不同卫星反演的大气CO2浓度差异时空特征分析

doi:10.7523/j.issn.2095-6134.2019.03.006

中国科学院大学学报 ›› 2019, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (3): 331-337.DOI: 10.7523/j.issn.2095-6134.2019.03.006

不同卫星反演的大气CO₂浓度差异时空特征分析

吴长江^1,2, 雷莉萍¹, 曾招城³

1. 中国科学院遥感与数字地球研究所数字地球重点实验室, 北京 100094;
2. 中国科学院大学资源与环境学院, 北京 100049;
3. 美国加州理工学院地质与行星科学系, 美国加利福尼亚州帕萨迪纳市 CA91125

收稿日期:2018-01-15 修回日期:2018-04-04 发布日期:2019-05-15
通讯作者: 雷莉萍
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划项目（2016YFA0600303）资助

Spatio-temporal analysis of differences among atmospheric CO₂ concentrations retrieved from different satellite observations

WU Changjiang^1,2, LEI Liping¹, ZENG Zhaocheng³

1. Key Laboratory of Digital Earth Science, Institute of Remote Sensing and Digital Earth, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100094, China;
2. College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China;
3. Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA

Received:2018-01-15 Revised:2018-04-04 Published:2019-05-15

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 定量化分析不同遥感观测卫星所反演的大气CO₂浓度之间的差异，对于利用卫星遥感数据准确揭示全球大气CO₂浓度的时空变化特征具有重要的参考价值。利用CarbonTracker模型模拟的大气CO₂廓线数据对SCIAMACHY、GOSAT和OCO-2卫星反演的大气CO₂柱浓度数据进行校正，并通过计算卫星校正前后的差值分析不同卫星观测平台对大气廓线的响应差异。同时比较分析不同时空尺度的各卫星观测所刻画的大气CO₂柱浓度变化的差异。实验结果表明，SCIAMACHY的差值明显大于其他2颗卫星，且在低纬度和高纬度区域分别显示（-0.25±0.15）×10^-6和（-0.38±0.25）×10^-6的浓度差异。消除这些差异后，3颗卫星的CO₂柱浓度观测数据显示相似的季节变化、年变化特征以及相似的空间分布规律。研究结果表明，模型模拟数据可用来整合这3颗卫星由于观测仪器响应和时空尺度不同所引起的大气CO₂柱浓度数据间的差异。

关键词: 大气CO₂浓度, SCIAMACHY, GOSAT, OCO-2, 模型模拟

Abstract: Quantitative analysis of the differences among the CO₂ concentrations retrieved from different satellites is important for understanding possibility of combining different satellites for observing the spatio-temporal variations in global atmospheric CO₂ concentration. In this study, we investigated the differences among the atmospheric CO₂ concentrations derived from SCIAMACHY, GOSAT, and OCO-2 by comparing with CO₂ simulations from CarbonTracker. Firstly, the sensitivities of the three satellites to CO₂ concentrations were quantified by adjusting the measurements based on the CO₂ profiles from CarbonTracker. Secondly, the spatio-temporal patterns of XCO₂ retrievals from the three satellites were further compared. The results show that SCIAMACHY shows averaged biases of (-0.25 ±0.15)×10^-6 and (-0.38 ±0.25)×10^-6 at high and low latitude regions, respectively, which are significantly larger than those showed by the other two satellites. Moreover, we found that, after removing these differences, the observations from the three satellites demonstrate similar seasonal and annual variations as well as similar spatial patterns. These results show that model simulations can be utilized to remove or reduce the differences among the XCO₂ retrievals from different satellites.

Key words: atmospheric CO₂ concentration, SCIAMACHY, GOSAT, OCO-2, model simulations

中图分类号:

TP79

吴长江, 雷莉萍, 曾招城. 不同卫星反演的大气CO₂浓度差异时空特征分析[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2019, 36(3): 331-337.

WU Changjiang, LEI Liping, ZENG Zhaocheng. Spatio-temporal analysis of differences among atmospheric CO₂ concentrations retrieved from different satellite observations[J]. , 2019, 36(3): 331-337.

