Abstract

Abstract. To check the accuracy of column-average dry air CO2 mole fractions (XCO2) retrieved from Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO-2) data, a similar quantity has been measured from the Multi-functional Fiber Laser Lidar (MFLL) aboard aircraft flying underneath OCO-2 as part of the Atmospheric Carbon and Transport (ACT) – America flight campaigns. Here we do a lagged correlation analysis of these MFLL–OCO-2 column CO2 differences and find that their correlation spectrum falls off rapidly at along-track separation distances under 10 km, with a correlation length scale of about 10 km, and less rapidly at longer separation distances, with a correlation length scale of about 20 km. The OCO-2 satellite takes many CO2 measurements with small (∼3 km2) fields of view (FOVs) in a thin (<10 km wide) swath running parallel to its orbit: up to 24 separate FOVs may be obtained per second (across a ∼6.75 km distance on the ground), though clouds, aerosols, and other factors cause considerable data dropout. Errors in the CO2 retrieval method have long been thought to be correlated at these fine scales, and methods to account for these when assimilating these data into top-down atmospheric CO2 flux inversions have been developed. A common approach has been to average the data at coarser scales (e.g., in 10 s long bins) along-track, then assign an uncertainty to the averaged value that accounts for the error correlations. Here we outline the methods used up to now for computing these 10 s averages and their uncertainties, including the constant-correlation-with-distance error model that was used to summarize the OCO-2 version 9 XCO2 retrievals as part of the OCO-2 flux inversion model intercomparison project. We then derive a new one-dimensional error model using correlations that decay exponentially with separation distance, apply this model to the OCO-2 data using the correlation length scales derived from the MFLL–OCO-2 differences, and compare the results (for both the average and its uncertainty) to those given by the current constant correlation error model. To implement this new model, the data are averaged first across 2 s spans to collapse the cross-track distribution of the real data onto the 1-D path assumed by the new model. Considering correlated errors can cause the average value to fall outside the range of the values averaged; two strategies for preventing this are presented. The correlation lengths over the ocean, which the land-based MFLL data do not clarify, are assumed to be twice those over the land. The new correlation model gives 10 s XCO2 averages that are only a few tenths of 1 ppm different from the constant correlation model. Over land, the uncertainties in the mean are also similar, suggesting that the +0.3 constant correlation coefficient currently used in the model there is accurate. Over the oceans, the twice-the-land correlation lengths that we assume here result in a significantly lower uncertainty on the mean than the +0.6 constant correlation currently gives – measurements similar to the MFLL ones are needed over the oceans to do better. Finally, we show how our 1-D exponential error correlation model may be used to account for correlations in inversion methods that choose to assimilate each XCO2 retrieval individually and also to account for correlations between separate 10 s averages when these are assimilated instead.

Highlights

  • Column-averaged CO2 mixing ratio measurements taken from satellites provide coverage across the globe that is far more extensive than that from in situ measurements

  • The individual OCO-2 retrievals are generally averaged together along-track across some distance closer to the model grid box size before being assimilated in the inversion: this is because the modeled measurements to which the true measurements will be compared in the inversion are available only at the grid box resolution, so it makes little sense to assimilate each measurement individually when assimilating a coarse-resolution average that summarizes those values will do just as well

  • We examine how the error correlation length scale derived above can help in weighting the column CO2 data from the OCO-2 satellite when used in global flux inversions

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Column-averaged CO2 mixing ratio measurements taken from satellites provide coverage across the globe that is far more extensive than that from in situ measurements. The Multi-functional Fiber Laser Lidar (MFLL) (Dobbs et al, 2008; Dobler et al, 2013), has been flown (Campbell et al, 2020) as part of NASA’s Atmospheric Carbon and Transport (ACT) – America project, an effort to detail CO2 variability as a function of weather and front location across the eastern half of North America (Davis et al, 2021) Several of these MFLL flights were designed to pass underneath OCO-2 along its ground track as it passed by, allowing CO2 from the better part of the full column to be compared between the two. 3.5, we assess the impact of the correlation length scale determined from the MFLL–OCO-2 data on the averages of actual OCO-2 version 10 XCO2 retrievals by calculating 10 s average values and their uncertainties using the new exponential correlation error model and comparing them to those given by the constant correlation error model. We discuss the implications of the new length-scale-dependent correlations in the conclusion

MFLL measurements and their pairing with OCO-2 overflight data
Method for analyzing a correlation length scale
Correlation length scale results
Application
Data averaging approach
Averaging assuming uncorrelated errors
Averaging assuming constant correlations not depending on distance
Averaging assuming correlations that decay exponentially with distance
Negative weights and their implications
Constant error correlation case with sub-optimal average
Comparison of the error models for two simple cases
Calculating correlations between averaging spans
Application of the error correlation models to OCO-2 v10 XCO2 data
Findings
Summary and conclusions

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.