Objective evaluation of surface- and satellite-driven carbon dioxide  atmospheric inversions

Chevallier, Frédéric; Remaud, Marine; O'Dell, Christopher W.; Baker, David; Peylin, Philippe; Cozic, Anne

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-14233-2019

Articles | Volume 19, issue 22

Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 14233–14251, 2019

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-14233-2019

© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 14233–14251, 2019

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-14233-2019

© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 19, issue 22

Research article 26 Nov 2019

Research article | 26 Nov 2019

Objective evaluation of surface- and satellite-driven carbon dioxide atmospheric inversions

Frédéric Chevallier et al.

Download

Final revised paper (published on 26 Nov 2019)
Preprint (discussion started on 15 Apr 2019)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Review Chevallier 2019', Anonymous Referee #1, 05 Jun 2019
RC2: 'Review', Anonymous Referee #2, 07 Jun 2019
RC3: 'Interactive comment on“Objective evaluation ofsurface- and satellite-driven CO2atmosphericinversions”byFrédéric Chevallier et al.', Anonymous Referee #3, 24 Jun 2019
AC1: 'Response to referees' comments', Frederic Chevallier, 09 Jul 2019

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

AR by Frederic Chevallier on behalf of the Authors (09 Jul 2019) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (01 Aug 2019) by Federico Fierli

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (14 Aug 2019)

RR by Anonymous Referee #3 (19 Aug 2019)

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (20 Sep 2019) by Federico Fierli

Dear Dr. Chevallier,

Firstly I would apologize for the long revision process. This is due to the difficulty in gathering reviews and the need to provide an Editor technical evaluation before publication you will find here.
I support publication for the paper, that is of definitely high quality, after addressing a final revision process that includes reviewer feedback and the Editor review that I may upload later on the ACP system.
Do not hesitate to come back to me for further clarifications.

It would be useful to make use of the detailed discussion provided in the response in the paper's body to provide more information to readers.

- Following reviewer 3 first two points authors correctly state in the abstract that the paper doesn´t provide claims on the usefulness of Satellite datasets in the retrieval. The answer to the reviewer is important and may be helpful to have a more through discussion to best reflect the strength of the analysis and avoid misunderstandings to the readers.
So, I would suggest to make use of the replies given in the Author's response on the discussion of the benefits of OCO vs GOSAT, the outcomes and the possible additional analysis needed – now in the conclusion – in the discussion section with also few additional details to discuss the coherence of Takagi et al results now added as reference.
The conclusions may then reflect the abstract statement.

- the same may be done for the use of aircraft data, e.g. with respect to the transport model uncertainty, and the coverage of aircraft and CONTRAIL measurements and their respective rms differences to provide such information in the paper text since reader's may not go to the discussion documents.

I hope you may be able to tackle these few technical rephrasing and provide a ready-for-publication version

Kind regards,

Federico Fierli

Hide

AR by Frederic Chevallier on behalf of the Authors (28 Sep 2019) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (10 Oct 2019) by Federico Fierli

Short summary

We present a way to rate the CO₂ flux estimates made from inversion of a global atmospheric transport model. Our approach relies on accurate aircraft measurements in the free troposphere. It shows that some satellite soundings can now provide inversion results that are, despite their uncertainty, comparable in credibility to traditional inversions using the accurate but sparse surface network and that these inversions are, therefore, complementary for studies of the global carbon budget.