scholarly journals EarthCARE Aerosol and Cloud Layer and Column Products

2018 ◽  
Vol 176 ◽  
pp. 02007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ulla Wandinger ◽  
Anja Hünerbein ◽  
Stefan Horn ◽  
Florian Schneider ◽  
David Donovan ◽  
...  

We introduce the development of EarthCARE Level 2 layer products derived from profile measurements of the high-spectral-resolution lidar ATLID and column products obtained from combined information of ATLID and the Multi-Spectral Imager (MSI). Layer products include cloud top height as well as aerosol layer boundaries and mean optical properties along the satellite nadir track. Synergistic column products comprise cloud top height, Ångström exponent, and aerosol type both along-track and across the MSI swath.

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (12) ◽  
pp. 4317-4340 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. R. Rogers ◽  
M. A. Vaughan ◽  
C. A. Hostetler ◽  
S. P. Burton ◽  
R. A. Ferrare ◽  
...  

Abstract. The Cloud–Aerosol Lidar with Orthogonal Polarization (CALIOP) instrument onboard the Cloud–Aerosol Lidar and Pathfinder Satellite Observations (CALIPSO) spacecraft has provided over 8 yr of nearly continuous vertical profiling of Earth's atmosphere. In this paper we investigate the V3.01 and V3.02 CALIOP 532 nm aerosol layer optical depth (AOD) product (i.e the AOD of individual layers) and the column AOD product (i.e., the sum AOD of the complete column) using an extensive database of coincident measurements. The CALIOP AOD measurements and AOD uncertainty estimates are compared with collocated AOD measurements collected with the NASA High Spectral Resolution Lidar (HSRL) in the North American and Caribbean regions. In addition, the CALIOP aerosol lidar ratios are investigated using the HSRL measurements. In general, compared with the HSRL values, the CALIOP layer AOD are biased high by less than 50% for AOD < 0.3 with higher errors for higher AOD. Less than 60% of the HSRL AOD measurements are encompassed within the CALIOP layer 1 SD uncertainty range (around the CALIOP layer AOD), so an error estimate is created to encompass 68% of the HSRL data. Using this new metric, the CALIOP layer AOD error is estimated using the HSRL layer AOD as ±0.035 ± 0.05 · (HSRL layer AOD) at night and ±0.05 ± 0.05 · (HSRL layer AOD) during the daytime. Furthermore, the CALIOP layer AOD error is found to correlate with aerosol loading as well as aerosol subtype, with the AODs in marine and dust layers agreeing most closely with the HSRL values. The lidar ratios used by CALIOP for polluted dust, polluted continental, and biomass burning layers are larger than the values measured by the HSRL in the CALIOP layers, and therefore the AODs for these types retrieved by CALIOP were generally too large. We estimated the CALIOP column AOD error can be expressed as ±0.05 ± 0.07 · (HSRL column AOD) at night and ±0.08 ± 0.1 · (HSRL column AOD) during the daytime. Multiple sources of error contribute to both positive and negative errors in the CALIOP column AOD, including multiple layers in the column of different aerosol types, lidar ratio errors, cloud misclassification, and undetected aerosol layers. The undetected layers were further investigated and we found that the layer detection algorithm works well at night, although undetected aerosols in the free troposphere introduce a mean underestimate of 0.02 in the column AOD in the data set examined. The decreased signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) during the daytime led to poorer performance of the layer detection. This caused the daytime CALIOP column AOD to be less accurate than during the nighttime, because CALIOP frequently does not detect optically thin aerosol layers with AOD < 0.1. Given that the median vertical extent of aerosol detected within any column was 1.6 km during the nighttime and 1.5 km during the daytime, we can estimate the minimum extinction detection threshold to be 0.012 km−1 at night and 0.067 km−1 during the daytime in a layer median sense. This extensive validation of level 2 CALIOP AOD products extends previous validation studies to nighttime lighting conditions and provides independent measurements of the lidar ratio; thus, allowing the assessment of the effect on the CALIOP AOD of using inappropriate lidar ratio values in the extinction retrieval.


2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 6141-6204 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. R. Rogers ◽  
M. A. Vaughan ◽  
C. A. Hostetler ◽  
S. P. Burton ◽  
R. A. Ferrare ◽  
...  

