Comparison and Validation of TROPOMI and OMI NO2 Observations over China

Abstract

The new-generation sensor TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI) onboard the Sentinel 5 precursor (S5P) satellite is promising for monitoring air pollutants with greater spatial resolution, especially for China, which suffers from severe pollution. As tropospheric NO2 vertical column densities (VCDs) from TROPOMI have become available since February 2018, this study presents the comparisons of NO2 data measured by TROPOMI and its predecessor Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) over China, together with validation against ground Multi-axis differential optical absorption spectroscopy (MAX-DOAS) measurements. At the nationwide scale, we used two different filters performed for the TROPOMI data (named TROPOMI50 and TROPOMI75), and the TROPOMI50 yielded larger values than TROPOMI75. The TROPOMI NO2 datasets from different filters show consistent spatial patterns with OMI, and the correlation coefficient values were both above 0.93. However, linear regression indicates that NO2 loadings in TROPOMI is about 2/3 to 4/5 of those in OMI, which is presumably due to a different cloud mask and uncertainties of air mass factors. The absolute difference is prominent over the high pollution areas such as Jing-Jin-Ji region and during winter and autumn, exceeding 0.6 × 1016 molecules cm−2 (molec cm−2). However, the NO2 concentrations retrieved from TROPOMI50 in the southern China may be somewhat higher than OMI. When it comes to the local-scale Jing-Jin-Ji hotspot, the analysis focuses on a comparison to TROPOMI75. TROPOMI manifests high quality and exhibits a significantly better performance of representing spatial variability. In contrast, OMI shows fewer effective pixels and does a poor job of capturing local details due to its row anomaly and low resolution. The absolute difference between two datasets shows the same seasonal behavior with NO2 variation, which is most striking in the winter (0.31 × 1016 molec cm−2) and is lowest in the summer (0.05 × 1016 molec cm−2). Furthermore, the ground MAX-DOAS instrument in Xianghe station, the representative site in Jing-Jin-Ji, is used to assess the skill of satellite retrievals. It turns out that both OMI and TROPOMI underestimate the observations, ranging from 30% to 50%, with OMI being less biased. In spite of the negative drift, the temporal structures of changes derived from OMI and TROPOMI closely match the ground-based records, since the correlation coefficients are above 0.8 and 0.95 for daily and monthly scales, respectively. Overall, TROPOMI NO2 retrievals are better suited for applications in China as well as the Jing-Jin-Ji hotspot due to its higher spatial resolution, although some improvements are also needed in the near future.