Photolysis frequency of NO2: measurement and modeling during the International Photolysis Frequency Measurement and Modeling Intercomparison (IPMMI)
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.. 2003 Photolysis frequency of NO2: measurement and modeling during the International Photolysis Frequency Measurement and Modeling Intercomparison (IPMMI). Journal of Geophysical Research, 108 (D16), 8544. 13, pp. 10.1029/2002JD002932Full text not available from this repository.
 The photolysis frequency of NO2, j(NO2), 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( NO2). 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 NO2 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(NO2) 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(NO2) 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 NO2 cross-section data reported in the literature.
|Item Type:||Publication - Article|
|Digital Object Identifier (DOI):||10.1029/2002JD002932|
|Programmes:||BAS Programmes > Other|
|Additional Keywords:||photolysis, NO2 (nitrogen dioxide), radiative transfer, intercomparison|
|NORA Subject Terms:||Physics
|Date made live:||13 Feb 2012 14:09|
Actions (login required)