Ellsworth J Welton

Dr. Ellsworth J Welton

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

25Years (2002-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
11 January 2019 in Atmospheric Measurement Techniques
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DGDavid M. Giles
David M. Giles
ASAlexander Sinyuk
Alexander Sinyuk
MSMikhail G. Sorokin
Mikhail G. Sorokin
JSJoel S. Schafer
Joel S. Schafer
ASAlexander Smirnov
Alexander Smirnov
ALAlexei I. Lyapustin
Alexei I. Lyapustin
The Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET) has provided highly accurate, ground-truth measurements of the aerosol optical depth (AOD) using Cimel Electronique Sun–sky radiometers for more than 25 years. In Version 2 (V2) of the AERONET database, the near-real-time AOD was semiautomatically quality controlled utilizing mainly cloud-screening methodology, while additional AOD data contaminated by clouds or affected by instrument anomalies were removed manually before attaining quality-assured status (Level 2.0). The large growth in the number of AERONET sites over the past 25 years resulted in significant burden to the manual quality control of millions of measurements in a consistent manner. The AERONET Version 3 (V3) algorithm provides fully automatic cloud screening and instrument anomaly quality controls. All of these new algorithm updates apply to near-real-time data as well as post-field-deployment processed data, and AERONET reprocessed the database in 2018. A full algorithm redevelopment provided the opportunity to improve data inputs and corrections such as unique filter-specific temperature characterizations for all visible and near-infrared wavelengths, updated gaseous and water vapor absorption coefficients, and ancillary data sets. The Level 2.0 AOD quality-assured data set is now available within a month after post-field calibration, reducing the lag time from up to several months. Near-real-time estimated uncertainty is determined using data qualified as V3 Level 2.0 AOD and considering the difference between the AOD computed with the pre-field calibration and AOD computed with pre-field and post-field calibration. This assessment provides a near-real-time uncertainty estimate for which average differences of AOD suggest a +0.02 bias and one sigma uncertainty of 0.02, spectrally, but the bias and uncertainty can be significantly larger for specific instrument deployments. Long-term monthly averages analyzed for the entire V3 and V2 databases produced average differences (V3–V2) of +0.002 with a ±0.02 SD (standard deviation), yet monthly averages calculated using time-matched observations in both databases were analyzed to compute an average difference of −0.002 with a ±0.004 SD. The high statistical agreement in multiyear monthly averaged AOD validates the advanced automatic data quality control algorithms and suggests that migrating research to the V3 database will corroborate most V2 research conclusions and likely lead to more accurate results in some cases.

13 April 2018 in EPJ Web of Conferences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
EWEllsworth J Welton
Ellsworth J Welton
SSSebastian A. Stewart
Sebastian A. Stewart
JLJasper R. Lewis
Jasper R. Lewis
LBLarry R. Belcher
Larry R. Belcher
JCJames R. Campbell
James R. Campbell
Simone LolliSimone Lolli
Simone Lolli
The NASA Micro Pulse Lidar Network (MPLNET) is a global federated network of Micro-Pulse Lidars (MPL) co-located with the NASA Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET). MPLNET began in 2000, and there are currently 17 long-term sites, numerous field campaigns, and more planned sites on the way. We have developed a new Version 3 processing system including the deployment of polarized MPLs across the network. Here we provide an overview of Version 3, the polarized MPL, and current and future plans.

7 March 2022 in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MOMartin Osborne
Martin Osborne
JLJohannes de Leeuw
Johannes de Leeuw
CWClaire Witham
Claire Witham
ASAnja Schmidt
Anja Schmidt
FBFrances Beckett
Frances Beckett
JHJim Haywood
Jim Haywood
Between 27 June and 14 July 2019 aerosol layers were observed by the United Kingdom (UK) Raman lidar network in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere. The arrival of these aerosol layers in late June caused some concern within the London Volcanic Ash Advisory Centre (VAAC) as according to dispersion simulations the volcanic plume from the 21 June 2019 eruption of Raikoke was not expected over the UK until early July. Using dispersion simulations from the Met Office Numerical Atmospheric-dispersion Modelling Environment (NAME), and supporting evidence from satellite and in situ aircraft observations, we show that the early arrival of the stratospheric layers was not due to aerosols from the explosive eruption of the Raikoke volcano but due to biomass burning smoke aerosols associated with intense forest fires in Alberta, Canada, that occurred 4 d prior to the Raikoke eruption. We use the observations and model simulations to describe the dispersion of both the volcanic and forest fire aerosol clouds and estimate that the initial Raikoke ash aerosol cloud contained around 15 Tg of volcanic ash and that the forest fires produced around 0.2 Tg of biomass burning aerosol. The operational monitoring of volcanic aerosol clouds is a vital capability in terms of aviation safety and the synergy of NAME dispersion simulations, and lidar data with depolarising capabilities allowed scientists at the Met Office to interpret the various aerosol layers over the UK and attribute the material to their sources. The use of NAME allowed the identification of the observed stratospheric layers that reached the UK on 27 June as biomass burning aerosol, characterised by a particle linear depolarisation ratio of 9 %, whereas with the lidar alone the latter could have been identified as the early arrival of a volcanic ash–sulfate mixed aerosol cloud. In the case under study, given the low concentration estimates, the exact identification of the aerosol layers would have made little substantive difference to the decision-making process within the London VAAC. However, our work shows how the use of dispersion modelling together with multiple observation sources enabled us to create a more complete description of atmospheric aerosol loading.

