Side by side measurements of CO2 by ground-based Fourier transform spectrometry (FTS)

High resolution solar absorption Fourier transform spectrometry (FTS) is the most precise ground-based remote sensing technique to measure the total column of atmospheric carbon dioxide. For carbon cycle studies as well as for the calibration and validation of spaceborne sensors the instrumental com...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inTellus. Series B, Chemical and physical meteorology Vol. 62; no. 5; pp. 749 - 758
Main Authors Messerschmidt, Janina, Macatangay, Ronald, Notholt, Justus, Petri, Christof, Warneke, Thorsten, Weinzierl, Christine
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Oxford, UK Taylor & Francis 01.11.2010
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:High resolution solar absorption Fourier transform spectrometry (FTS) is the most precise ground-based remote sensing technique to measure the total column of atmospheric carbon dioxide. For carbon cycle studies as well as for the calibration and validation of spaceborne sensors the instrumental comparability of FTS systems is of critical importance. Retrievals from colocated measurements by two identically constructed FTS systems have been compared for the first time. Under clear sky conditions a precision for the retrieved x CO 2 better than ˜0.1% is demonstrated and the instruments agree within ˜0.07%. An important factor in achieving such good comparability of the x CO 2 is an accurate sampling of the internal reference laser. A periodic laser mis-sampling leads to ghosts (artificial spectral lines), which are mirrored images from original spectral lines. These ghosts can interfere with the spectral range of interest. The influence of the laser mis-sampling on the retrieved x CO 2 and x O 2 in the near-IR has been quantified. For a typical misalignment, the ratio of the ghost intensity compared to the intensity of the original spectral line is about 0.18% and in this case the retrieved x CO 2 is wrong by 0.26% (1 ppm) and the retrieved x O 2 is wrong by 0.2%.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0280-6509
1600-0889
DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00491.x