Coverage‐Limiting Factors Affecting the Monitoring of Urban Emissions With the Orbiting Carbon Observatory Missions
A growing number of space‐based platforms, like the Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO‐2 and OCO‐3) missions, observe Earth's atmospheric carbon dioxide CO2 $\left(\mathrm{C}{\mathrm{O}}_{\mathrm{2}}\right)$ concentrations with high accuracy and precision. With the original goal of constraining n...
Saved in:
| Published in: | AGU advances Vol. 6; no. 3 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
01.06.2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| ISSN: | 2576-604X, 2576-604X |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | A growing number of space‐based platforms, like the Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO‐2 and OCO‐3) missions, observe Earth's atmospheric carbon dioxide CO2 $\left(\mathrm{C}{\mathrm{O}}_{\mathrm{2}}\right)$ concentrations with high accuracy and precision. With the original goal of constraining natural CO2 $\mathrm{C}{\mathrm{O}}_{\mathrm{2}}$ fluxes at regional to global scales, these instruments have now become popular tools for studying anthropogenic emissions from cities around the world. As signatories of the Paris Climate Agreement are expected to produce nationally determined contributions (NDC) to global carbon emissions, continued monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) of these estimates will be essential. While the use of OCO‐2 and OCO‐3 missions for MRV purposes is increasing, several physical and environmental factors limit data collection. Using the continental United States as a test case, the influences of orbital mechanics and environmental factors on local‐ and national‐level emissions estimates are explored through a series of linear and multi‐linear regressions to predict each instrument's effective revisit time. Results suggest that, due to environmental factors, western regions of the U.S. are more likely to be constrained at a sub‐annual scale than eastern regions, with effective instrument revisit times <30 ${< } 30$ days. East coast cities have effective revisit times >30 ${ >} 30$ days; however, this varies seasonally. The characteristics of the instruments' orbits also vary the frequency of urban observations in both space and time. Implications for observation‐derived emission estimates at local and national scales and remedies for such shortcomings in future missions are discussed.
Plain Language Summary
Carbon dioxide CO2 $\left(\mathrm{C}{\mathrm{O}}_{\mathrm{2}}\right)$ is a key driver of global climate change and the ability to monitor human‐based emissions of this gas is crucial for quantifying the effectiveness of carbon‐reduction policies. In recent years, space‐based platforms have provided atmospheric CO2 $\mathrm{C}{\mathrm{O}}_{\mathrm{2}}$ observations with near‐global coverage and efforts to ingest these data into local, regional, and national carbon accounting methodologies have been successful. However, space‐based observations are influenced by physical and environmental factors that affect their coverage. This study investigated these factors and determined that the time needed to constrain emissions varies among cities within the United States. Key factors that affect these space‐based platforms include the type of orbit they are in, the location of clouds in Earth's atmosphere, and the distribution of atmospheric aerosols. Results show that cities on the west coast are more frequently observed than cities in the northeast. These limitations should be considered when cities are seeking to monitor their emission reduction efforts with space‐based technologies.
Key Points
Orbital mechanics and environmental factors limit the ability of OCO‐2 and OCO‐3 to collect data in space and time
Understanding when and where these effects are most prevalent informs city‐level monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) goals
Our findings can inform local MRV efforts around the world, providing more realistic spatiotemporal resolutions when using space‐based data |
|---|---|
| Bibliography: | Peer Review The peer review history for this article is available as a PDF in the Supporting Information. |
| ISSN: | 2576-604X 2576-604X |
| DOI: | 10.1029/2024AV001630 |