Abstract

<strong class="journal-contentHeaderColor">Abstract.</strong> We present a database of MAX-DOAS (Multi-AXis Differential Optical Absorption Spectroscopy) ground-based observations of NO<sub>2 </sub>and H<sub>2</sub>CO performed for the first time in the city of Kinshasa. These measurements were conducted between November 2019 and July 2021 and processed using the standardized inversion tools developed in the ESA FRM4DOAS (Fiducial Reference Measurements for Ground-Based DOAS Air-Quality Observations) project. The retrieved geophysical quantities are used to validate column observations from the TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI) in Kinshasa. In the validation, we experiment three different comparison cases of increasing complexity. In the first case, a direct comparison between MAX-DOAS observations (average +/- 60 minutes around overpass) and TROPOMI shows an underestimation of TROPOMI with a median bias of -40 % (<em>s</em>=0.26 and <em>R</em>=0.41) for NO<sub>2</sub> and -26 % (<em>s</em>=0.24 and <em>R</em>=0.28) for H<sub>2</sub>CO. The second case takes into account the different vertical sensitivities of the two instruments and the apriori profile. We note a slight decrease of the biases and a strong improvement of the linear regression parameter, about -35 % (<em>s</em>=0.72 and <em>R</em>=0.74) for NO<sub>2</sub> and 1 % (<em>s</em>=1.01 and <em>R</em>=0.66) for H<sub>2</sub>CO. The third case, which is considered more realistic than the first two, builds on the second case by considering also the direction of sight of the MAX-DOAS. For this third case, we find a bias of -2 % (<em>s</em>= 1.09; <em>R</em>= 0.59) for NO<sub>2</sub> and 13 % (<em>s</em>= 1.51; <em>R</em>= 0.60) for H<sub>2</sub>CO. Those results indicate a large impact of the vertical sensitivity and horizontal heterogeneity in this validation process at this site. In order to evaluate the capability of the GEOS-Chem model in this region, we performed the comparisons between TROPOMI and the simulations made for 2020. We found a bias of 16 % (<em>s</em>= 0.42 and <em>R</em> = 0.80) for NO<sub>2</sub> and bais of 61 % (<em>s</em>= 0.05 and <em>R</em> = 0.24) for H<sub>2</sub>CO.

Full Text
Paper version not known

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.