Articles | Volume 8, issue 9
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-3831-2015
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-3831-2015
Research article
 | 
18 Sep 2015
Research article |  | 18 Sep 2015

OMI tropospheric NO2 air mass factors over South America: effects of biomass burning aerosols

P. Castellanos, K. F. Boersma, O. Torres, and J. F. de Haan

Related authors

Estimating the variability in NOx emissions from Wuhan with TROPOMI NO2 data during 2018 to 2023
Qianqian Zhang, K. Folkert Boersma, Chiel van der Laan, Alba Mols, Bin Zhao, Shengyue Li, and Yuepeng Pan
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 3313–3326, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-3313-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-3313-2025, 2025
Short summary
TROPOMI Level 3 tropospheric NO2 Dataset with Advanced Uncertainty Analysis from the ESA CCI+ ECV Precursor Project
Isolde Glissenaar, Klaas Folkert Boersma, Isidora Anglou, Pieter Rijsdijk, Tijl Verhoelst, Steven Compernolle, Gaia Pinardi, Jean-Christopher Lambert, Michel Van Roozendael, and Henk Eskes
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-616,https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-616, 2025
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Accurate space-based NOx emission estimates with the flux divergence approach require fine-scale model information on local oxidation chemistry and profile shapes
Felipe Cifuentes, Henk Eskes, Enrico Dammers, Charlotte Bryan, and Folkert Boersma
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 621–649, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-621-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-621-2025, 2025
Short summary
Quantifying uncertainties in satellite NO2 superobservations for data assimilation and model evaluation
Pieter Rijsdijk, Henk Eskes, Arlene Dingemans, K. Folkert Boersma, Takashi Sekiya, Kazuyuki Miyazaki, and Sander Houweling
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 483–509, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-483-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-483-2025, 2025
Short summary
An improved Bayesian inversion to estimate daily NOx emissions of Paris from TROPOMI NO2 observations between 2018–2023
Alba Mols, Klaas Folkert Boersma, Hugo Denier van der Gon, and Maarten Krol
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-49,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-49, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Gases | Technique: Remote Sensing | Topic: Data Processing and Information Retrieval
Predictions of failed satellite retrieval of air quality using machine learning
Edward Malina, Jure Brence, Jennifer Adams, Jovan Tanevski, Sašo Džeroski, Valentin Kantchev, and Kevin W. Bowman
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 18, 1689–1715, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-1689-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-1689-2025, 2025
Short summary
Deep transfer learning method for seasonal TROPOMI XCH4 albedo correction
Alexander C. Bradley, Barbara Dix, Fergus Mackenzie, J. Pepijn Veefkind, and Joost A. de Gouw
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 18, 1675–1687, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-1675-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-1675-2025, 2025
Short summary
Global retrieval of TROPOMI tropospheric HCHO and NO2 columns with improved consistency based on the updated Peking University OMI NO2 algorithm
Yuhang Zhang, Huan Yu, Isabelle De Smedt, Jintai Lin, Nicolas Theys, Michel Van Roozendael, Gaia Pinardi, Steven Compernolle, Ruijing Ni, Fangxuan Ren, Sijie Wang, Lulu Chen, Jos Van Geffen, Mengyao Liu, Alexander M. Cede, Martin Tiefengraber, Alexis Merlaud, Martina M. Friedrich, Andreas Richter, Ankie Piters, Vinod Kumar, Vinayak Sinha, Thomas Wagner, Yongjoo Choi, Hisahiro Takashima, Yugo Kanaya, Hitoshi Irie, Robert Spurr, Wenfu Sun, and Lorenzo Fabris
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 18, 1561–1589, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-1561-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-1561-2025, 2025
Short summary
Quantitative estimate of several sources of uncertainty in drone-based methane emission measurements
Tannaz H. Mohammadloo, Matthew Jones, Bas van de Kerkhof, Kyle Dawson, Brendan J. Smith, Stephen Conley, Abigail Corbett, and Rutger IJzermans
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 18, 1301–1324, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-1301-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-1301-2025, 2025
Short summary
Implementation and application of an improved phase spectrum determination scheme for Fourier transform spectrometry
Frank Hase, Paolo Castracane, Angelika Dehn, Omaira Elena García, David W. T. Griffith, Lukas Heizmann, Nicholas B. Jones, Tomi Karppinen, Rigel Kivi, Martine de Mazière, Justus Notholt, and Mahesh Kumar Sha
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 18, 1257–1267, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-1257-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-1257-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Acarreta, J. R., de Haan, J. F., and Stammes, P.: Cloud pressure retrieval using the O2–O2 absorption band at 477 nm, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D05204, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003915, 2004.
Ahn, C., Torres, O., and Jethva, H.: Assessment of OMI near UV aerosol optical depth over land, J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 119, 2457–2473, 2014.
Beirle, S., Boersma, K. F., Platt, U., Lawrence, M. G., and Wagner, T.: Megacity Emissions and Lifetimes of Nitrogen Oxides Probed from Space, Science, 333, 1737–1739, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1207824, 2011.
Boersma, K. F., Eskes, H. J., and Brinksma, E. J.: Error analysis for tropospheric NO2 retrieval from space, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D04311, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003962, 2004.
Boersma, K. F., Eskes, H. J., Dirksen, R. J., van der A, R. J., Veefkind, J. P., Stammes, P., Huijnen, V., Kleipool, Q. L., Sneep, M., Claas, J., Leitão, J., Richter, A., Zhou, Y., and Brunner, D.: An improved tropospheric NO2 column retrieval algorithm for the Ozone Monitoring Instrument, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 4, 1905–1928, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-1905-2011, 2011.
Download
Short summary
Inaccuracies in the retrieval of NO2 tropospheric columns due to the radiative effects of light-absorbing aerosols are not well understood. Here we explicitly account for the effects of aerosols in the Dutch OMI NO2 (DOMINO) tropospheric AMF calculation by including aerosol observations collocated with OMI pixels. The AMF calculations that included aerosol absorption and scattering were on average 10% higher than traditional AMFs. Errors can reach a factor of 2 for individual pixels.
Share