参考文献

[1] Schneising O, Heymann J, Buchwitz M, et al. Anthropogenic carbon dioxide source areas observed from space:assessment of regional enhancements and trends[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry & Physics, 2013, 13(5):2445-2454.
[2] 刘毅, 杨东旭, 蔡兆男. 中国碳卫星大气CO₂反演方法:GOSAT数据初步应用[J]. 科学通报, 2013, 58(11):996-999.
[3] Hakkarainen J, Ialongo I, Tamminen J. Direct space-based observations of anthropogenic CO₂ emission areas from OCO-2[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2016, 43(21):400-406.
[4] Janardanan R, Maksyutov S, Oda T, et al. Comparing GOSAT observations of localized CO₂ enhancements by large emitters with inventory-based estimates[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2016, 43(7):3486-3493.
[5] 布然, 雷莉萍, 郭丽洁,等. 大气CO₂浓度时空变化卫星遥感监测的应用潜力分析[J]. 遥感学报, 2015, 19(1):34-45.
[6] He Z, Zeng Z C, Lei L, et al. A data-driven assessment of biosphere-atmosphere interaction impact on seasonal cycle patterns of XCO2 using GOSAT and MODIS observations[J]. Remote Sensing, 2017, 9(3):251-272.
[7] Wunch D, Wennberg P O, Osterman G, et al. Comparisons of the orbiting carbon observatory-2(OCO-2) XCO2 measurements with TCCON[J]. Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 2017, 10(6):2209-2238.
[8] Kulawik S, Wunch D, O'Dell C, et al. Consistent evaluation of ACOS-GOSAT, BESD-SCIAMACHY, CarbonTracker, and MACC through comparisons to TCCON[J]. Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 2015, 8(6):6217-6277.
[9] Connor B J, Rodgers C D. Intercomparison of remote sounding instruments[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres, 2003, 108(D3):2152-2206.
[10] Jing Y, Shi J, Wang T, et al. Mapping global atmospheric CO₂ concentration at high spatiotemporal resolution[J]. Atmosphere, 2014, 5(4):870-888.
[11] Butz A, Deutscher N M. The greenhouse gas climate change initiative (GHG-CCI):comparative validation of GHG-CCI SCIAMACHY/ENVISAT and TANSO-FTS/GOSAT CO₂ and CH₄[J]. Atmospheric MeasurementTechniques Discussions, 2014, 6(5):8679-8741.
[12] O'Dell C W, Connor B, Bosch H, et al. The ACOS CO₂ retrieval algorithm-Part 1:Description and validation against synthetic observations[J]. Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 2012, 4(1):99-121.
[13] Worden J R, Doran G, Kulawik S, et al. Evaluation and attribution of OCO-2 XCO2 uncertainties[J]. Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 2017, 10(7):1-28.
[14] Reuter M, Bovensmann H, Buchwitz M, et al. Retrieval of atmospheric CO₂ with enhanced accuracy and precision from SCIAMACHY:validation with FTS measurements and comparison with model results[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres, 2011, 116(D4):220-237.
[15] Peters W, Jacobson A R, Sweeney C, et al. An atmospheric perspective on North American carbon dioxide exchange:CarbonTracker[J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2007, 104(48):18925-18930.
[16] Rodgers C D. Inverse methods for atmospheric sounding[M]. London:World Scientific, 2000:187-196.
[17] Gurney K R, Law R M, Denning A S, et al. Towards robust regional estimates of CO₂ sources and sinks using atmospheric transport models[J]. Nature, 2002, 415(6872):626-630.
[18] Law R M, Rayner P J, Steele L P, et al. Using high temporal frequency data for CO₂ inversions[J]. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 2002, 16(4):1053-1070.
[19] Chevallier F, Broquet G, Pierangelo C, et al. Probabilistic global maps of the CO₂ column at daily and monthly scales from sparse satellite measurements[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres, 2017, 122(14):7614-7629.
[20] Han G, Ma X, Liang A, et al. Performance evaluation for China's planned CO₂-IPDA[J]. Remote Sensing, 2017, 9(8):768-789.

不同卫星反演的大气CO₂浓度差异时空特征分析

Spatio-temporal analysis of differences among atmospheric CO₂ concentrations retrieved from different satellite observations

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 1

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

访问统计

联系我们