26 March 2018 in Atmospheric Measurement Techniques
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Simone LolliSimone Lolli
Simone Lolli
FMFabio Madonna
Fabio Madonna
MRMarco Rosoldi
Marco Rosoldi
JCJames Campbell
James Campbell
EWEllsworth J Welton
Ellsworth J Welton
GPGelsomina Pappalardo
Gelsomina Pappalardo
In the past 2 decades, ground-based lidar networks have drastically increased in scope and relevance, thanks primarily to the advent of lidar observations from space and their need for validation. Lidar observations of aerosol and cloud geometrical, optical and microphysical atmospheric properties are subsequently used to evaluate their direct radiative effects on climate. However, the retrievals are strongly dependent on the lidar instrument measurement technique and subsequent data processing methodologies. In this paper, we evaluate the discrepancies between the use of Raman and elastic lidar measurement techniques and corresponding data processing methods for two aerosol layers in the free troposphere and for two cirrus clouds with different optical depths. Results show that the different lidar techniques are responsible for discrepancies in the model-derived direct radiative effects for biomass burning (0.05 W m −2 at surface and 0.007 W m −2 at top of the atmosphere) and dust aerosol layers (0.7 W m −2 at surface and 0.85 W m −2 at top of the atmosphere). Data processing is further responsible for discrepancies in both thin (0.55 W m −2 at surface and 2.7 W m −2 at top of the atmosphere) and opaque (7.7 W m −2 at surface and 11.8 W m −2 at top of the atmosphere) cirrus clouds. Direct radiative effect discrepancies can be attributed to the larger variability of the lidar ratio for aerosols (20–150 sr) than for clouds (20–35 sr). For this reason, the influence of the applied lidar technique plays a more fundamental role in aerosol monitoring because the lidar ratio must be retrieved with relatively high accuracy. In contrast, for cirrus clouds, with the lidar ratio being much less variable, the data processing is critical because smoothing it modifies the aerosol and cloud vertically resolved extinction profile that is used as input to compute direct radiative effect calculations.

18 December 2020 in Atmospheric Measurement Techniques
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JLJasper Lewis
Jasper Lewis
JCJames Campbell
James Campbell
SSSebastian A. Stewart
Sebastian A. Stewart
ITIvy Tan
Ivy Tan
EWEllsworth J Welton
Ellsworth J Welton
Simone LolliSimone Lolli
Simone Lolli
A method to distinguish cloud thermodynamic phase from polarized Micro Pulse Lidar (MPL) measurements is described. The method employs a simple enumerative approach to classify cloud layers as either liquid water, ice water, or mixed-phase clouds based on the linear volume depolarization ratio and cloud top temperatures derived from Goddard Earth Observing System, version 5 (GEOS-5), assimilated data. Two years of cloud retrievals from the Micro Pulse Lidar Network (MPLNET) site in Greenbelt, MD, are used to evaluate the performance of the algorithm. The fraction of supercooled liquid water in the mixed-phase temperature regime (−37–0 ∘C) calculated using MPLNET data is compared to similar calculations made using the spaceborne Cloud-Aerosol Lidar with Orthogonal Polarization (CALIOP) instrument onboard the Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observations (CALIPSO) satellite, with reasonable consistency.

11 July 2018 in Remote Sensing
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Simone LolliSimone Lolli
Simone Lolli
Leo Pio D'AdderioLeo Pio D'Adderio
Leo Pio D'Adderio
JCJames Campbell
James Campbell
Michaël SicardMichaël Sicard
Michaël Sicard
EWEllsworth J Welton
Ellsworth J Welton
FMFabio Madonna
Fabio Madonna
In this paper, we illustrate a new, simple and complementary ground-based methodology to retrieve the vertically resolved atmospheric precipitation intensity through a synergy between measurements from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Micropulse Lidar network (MPLNET), an analytical model solution and ground-based disdrometer measurements. The presented results are obtained at two mid-latitude MPLNET permanent observational sites, located respectively at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, USA, and at the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain. The methodology is suitable to be applied to existing and/or future lidar/ceilometer networks with the main objective of either providing near real-time (3 h latency) rainfall intensity measurements and/or to validate satellite missions, especially for critical light precipitation (<3 mm h−1).