Cited by 53Atmospheric aerosols and cloudsMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsSolar Radiation and Photovoltaics

Downwelling surface solar irradiance in the tropical Atlantic Ocean: a comparison of re-analyses and satellite-derived data sets to PIRATA measurements.

Open access
Trolliet, Mélodie, Walawender, Jakub P., Bourlès, Bernard, Boilley, Alexandre, Trentmann, Jörg, Blanc, Philippe, Lefèvre, Mireille, Wald, Lucien·2018·Ocean Science

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Abstract. This paper assesses the merits and drawbacks of several data sets of solar downwelling radiation received at the horizontal surface of the tropical Atlantic Ocean where the magnitude of this radiation and its spatial and temporal variability are not well known. The data sets are compared to quality-controlled measurements of hourly means of irradiance made at five buoys of the PIRATA network for the period 2012–2013. The data sets comprise the re-analyses MERRA-2 and ERA5, and three satellite-derived data sets: HelioClim-3v5, SARAH-2 and CAMS Radiation Service v2. It was found that the re-analyses MERRA-2 and ERA5 often report cloud-free conditions while the actual conditions are cloudy, yielding an overestimation of the irradiance in such cases; and reciprocally, they report actual cloud-free conditions as cloudy, yielding an underestimation. The re-analyses exhibit more bias in irradiance in cases of medium and high-level clouds than for low-level clouds. They correlate well with the hourly means of irradiance (as a whole, correlation coefficients greater than 0.85 for MERRA-2 and 0.89 for ERA5); they correlate very poorly with daily means of irradiance (coefficients of less than 0.48 and 0.59 for MERRA-2 and ERA5, respectively) and with the hourly and daily clearness indices (coefficients of less than 0.53 and 0.46 for MERRA-2 and less than 0.63 and 0.59 for ERA5). The irradiance pattern at both hourly and daily timescales is spatially distorted by re-analyses, especially for MERRA-2. The three satellite-derived data sets exhibit similar performances between them. The correlation coefficients are greater than 0.95 and 0.78 for irradiance and clearness index, respectively, in most cases for hourly values and 0.90 and 0.88, respectively, for daily values. The relative standard deviation of errors is of the order of 15 % for hourly values and 8 % for daily values. It is concluded that these data sets reproduce well the dynamics of the irradiance and clearness index at both hourly and daily timescales. They exhibit overestimation, with the lowest biases reached by the CAMS Radiation Service v2 and ranging between 11 and 37 W m−2 depending on the buoy. It is suggested that HelioClim-3v5 and CAMS Radiation Service v2 are suited for reproducing the spatial gradients of the irradiance and reflecting the spatial variability in the irradiance.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5194/os-14-1021-2018

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • For reanalysis fluxes, there are major uncertainties in tropical shortwave and longwave radiation associated with long-standing problems of parameterizing tropical convective clouds and low-altitude stratocumulus clouds in reanalysis models.

    “For reanalysis fluxes, there are major uncertainties in tropical shortwave and longwave radiation associated with the long-standing problems of parameterizing tropical convective clouds and low-altitude stratocumulus clouds in reanalysis models (Trolliet et al., 2018).”

    From The tropical atlantic observing system (2019) · cites this paper as Trolliet et al., 2018

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Koster, R. (Ed.): Technical Report Series on Global Modeling and Data Assimilation, Vol. 43, National Aeronautics and Space Ad- ministration (NASA), 139 pp., 2015.
  2. Pfeifroth, U., Kothe, S., Müller, R., Trentmann, J., Holl- mann, R., Fuchs, P., and Werscheck M.: Surface Ra- diation Data Set -Heliosat (SARAH) -Edition 2. Satellite Application Facility on Climate Monitoring, https://doi.org/10.5676/EUM_SAF_CM/SARAH/V002, 2017. · DOI
  3. Wald, L.: Solar radiation energy (fundamentals), in: Solar Energy Conversion and Photoenergy Systems, edited by: Blanco, J. and Malato, S., in: Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS), Developed under the Auspices of the UNESCO, Eolss Publish- M. Trolliet et al.: Comparing PIRATA measurements, re-analyses and satellite-derived data ers, Oxford, UK, available at: http://www.eolss.net (last access: 1 September 2018), 2007.
  4. WMO: Guide to meteorological instruments and methods of obser- vation, WMO-No 8, 2008 edition updated in 2010, World Mete- orological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2012.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Trolliet, M., Walawender, J. P., Bourlès, B., Boilley, A., Trentmann, J., Blanc, P., Lefèvre, M., & Wald, L.
Affiliations
  • Université Paris Sciences et Lettres (FR)
  • Deutscher Wetterdienst (DE)
  • Laboratoire d’Études en Géophysique et Océanographie Spatiales (FR)
  • Transvalor (France) (FR)
Venue
Ocean Science
Published
2018-09-12
Volume
14
Issue
5
Pages
1021-1056
ISSN
  • 1812-0784 (ISSN-L)
  • 1812-0792
OpenAlex
W2891349009
Cited by
51
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4
FWCI
3.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Ocean science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Institutional Archive of Ifremer (French Research Institute for Exploitation of the Sea) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Biogeosciences (European Geosciences Union) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • European Commission
  • European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Atmospheric aerosols and clouds
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Solar Radiation and Photovoltaics
Keywords
surface solar radiation, downwelling radiation, tropical Atlantic, reanalysis evaluation, MERRA-2, ERA5 reanalysis, satellite-derived irradiance, clearness index, data comparison

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review