Abstract. The Cloud-Aerosol Lidar with Orthogonal Polarization (CALIOP) instrument onboard the Cloud Aerosol Lidar and Pathfinder Satellite Observations (CALIPSO) spacecraft has provided over 8 years of nearly continuous vertical profiling of Earth's atmosphere. In this paper we investigate the CALIOP 532 nm aerosol layer optical depth (AOD) product, the AOD of individual layers, and the column AOD product, the sum AOD of the complete column, using an extensive database of coincident measurements. The CALIOP AOD measurements and AOD uncertainty estimates are compared with collocated AOD measurements collected with the NASA High Spectral Resolution Lidar (HSRL) in the North American and Caribbean regions. In addition, the CALIOP aerosol lidar ratios are investigated using the HSRL measurements. In general, compared with the HSRL values, the CALIOP layer AOD are biased high by less than 50% for AOD < 0.3 with higher errors for higher AOD. Less than 60% of the HSRL AOD measurements are encompassed within the CALIOP layer one-standard-deviation uncertainty range (around the CALIOP layer AOD), so an error estimate is created to encompass 68% of the HSRL data. Using this new metric, the CALIOP layer AOD error is estimated using the HSRL layer AOD as ± 0.035 ± 0.05 · (HSRL layer AOD) at night and ±0.05 ± 0.05 · (HSRL layer AOD) during the daytime. Furthermore, the CALIOP layer AOD error is found to correlate with aerosol loading as well as aerosol subtype, with the AODs in marine and dust layers agreeing most closely with the HSRL values. The lidar ratios used by CALIOP for polluted dust, polluted continental, and biomass burning layers are larger than the values measured by the HSRL in the CALIOP layers, and, therefore, the AODs for these types retrieved by CALIOP were generally too large. We estimated the CALIOP column AOD error can be expressed as ± 0.05 ± 0.07 · (HSRL column AOD) at night and ± 0.08 ± 0.1 · (HSRL column AOD) during the daytime. Multiple sources of error contribute to both positive and negative errors in the CALIOP column AOD, including multiple layers in the column of different aerosol types, lidar ratio errors, cloud misclassification, and undetected aerosol layers. The undetected layers were further investigated and we found that the layer detection algorithm works well at night, although undetected aerosols in the free troposphere introduce a mean underestimate of 0.02 in the column AOD in the dataset examined. The decreased SNR during the daytime led to poorer performance of the layer detection. This caused the daytime CALIOP column AOD to be less accurate than during the nighttime because CALIOP frequently does not detect optically thin aerosol layers with AOD < 0.1. Given that the median vertical extent of aerosol detected within any column was 1.6 km during the nighttime and 1.5 km during the daytime we can estimate the minimum extinction detection threshold to be 0.012 km−1 at night and 0.067 km−1 during the daytime in a layer median sense. This extensive validation of level 2 CALIOP aerosol layer optical depth products extends previous validation studies to nighttime lighting conditions and provides independent measurements of the lidar ratio, thus allowing the assessment of the effect on the CALIOP AOD of using inappropriate lidar ratio values in the extinction retrieval.


2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. P. Burton ◽  
R. A. Ferrare ◽  
C. A. Hostetler ◽  
J. W. Hair ◽  
R. R. Rogers ◽  
...  

Abstract. The NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) airborne High Spectral Resolution Lidar (HSRL) on the NASA B200 aircraft has acquired extensive datasets of aerosol extinction (532 nm), aerosol optical depth (AOD) (532 nm), backscatter (532 and 1064 nm), and depolarization (532 and 1064 nm) profiles during 18 field missions that have been conducted over North America since 2006. The lidar measurements of aerosol intensive parameters (lidar ratio, depolarization, backscatter color ratio, and spectral depolarization ratio) are shown to vary with location and aerosol type. A methodology based on observations of known aerosol types is used to qualitatively classify the extensive set of HSRL aerosol measurements into eight separate types. Several examples are presented showing how the aerosol intensive parameters vary with aerosol type and how these aerosols are classified according to this new methodology. The HSRL-based classification reveals vertical variability of aerosol types during the NASA ARCTAS field experiment conducted over Alaska and northwest Canada during 2008. In two examples derived from flights conducted during ARCTAS, the HSRL classification of biomass burning smoke is shown to be consistent with aerosol types derived from coincident airborne in situ measurements of particle size and composition. The HSRL retrievals of AOD and inferences of aerosol types are used to apportion AOD to aerosol type; results of this analysis are shown for several experiments.


2008 ◽  
Vol 47 (36) ◽  
pp. 6734 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johnathan W. Hair ◽  
Chris A. Hostetler ◽  
Anthony L. Cook ◽  
David B. Harper ◽  
Richard A. Ferrare ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (11) ◽  
pp. 13084 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dong Liu ◽  
Yongying Yang ◽  
Zhongtao Cheng ◽  
Hanlu Huang ◽  
Bo Zhang ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document