4.7 Article

Aerosol Retrieval Sensitivity and Error Analysis for the Cloud and Aerosol Polarimetric Imager on Board TanSat: The Effect of Multi-Angle Measurement

Journal

REMOTE SENSING
Volume 9, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/rs9020183

Keywords

aerosol; CAPI; DFS; retrieval error

Funding

  1. National High-Tech Research and Development Program of China [2011AA12A104]
  2. Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDA04077300]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41375035]
  4. External Cooperation Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [GJHZ1507]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aerosol scattering is an important source of error in CO2 retrievals from satellite. This paper presents an analysis of aerosol information content from the Cloud and Aerosol Polarimetric Imager (CAPI) onboard the Chinese Carbon Dioxide Observation Satellite (TanSat) to be launched in 2016. Based on optimal estimation theory, aerosol information content is quantified from radiance and polarization observed by CAPI in terms of the degrees of freedom for the signal (DFS). A linearized vector radiative transfer model is used with a linearized Mie code to simulate observation and sensitivity (or Jacobians) with respect to aerosol parameters. In satellite nadir mode, the DFS for aerosol optical depth is the largest, but for mode radius, it is only 0.55. Observation geometry is found to affect aerosol DFS based on the aerosol scattering phase function from the comparison between different viewing zenith angles or solar zenith angles. When TanSat is operated in target mode, we note that multi-angle retrieval represented by three along-track measurements provides additional 0.31 DFS on average, mainly from mode radius. When adding another two measurements, the a posteriori error decreases by another 2%-6%. The correlation coefficients between retrieved parameters show that aerosol is strongly correlated with surface reflectance, but multi-angle retrieval can weaken this correlation.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available