Direct top-down estimates of biomass burning CO emissions using TES and MOPITT versus bottom-up GFED inventory

被引:32
|
作者
Pechony, Olga [1 ,2 ]
Shindell, Drew T. [1 ,2 ]
Faluvegi, Greg [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] NASA, Goddard Inst Space Studies, New York, NY 10025 USA
[2] Columbia Earth Inst, New York, NY USA
关键词
Carbon monoxide; Biomass burning emissions; MOPITT; TES; GFED; Climate model; NADIR RETRIEVALS; CARBON-MONOXIDE; BURNED AREA; SATELLITE; SPECTROMETER; VARIABILITY; POLLUTION; OZONE; SIMULATIONS; CHEMISTRY;
D O I
10.1002/jgrd.50624
中图分类号
P4 [大气科学(气象学)];
学科分类号
0706 ; 070601 ;
摘要
In this study, we utilize near-simultaneous observations from two sets of multiple satellite sensors to segregate Tropospheric Emission Spectrometer (TES) and Measurements of Pollution in the Troposphere (MOPITT) CO observations over active fire sources from those made over clear background. Hence, we obtain direct estimates of biomass burning CO emissions without invoking inverse modeling as in traditional top-down methods. We find considerable differences between Global Fire Emissions Database (GFED) versions 2.1 and 3.1 and satellite-based emission estimates in many regions. Both inventories appear to greatly underestimate South and Southeast Asia emissions, for example. On global scales, however, CO emissions in both inventories and in the MOPITT-based analysis agree reasonably well, with the largest bias (30%) found in the Northern Hemisphere spring. In the Southern Hemisphere, there is a one-month shift between the GFED and MOPITT-based fire emissions peak. Afternoon tropical fire emissions retrieved from TES are about two times higher than the morning MOPITT retrievals. This appears to be both a real difference due to the diurnal fire activity variations, and a bias due to the scarcity of TES data.
引用
收藏
页码:8054 / 8066
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Bottom-up versus top-down control in phytoplankton of the Southern Ocean
    Smith, WO
    Lancelot, C
    ANTARCTIC SCIENCE, 2004, 16 (04) : 531 - 539
  • [22] Bottom-up adaptation versus top-down control in the Simon task
    Alpay, Gamze
    Stuermer, Birgit
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2008, 43 (3-4) : 558 - 558
  • [23] STATE-INITIATED TOP-DOWN VERSUS BOTTOM-UP REFORM
    MARSH, DD
    BOWMAN, GA
    EDUCATIONAL POLICY, 1989, 3 (03) : 195 - 216
  • [24] Reconciling the bottom-up and top-down estimates of the methane chemical sink using multiple observations
    Zhao, Yuanhong
    Saunois, Marielle
    Bousquet, Philippe
    Lin, Xin
    Hegglin, Michaela I.
    Canadell, Josep G.
    Jackson, Robert B.
    Zheng, Bo
    ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS, 2023, 23 (01) : 789 - 807
  • [25] Top-down and bottom-up controls on periphyton biomass and productivity in Lake Tanganyika
    McIntyre, Peter B.
    Michel, Ellinor
    Olsgard, Michelle
    LIMNOLOGY AND OCEANOGRAPHY, 2006, 51 (03) : 1514 - 1523
  • [26] Up or down in space? Uniting the bottom-up versus top-down paradigm and spatial ecology
    Gripenberg, Sofia
    Roslin, Tomas
    OIKOS, 2007, 116 (02) : 181 - 188
  • [27] Top-down versus bottom-up control of autotrophic biomass - a meta-analysis on experiments with periphyton
    Hillebrand, H
    JOURNAL OF THE NORTH AMERICAN BENTHOLOGICAL SOCIETY, 2002, 21 (03): : 349 - 369
  • [28] Top-down estimates of biomass burning emissions of black carbon in the Western United States
    Mao, Y. H.
    Li, Q. B.
    Chen, D.
    Zhang, L.
    Hao, W. -M.
    Liou, K. -N.
    ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS, 2014, 14 (14) : 7195 - 7211
  • [29] Reconciling the differences between top-down and bottom-up estimates of nitrous oxide emissions for the US Corn Belt
    Griffis, T. J.
    Lee, X.
    Baker, J. M.
    Russelle, M. P.
    Zhang, X.
    Venterea, R.
    Millet, D. B.
    GLOBAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL CYCLES, 2013, 27 (03) : 746 - 754
  • [30] FUTURE CONSUMPTION AND EMISSIONS OF HYDROFLUOROCARBON (HFC) ALTERNATIVES TO CFCS - COMPARISON OF ESTIMATES USING TOP-DOWN END BOTTOM-UP APPROACHES
    MCCULLOCH, A
    ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL, 1995, 21 (04) : 353 - 362