4.6 Article

Validation of MOPITT Version 5 thermal-infrared, near-infrared, and multispectral carbon monoxide profile retrievals for 2000-2011

Journal

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-ATMOSPHERES
Volume 118, Issue 12, Pages 6710-6725

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/jgrd.50272

Keywords

MOPITT; carbon monoxide; satellite remote sensing; validation

Funding

  1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Earth Observing System (EOS) Program
  2. National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Validation results are reported for the MOPITT (Measurements of Pollution in the Troposphere) Version 5 (V5) product for tropospheric carbon monoxide (CO) and are compared to results for the Version 4 product. The V5 retrieval algorithm introduces (1) a method for reducing retrieval bias drift associated with long-term instrumental degradation, (2) a more exact representation of the effects of random errors in the radiances and, for the first time, (3) the use of MOPITT's near-infrared (NIR) radiances to complement the thermal-infrared (TIR) radiances. Exploiting TIR and NIR radiances together facilitates retrievals of CO in the lowermost troposphere. V5 retrieval products based (1) solely on TIR measurements, (2) solely on NIR measurements and (3) on both TIR and NIR measurements are separately validated and analyzed. Actual retrieved CO profiles and total columns are compared with equivalent retrievals based on in situ measurements from (1) routine NOAA aircraft sampling mainly over North America and (2) the HIAPER Pole to Pole Observations (HIPPO) field campaign. Particular attention is focused on the long-term stability and geographical uniformity of the retrieval errors. Results for the retrieved total column clearly indicate reduced temporal bias drift in the V5 products compared to the V4 product, and do not exhibit a positive bias in the Southern Hemisphere, which is evident in the V4 product.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available