Recently we’ve been discussing products from the AIRS satellite instrument (Atmospheric InfraRed Sounder) onboard the Aqua satellite. There has been quite a bit of interest in this because unlike the satellite temperature record that goes back to 1979, until now we have not had a complementary satellite derived CO2 record. We are about to have one, and much more.
Click image to see a slide show with this graphic in it (PDF)
I wrote to the AIRS team to inquire about when the satellite data on CO2, and other relevant products might be made public. All that has been released so far are occasional snippets of data and imagery, such as the short slide show above.
Here is the response I got from them:
Thank you for your interest in the AIRS CO2 data product.
We are still in the validation phase in developing this new product.
It will be part of the Version 6 data release, but for now those of us
working on it are intensively validating our results using in situ
measurements by aircraft and upward looking fourier transform IR
spectrometers (TCCON network and others).
The AIRS CO2 product is for the mid-troposphere. For quite some time
it was accepted theory that CO2 in the free troposphere is
“well-mixed”, i.e., the difference that might be seen at that altitude
would be a fraction of a part per million (ppmv). Models, which
ingest surface fluxes from known sources, have long predicted a smooth
(small)variation with latitude, with steadily diminishing CO2 as you
move farther South. We have a “two-planet” planet – land in the
Northern Hemisphere and ocean in the Southern Hemisphere. Synoptic
weather in the NH can be seen to control the distribution of CO2 in
the free troposphere. The SH large-scale action is mostly zonal.
Since our results are at variance with what is commonly accepted by he
scientific community, we must work especially hard to validate them.
We have just had a paper accepted by Geophysical Research Letters that
will be published in 6-8 weeks, and are preparing a validation paper.
We have global CO2 retrievals (day and night, over ocean and land, for
clear and cloudy scenes) spanning the time period from Sept 2002 to
the present. Those data will be released as we satisfactorily
validate them.
I suggest you Google “Carbon Tracker” for some interesting maps
generated using model atmospheres and data for CO2 sources. It shows
the CO2 weather in the lowest part of the atmosphere.
The big picture is that CO2 sources and sinks are in the planetary
boundary layer. Global circulation of CO2 occurs in the free
troposphere. Thus, PBL is local whereas free troposphere is
international.
———-
AIRS Team
With the suggestion of using the Google “Carbon tracker”, some readers might look at this response as a “dodge”. I don’t see it that way at all. Why? Because they are actively engaged in proving the instrument by doing a series of aircraft based measurements to validate the data the instrument on the spacecraft is seeing.
For example, read this paper from them:
First Satellite Remote Sounding of the Global Mid-Tropospheric CO2
These graphics show how hard they are working to validate the data from in situ measurements using airborne flask samples sent to a lab spectrometer:
…and the results of the flask sample measurements:
Read more about this here in this paper (PDF)
Also if you read between the lines in their response to me, particularly this paragraph:
Since our results are at variance with what is commonly accepted by he
scientific community, we must work especially hard to validate them.
We have just had a paper accepted by Geophysical Research Letters that
will be published in 6-8 weeks, and are preparing a validation paper.
I’d say that waiting that 6-8 weeks for the paper and supporting data will be well worth it. The working title of the upcoming paper is: “Satellite Remote Sounding of Mid-Tropospheric CO2” and the lead author is Moustafa T. Chahine.
Good things come to those who wait.
Isn’t Roy Spencer on the AIRS satelite team?
JamesG, et al:
“I hope their aircraft measures differences in altitude too. Other aircraft measurements…”
We’ll have to wait and see, but it’s hard to imagine that the measurements aren’t tagged or linked to either latitude/longitude/height or ECEF coordinates. That’s one of the beauties of GPS, the linking of positional data and time stamps to the underlying data. And where better to have good GPS positioning than in an airplane at altitude 🙂
Apropos of almost nothing but just an observation. Chinese, with nearly three thousand years of carefully recorded weather data, have always differentiated in their language between the sensation of heat from actual temperature, and the oppressive feeling of heat from humidty. In Chinese Mandarin you state the temperature is hot by saying “Re” but you can also say it feels hot by saying “Shi.” (I am too lazy tonight to round up a dictionary and pull up just which of the 86 characters pronounced “shi” is that one. If anyone really wants to know ask and I will bestir myself.)
