Sensitivity of aerosol optical depth trends using long-term measurements of different sun photometers
This work aims to assess differences in the aerosol optical depth (AOD) trend estimations when using high-quality AOD measurements from two different instruments with different technical characteristics and operational (e.g. measurement frequency), calibration and processing protocols. The different...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Copernicus
2022
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11850/576926 https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-b-000576926 |
| Summary: | This work aims to assess differences in the aerosol optical depth (AOD) trend estimations when using high-quality AOD measurements from two different instruments with different technical characteristics and operational (e.g. measurement frequency), calibration and processing protocols. The different types of sun photometers are the CIMEL that is part of AERONET (AErosol RObotic NETwork) and a precision filter radiometer (PFR) that is part of the Global Atmosphere Watch Precision Filter Radiometer network. The analysis operated for two wavelengths (500 and 501 and 870 and 862 nm for CIMEL–PFR) in Davos, Switzerland, for the period 2007–2019. For the synchronous AOD measurements, more than 95 % of the CIMEL–PFR AOD differences are within the WMO-accepted limits, showing very good measurement agreement and homogeneity in calibration and post-correction procedures. AOD trends per decade in AOD for Davos for the 13-year period of analysis were approximately −0.017 and −0.007 per decade for 501 and 862 nm (PFR), while the CIMEL–PFR trend differences have been found 0.0005 and 0.0003, respectively. The linear trend difference for 870 and 862 nm is larger than the linear fit standard error. When calculating monthly AODs using all PFR data (higher instrument frequency) and comparing them with the PFR measurements that are synchronous with CIMEL, the trend differences are smaller than the standard error. Linear trend differences of the CIMEL and PFR time series presented here are not within the calculated trend uncertainties (based on measurement uncertainty) for 870 and 862 nm. On the contrary, PFR trends, when comparing high- and low-measurement-frequency datasets are within such an uncertainty estimation for both wavelengths. Finally, for time-varying trends all trend differences are well within the calculated trend uncertainties. ISSN:1867-1381 ISSN:1867-8548 |
|---|