Ground-based MAX-DOAS observations of tropospheric formaldehyde VCDs and comparisons with the CAMS model at a rural site near Beijing during APEC 2014

Tian, Xin; Xie, Pinhua; Xu, Jin; Wang, Yang; Li, Ang; Wu, Fengcheng; Hu, Zhaokun; Liu, Cheng; Zhang, Qiong

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-3375-2019

Articles | Volume 19, issue 5

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-3375-2019

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

Special issue:

Regional transport and transformation of air pollution in...

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-3375-2019

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

Articles | Volume 19, issue 5

Research article

|

15 Mar 2019

Research article |

| 15 Mar 2019

Ground-based MAX-DOAS observations of tropospheric formaldehyde VCDs and comparisons with the CAMS model at a rural site near Beijing during APEC 2014

Xin Tian, Pinhua Xie, Jin Xu, Yang Wang, Ang Li, Fengcheng Wu, Zhaokun Hu, Cheng Liu, and Qiong Zhang

Download

Final revised paper (published on 15 Mar 2019)
Supplement to the final revised paper
Preprint (discussion started on 04 Jun 2018)
Supplement to the preprint

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

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

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

EC1: 'rejection', Zhanqing Li, 31 Jul 2018
RC1: 'Review of Ground-based MAX-DOAS observations of tropospheric formaldehyde and comparisons with CAMS model at a rural site near Beijing', Anonymous Referee #1, 20 Sep 2018
- AC1: 'Ground-based MAX-DOAS observations of tropospheric formaldehyde VCDs and comparisons with the CAMS model at a rural site near Beijing during APEC 2014', Xin Tian, 13 Dec 2018
- AC3: 'Ground-based MAX-DOAS observations of tropospheric formaldehyde VCDs and comparisons with the CAMS model at a rural site near Beijing during APEC 2014', Xin Tian, 13 Dec 2018
RC2: 'Referee's Recommendations and Comments', Anonymous Referee #2, 09 Oct 2018
AC2: 'Ground-based MAX-DOAS observations of tropospheric formaldehyde VCDs and comparisons with the CAMS model at a rural site near Beijing during APEC 2014', Xin Tian, 13 Dec 2018

Peer-review completion

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

AR by Xin Tian on behalf of the Authors (13 Dec 2018) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (19 Dec 2018) by Robert McLaren

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (09 Jan 2019)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

The manuscript has been substantially improved from the previous submitted version. The English is improved as well as the paper organization and statistical analysis. I am also satisfied with the author's response to most of my comments in my earlier report. I only have a few additional minor comments that I will submit below. If these minor corrections are addressed I am happy to accept the manuscript for final publication.
*************************************************************************

