Evaluation of single-footprint AIRS CH<sub>4</sub> profile retrieval uncertainties using aircraft profile measurements

oleh: S. S. Kulawik, J. R. Worden, V. H. Payne, D. Fu, S. C. Wofsy, S. C. Wofsy, K. McKain, K. McKain, C. Sweeney, B. C. Daube Jr., B. C. Daube Jr., A. Lipton, A. Lipton, I. Polonsky, Y. He, K. E. Cady-Pereira, E. J. Dlugokencky, D. J. Jacob, D. J. Jacob, Y. Yin

Format: Article
Diterbitkan: Copernicus Publications 2021-01-01

Deskripsi

<p>We evaluate the uncertainties of methane optimal estimation retrievals from single-footprint thermal infrared observations from the Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS). These retrievals are primarily sensitive to atmospheric methane in the mid-troposphere through the lower stratosphere (<span class="inline-formula">∼2</span> to <span class="inline-formula">∼17</span> <span class="inline-formula">km</span>). We compare them to in situ observations made from aircraft during the HIAPER Pole to Pole Observations (HIPPO) and Atmospheric Tomography Mission (ATom) campaigns, and from the NOAA GML aircraft network, between the surface and 5–13 <span class="inline-formula">km</span>, across a range of years, latitudes between 60<span class="inline-formula"><sup>∘</sup></span> S to 80<span class="inline-formula"><sup>∘</sup></span> N, and over land and ocean. After a global, pressure-dependent bias correction, we find that the land and ocean have similar biases and that the reported observation error (combined measurement and interference errors) of <span class="inline-formula">∼27</span> <span class="inline-formula">ppb</span> is consistent with the SD between aircraft and individual AIRS observations. A single observation has measurement (noise related) uncertainty of <span class="inline-formula">∼17</span> <span class="inline-formula">ppb</span>, a <span class="inline-formula">∼20</span> <span class="inline-formula">ppb</span> uncertainty from radiative interferences (e.g., from water or temperature), and <span class="inline-formula">∼30</span> <span class="inline-formula">ppb</span> due to “smoothing error”, which is partially removed when making comparisons to in situ measurements or models in a way that accounts for this regularization. We estimate a 10 <span class="inline-formula">ppb</span> validation uncertainty because the aircraft typically did not measure methane at altitudes where the AIRS measurements have some sensitivity, e.g., the stratosphere, and there is uncertainty in the truth that we validate against. Daily averaging only partly reduces the difference between aircraft and satellite observation, likely because of correlated errors introduced into the retrieval from temperature and water vapor. For example, averaging nine observations only reduces the aircraft–model difference to <span class="inline-formula">∼17 ppb</span> vs. the expected <span class="inline-formula">∼10</span> <span class="inline-formula">ppb</span>. Seasonal averages can reduce this <span class="inline-formula">∼17</span> <span class="inline-formula">ppb</span> uncertainty further to <span class="inline-formula">∼10</span> <span class="inline-formula">ppb</span>, as determined through comparison with NOAA aircraft, likely because uncertainties related to radiative effects of temperature and water vapor are reduced when averaged over a season.</p>