4.3 Article

Validation of Column-Averaged Dry-Air Mole Fraction of CO2 Retrieved from OCO-2 Using Ground-Based FTS Measurements

期刊

JOURNAL OF METEOROLOGICAL RESEARCH
卷 32, 期 3, 页码 433-443

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s13351-018-7118-6

关键词

Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2); Fourier Transform Spectrometer (FTS); carbon dioxide (CO2); validation

资金

  1. TanSat Project [2011AA12A104]
  2. National Science and Technology Support Program of China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In order to correctly use the column-averaged atmospheric CO2 dry-air mole fraction (XCO2) data in the CO2 flux studies, XCO2 measurements retrieved from the Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2) in 2015 were compared with those obtained from the global ground-based high-resolution Fourier Transform Spectrometer (FTS) participating in the Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON). The XCO2 retrieved from three observing modes adopted by OCO-2, i.e., nadir, target, and glint, were separately validated by the FTS measurements at up to eight TCCON stations located in different areas. These comparisons show that OCO-2 glint mode yields the best qualitative estimations of CO2 concentration among the three operational approaches. The overall results regarding the glint mode show no obvious systematic biases. These facts may indicate that the glint concept is appropriate for not only oceans but also land regions. Negative systematic biases in nadir and target modes have been found at most TCCON sites. The standard deviations of XCO2 retrieved from target and nadir modes within the observation period are similar, and larger than those from glint mode. We also used the FTS site in Beijing, China, to assess the OCO-2 XCO2 in 2016. This site is located in a typical urban area, which has been absent in previous studies. Overall, OCO-2 XCO2 agrees well with that from FTS at this site. Such a study will benefit the validation of the newly launched TanSat products in China.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据