Minor Corrections {words added are sometimes in CAPS to highlight additions}

P1, L17 : using A Multi-AXis Differential ….
P2, L1 {suggest 38% and 31%, as I don’t think 4 significant figures is appropriate}
P2, L5: cut out the word “suitably”
P2, L6: This finding MAY indicate…
P2, L15: …emission reduction measurements {is it measurements or strategies or maybe measurement strategies? I would use emission reduction strategies in accordance…}
P2, L19: …road cleaning [procedures] {optional word to add}
P2, L22: …weather conditions [compared with] previous years ….
P2, L25: …add a REFERENCE to the end of this line please.
P3, L4: … Wang et al.
L5: {would reduce significant figures here, 62%, 41%, etc.}
L4-L7: {So the O3 increased by 101%, you could also say that the O3 level approximately doubled over this period then, right?}
L9 : {do you mean that there is less O3 titration due to NOx, if so re-word this? Not sure if inhibition of O3 is the best wording here?}
L10-12: {sorry but I am not sure what the difference is between traffic, urban, suburban and regional stations, define it or at least reference it please}
L14: VCDs
L15: {replace “surrounds” with “its surroundings based on THE Ozone…” or with”its suburbs based..”
L22-23: .. experiencing significant descreases of 47% and 68% versus what? {…versus the average 2008 values, state what you mean here}
P4, L5: Tropospheric formaldehyde…
L17-20: {check with the journal as to how radicals are represented correctly and make sure you are using the correct notation}
P5, L5: …called Multi-AXis Differential {see P1, L17}
L12: ..in THE Huairou District..
L19: {I think you have a typo here, replace HONO with HCHO, right?}
P6, L5: …in the Yanqi Lake [region] near …
L6: from October 1, 2014 TO January ….
L8: …the mountains TO the southwest…
L10: ..and Tianjin ARE the primary pollution sources {or …ARE primary pollution hotspots.}
L18-19: …(Thermo Scientific, Model 42i), and ozone …photometry (Thermo Scientific, Model 49i).
P7, L4: …six elevation angles (EAs) 3, 5, 10 etc {add the degree symbol to each angle please}
FIGURE 3 – {not sure where your scattered light is, please fix the figure}
L5 : {this is a typo from me, change SCANS to scans}
L11: … of -10.6C to 20.7C.. {keep degree signs though}
L14: cut out the words {with a wind speed of less than 3.5 m s-1} and replace with … during the observationS, while wind speeds of ….
L19: …based on THE Beer-Lambert Law…
L25: ..for all the retrievals to determine {retrieve} slant …
P8, L2: …The Ring structure …
L5-L6: {define what large RMS values are, what was your threshold please?}
L12-L13: add brackets (and measured in a small sun zenith angle 90 elevation around noon).
P9, L7: {do your lower EAs have obstacles in their paths, if so, what is the use of them? what about using the geometric approximation for the lower EAs, that doesn’t work either right? You have a lot of unused data in your data set (ie. 3, 5, 10 degrees). Perhaps later to get a VCD from RTM?}
L15: {what is TG?}
L16: .. VCDs ..
L17: … are obtained from the ..
P9-10, l23-l1 : {from your figure 6, it appears that the VCDgeo > VCDamf for 30 degrees, but VCDamf>VCDgeo at 15 degrees, is there any explanation for this?}
L6: {any explanation for the large range in the fitting error?}
L12: {if the total error is 12% on average, what is the range?}
L16: {you defined what CAMS stands for in the intro, but I would also repeat it here since it has been 9 pages since you introduced it}
L23 : TM5 chemical transport model (CTM)?
P11, L1: {is it T5 or T255?}
L2-L3: change to 00:00, 06:00, 12:00, 18:00 UTC.
L15: …show that THE cloud coefficient …
L21: {it looks like 3 peaks to me?}
P12, L1: {I would reduce to 1 decimal, e.g. 2.2%, -23.5% etc.}
L4: …and a dominant southerly wind flow with a speed of more than 2.0 m/s, during the two days …
L24: {keep significant figures constant, 17%, 16%, 12% …}
P13, L5: … correspond to a minimum in the average HCHO VCDs (6.64 * 1015 molec cm-2).
L6-7: {what about VOCs from natural sources?}
P14, L1: {I would say 38% and 31% here, be consistent in your significant figures please.}
L10: … the effects of the control measures, …
L10-L12: {how do you know this, what is your proof? }
L14: … considerably lower than 10.3 or 9.20 …
L16: significant figures please
P15, l2: Equation 1
L9: ..could be the dominant ..
L9:… during other periods …
L13: .. replace obviously with statistically {or significantly} depending on what you mean
L19-L20: the O3 is surface but the NO2 is VCD, is this a potential source of error? If so, mention it somewhere.
P16, L7: ..other VOCs could be the …
L12: (Figure 15a)?
L14: (Figure 15c)?
P17, L7: … the economy near the UCAS has grown rapidly …
L16: {statistically significant?}
P18, L2: .. and the CAMS model becomes larger or …and the CAMS model becomes more pronounced.
P19, L12: …on HCHO were evaluated…
L16: significant figures
L23: {could state the per cent error here instead of exact value, since you did that earlier, but it is your choice}

Hide

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (09 Jan 2019) by Robert McLaren

AR by Xin Tian on behalf of the Authors (17 Jan 2019) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (01 Feb 2019) by Robert McLaren

AR by Xin Tian on behalf of the Authors (06 Feb 2019) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (21 Feb 2019) by Robert McLaren

AR by Xin Tian on behalf of the Authors (26 Feb 2019) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (01 Mar 2019) by Robert McLaren

AR by Xin Tian on behalf of the Authors (04 Mar 2019) Author's response Manuscript

Download

Article (12577 KB)
Full-text XML

Short summary

We used the MAX-DOAS instrument installed at the UCAS, Beijing, to evaluate effects on HCHO. The daily variation, transport, sources, and the effect of APEC emission control measures on HCHO were analyzed. Dependences of HCHO VCDs on wind fields indicated that the HCHO values were affected by the transport of pollutants from the south. The results from comparing the MAX-DOAS with the CAMS model indicate the CAMS model can simulate the effects of transport and the secondary sources of HCHO well.