Search NASA⌕ Search

NASA NTRS · 20160010517

Combing Visible and Infrared Spectral Tests for Dust Identification

Abstract

The MODIS Dark Target aerosol algorithm over Ocean (DT-O) uses spectral reflectance in the visible, near-IR and SWIR wavelengths to determine aerosol optical depth (AOD) and Angstrom Exponent (AE). Even though DT-O does have "dust-like" models to choose from, dust is not identified a priori before inversion. The "dust-like" models are not true "dust models" as they are spherical and do not have enough absorption at short wavelengths, so retrieved AOD and AE for dusty regions tends to be biased. The inference of "dust" is based on postprocessing criteria for AOD and AE by users. Dust aerosol has known spectral signatures in the near-UV (Deep blue), visible, and thermal infrared (TIR) wavelength regions. Multiple dust detection algorithms have been developed over the years with varying detection capabilities. Here, we test a few of these dust detection algorithms, to determine whether they can be useful to help inform the choices made by the DT-O algorithm. We evaluate the following methods: The multichannel imager (MCI) algorithm uses spectral threshold tests in (0.47, 0.64, 0.86, 1.38, 2.26, 3.9, 11.0, 12.0 micrometer) channels and spatial uniformity test [Zhao et al., 2010]. The NOAA dust aerosol index (DAI) uses spectral contrast in the blue channels (412nm and 440nm) [Ciren and Kundragunta, 2014]. The MCI is already included as tests within the "Wisconsin" (MOD35) Cloud mask algorithm.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Zhou, Yaping, Levy, Robert, Kleidman, Richard, Remer, Lorraine, Mattoo, Shana. 2016-06-06. Combing Visible and Infrared Spectral Tests for Dust Identification. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20160010517

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related reports

Impact of Wildfires on Solar Resource Availability in California in a Changing Climate

Wildfires can emit large amounts of atmospheric particulate matters and influence not only air quality but also availability of photovoltaic (PV) generation due to scattering and absorption of solar radiation. Under anthropogenic changing climate, wildfire activity is projected to increase over western North America due to drier and warmer climate, implying increasing impact on solar resource and larger uncertainty in solar generation especially in regions with faster PV penetration. This study focuses on quantifying the impact of wildfires on aerosol optical depth (AOD) and thus solar resource over California using National Solar Radiation Database (NSRDB), developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). This assessment includes historical analysis and estimation of solar resource under wildfire scenarios (2020 wildfire and an enhanced wildfire scenario based on 2020 wildfires). Historical analysis for the period of July-October 2019/2020 (low/high fire activity period) shows that the averaged global horizontal irradiance (GHI) and direct normal irradiance (DNI) are reduced by about 30 and 90 W m-2 (5.6 and 15.3%), respectively, during high fire activity period. To create AOD dataset for enhanced fire scenario, 165% increase in burn area (in around 2050) is selected based on comprehensive literature review, which is further applied to the Fire INventory from NCAR (FINN) fire emission. WRF-Chem model with the enhanced FINN emissions is used to simulate and represent a preserving spatial distribution of burned areas and wildfire-emitted aerosols. Our initial analysis suggests that the"enhanced 2020 wildfire" AOD can increase by a factor of 1.3 - 2, which can significantly reduce solar irradiance and increase uncertainty in generation and reliability of power system in extreme wildfire events under a high solar penetration scenario. Overall, this study provides an estimate of the impacts of wildfires on solar resource to make informed decisions on reserve planning, generation scheduling, and reliability investments.

aerosol optical depth↗

Assessing Uncertainties of a Geophysical Approach to Estimate Surface Fine Particulate Matter Distributions from Satellite-Observed Aerosol Optical Depth

Health impact analyses are increasingly tapping the broad spatial coverage of satellite aerosol optical depth (AOD) products to estimate human exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5). We use a forward geophysical approach to derive ground-level PM2.5 distributions from satellite AOD at 1 km2(exp) resolution for 2011 over the northeastern US by applying relationships between surface PM2.5 and column AOD (calculated offline from speciated mass distributions) from a regional air quality model (CMAQ; 12×12 km2(exp) horizontal resolution). Seasonal average satellite-derived PM2.5 reveals more spatial detail and best captures observed surface PM2.5 levels during summer. At the daily scale, however, satellite-derived PM2.5 is not only subject to measurement uncertainties from satellite instruments, but more importantly to uncertainties in the relationship between surface PM2.5 and column AOD. Using 11 ground-based AOD measurements within 10 km of surface PM2.5 monitors, we show that uncertainties in modeled PM2.5∕AOD can explain more than 70 % of the spatial and temporal variance in the total uncertainty in daily satellite-derived PM2.5 evaluated at PM2.5 monitors. This finding implies that a successful geophysical approach to deriving daily PM2.5 from satellite AOD requires model skill at capturing day-to-day variations in PM2.5∕AOD relationships. Overall, we estimate that uncertainties in the modeled PM2.5∕AOD lead to an error of 11 µg m−3(exp) in daily satellite-derived PM2.5, and uncertainties in satellite AOD lead to an error of 8 µg m−3(exp). Using multi-platform ground, airborne, and radiosonde measurements, we show that uncertainties of modeled PM2.5∕AOD are mainly driven by model uncertainties in aerosol column mass and speciation, while model representation of relative humidity and aerosol vertical profile shape contributes some systematic biases. The parameterization of aerosol optical properties, which determines the mass extinction efficiency, also contributes to random uncertainty, with the size distribution being the largest source of uncertainty and hygroscopicity of inorganic salt the second largest. Future efforts to reduce uncertainty in geophysical approaches to derive surface PM2.5 from satellite AOD would thus benefit from improving model representation of aerosol vertical distribution and aerosol optical properties, to narrow uncertainty in satellite-derived PM2.5.

aerosol optical depth↗

Refined Use of Satellite Aerosol Optical Depth Snapshots to Constrain Biomass Burning Emissions in the GOCART Model

Simulations of biomass burning (BB) emissions in global chemistry and aerosol transport models depend on external inventories, which provide location and strength of burning aerosol sources. Our previous work (Petrenko et al., 2012) shows that satellite snapshots of aerosol optical depth (AOD) near the emitted smoke plume can be used to constrain model-simulated AOD, and effectively, the assumed source strength. We now refine the satellite-snapshot method and investigate applying simple multiplicative emission correction factors for the widely used Global Fire Emission Database version 3 (GFEDv3) emission inventory can achieve regional-scale consistency between MODIS AOD snapshots and the Goddard Chemistry Aerosol Radiation and Transport (GOCART) model. The model and satellite AOD are compared over a set of more than 900 BB cases observed by the MODIS instrument during the 2004, and 2006-2008 biomass burning seasons. The AOD comparison presented here shows that regional discrepancies between the model and satellite are diverse around the globe yet quite consistent within most ecosystems. Additional analysis of including small fire emission correction shows the complimentary nature of correcting for source strength and adding missing sources, and also indicates that in some regions other factors may be significant in explaining model-satellite discrepancies. This work sets the stage for a larger intercomparison within the Aerosol Inter-comparisons between Observations and Models (AeroCom) multi-model biomass burning experiment. We discuss here some of the other possible factors affecting the remaining discrepancies between model simulations and observations, but await comparisons with other AeroCom models to draw further conclusions.

aerosol optical depth↗