Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A comparison of atmospheric CO2 concentration GOSAT-based observations and model simulations

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Science China Earth Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Satellite observations of atmospheric CO2 are able to truly capture the variation of global and regional CO2 concentration. The model simulations based on atmospheric transport models can also assess variations of atmospheric CO2 concentrations in a continuous space and time, which is one of approaches for qualitatively and quantitatively studying the atmospheric transport mechanism and spatio-temporal variation of atmospheric CO2 in a global scale. Satellite observations and model simulations of CO2 offer us two different approaches to understand the atmospheric CO2. However, the difference between them has not been comprehensively compared and assessed for revealing the global and regional features of atmospheric CO2. In this study, we compared and assessed the spatio-temporal variation of atmospheric CO2 using two datasets of the column-averaged dry air mole fractions of atmospheric CO2 (XCO2) in a year from June 2009 to May 2010, respectively from GOSAT retrievals (V02.xx) and from Goddard Earth Observing System-Chemistry (GEOS-Chem), which is a global 3-D chemistry transport model. In addition to the global comparison, we further compared and analyzed the difference of CO2 between the China land region and the United States (US) land region from two datasets, and demonstrated the reasonability and uncertainty of satellite observations and model simulations. The results show that the XCO2 retrieved from GOSAT is globally lower than GEOS-Chem model simulation by 2 ppm on average, which is close to the validation conclusion for GOSAT by ground measures. This difference of XCO2 between the two datasets, however, changes with the different regions. In China land region, the difference is large, from 0.6 to 5.6 ppm, whereas it is 1.6 to 3.7 ppm in the global land region and 1.4 to 2.7 ppm in the US land region. The goodness of fit test between the two datasets is 0.81 in the US land region, which is higher than that in the global land region (0.67) and China land region (0.68). The analysis results further indicate that the inconsistency of CO2 concentration between satellite observations and model simulations in China is larger than that in the US and the globe. This inconsistency is related to the GOSAT retrieval error of CO2 caused by the interference among input parameters of satellite retrieval algorithm, and the uncertainty of driving parameters in GEOS-Chem model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andres R J, Marland G, Fung I, et al. 1996. A 1°×1° distribution of carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel consumption and cement manufacture. Glob Biogeochem Cycle, 10: 419–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker D F, Law R M, Gurney K M, et al. 2006. TransCom 3 inversion intercomparison: Impact of transport model errors on the interannual variability of regional CO2 fluxes, 1988–2003. Glob Biogeochem Cycle, 20: GB1002, doi: 10.1029/2004GB002439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bey I, Jacob D J, Yantosca R M, et al. 2001. Global modeling of tropospheric chemistry with assimilated meteorology: Model description and evaluation. J Geophys Res, 106: 23073–23095

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boden T A, Marland G, Andres R J. 1995. Estimates of global, regional, and national annual CO2 emissions from fossil-fuel burning, hydraulic cement production, and gas flaring: 1950–1992. Environ Sci Div, doi: 10.2172/207068

  • Bovensmann H, Buchwitz M, Burrows J P, et al. 2010. A remote sensing technique for global monitoring of power plant CO2 emissions from space and related applications. Atmos Meas Tech, 3: 781–811

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butz A, Guerlet S, Hasekamp O, et al. 2011. Toward accurate CO2 and CH4 observations from GOSAT. Geophys Res Lett, 38: L14812, doi: 10.1029/2011GL047888

    Google Scholar 

  • Canadell J G, Corinne Le Quéré, Raupach M R, et al. 2007. Contributions to accelerating atmospheric CO2 growth from economic activity, carbon intensity, and efficiency of natural sinks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 104: 18866–18870

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chevallier F, Breon F M, Rayner P J. 2007. Contribution of the Orbiting Carbon Observatory to the estimation of CO2 sources and sinks: Theoretical study in a variational data assimilation framework. J Geophys Res, 112: D09307, doi: 10.1029/2006JD007375

    Google Scholar 

  • Cogan A J, Boesch H, Parker R J, et al. 2012. Atmospheric carbon dioxide retrieved from the Greenhouse gases Observing SATellite (GOSAT): Comparison with ground-based TCCON observations and GEOS-Chem model calculations. J Geophys Res, 117: D21301

    Google Scholar 

  • Crisp D, Atlas R M, Breon F M, et al. 2004. The Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO) mission. Adv Space Res, 34: 700–709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feng L, Palmer P I, Yang Y, et al. 2011. Evaluating a 3-D transport model of atmospheric CO2 using ground-based, aircraft, and space-borne data. Atmos Chem Phys, 11: 2789–2803

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregg J S, Andres R J, Marland G. 2008. China: Emissions pattern of the world leader in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel consumption and cement production. Geophys Res Lett, 35: L08806, doi: 10.1029/2007GL032887