In the same way the Chinese language distinguishes between hot in temperature and “hot” in sensation from spices by two different words. (“Re” again, or “La” for spicy).
As a good psycho-linguist I have to point out that the development of a people’s language is a combination of the interaction of their environment with their culture. Hence the difference between the specific Inuit words for snow in its different incarnations (new, old, light, heavy, powdery, dense, etc.) and the many distinct Arabic words for camel (male, female, young, old, able to breed, barren, good, bad, etc.)
After many years of studying Chinese I continue to be amused by the fine gradations of certain words for things that are smelt, heard, felt, or experienced whereas actual physical things have very gross word usage. For instance,shades of color are very poorly defined and the only color of blue you can use with one word is the sky on a clear day and the only real word for green is the green of a Mongolian grassland after a recent rain. Black, red, and white have individual names everything else has to be a description.
Ta,
John in a philosophical mood.
So if the result is validated, we find that Co2 varies from place to place by up to 3%, as opposed to the less than 1% that scientists had previously supposed?
REPLY: It may be more than that, there’s vertical inhomgeneity as well. We’ll just have to wait and see. – Anthony
Correct me if I’m wrong but the satellite data is being matched with an airplane ride at the same altitude that the satellite data is taken from. CO2 measures from the airplane are cross matched with the satellite data to see if CO2 flask measures on the airplane are the same as the beam signature pointed from the satellite into the troposphere. The stairstep graphs are measures taken closer to the ground (IE where the outgassing and sink areas are). You won’t necessarily see the stairstep graph from the troposphere results if the potential new theory is right: CO2 is not well mixed in the troposphere where it has the greatest potential to affect temperature. And then, while there may be zonal or regional trends since 2002, the next step will be to determine just how the CO2 got there in this globby, uneven kind of mixed pattern, and why trends are showing up (a hunch: some will be up, some will be down, just like ozone). Don’t forget that cosmic rays produce 14CO2. With solar cycles, one might expect to see an increase in 14CO2 reflected in the overall CO2 measure for a troposphere area during minimums and then only when cosmic rays are hitting Earth during minimums in these areas.
This could explain a whole, whole bunch about that “83 year time lag” between the ice cores and Mauna Loa. Yep, it’s a bunch of bull pucky. NEXT!!!!!!!
[…] Watts Up With That? – 31 July, 2008 _____________________________ […]
Basil (12:51:13) :
“”This lead me to here:
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/carbontracker/tseries.php?type=mr#imagetable
Looks to me like it is in rough agreement with what we see in the traditional Mauna Loa sawtooth graph.””
This is good for the Mauna Loa graphs. The saw tooth is obviously the earth breathing in and out . Human CO2 output would look like that plotted in seconds.
From the link you provided, I saw that the Indonesia results are rather out of the mold, more constant than saw tooth and large discrepancies with models, and I wonder whether this is true of all tropics or what.
from the pdf link above:
“Our results demonstrate that satellite derived CO2 data which track weather
patterns can also be used to study the vertical and horizontal transports in the Earth’s atmosphere. Since no model information were used to derive the distribution of CO2 the results discussed in this paper are independent of models and thus provide an objective means to assess and improve the accuracy and performance of current three-dimensional chemistry transport models.”
It is important that the results of AIRS do not depend on models. They then can be used to validate surface data, in the engineering sense of the word, rather than the other way around that the scientific community has been forced fed.
It is the data that trumps models and not the other way around, which is the common misconception in the dominant groups of climatology.
