Does GOSAT capture the true seasonal cycle of XCO 2?

Abstract

The seasonal cycle accounts for a dominant mode of total column CO 2 (XCO 2) annual variability and is connected to CO 2 uptake and release; it thus represents an important variable to accurately measure from space. We quantitatively evaluate the XCO 2 seasonal cycle of the Greenhouse Gases Observing Satellite (GOSAT) observations from the Atmospheric CO 2 Observations from Space (ACOS) retrieval system, and compare average regional seasonal cycle features to those directly measured by the Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON). We analyze the mean seasonal cycle amplitude, dates of maximum and minimum XCO 2, as well as the regional growth rates in XCO 2 through the fitted trend over several years. We find that GOSAT generally captures the seasonal cycle amplitude within 1.0 ppm accuracy compared to TCCON, except in Europe, where the difference exceeds 1.0 ppm at two sites, and the amplitude captured by GOSAT is generally shallower compared to TCCON. This bias over Europe is not as large for the other GOSAT retrieval algorithms (NIES v02.21, RemoTeC v2.35, UoL v5.1, and NIES PPDF-S v.02.11), although they have significant biases at other sites. The ACOS bias correction was found to partially explain the shallow amplitude over Europe. The impact of the TCCON retrieval version, co-location method, and aerosol changes in the ACOS algorithm were also tested, and found to be few tenths-of-a-ppm and mostly non-systematic. We find generally good agreement in the date of minimum XCO 2 between ACOS and TCCON, but ACOS generally infers a date of maximum XCO 2 2–3 weeks later than TCCON. We further analyze the latitudinal dependence of the seasonal cycle amplitude throughout the Northern Hemisphere, and compare the dependence to that predicted by current optimized models that assimilate in-situ measurements of CO 2. In the zonal averages, GOSAT agrees with the models to within 1.4 ppm, depending on the model and latitude. We also show that the seasonal cycle of XCO 2 depends on longitude especially at the mid-latitudes: the amplitude of GOSAT XCO 2 doubles from West US to East Asia at 45–50° N, which is only partially shown by the models. In general, we find that model-to-model differences can be larger than GOSAT-to-model differences. These results suggest that GOSAT retrievals of the XCO 2 seasonal cycle may be sufficiently accurate to evaluate land surface models in regions with significant discrepancies between the models.