Articles | Volume 9, issue 2
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 9, 683–709, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-683-2016
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 9, 683–709, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-683-2016
Research article
29 Feb 2016
Research article | 29 Feb 2016

Consistent evaluation of ACOS-GOSAT, BESD-SCIAMACHY, CarbonTracker, and MACC through comparisons to TCCON

Susan Kulawik et al.

Viewed

Total article views: 5,986 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
3,160 2,375 451 5,986 126 131
  • HTML: 3,160
  • PDF: 2,375
  • XML: 451
  • Total: 5,986
  • BibTeX: 126
  • EndNote: 131
Views and downloads (calculated since 22 Jun 2015)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 22 Jun 2015)

Cited

Saved (preprint)

Latest update: 09 Aug 2022
Download
Short summary
To accurately estimate source and sink locations of carbon dioxide, systematic errors in satellite measurements and models must be characterized. This paper examines two satellite data sets (GOSAT, launched 2009, and SCIAMACHY, launched 2002), and two models (CarbonTracker and MACC) vs. the TCCON CO2 validation data set. We assess biases and errors by season and latitude, satellite performance under averaging, and diurnal variability. Our findings are useful for assimilation of satellite data.