They’re taking an awful long time to validate the accuracy of the onboard instrumentation…considering it’s lifetime is projected only through 2009. It was launched in ’02, and if the device still has’nt passed IOT, to my way of thinking, this means it never will.
A lot of world government policy has been based on the “variance” to the new data.
I am not surprised they are being careful.
Another crucial to AGW parameter that is not well studied and I have not seen any satellite maps is the albedo. In a toy weather model in Junkscience.com a tiny change in albedo makes large changes in temperatures.
From a link provided by L.Svalgaard in solarcycle24.com I see that the lack of measurement and the relience on modelint is taken for granted.
”
http://www.iac.es/galeria/epalle/reprints/Palle_etal_EOS_2006.pdf
Does somebody know of albedo maps from satellites?
“To derive ideal estimates of the Earth’s
reflectance, it would be necessary to observe
reflected radiances at all angles from
all points on the Earth, which is technically
impossible.Therefore, all measurements from
which albedo can be inferred require assumptions
and/or modeling. During recent
decades, there have been some efforts to
measure the Earth’s albedo from space; but
a long-term data series of the Earth’s albedo
is difficult to obtain due to the complicated
intercalibration of the different satellite data
and the long gaps in the series. However, the
availability of different albedo (and cloud)
databases, and their intercomparisons, can
help to constrain the assumptions necessary
to derive estimates”
It is encouraging that the AIR has been cleared at the moment at least , for CO2. Maybe a similar sleuthing should start for albedo?
What I “hate” ( as in “I hate windows vista”) in this climate bibliography I have immersed myself in the last months, is the assumption that data is malleable and disposable when it does not agree with our standards, particularly multimillion expensive satellite data. The very concept of “anomaly” raises my hackles, because it presupposes what “omaly” is. ( being greek the word has more connotations that you would care to learn).
Sorry, that was a link given in the thread Svalgaard #8 in Climate Audit.
They should mount standardized CO2, temp and water vapour sensors on all (or many) commercial planes flying around the world recording levels during all phases of the flights. This would really get us lots of data. They have, after all been doing similar things (temp, salinity etc) with ships at sea for over 100 years now. Imagine all the cross checking we could do then against satellite data, we’d also have partial 3D maps over continental masses which would be quite useful i’d imagine.
anna v
I believe it is possible to gain some idea of albedo from “earthshine”.
Of course today would be problematical with the eclipse. 🙂
(anna v) “a tiny change in albedo makes large changes in temperatures.”
That is a subject which I have been researching for the last year, and for something so basic, there is almost no reliable data available.
When Anthony mentioned measuring Earthshine as a method of measuring albedo last year, I got involved. Instead of using neutral density filters like NASA was doing, I approached the problem from another direction.
http://www.bbso.njit.edu/Research/EarthShine/espaper/earthshine_proposal.html
In recent years, software has been developed to combine multiple images obtained using different exposure lenghts. High dynamic range imaging allowed me to measure Earthshine and this is how I attacked the problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_dynamic_range_imaging
Why such a basic and important measurement as albedo is not being tracked every day, is an absolute mystery to me.
albedo maps from satellites;
http://www.exploratorium.edu/climate/atmosphere/data2.html
This latest AQUA result is promising; AGW relies on the myth of average temperature and a uniform mixing of CO2; with uniform mixing the concept of atmospheric opaqueness can be argued along with the heat-trapping lag created vertical expansion of the non-outward radiative portion of the atmosphere; with uneven mixing, if one accepts that some atmospheric heating is done by CO2, then radiative windows exist and thermal gradient caused weather allows the quick dispersal of any extra heat and balance to be maintained. This has potential.
H. Smith (01:22:00) :
“They should mount standardized CO2, temp and water vapour sensors on all (or many) commercial planes flying around the world recording levels during all phases of the flights.”
The drawback is that jet aircraft tend to fly at the most efficient altitude. Something about minimizing fuel expense. Variances include stuff like avoiding turbulence and other aircraft.
