passive ozone
Dear all,
>> Concerning the passivity of passive ozone, I believe that it is absolute. I.e.
>> it has no feedbacks on the model evolution. If we start listing the feedbacks which it doesn't have we need to
>> anticipate all feedbacks for true ozone that might be incorporated into the models in the future. Isn't it
>> simpler to say that there are none?
>>
>> Chemically_passive would be wrong, as it is also radiatively passive.
Please don't go down this path! Adding all kinds of attributes into the standard_name will lead nowhere! I think it would me much clearer to define additional attributes as for example
feedbacks:"radiation, chemistry, ..." or "none" if it is "absolutely passive".
As for the standard name the quantity should still be called the same as "ozone". Our model simulations always include some element of simplification and I believe it is more important to recognize that the standard_name variable reflects "something that has a behaviour which in many respects is similar to ozone" than to nail down every detail as to why my ozone is different from yours.
Best regards,
Martin
< Dr. Martin G. Schultz, ICG-2, Forschungszentrum J?lich >
< D-52425 J?lich, Germany >
< ph: +49 (0)2461 61 2831, fax: +49 (0)2461 61 8131 >
< email: m.schultz at fz-juelich.de >
< web:
http://www.fz-juelich.de/icg/icg-2/m_schultz >
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Forschungszentrum J?lich GmbH
52425 J?lich
Sitz der Gesellschaft: J?lich
Eingetragen im Handelsregister des Amtsgerichts D?ren Nr. HR B 3498
Vorsitzende des Aufsichtsrats: MinDir'in B?rbel Brumme-Bothe
Gesch?ftsf?hrung: Prof. Dr. Achim Bachem (Vorsitzender),
Dr. Ulrich Krafft (stellv. Vorsitzender), Prof. Dr. Harald Bolt,
Dr. Sebastian M. Schmidt
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Fri Mar 07 2008 - 04:37:47 GMT
