Open AccessPhotolysis frequency of NO 2 : Measurement and modeling during the International Photolysis Frequency Measurement and Modeling Intercomparison (IPMMI)
Author(s) -
Shetter R. E.,
Junkermann W.,
Swartz W. H.,
Frost G. J.,
Crawford J. H.,
Lefer B. L.,
Barrick J. D.,
Hall S. R.,
Hofzumahaus A.,
Bais A.,
Calvert J. G.,
Cantrell C. A.,
Madronich S.,
Müller M.,
Kraus A.,
Monks P. S.,
Edwards G. D.,
McKenzie R.,
Johnston P.,
Schmitt R.,
Griffioen E.,
Krol M.,
Kylling A.,
Dickerson R. R.,
Lloyd S. A.,
Martin T.,
Gardiner B.,
Mayer B.,
Pfister G.,
Röth E. P.,
Koepke P.,
Ruggaber A.,
Schwander H.,
van Weele M.
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
journal of geophysical research: atmospheres
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.67
H-Index - 298
eISSN - 2156-2202
pISSN - 0148-0227
DOI - 10.1029/2002jd002932
Subject(s) - photodissociation , radiative transfer , atmospheric radiative transfer codes , environmental science , actinometer , stratosphere , troposphere , atmospheric sciences , computational physics , remote sensing , meteorology , chemistry , physics , optics , plasma , geology , photochemistry , quantum mechanics
The photolysis frequency of NO 2 , j (NO 2 ), was determined by various instrumental techniques and calculated using a number of radiative transfer models for 4 days in June 1998 at the International Photolysis Frequency Measurement and Modeling Intercomparison (IPMMI) in Boulder, Colorado. Experimental techniques included filter radiometry, spectroradiometry, and chemical actinometry. Eight research groups participated using 14 different instruments to determine j (NO 2 ). The blind intercomparison experimental results were submitted to the independent experimental referee and have been compared. Also submitted to the modeling referee were the results of NO 2 photolysis frequency calculations for the same time period made by 13 groups who used 15 different radiative transfer models. These model results have been compared with each other and also with the experimental results. The model calculation of clear‐sky j (NO 2 ) values can yield accurate results, but the accuracy depends heavily on the accuracy of the molecular parameters used in these calculations. The instrumental measurements of j (NO 2 ) agree to within the uncertainty of the individual instruments and indicate the stated uncertainties in the instruments or the uncertainties of the molecular parameters may be overestimated. This agreement improves somewhat with the use of more recent NO 2 cross‐section data reported in the literature.