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurney K R, Chen Y H, Maki T, et al. 2005. Sensitivity of atmospheric CO2 inversions to seasonal and interannual variations in fossil fuel emissions. J Geophys Res, 110: D10308, doi: 10.1029/2004JD005373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houweling S, Breon F M, Aben I, et al. 2004. Inverse modeling of CO2 sources and sinks using satellite data: A synthetic inter-comparison of measurement techniques and their performance as a function of space and time. Atmos Chem Phys, 4: 523–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hungershoefer K, Breon F M, Peylin P, et al. 2010. Evaluation of various observing systems for the global monitoring of CO2 surface fluxes. Atmos Chem Phys, 10: 10503–10520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingmann P, Veihelmann B, Langen J, et al. 2012. Requirements for the GMES Atmosphere Service and ESA’s implementation concept: Sentinels-4/-5 and -5p. Remote Sens Environ, 120: 58–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kong S F, Lu B, Han B, et al. 2010. Seasonal variation analysis of atmospheric CH4, N2O and CO2 in Tianjin offshore area. Sci China Earth Sci, 53: 1205–1215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu L X, Zhou L X, Zhang X C, et al. 2009. The characteristics of atmospheric CO2 concentration variation of four national background stations in China. Sci China Ser D-Earth Sci, 52: 1857–1863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marland G, Boden T A, Andres R J. 2008. Global, Regional, and National Fossil Fuel CO2 Emissions. In Trends: A Compendium of Data on Global Change. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn., U.S.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nassar R, Jones D B A, Suntharalingam P, et al. 2010. Modeling global atmospheric CO2 with improved emission inventories and CO2 production from theoxidation of other carbon species. Geosci Model Dev, 3: 689–716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NIES GOSAT Project. 2012. Summary of the GOSAT Level 2 data Products Validation Activity NIES GOSAT Project. 2010. Algorithm theoretical basis document for CO2 and CH4 column amounts retrieval from GOSAT TANSO-FTS SWIR. NIES-GOSAT-PO-017, V1.0

    Google Scholar 

  • Ota Y, Yoshida Y, Yokota T. 2008. Study of retrieving column amount of carbon dioxide from satellite-based near-infrared observation of solar scatter light in clear sky condition-Error estimation optimization of vertical pressure grid. J Remote Sens Soc Japan, 128,2: 152–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Reuter M, Bovensmann H, Buchwitz M, et al. 2011. Retrieval of atmospheric CO2 with enhanced accuracy and precision from SCIAMACHY: Validation with FTS measurements and comparison with model results. J Geophys Res, 116: D04301, doi: 10.1029/2010JD015047

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneising O, Buchwitz M, Burrows J P, et al. 2008. Three years of greenhouse gas column-averaged dry air mole fractions retrieved from satellite-Part 1: Carbon dioxide. Atmos Chem Phys, 8: 3827–3853

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, et al. 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Suntharalingam P, Jacob D J, Palmer P I, et al. 2004. Improved quantification of Chinese carbon fluxes using CO2/CO correlations in Asian outflow. J Geophys Res, 109: D18S18, doi: 10.1029/2003JD004362

    Google Scholar 

  • Uchino O, Kikuchi N, Sakai T, et al. 2012. Influence of aerosols and thin cirrus clouds on the GOSAT-observed CO2: A case study over Tsukuba. Atmos Chem Phys, 12: 3393–3404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wunch D, Toon G C, Blavier J F L, et al. 2011a. The total carbon column observing network. Philos Trans R Soc A-Math Phys Eng Sci, 369: 2087–2112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wunch D, Wennberg P O, Toon G C, et al. 2011b. A method for evaluating bias in global measurements of CO2 total columns from space. Atmos Chem Phys, 11: 12317–12337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yokota T, Yoshida Y, Eguchi N, et al. 2009. Global Concentrations of CO2 and CH4 Retrieved from GOSAT: First Preliminary Results. Sola, 5: 160–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeng Z C, Lei L P, Guo L J, et al. 2013. Incorporating temporal variability to improve geostatistical analysis of satellite-observed CO2 in China. Chin Sci Bull, 58: doi: 10.1007/s11434-012-5652-7

  • Zhou T, Yi C X, Peter S B, et al. 2008. Links between global CO2 variability and climate anomalies of biomes. Sci China Ser D-Earth Sci, 51: 740–747

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Key Laboratory of Digital Earth Science, Institute of Remote Sensing and Digital Earth, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100094, China

    LiPing Lei, XianHua Guan, ZhaoCheng Zeng, Bing Zhang, Fei Ru & Ran Bu

Authors
  1. LiPing Lei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. XianHua Guan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. ZhaoCheng Zeng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bing Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Fei Ru
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ran Bu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bing Zhang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lei, L., Guan, X., Zeng, Z. et al. A comparison of atmospheric CO2 concentration GOSAT-based observations and model simulations. Sci. China Earth Sci. 57, 1393–1402 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11430-013-4807-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11430-013-4807-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation