionally up to 50% too small because of unrealistically small climatological surface albedo.

Health effects from stratospheric ozone depletion and interactions with climate change

The potential health effects of elevated levels of ambient UV-B radiation are diverse, and it is difficult to quantify the risks, especially as they are likely to be considerably modified by human behaviour. Nevertheless epidemiological and experimental studies have confirmed that UV radiation is a definite risk factor for certain types of cataract, with peak efficacy in the UV-B waveband. The causal link between squamous cell carcinoma and cumulative solar UV exposure has been well established. New findings regarding the genetic basis of skin cancer, including studies on genetically modified mice, have confirmed the epidemiological evidence that UV radiation contributes to the formation of basal cell carcinomas and cutaneous melanomas, For the latter, animal models have demonstrated that UV exposure at a very young age is more detrimental than exposure in adulthood. Although suppression of certain immune responses has been recognised following UV exposure, the impact of this suppression on the control of infectious and autoimmune diseases is largely unknown. However, studies on several microbial infections have indicated significant consequences in terms of symptoms or reactivation of disease. The possibility that the immune response to vaccination could be depressed by UV-B exposure is of considerable concern. Newly emerging possibilities regarding interactions between ozone depletion and global climate change further complicate the risk assessments for human health but might result in an increased incidence of cataracts and skin cancer, plus alterations in the patterns of certain categories of infectious and other diseases.

Variability of UV Irradiance in Europe

The diurnal and annual variability of solar UV radiation in Europe is described for different latitudes, seasons and different biologic weighting functions. For the description of this variability under cloudless skies the widely used one‐dimensional version of the radiative transfer model UVSPEC is used. We reconfirm that the major factor influencing the diurnal and annual variability of UV irradiance is solar elevation. While ozone is a strong absorber of UV radiation its effect is relatively constant when compared with the temporal variability of clouds. We show the significant role that clouds play in modifying the UV climate by analyzing erythemal irradiance measurements from 28 stations in Europe in summer. On average, the daily erythemal dose under cloudless skies varies between 2.2 kJ m−2 at 70°N and 5.2 kJ m−2 at 35°N, whereas these values are reduced to 1.5–4.5 kJ m−2 if clouds are included. Thus clouds significantly reduce the monthly UV irradiation, with the smallest reductions, on average, at lower latitudes, which corresponds to the fact that it is often cloudless in the Mediterranean area in summer.

Reduction of solar UV by clouds: A comparison between satellite‐derived cloud effects and ground‐based radiation measurements

Assessment of the effects of ozone depletion on biologically effective solar UV at ground level has been greatly advanced through the use of remote sensing data. Satellite data on atmospheric properties allow the construction of geographically distributed surface UV radiation maps based on radiative transfer calculations. In this respect, clouds play a dominant but rather complex role. We compared the reduction of daily UV doses due to clouds, as derived from satellite cloud data, with the reduction derived from routine ground-based measurements of global solar radiation (i.e., broadband total solar irradiances with wavelengths between 0.3 and 2.8 μm). An empirical relationship is used to link the reduction due to clouds of global solar radiation and UV radiation. The abundance of global solar radiation measurements (data from over 125 stations in 30 satellite grid cells) for the European region ensured a sound basis for the data analysis for the period considered (May, June, and July of 1990, 1991, and 1992). Approximately 6500 daily UV-reduction factors, defined as the ratio of daily UV doses calculated with and without clouds, were thus obtained applying both methods. The daily UV-reduction factors (and 10-day averaged UV reduction factors) from the two independent sources correlated well, with r 2 = 0.83 (r 2 = 0.89), and had a standard deviation of 0.06 (0.03). Over 90% of the satellite-derived results agreed within a range of ±0.14 (±0.07) with the ground-based measurement-derived results. We evaluated sources of uncertainty related to spatial and temporal resolution, and optical properties, and estimated their consequences and range. Among these different sources the largest uncertainties are caused by the sampling error, i.e., grid-cell average versus station average, which is on average 0.10 for daily UV-reduction factors. Information on the atmospheric optical properties during the measurements may reduce the stated range of uncertainty from ±0.14 to ±0.07. The variation of the measurements from station to station is then the limiting factor. We concluded that the reduction of daily UV based on satellite-derived cloud cover and cloud optical thickness relates well with the UV reduction due to clouds derived from ground-based global solar radiation measurements.

