Constraining Aerosol Phase Function Using Dual‐View Geostationary Satellites. Issue 20 (12th October 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bian, Qijing; Kreidenweis, Sonia; Chiu, J. Christine; Miller, Steven D.; Xu, Xiaoguang; Wang, Jun; Kahn, Ralph A.; Limbacher, James A.; Remer, Lorraine A.; Levy, Robert C.
• Is Part Of: Journal of geophysical research. Volume 126:Issue 20(2021)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2021-10-12
• Subjects: Atmospheric physics -- Periodicals; Geophysics -- Periodicals; 551.5
• DOI: 10.1029/2021JD035209
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2169-897X

Abstract

Abstract: Passive satellite observations play an important role in monitoring global aerosol properties and helping quantify aerosol radiative forcing in the climate system. The quality of aerosol retrievals from the satellite platform relies on well‐calibrated radiance measurements from multiple spectral bands, and the availability of appropriate particle optical models. Inaccurate scattering phase function assumptions can introduce large retrieval errors. The high‐spatial resolution, dual‐view observations from the advanced baseline imagers onboard the two most recent geostationary operational environmental satellites (GOES), East and West, provide a unique opportunity to better constrain the aerosol phase function. Using dual GOES reflectance measurements for a dust event in the Gulf of Mexico in 2019, we demonstrate how a first‐guess phase function can be reconstructed by considering the variations in observed scattering angles throughout the day. Using the reconstructed phase function, aerosol optical depth retrievals from the two satellites are self‐consistent and agree well with surface‐based optical depth estimates. We evaluate our methodology and reconstructed phase function against independent retrievals made from low‐Earth‐orbit multi‐angle observations for a different dust event in 2020. Our new aerosol optical depth retrievals have a root‐mean‐square‐difference of 0.019–0.047. Furthermore, the retrievals between the two geostationary satellites for this case agree within about 0.059 ± 0.072, as compared to larger discrepancies between the operational GOES products at times, which do not employ the dual‐view technique. Key Points: Dual, opposing‐view geostationary satellite observations help constrain structural properties of dust scattering phase function The newly reconstructed phase function produces consistent aerosol optical depth retrievals between the two satellites The retrievals between the two satellites agree within 0.059 ± 0.072, compared to 0.157 ± 0.084 in single view retrievals