EarthRef.org Reference Database (ERR)
Development and Maintenance by the EarthRef.org Database Team

Detailed Reference Information
Shetter et al. 2003
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. and 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: doi: 10.1029/2002JD002932. issn: 0148-0227.

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.

BACKGROUND DATA FILES

Abstract

Keywords
Atmospheric Composition and Structure, Transmission and scattering of radiation, Atmospheric Composition and Structure, Troposphere--composition and chemistry, Atmospheric Composition and Structure, Instruments and techniques
Journal
Journal of Geophysical Research
http://www.agu.org/journals/jb/
Publisher
American Geophysical Union
2000 Florida Avenue N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20009-1277
USA
1-202-462-6900
1-202-328-0566
service@agu.org
Click to clear formClick to return to previous pageClick to submit