Know Your Standard: Clarifying the CIE Erythema Action Spectrum

The standard erythema action spectrum provides an internationally accepted representation of the erythema‐inducing effectiveness of wavelengths in the UV part of the spectrum. The action spectrum forms the basis of the UV index used for public health information, defines the standard erythema dose unit and the minimum erythema dose and is the default response spectrum aspired to by a range of UV radiometer manufacturers. However, there are several versions of this erythema action spectrum in use, and only one of them has been endorsed as a standard. While the differences in erythemally weighted radiation incurred by choice of action spectrum will be no more than a few percent, this uncertainty is unnecessary. Here we detail the differences in the different versions of erythema action spectra, illustrate the resulting effects in quantifying UV doses and encourage readers to use only the standard version of the action spectrum in the future.

Skin Cancer Risks Avoided by the Montreal Protocol—Worldwide Modeling Integrating Coupled Climate-Chemistry Models with a Risk Model for UV

The assessment model for ultraviolet radiation and risk “AMOUR” is applied to output from two chemistry‐climate models (CCMs). Results from the UK Chemistry and Aerosols CCM are used to quantify the worldwide skin cancer risk avoided by the Montreal Protocol and its amendments: by the year 2030, two million cases of skin cancer have been prevented yearly, which is 14% fewer skin cancer cases per year. In the “World Avoided,” excess skin cancer incidence will continue to grow dramatically after 2030. Results from the CCM E39C‐A are used to estimate skin cancer risk that had already been inevitably committed once ozone depletion was recognized: excess incidence will peak mid 21st century and then recover or even super‐recover at the end of the century. When compared with a “No Depletion” scenario, with ozone undepleted and cloud characteristics as in the 1960s throughout, excess incidence (extra yearly cases skin cancer per million people) of the “Full Compliance with Montreal Protocol” scenario is in the ranges: New Zealand: 100–150, Congo: −10–0, Patagonia: 20–50, Western Europe: 30–40, China: 90–120, South‐West USA: 80–110, Mediterranean: 90–100 and North‐East Australia: 170–200. This is up to 4% of total local incidence in the Full Compliance scenario in the peak year.

Ozone depletion and skin cancer incidence: a source risk approach

The atmospheric ozone layer serves as a protective filter against (part of) the harmful ultraviolet (UV) radiation from the sun. The depletion of the ozone layer, which was observed on a global scale over the past decades, is most probably caused by the global emission of halocarbons, and leads to an increase in UV at groundlevel, and thus, to increases in UV-related risks, like skin cancer incidence. Using satellite data on ozone depletion, a location specific estimate of changes in UV-levels is made for Europe. A source-risk model is used to illustrate effects of countermeasures on future skin cancer risks. Geographical differences and uncertainties are indicated.

Spatial- and Time-Explicit Human Damage Modeling of Ozone Depleting Substances in Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer is mainly caused by emissions of persistent halocarbons of anthropogenic origin. The resulting increase of solar ultraviolet radiation at the Earths surface is associated with increased exposure of humans and increased human health damage. Here we assessed the change in human health damage caused by three types of skin cancer and cataract in terms of (healthy) years of life lost per kiloton emission reduction of an ozone-depleting substance (ODS). This so-called characterization factor is used in Life Cycle Assessments (LCAs). Characterization factors are provided for the emissions of five chlorofluorocarbons, three hydrochlorofluorocarbons, three (bromine-containing) halons, carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, and anthropogenic emissions of methyl bromide. We employed dynamic calculations on a global scale for this purpose, taking physical and social geographic data into account such as skin tones, population density, average age, and life expectancy. When emission rates of all ODSs in 2007 are multiplied by our characterization factors, the resulting number of years of life lost may be a factor of 5 higher than reported previously. This increase is merely explained through the global demographic development until 2100 we took into account.

Modelling solar UV radiation in the past: comparison of algorithms and input data

The objectives of the COST action 726 are to establish long-term changes of UV-radiation in the past, which can only be derived by modelling with good and available proxy data. To find the best available models and input data, 16 models have been tested by modelling daily doses for two years of data measured at four stations distributed over Europe. The modelled data have been compared with the measured data, using different statistical methods. Models that use Cloud Modification Factors for the UV spectral range, derived from co-located measured global irradiance, give the best results.