Boundary-Layer Meteorology

, Volume 124, Issue 2, pp 129–141

On the relationship between the eddy covariance, the turbulent flux, and surface exchange for a trace gas such as CO2

Original Paper

Abstract

In the context of CO2 surface exchange estimation, an analysis combining the basic principles of diffusion and scalar conservation shows that the mixing ratio is the appropriate variable both for defining the (eddy covariance) turbulent flux and also for expressing the relationship between the turbulent flux and surface exchange in boundary-layer budget equations. Other scalar intensity variables sometimes chosen, both the CO2 density and molar fraction, are susceptible to the influence of surface exchange of heat and water vapour. The application of a hypsometric analysis to the boundary-layer “control volume” below the tower measurement height reveals flaws in previously applied approaches: (a) incompressibility cannot be assumed to simplify mass conservation (the budget in terms of CO2 density); (b) compressibility alone makes the analysis of mass conservation vulnerable to uncertainties associated with resultant non-zero vertical velocities too small to measure or model over real terrain; and (c) the WPL (Webb et al. (1980) Quart J Roy Meteorol Soc 106:85–100) “zero dry air flux” assumption is invalidated except at the surface boundary. Nevertheless, the definition and removal of the WPL terms do not hinge upon this last assumption, and so the turbulent CO2 flux can be accurately determined by eddy covariance using gas analysers of either open- or closed-path design. An appendix discusses the necessary assumptions and appropriate interpretations for deriving the WPL terms.

Keywords

Conservative scalars Eddy covariance Mixing ratio Net ecosystem exchange Turbulent flux 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aubinet M, Grelle A, Ibrom A, Rannik Ü, Moncrieff JB, Foken T, Kowalski AS, Martin PH, Berbigier P, Bernhofer C, Clement R, Elbers JA, Granier A, Grünwald T, Morgenstern K, Pilegaard K, Rebmann C, Snijders W, Valentini R, Vesala T (2000) Estimates of the annual net carbon and water exchange of forests: the EUROFLUX methodology. Adv Ecol Res 30:113–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baldocchi DD (2003) Assessing the eddy covariance technique for evaluating carbon dioxide exchange rates of ecosystems: past, present and future. Global Change Biol 9:479–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baldocchi DD, Falge E, Gu L, Olson R, Hollinger D, Running D, Anthoni PM, Bernhofer C, Davis KJ, Evans R, Fuentes JD, Goldstein AH, Katul GG, Law BE, Lee Z, Malhi Y, Meyers TP, Munger W, Oechel W, Paw UKT, Pilegaard K, Schmid HP, Valentini R, Verma SB, Vesala T, Wilson KB, Wofsy SC (2001) FLUXNET: a new tool to study the temporal and spatial variability of ecosystem-scale carbon dioxide, water vapor, and energy flux densities. Bull Amer Meteorol Soc 82(11):2415–2434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baldocchi DD, Hicks BB, Meyers TP (1988) Measuring biosphere-atmosphere exchange of biologically-related gases with micrometeorological methods. Ecology 69(5):1331–1340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Batchelor GK (1967) An introduction to fluid dynamics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 615 ppGoogle Scholar
  6. Dabberdt WF, Lenschow DH, Horst TW, Zimmerman PR, Oncley SP, Delany AC (1993) Atmosphere-surface exchange measurements. Science 260:1472–1480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Finnigan JJ, Clement R, Malhi Y, Leuning R, Cleugh HA (2003) A re-evaluation of long-term flux measurement techniques. Part I: Averaging and coordinate rotation. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 107:1–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fuehrer PL, Friehe CA (2002) Flux corrections revisited. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 102:415–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Holton JR (1992) An introduction to dynamic meteorology. Academic Press, San Diego, 511 ppGoogle Scholar
  10. Khvorostyanov VI, Curry JA (1999) Toward the theory of stochastic condensation in clouds. Part I: A general kinetic equation. J Atmos Sci 56:3985–3996Google Scholar
  11. Lee X (1998) On micrometeorological observations of surface-air exchange over tall vegetation. Agric Forest Meteorol 91:39–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Leuning R (2004) Measurements of trace gas fluxes in the atmosphere using eddy covariance: WPL corrections revisted. In: Lee X, Massman WJ, Law BE (eds) Handbook of micrometeorology, A guide for surface flux measurement and analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 119–132Google Scholar
  13. Leuning R (2007) The correct form of the Webb, Pearman and Leuning equation for eddy fluxes of trace gases in steady and non-steady state, horizontally homogeneous flows. Boundary-Layer Meteorol (in press)Google Scholar
  14. Leuning R, Judd MJ (1996) The relative merits of open- and closed-path analysers for measurement of eddy fluxes. Global Change Biol 2:241–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leuning R, Legg BJ (1982) Comments on “The influence of water vapor fluctuations on turbulent fluxes”, by Brook. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 23:255–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Liu H (2005) An alternative approach for CO2 flux correction caused by heat and water vapour transfer. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 115:151–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Massman WJ (2000) A simple method for estimating frequency response corrections for eddy covariance systems. Agric Forest Meteorol 104:185–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Massman WJ, Tuovinen J-P (2006) An analysis and implications of alternative methods of deriving the density (WPL) terms for eddy covariance flux measurements. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 121:221–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Paw UKT, Baldocchi DD, Meyers TP, Wilson KB (2000) Correction of eddy-covariance measurements incorporating both advective effects and density fluxes. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 97:487–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rannik Ü, Keronen P, Hari P, Vesala T (2004) Estimation of forest–atmosphere CO2 exchange by eddy covariance and profile techniques. Agric Forest Meteorol 126:141–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Webb EK, Pearman GI, Leuning R (1980) Correction of flux measurements for density effects due to heat and water vapour transfer. Quart J Roy Meteorol Soc 106:85–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Wofsy SC, Goulden ML, Munger JW, Fan SM, Bakwin PS, Daube BC, Bassow SL, Bazzaz FA (1993) Net exchange of CO2 in a mid-latitude forest. Science 260:1314–1317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Xu L-K, Matista AA, Hsiao TC (1999) A technique for measuring CO2 and water vapor profiles within and above plant canopies over short periods. Agric Forest Meteorol 94:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Yi C, Davis KJ, Bakwin PS, Berger BW, Marr LC (2000) Influence of advection on measurements of the net ecosystem-atmosphere exchange of CO2 from a very tall tower. J Geophys Res 105(D8):9991–9999CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew S. Kowalski
    • 1
    • 2
  • Penélope Serrano-Ortiz
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Departamento de Física AplicadaUniversidad de GranadaGranadaSpain
  2. 2.Centro Andaluz de Medio Ambiente (CEAMA)GranadaSpain

Personalised recommendations