Once upon a time in a debate about public vs. private weather measurments I suggested that FedEx could outfit cargo planes with GPS-guided gliders and release a few on transcontinental flights, sorta like how radiosondes are released into hurricanes. The gliders could then fly themselves to a nearby FedEx distribution center collecting a weather profile on the way down. Then a quick trip to the airport and they’d be ready for another flight.
Distribution easy, data transport easy, good PR, the only issues I see are FAA approval and that it would be nice to get data from the tropopause instead of just flight level. Perhaps model II could be designed to seek out thunderstorm updrafts, and then fly well away from the storm column.
“They have, after all been doing similar things (temp, salinity etc) with ships at sea for over 100 years now. ‘
Yes, and those measurements have been called into questions. Unless the measurements are a primary mission, and not an add on to the flight crews duties, I don’t see how you can do the research down to a few PPM’s or a fraction of a degree.
I believe he’s the team leader, but I could be mistaken.
REPLY: He’s on UAH as team leader but not on AIRS, AFAIK – Anthony
Ahhh Basil, if it is soooooooo well mixed, why can’t we have some of the measuring stations convenient to us. You know, like at airports next to the temperature measurement stations??
Don’t they have the CO2 stations far away from major anthropogenic sources?? Don’t they have little RULES for acceptance of measurements, like, the reading must be within their parameters for 6 hours before it is accepted??
Don’t they toss out a significant number of days readings and interpolate for their graphs??
I would LOVE to see their raw data, by day, annotated with know Mona Loa eruptions, to see how well even Mona Loa matches WELL MIXED!!!!!
Can anyone imagine throwing out otherwise valid temp data because it doesn’t fall within narrow preconceptions?
Oh yeah, we can just check the changes in the GISS data!!
anna v, thank you for the new term: modelint. Cause that is just about what we have at the moment from model data. Lint.
From Roger Pielke’s site:
The Draft report Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States has been released. There is an announcement of the Public Review Draft of the Unified Synthesis Product Global Climate Change in the United States. Public comments are due by August 14 2008 [Climate Science readers are urged to submit comments].
This US Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) report is Co-Chaired by Thomas R. Karl, Jerry Melillo, and Thomas C. Peterson with the Senior Editor and Synthesis Team Coordinator Susan J. Hassol. These are the same individuals who have led past CCSP reports (e.g. see and see), with Tom Karl and Tom Peterson deliberately excluding scientific perspectives that differ from their viewpoints (i.e. see). Susan Hassol was writer of the HBO Special “To Hot Not to Handle”. This HBO show clearly had a specific perspective on the climate change issue, and lacked a balanced perspective. The HBO Executive Producer was Ms. Laurie David.
REPLY: I’ve been reading that report, NCDC has gone off the deep end. – Anthony
It also takes a lot of guts to go against the Bush manipulation machine:
http://lamarguerite.wordpress.com/2008/04/24/environmental-scientists-not-allowed-to-speak-their-truth/
REPLY: …or the Gore manipulation machine.
cohenite (05:29:27) :
“albedo maps from satellites;
http://www.exploratorium.edu/climate/atmosphere/data2.html
This latest AQUA result is promising; ”
Thanks for the link. It is interesting, but “latest”? it is not. It says it is from 2000.
Really, even if one is not coming from a conspiracy prone culture ( mine is greek, and three greeks make a conspiracy 😉 ) something is very fishy when multimillion government projects give eight year old indicative plots instead of a continuous stream of maps from measurements. Forces one to thinka All these are NASA, and Hansen is BIG in NASA. Maybe there is a strangle hold on promotions? funding? What is going on?
Pamela Gray (09:08:20) :
“anna v, thank you for the new term: modelint. Cause that is just about what we have at the moment from model data. Lint.”
You know the saying ” a slipping tongue says the truth”
we should have ” as skidding finger prints the truth” 🙂 .