Articles | Volume 10, issue 4
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-1299-2017
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-1299-2017
Research article
 | 
03 Apr 2017
Research article |  | 03 Apr 2017

A European-wide 222radon and 222radon progeny comparison study

Dominik Schmithüsen, Scott Chambers, Bernd Fischer, Stefan Gilge, Juha Hatakka, Victor Kazan, Rolf Neubert, Jussi Paatero, Michel Ramonet, Clemens Schlosser, Sabine Schmid, Alex Vermeulen, and Ingeborg Levin

Related authors

Strategic design of methane observation networks to improve emission estimates: A case study in Africa
Hui Li, Philippe Ciais, Frédéric Chevallier, Bo Zheng, Paul I. Palmer, Frank Hase, Morgan Lopez, Elsa M. Ordway, Shushi Peng, Danielle Monteverde, Michel Ramonet, Jason M. St. Clair, Le Bienfaiteur Sagang, and Benjamin Poulter
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 26, 11893–11908, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-26-11893-2026,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-26-11893-2026, 2026
Short summary
Urban atmospheric CO2 plumes from space – Part 2: Representation of fine-scale structures
Alohotsy Rafalimanana, Thomas Lauvaux, Charbel Abdallah, Mali Chariot, Michel Ramonet, Josselin Doc, Olivier Laurent, Morgan Lopez, Anja Raznjevic, Maarten Krol, Leena Järvi, Andreas Christen, Dana Looschelders, Leslie David, Olivier Sanchez, Laura Bignotti, Benjamin Loubet, Sue Grimmond, and William Morrison
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2581,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2581, 2026
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
Using high frequency observations of δ13C-CH4 and δ2H-CH4 and uncertain regional isotopic signatures to estimate sources of UK methane emissions
Alice E. Ramsden, Anita L. Ganesan, Matthew Rigby, Chris Rennick, Tim Arnold, Emmal Safi, Edward Chung, Dafina Kikaj, Cameron Yeo, Dave Lowry, Pete Levy, Simon O'Doherty, Kieran M. Stanley, Dickon Young, Joe Pitt, Damien Martin, Morgan Lopez, Michel Ramonet, Grant L. Forster, Arnoud Frumau, and Alistair J. Manning
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 26, 11421–11448, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-26-11421-2026,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-26-11421-2026, 2026
Short summary
Urban atmospheric CO2 plumes from space – Part 1: Atmospheric modeling of the urban boundary layer
Alohotsy Rafalimanana, Thomas Lauvaux, Charbel Abdallah, Mali Chariot, Michel Ramonet, Josselin Doc, Olivier Laurent, Morgan Lopez, Anja Raznjevic, Maarten Krol, Leena Järvi, Andreas Christen, Dana Looschelders, Leslie David, Olivier Sanchez, Laura Bignotti, Benjamin Loubet, Sue Grimmond, and William Morrison
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2109,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2109, 2026
Short summary
Two years of total column measurements of CO2, CH4 and CO in Paris, France
Josselin Doc, François-Marie Bréon, Morgan Lopez, Yao Té, Pascal Jeseck, Jinghui Lian, Guillaume Nief, Antoine Parent, Hippolyte Leuridan, and Michel Ramonet
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 26, 8937–8959, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-26-8937-2026,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-26-8937-2026, 2026
Short summary

Cited articles

Biraud, S.: Vers la régionalisation des puits et sources des composes à effet de serre: analyse de la variabilité synoptique à l'observatoire de Mace Head, Irlande, PhD Thesis, University of Paris VII, France, 2000.
Capuana, C.-A.: Calibration of ionization chambers and comparison of two monitors for radon measurement, BA Thesis, Institut für Umweltphysik, Heidelberg University, 2016 (in German).
Chambers, S., Williams, A. G., Zahorowski, W., Griffiths, A. D., and Crawford, J.: Separating remote fetch and local mixing influences on vertical radon measurements in the lower atmosphere, Tellus B, 63, 843–859, 2011.
Cuntz, M.: The Heidelberg 222Rn monitor: Calibration, optimisation, application, Diploma Thesis, Institut für Umweltphysik, Heidelberg University, Germany, 1997.
Dörr, H., Kromer, B., Levin, I., Münnich, K. O., and Volpp, H. J.: CO2 and Radon-222 as tracers for atmospheric transport, J. Geophys. Res., 88, 1309–1313, 1983.
Short summary
A European-wide 222radon/222radon progeny comparison study has been conducted at nine measurement stations in order to determine differences between existing 222radon instrumentation and atmospheric data sets, respectively. Mean differences up to 45 % were found between monitors. These differences need to be taken into account if the data shall serve for quantitative regional atmospheric transport model validation.
Share