| Literature DB >> 27809272 |
Li Li Zhang1, Tian Xiang Yue2, John P Wilson3,4, Ding Yi Wang5, Na Zhao6, Yu Liu7, Dong Dong Liu8, Zheng Ping Du9, Yi Fu Wang10, Chao Lin11, Yu Quan Zheng12, Jian Hong Guo13.
Abstract
The TanSat carbon satellite is to be launched at the end of 2016. In order to verify the performance of its instruments, a flight test of TanSat instruments was conducted in Jilin Province in September, 2015. The flight test area covered a total area of about 11,000 km² and the underlying surface cover included several lakes, forest land, grassland, wetland, farmland, a thermal power plant and numerous cities and villages. We modeled the column-average dry-air mole fraction of atmospheric carbon dioxide (XCO₂) surface based on flight test data which measured the near- and short-wave infrared (NIR) reflected solar radiation in the absorption bands at around 760 and 1610 nm. However, it is difficult to directly analyze the spatial distribution of XCO₂ in the flight area using the limited flight test data and the approximate surface of XCO₂, which was obtained by regression modeling, which is not very accurate either. We therefore used the high accuracy surface modeling (HASM) platform to fill the gaps where there is no information on XCO₂ in the flight test area, which takes the approximate surface of XCO₂ as its driving field and the XCO₂ observations retrieved from the flight test as its optimum control constraints. High accuracy surfaces of XCO₂ were constructed with HASM based on the flight's observations. The results showed that the mean XCO₂ in the flight test area is about 400 ppm and that XCO₂ over urban areas is much higher than in other places. Compared with OCO-2's XCO₂, the mean difference is 0.7 ppm and the standard deviation is 0.95 ppm. Therefore, the modelling of the XCO₂ surface based on the flight test of the TanSat instruments fell within an expected and acceptable range.Entities:
Keywords: HASM; TanSat; XCO2 retrieval; XCO2 simulation; flight test
Year: 2016 PMID: 27809272 PMCID: PMC5134477 DOI: 10.3390/s16111818
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Flight parameters.
| Type | Parameters |
|---|---|
| Flight height | 5 km ± 30 m |
| Flight speed | 220 ± 6.6 km/h |
| Flight time | 10:30–13:30 |
| Solar zenith angle | 40°–55° |
| Flight geometric requirements | Flight drift angle is <5°; range of three-axis attitude angle is <2°; route is straight and course deviation is <60 m. |
| Meteorological conditions | Good weather with visibility >10 km. |
NIR spectral bands used for the flight retrieval.
| Band 1 | Band 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Wavelength range (nm) | 758–772 | 1592–1625 |
| Spectral resolution (nm) | 0.044 | 0.13 |
Figure 1Band 1’s flight test observational L1B data: spectral radiance in 760 nm.
Figure 2Band 2’s flight test observational L1B data: spectral radiance in 1610 nm.
Figure 3The flight test area showing: (a) the overall flight test area; (b) Xianghai Reserve; and (c) the Changan Lake area.
List of ground observations and methods used to gather them.
| Observations | Observation Methods Used |
|---|---|
| Temperature profile | Sonde measurement |
| Humidity profile | Sonde measurement |
| Pressure profile | Sonde measurement |
| Wind profile | Sonde measurement |
| CO2 profile | Captive balloon |
| CO2 concentration in surface layer | Greenhouse gases online laser analyzer UGGA |
| Surface reflectance | Analytical Spectral Devices (ASD) spectrometer |
| Aerosol optical depth | Sun photometer CE318 |
Figure 4The overall workflow.
Figure 5Major components and tasks included in the retrieval algorithm workflow.
SCIATRAN model inputs and outputs.
| Inputs | Outputs |
|---|---|
| Solar irradiance spectra | Radiance spectrum |
| Gas absorption and scattering cross sections | Jacobians (partial derivatives of the radiance spectrum with respect to each of the state vector elements) |
| Atmospheric state | - |
| Surface state | - |
| Instrument line shape function | - |
| Aerosol optical properties | - |
Figure 6Workflow used to estimate approximate XCO2 surface.
Explanatory variables used to model CO2 in different layers.
| Dependent Variables | Explanatory Variables |
|---|---|
| CO2 concentration in surface layer | Surface pressure, atmospheric humidity, atmospheric temperature, soil humidity, soil temperature, upward and downward shortwave radiation, altitude, longitude and latitude |
| CO2 profile (not including surface layer) | Temperature, pressure and humidity profiles, wind speed and direction, latitude and longitude |
Figure 7XCO2 concentrations estimated in the flight test area using full physics retrieval approach.
Figure 8Approximate XCO2 surface in the flight test area.
Figure 9The XCO2 concentrations in the flight test area estimated with HASM.
Figure 10The XCO2 estimates from OCO-2 in the flight test area.
The XCO2 difference between HASM and OCO-2 estimates in the flight test area.
| Number | Longitude (°) | Latitude (°) | Flight Test (ppm) | OCO-2 (ppm) | Difference (ppm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 124.35 | 45.34 | 396.67 | 398.34 | −1.67 |
| 2 | 124.40 | 45.06 | 399.13 | 397.54 | 1.59 |
| 3 | 124.42 | 45.07 | 398.85 | 397.07 | 1.78 |
| 4 | 124.47 | 45.01 | 398.05 | 397.35 | 0.70 |
| 5 | 124.48 | 45.00 | 398.36 | 397.49 | 0.87 |
| 6 | 124.48 | 44.99 | 398.05 | 397.84 | 0.21 |
| 7 | 124.49 | 45.02 | 398.75 | 397.42 | 1.33 |
| 8 | 124.49 | 44.98 | 397.82 | 397.25 | 0.57 |
| 9 | 124.50 | 45.00 | 399.01 | 397.23 | 1.78 |
| 10 | 124.50 | 44.98 | 398.73 | 397.63 | 1.10 |
| 11 | 124.50 | 44.96 | 397.99 | 396.73 | 1.26 |
| 12 | 124.50 | 44.93 | 397.24 | 397.04 | 0.20 |
| 13 | 124.51 | 44.96 | 397.92 | 397.29 | 0.63 |
| 14 | 124.52 | 44.94 | 397.35 | 397.87 | −0.52 |