Atmospheric Measurement Techniques
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques
AMT
Articles | Volume 9, issue 5
Articles | Volume 9, issue 5
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-2119-2016
© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-2119-2016
© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
Articles | Volume 9, issue 5
Research article
 | 
13 May 2016
Research article |  | 13 May 2016

Algorithm update of the GOSAT/TANSO-FTS thermal infrared CO2 product (version 1) and validation of the UTLS CO2 data using CONTRAIL measurements

Naoko Saitoh, Shuhei Kimoto, Ryo Sugimura, Ryoichi Imasu, Shuji Kawakami, Kei Shiomi, Akihiko Kuze, Toshinobu Machida, Yousuke Sawa, and Hidekazu Matsueda

Viewed

Total article views: 3,739 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
2,297 1,310 132 3,739 174 194
  • HTML: 2,297
  • PDF: 1,310
  • XML: 132
  • Total: 3,739
  • BibTeX: 174
  • EndNote: 194
Views and downloads (calculated since 10 Dec 2015)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 10 Dec 2015)
Latest update: 26 Nov 2025
Download
Short summary
This study compared GOSAT/TANSO-FTS thermal infrared (TIR) V1 and CONTRAIL CME CO2 data in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere. The TIR CO2 averages agreed with the CME CO2 averages within 0.1 and 0.5 % in the Southern and Northern Hemisphere. At northern low and middle latitudes, their agreements were worse in spring and summer. The negative bias there made the maximum of TIR data being lower than that of CME data, which leads to underestimating the amplitude of CO2 seasonal variation.
Read more
Share