An AeroCom–AeroSat study: intercomparison of satellite AOD datasets for aerosol model evaluation

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorSchutgens, Nick
dc.contributor.authorSayer, Andrew
dc.contributor.authorHeckel, Andreas
dc.contributor.authorHsu, Christina
dc.contributor.authorWang, Yujie
dc.contributor.authoret al
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-27T13:05:04Z
dc.date.available2022-10-27T13:05:04Z
dc.date.issued2020-10-30
dc.descriptionAuthors:- Nick Schutgens, Andrew M. Sayer,, Andreas Heckel, Christina Hsu, Hiren Jethva,, Gerrit de Leeuw, Peter J. T. Leonard, Robert C. Levy, Antti Lipponen, Alexei Lyapustin, Peter North, Thomas Popp, Caroline Poulsen,a, Virginia Sawyer,, Larisa Sogacheva, Gareth Thomas, Omar Torres, Yujie Wang, Stefan Kinne, Michael Schulz, and Philip Stieren_US
dc.description.abstractTo better understand and characterize current uncertainties in the important observational constraint of climate models of aerosol optical depth (AOD), we evaluate and intercompare 14 satellite products, representing nine different retrieval algorithm families using observations from five different sensors on six different platforms. The satellite products (super-observations consisting of 1◦ × 1 ◦ daily aggregated retrievals drawn from the years 2006, 2008 and 2010) are evaluated with AErosol RObotic NETwork (AERONET) and Maritime Aerosol Network (MAN) data. Results show that different products exhibit different regionally varying biases (both under- and overestimates) that may reach ±50 %, although a typical bias would be 15 %–25 % (depending on the product). In addition to these biases, the products exhibit random errors that can be 1.6 to 3 times as large. Most products show similar performance, although there are a few exceptions with either larger biases or larger random errors. The intercomparison of satellite products extends this analysis and provides spatial context to it. In particular, we show that aggregated satellite AOD agrees much better than the spatial coverage (often driven by cloud masks) within the 1◦ × 1 ◦ grid cells. Up to ∼ 50 % of the difference between satellite AOD is attributed to cloud contamination. The diversity in AOD products shows clear spatialpatterns and varies from 10 % (parts of the ocean) to 100 % (central Asia and Australia). More importantly, we show that the diversity may be used as an indication of AOD uncertainty, at least for the better performing products. This provides modellers with a global map of expected AOD uncertainty in satellite products, allows assessment of products away from AERONET sites, can provide guidance for future AERONET locations and offers suggestions for product improvements. We account for statistical and sampling noise in our analyses. Sampling noise, variations due to the evaluation of different subsets of the data, causes important changes in error metrics. The consequences of this noise term for product evaluation are discussed.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThe work by Nick Schutgens is part of the Vici research programme, project number 016.160.324, which is (partly) financed by the Dutch Research Council (NWO). Philip Stier was funded by the European Research Council (ERC) project constRaining the EffeCts of Aerosols on Precipitation (RECAP) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation programme, grant agreement no. 724602, the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation and the Natural Environment Research Council project NE/P013406/1 (A-CURE).en_US
dc.description.urihttps://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/12431/2020/en_US
dc.format.extent27 pagesen_US
dc.genrejournal articlesen_US
dc.identifierdoi:10.13016/m2ywui-rzvk
dc.identifier.citationSchutgens, N., Sayer, A. M., Heckel, A., Hsu, C., Jethva, H., de Leeuw, G., Leonard, P. J. T., Levy, R. C., Lipponen, A., Lyapustin, A., North, P., Popp, T., Poulsen, C., Sawyer, V., Sogacheva, L., Thomas, G., Torres, O., Wang, Y., Kinne, S., Schulz, M., and Stier, P.: An AeroCom–AeroSat study: intercomparison of satellite AOD datasets for aerosol model evaluation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 12431–12457, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-12431-2020, 2020.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-12431-2020
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11603/26239
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherEGUen_US
dc.relation.isAvailableAtThe University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC)
dc.relation.ispartofUMBC GESTAR II Collection
dc.relation.ispartofUMBC Faculty Collection
dc.relation.ispartofUMBC Joint Center for Earth Systems Technology (JCET)
dc.rightsThis work was written as part of one of the author's official duties as an Employee of the United States Government and is therefore a work of the United States Government. In accordance with 17 U.S.C. 105, no copyright protection is available for such works under U.S. Law.en_US
dc.rightsPublic Domain Mark 1.0*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/*
dc.titleAn AeroCom–AeroSat study: intercomparison of satellite AOD datasets for aerosol model evaluationen_US
dc.typeTexten_US
dcterms.creatorhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-9149-1789en_US

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Thumbnail Image
Name:
acp-20-12431-2020.pdf
Size:
21.12 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
Thumbnail Image
Name:
acp-20-12431-2020-supplement.pdf
Size:
1.97 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.56 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

UMBC GESTAR II
UMBC Faculty Collection
UMBC Joint Center for Earth Systems Technology (JCET)