the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Reduction of airmass-dependent biases in TCCON XCH4 retrievals during polar vortex conditions
Abstract. Trace gas measurements from the Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON) are important for monitoring the global climate system and for validating satellite measurements. In the Arctic, ground-based data coverage is relatively limited due the inherent challenges of conducting measurements in this region (e.g., remoteness, harsh weather) and the polar nights, which prevent solar absorption measurements for half of the year. TCCON measurements from the Arctic sites are of significant value for the validation of satellite data products in this region, as these measurements can extend the spatio-temporal coverage in the Arctic. In this study, we investigate the TCCON methane (CH4) retrieval under polar vortex conditions. The CH4 profile exhibits a distinct shape inside the vortex, which is related to the descent of stratospheric air inside the vortex. We show that the standard TCCON CH4 prior does not sufficiently reproduce this profile shape, leading to airmass dependencies (AMDs), increased spectral residuals and less sensitive averaging kernels. These effects can be explained by the fact that TCCON uses a profile scaling retrieval (PSR) where the prior shape is fixed and only a scaling factor is retrieved. We further show that changes in the prior can improve the retrieval within the polar vortex. This leads to mean differences between 1 and 2 ppb in XCH4 compared to the standard retrieval, and maximum differences up to roughly 17 ppb. This manuscript highlights the importance of understanding the limitations of retrieval methods to avoid misinterpretation of data. Furthermore, it emphasizes the need to investigate the shape of trace gas profiles inside the polar vortex to improve PSR in the Arctic, which could include in situ data campaigns focusing on inside-vortex air.
Competing interests: At least one of the (co-)authors is a member of the editorial board of Atmospheric Measurement Techniques.
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.- Preprint
(4650 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 19 Apr 2025)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-4055', Frank Hase, 28 Mar 2025
reply
The manuscript under consideration by Hachmeister et al. investigates the impact of polar vortex dynamics on XCH4 retrievals from TCCON. This is a very relevant topic for high-latitude sites and I recommend publication after minor revisions.
Specific comments:
I agree one would expect the variations of the CH4 a-priori profile to be a profound disturbance of CH4 retrievals under vortex conditions. However, the disappointingly low Pearson correlation of the results shown in Fig. 4 and the huge scatter of airmass dependence as fct of XGF shown in Figs. 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 seem to indicate further mechanisms of action being involved. There is only a very short discussion on this problem (lines 145 ff). I think this aspect would deserve a more systematic investigation. Specifically, I would find it interesting to show the typical scatter of XCH4 airmass dependence for a midlatitude background site. This would provide a benchmark and help to decide whether this large scatter is related to some additional mechanism affecting polar sites.
Overall, it would preferrable to perform a more consistent investigation across all TCCON sites (the model prior is investigated for Ny-Alesund only, why?).
On several occurences (section on detection of polar vortex, use of model prior, relation between observation and vortex edge, ...) the reader wonders whether the slanted line-of-sight of the FTIR measurement is taken into account. Given the low SZA angles during relevant periods, the lateral displacement of LOS coordinates as function of altitude can be quite pronounced. Please detail on this aspect.
My main critics of the current manuscript is related to section 7.4, the AirCore comparison. In my impression, the study falls short at this point. A single AirCore is used for illustrating the effects on a TCCON observation. I would expect a systematic investigation in this section which makes use of all available in-vortex AirCore launches and compares these profiles with standard TCCON a-prioris for estimating the expected disturbance on TCCON XCH4 results. Note that this only requires TCCON sensitivities, not actual colocated TCCON observations. Next, the static prior (using the option of a vortex mask) and the model prior could undergo the same kind of investigation.
Minor / technical comments:Abstract: "In the Arctic .. polar nights .. prevent solar absorption measurements for half of the year". This is not true.
Abstract: "These effects can be explained by the fact that TCCON uses a profile scaling retrieval". This would indicate that application of a profile retrieval would altogether cure the problem. This is not true, as a constrained profile retrieval still has imperfect column sensitivity (although improved over a scaling retrieval).
Appendix B and C:
Why are these rather ad-hoc profile correction schemes used? A correction describing a downwelling of the original undisturbed profile would better correspond to the underlying processes?Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-4055-RC1
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
94 | 18 | 3 | 115 | 2 | 1 |
- HTML: 94
- PDF: 18
- XML: 3
- Total: 115
- BibTeX: 2
- EndNote: 1
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|---|---|---|
United States of America | 1 | 25 | 23 |
China | 2 | 14 | 13 |
Germany | 3 | 11 | 10 |
undefined | 4 | 8 | 7 |
Canada | 5 | 6 | 5 |
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1
- 25