the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
An open-path observatory for greenhouse gases based on near-infrared Fourier transform spectroscopy
Tobias D. Schmitt
Jonas Kuhn
Ralph Kleinschek
Benedikt A. Löw
Stefan Schmitt
William Cranton
Martina Schmidt
Sanam N. Vardag
Frank Hase
David W. T. Griffith
Abstract. Monitoring the atmospheric concentrations of the greenhouse gases (GHG) carbon dioxide CO2 and methane CH4 is a key ingredient for fostering our understanding of the mechanisms behind the sources and sinks of these gases and for verifying and quantitatively attributing their anthropogenic emissions. Here, we present the instrumental setup and performance evaluation of an open-path GHG observatory in the city of Heidelberg, Germany. The observatory measures path-averaged concentrations of CO2 and CH4 along a 1.55 km path in the urban boundary layer above the city. We are combining these open-path data with local in-situ measurements to evaluate the representativeness of these observation types on the kilometer-scale. This representativeness is necessary to accurately quantify emissions, since atmospheric models tasked with this job typically operate on kilometer-scale horizontal grids.
For the operational period between Feb. 8 and Jul. 11, 2023, we find a precision of 2.7 ppm (0.58 %) and 18 ppb (0.89 %) for the dry air mole fractions of CO2 (xCO2) and CH4 (xCH4) in 5-minute measurements, respectively. After calibration, the open-path measurements show excellent agreement with the local in-situ data under atmospheric background conditions. Both datasets show clear signals of traffic CO2 emissions on the diurnal CO2 cycle. However, there are particular situations, such as under south-easterly wind conditions, where the in-situ and open-path data reveal distinct differences up to 20 ppm in xCO2 most likely related to their different sensitivity to local emission and transport patterns.
Our setup is based on a Bruker IFS 125 HR Fourier transform spectrometer, which offers a spacious and modular design providing ample opportunities for future refinements of the technique with respect to finer spectral resolution and wider spectral coverage to inform on gases such as carbon monoxide and nitrogen dioxide.
- Preprint
(14135 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Tobias D. Schmitt et al.
Status: open (until 11 Oct 2023)
-
RC1: 'Comment on amt-2023-185', Anonymous Referee #1, 11 Sep 2023
reply
This manuscript is well written and describes the full details of the instrumental setup, as well as spectroscopy measurement and retrieval analysis. It explains clearly the steps of the quantitative calculation and uncertainties. It also states clearly that some instrumental work in this study was built up from previous work and the setup in this study is a more portable application. This study also includes the comparison of the open-path measurement and in situ point measurement over a period of months. It will serve as a very useful reference for open-path FTS measurement of trace gases in regions that have urban other emission sources. Therefore, I recommend publishing this work after addressing my minor comments below.
Minor comments:
Line 238-248 and Figure 9 are very interesting: (1) How many nights did you find showing similar big differences as March-17 and March-18? Was there any special events? What is the height is the roof top? Were other nights similar or different? Some nights may have higher boundary layer height than other nights. Any daytime observation when the wind was from 135 degrees? (2) Your hypothesis could make sense and I agree that you would need high-resolution models to investigate this further. I wonder if the air mass trajectory models with high-resolution meteorological data would help get an initial estimate of your hypothesis. Did you try any?
Figure 10: what is the red solid line? The orientation of the open-path? You need to explain it in the caption.
Line 262-264: “ … with average differences of less than 1 ppm during the day and slightly larger differences during night.” Did you do any test to verify that the difference during night is statistically significant larger than the difference during the day? One issue here is the number of days for weekends + holidays is much less than the number of days for weekdays.
Line 264-266: how far is the closest major road to your point CRDS measurement?
Figure 11: the morning peak of xCO2 on the weekends is 1 hour earlier than that on the weekdays. Interesting. Any explanation?
Line 299-303. Nice. I had similar thoughts before reading this page.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2023-185-RC1
Tobias D. Schmitt et al.
Tobias D. Schmitt et al.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
219 | 68 | 13 | 300 | 8 | 9 |
- HTML: 219
- PDF: 68
- XML: 13
- Total: 300
- BibTeX: 8
- EndNote: 9
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1