Creating a consistent dark-target aerosol optical depth record from MODIS and VIIRS

Tuesday, 16 December 2014
Robert C Levy1, Shana Mattoo1,2, Leigh A Munchak1,2, Falguni Patadia1,3 and Robert Holz4, (1)NASA/Goddard Space Flight Ctr, Greenbelt, MD, United States, (2)Science Systems and Applications, Inc., Lanham, MD, United States, (3)Morgan State University, Greenbelt, MD, United States, (4)UW SSEC, Madison, WI, United States
To answer fundamental questions about our changing climate, we must quantify how aerosols are changing over time. This is a global question that requires regional characterization, because in some places aerosols are increasing and in others they are decreasing. Although NASA’s Moderate resolution Imaging Spectrometer (MODIS) sensors have provided quantitative information about global aerosol optical depth (AOD) for more than a decade, the creation of an aerosol climate data record (CDR) requires consistent multi-decadal data. With the Visible and Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS) aboard Suomi-NPP, there is potential to continue the MODIS aerosol time series. Yet, since the operational VIIRS aerosol product is produced by a different algorithm, it is not suitable to continue MODIS to create an aerosol CDR. Therefore, we have applied the MODIS Dark-target (DT) algorithm to VIIRS observations, taking into account the slight differences in wavelengths, resolutions and geometries between the two sensors. More specifically, we applied the MODIS DT algorithm to a dataset known as the Intermediate File Format (IFF), created by the University of Wisconsin. The IFF is produced for both MODIS and VIIRS, with the idea that a single (MODIS-like or ML) algorithm can be run either dataset, which can in turn be compared to the MODIS Collection 6 (M6) retrieval that is run on standard MODIS data. After minimizing or characterizing remaining differences between ML on MODIS-IFF (or ML-M) and M6, we have performed apples-to-apples comparison between ML-M and ML on VIIRS IFF (ML-V). Examples of these comparisons include time series of monthly global mean, monthly and seasonal global maps at 1° resolution, and collocations as compared to AERONET. We concentrate on the overlapping period January 2012 through June 2014, and discuss some of the remaining discrepancies between the ML-V and ML-M datasets.