English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

. The Tropospheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI), aboard the Sentinel-5Precursor (S5P) satellite, launched on 13 October 2017, providesmeasurements of atmospheric trace gases and of cloud and aerosol propertiesat an unprecedented spatial resolution ofapproximately 7×3.5  km 2 (approx.  5.5×3.5  km 2 as of 6 August 2019), achieving near-global coverage in 1 d. The retrieval of nitrogen dioxide ( NO2 ) concentrations is athree-step procedure: slant column density (SCD) retrieval, separation of theSCD in its stratospheric and tropospheric components, and conversion ofthese into vertical column densities. This study focusses on the TROPOMI NO2 SCD retrieval:the retrieval method used, the stability of the SCDs and the SCDuncertainties, and a comparison with the Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) NO2 SCDs. The statistical uncertainty, based on the spatial variability of the SCDsover a remote Pacific Ocean sector, is 8.63  µ mol m −2 for allpixels (9.45  µ mol m −2 for clear-sky pixels), which is verystable over time and some 30 % less than the long-term average overOMI–QA4ECV data (since the pixel size reduction TROPOMI uncertainties are ∼8  % larger). The SCD uncertainty reported by the differential optical absorption spectroscopy (DOAS) fit is about 10 % largerthan the statistical uncertainty, while for OMI–QA4ECV the DOAS uncertaintyis some 20 % larger than its statistical uncertainty. Comparison of the SCDs themselves over the Pacific Ocean, averaged over 1 month, shows that TROPOMI is about 5 % higher than OMI–QA4ECV, which seemsto be due mainly to the use of the so-called intensity offset correction inOMI–QA4ECV but not in TROPOMI: turning that correction off means about 5 %higher SCDs. The row-to-row variation in the SCDs of TROPOMI, the “stripe amplitude”, is2.15  µ mol m −2 , while for OMI–QA4ECV it is a factor of ∼2 ( ∼5 ) larger in 2005 (2018); still, a so-called stripecorrection of this non-physical across-track variation is useful for TROPOMIdata. In short, TROPOMI shows a superior performance compared with OMI–QA4ECVand operates as anticipated from instrument specifications. The TROPOMI data used in this study cover 30 April 2018 up to31 January 2020.

S5P TROPOMI NO&lt;sub&gt;2&lt;/sub&gt; slant column retrieval: method, stability, uncertainties and comparisons with OMI

S5P TROPOMI NO<sub>2</sub> slant column retrieval: method, stability, uncertainties and comparisons with OMI