the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Surface Ozone Distribution & Trends Over Ireland : Insights from long-term measurement record and source attribution modelling
Abstract. Surface ozone (O3) pollution is assessed across Ireland with a focus on long-term trends with a specific focus on the Mace Head atmospheric research station which monitors background O3 advected into Europe via prevailing South Westerlies. Using innovative trajectory analysis, O3 concentrations, exceedances and were identified by sectors, revealing distinct seasonal and spatial patterns. Findings show a significant rising trend in surface O3 at Irish urban sites over the past two decades but without a similar trend at coastal sites. Highest O3 levels and exceedances were observed at remote coastal sites, less influenced by local emissions, and heavily influenced by meteorological processes, including transboundary pollution and stratospheric intrusion. At Mace Head, springtime O3 levels show a declining trend, with a rising winter-time trend. Looking only at the clean sector, the springtime decline remains significant; but without rising wintertime trends, implying the rising winter trends are a response to declining European emissions. Advanced modelling tools are used to quantify O3 source contributions, elucidating key drivers behind the observed changes. Characteristic springtime O3 maxima at Mace Head are attributed to stratospheric transport, influences from westerly transboundary air pollution, and lightning NOx. Combined trend and sectoral observational analysis reveals that total spring-time concentrations are in decline, with exceedances from the UK & continental sector declining at a greater rate. This research highlights the importance of seasonal factors in air quality management across Ireland, emphasising the need for a multi-faceted approach to control O3 levels and reduce exceedances through global and regional emission reductions.
Competing interests: At least one of the (co-)authors is a member of the editorial board of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.- Preprint
(2576 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(2185 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-3824', William Collins, 08 Sep 2025
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2025/egusphere-2025-3824/egusphere-2025-3824-RC1-supplement.pdfCitation: https://doi.org/
10.5194/egusphere-2025-3824-RC1 -
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-3824', Rama Krishna Karumuri, 22 Nov 2025
This paper addresses an important topic: surface ozone (O₃) trends across Ireland, using long-term observational data and model (CAM4‑Chem + tagging via TOAST 1.0) source-attribution analyses. The combination of measurements, trajectory / sector classification, and modelling is commendable. The regional focus on Ireland particularly the background coastal site at Mace Head adds value, since many O₃ studies focus on larger continental areas. The methods are reasonably described, and the results are of interest for air‐quality / atmospheric chemistry / policy communities. That said, the manuscript requires substantial improvement in several areas before it is ready for publication: grammar & sentence structure need polishing, some methodological choices need clarification, some results could be better contextualized, and a number of references appear missing or inconsistent.
Major concerns
- The abstract and introduction present the study aims, but the phrasing is sometimes confusing. For example: “Using innovative trajectory analysis, O₃ concentrations, exceedances and were identified by sectors…” (L17–19) – the sentence is awkward, and a verb seems missing (“and … were identified”).
- It would help to explicitly state the hypotheses (e.g., “We hypothesise that urban sites will show increasing O₃ due to reduced NOₓ titration while background coastal sites will show declining O₃ thanks to precursor reductions”). A clear statement of hypotheses will strengthen the framing.
- The authors mention “innovative trajectory analysis” but more precisely explain what is new compared to previous work. Many previous studies have done back-trajectory classification. Clarify what is novel.
- I suggest a thorough pass with a native English speaker or professional editing service to improve readability, grammar, and logical flow.
- The trajectory classification: The criteria (72h over ocean) for “clean sector” should be justified more clearly. Why 72 h? Why 100 m height at 6:00 UTC? Are results sensitive to these thresholds?
- The modelling: The CAM4-Chem grid resolution is coarse (1.9° × 2.5°) (L229). This is acknowledged by the authors in discussing biases (L486–490). However the implications for interpretation (especially for urban sites) should be more emphasised. Is the coarse resolution adequate for urban site comparisons?
- The source tagging via TOAST is described, but I would recommend including a validation of the tagging method (or refer to validation studies) in a little more detail. For instance, what is the error/uncertainty associated with the tagging?
- Statistical trend methods: The authors use Theil-Sen slopes + Mann-Kendall tests (L180–185). It may help to compare with alternative methods or at least to discuss the limitations (e.g., non-stationarity, autocorrelation).
- In modelling vs observations comparison (Section 3.4.1), only five sites are used. Why these? Are they representative? Could more sites be used or reasons given for the selection?
- The result that urban sites show increasing O₃ trends (e.g., Rathmines +0.27 µg m−³ yr−¹ for full period) (L363–365) is interesting. But the mechanism is briefly mentioned (“weekend effect”, NOₓ titration) (L311–313); this could be developed further, perhaps linking to local emission inventories or changes in VOC/NOₓ ratios over time in Ireland.
- The discussion of the 2020 COVID-19 lockdown (Section 3.3) is interesting (L451–458). But the data are limited (March-May 2020) and a more nuanced discussion of meteorology confounding effects would strengthen the claim.
- The authors report a decline in spring-time O₃ at Mace Head but an increase in winter trends (L465–470). This is a key finding. However, the discussion linking these to emission reductions, stratospheric intrusion, hemispheric transport is somewhat speculative and could be better supported by citations or sensitivity tests.
- It would help to compare the Irish trends with trends elsewhere (Western Europe, North Atlantic) more thoroughly — e.g., are the trends consistent with broader European background ozone literature?
- The uncertainties in modelling and measurement (especially for attribution of sources) should be more explicitly discussed.
Minor Comments:
- Line 229 - It would be useful to maintain the same order of stations throughout all tables and figures.
- Line 326 - Figure 5 Why these NO2 and CH4 sites are selected.
- Line 342 - This sentence needs to be rewritten for clarity; the current wording is difficult to follow.
- Line 353 Include details of the model grid used over Ireland to support the interpretation of spatial results.
- Line 415 Figure 8 Clarify what the SHIP parameter represents. It is not defined in Table 3.
- Line 456 - Please provide details of the method used to define background and EU- influenced airmasses. This information is essential.
- Line 543 Check this sentence , it appears incomplete and needs revision.
- Line 551 Figure 13: Change the colour scheme to improve readability.
- Supplementary material - Section 3 is missing. Please correct the numbering and ensure figures.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3824-RC2
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,913 | 47 | 25 | 1,985 | 41 | 33 | 22 |
- HTML: 1,913
- PDF: 47
- XML: 25
- Total: 1,985
- Supplement: 41
- BibTeX: 33
- EndNote: 22
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1