Intercomparison of NO2, O4, O3 and HCHO slant column measurements by MAX-DOAS and zenith-sky UV¿visible spectrometers during CINDI-2

40 pags., 22 figs., 13 tabs.In September 2016, 36 spectrometers from 24 institutes measured a number of key atmospheric pollutants for a period of 17¿d during the Second Cabauw Intercomparison campaign for Nitrogen Dioxide measuring Instruments (CINDI-2) that took place at Cabauw, the Netherlands (51.97¿¿N, 4.93¿¿E). We report on the outcome of the formal semi-blind intercomparison exercise, which was held under the umbrella of the Network for the Detection of Atmospheric Composition Change (NDACC) and the European Space Agency (ESA). The three major goals of CINDI-2 were (1) to characterise and better understand the differences between a large number of multi-axis differential optical absorption spectroscopy (MAX-DOAS) and zenith-sky DOAS instruments and analysis methods, (2) to define a robust methodology for performance assessment of all participating instruments, and (3) to contribute to a harmonisation of the measurement settings and retrieval methods. This, in turn, creates the capability to produce consistent high-quality ground-based data sets, which are an essential requirement to generate reliable long-term measurement time series suitable for trend analysis and satellite data validation. The data products investigated during the semi-blind intercomparison are slant columns of nitrogen dioxide (NO2), the oxygen collision complex (O4) and ozone (O3) measured in the UV and visible wavelength region, formaldehyde (HCHO) in the UV spectral region, and NO2 in an additional (smaller) wavelength range in the visible region. The campaign design and implementation processes are discussed in detail including the measurement protocol, calibration procedures and slant column retrieval settings. Strong emphasis was put on the careful alignment and synchronisation of the measurement systems, resulting in a unique set of measurements made under highly comparable air mass conditions. The CINDI-2 data sets were investigated using a regression analysis of the slant columns measured by each instrument and for each of the target data products. The slope and intercept of the regression analysis respectively quantify the mean systematic bias and offset of the individual data sets against the selected reference (which is obtained from the median of either all data sets or a subset), and the rms error provides an estimate of the measurement noise or dispersion. These three criteria are examined and for each of the parameters and each of the data products, performance thresholds are set and applied to all the measurements. The approach presented here has been developed based on heritage from previous intercomparison exercises. It introduces a quantitative assessment of the consistency between all the participating instruments for the MAX-DOAS and zenith-sky DOAS techniques.CINDI-2 received funding from the Netherlands Space Office (NSO). Funding for this study was provided by ESA through the CINDI-2 (ESA contract no. 4000118533/16/ISbo) and FRM4DOAS (ESA contract no. 4000118181/16/I-EF) projects and partly within the EU 7th Framework Programme QA4ECV project (grant agreement no. 607405). The BOKU MAX-DOAS instrument was funded and the participation of Stefan F. Schreier was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF): I 2296-N29. The participation of the University of Toronto team was supported by the Canadian Space Agency (through the AVATARS project) and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (through the PAHA project). The instrument was primarily funded by the Canada Foundation for Innovation and is usually operated at the Polar Environment Atmospheric Research Laboratory (PEARL) by the Canadian Network for the Detection of Atmospheric Change (CANDAC). Funding for CISC was provided by the UVAS (“Ultraviolet and Visible Atmospheric Sounder”) projects SEOSAT/INGENIO, ESP2015-71299- R, MINECO-FEDER and UE. The activities of the IUP-Heidelberg were supported by the DFG project RAPSODI (grant no. PL 193/17-1). SAOZ and Mini-SAOZ instruments are supported by the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) and the Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales (CNES). INTA recognises support from the National funding projects HELADO (CTM2013-41311-P) and AVATAR (CGL2014-55230-R). AMOIAP recognises support from the Russian Science Foundation (grant no. 16-17-10275) and the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (grant nos. 16-05- 01062 and 18-35-00682). Ka L. Chan received transnational access funding from ACTRIS-2 (H2020 grant agreement no. 654109). Rainer Volkamer recognises funding from NASA’s Atmospheric Composition Program (NASA-16-NUP2016-0001) and the US National Science Foundation (award AGS-1620530). Henning Finkenzeller is the recipient of a NASA graduate fellowship. Mihalis Vrekoussis recognises support from the University of Bremen and the DFG Research Center/Cluster of Excellence “The Ocean in the Earth System-MARUM”. Financial support through the University of Bremen Institutional Strategy in the framework of the DFG Excellence Initiative is gratefully appreciated for Anja Schönhardt. Pandora instrument deployment was supported by Luftblick through the ESA Pandonia Project and NASA Pandora Project at the Goddard Space Flight Center under NASA Headquarters’ Tropospheric Composition Program. The article processing charges for this open-access publication were covered by BK Scientific

Introduction

10.4337/9781781006412.00005Water Governance: An Evaluation of Alternative Architectures1-4

Energy and material flows of megacities

Understanding the drivers of energy and material flows of cities is important for addressing global environmental challenges. Accessing, sharing, and managing energy and material resources is particularly critical for megacities, which face enormous social stresses because of their sheer size and complexity. Here we quantify the energy and material flows through the world\u27s 27 megacities with populations greater than 10 million people as of 2010. Collectively the resource flows through megacities are largely consistent with scaling laws established in the emerging science of cities. Correlations are established for electricity consumption, heating and industrial fuel use, ground transportation energy use, water consumption, waste generation, and steel production in terms of heating-degree-days, urban form, economic activity, and population growth. The results help identify megacities exhibiting high and low levels of consumption and those making efficient use of resources. The correlation between per capita electricity use and urbanized area per capita is shown to be a consequence of gross building floor area per capita, which is found to increase for lower-density cities. Many of the megacities are growing rapidly in population but are growing even faster in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) and energy use. In the decade from 2001-2011, electricity use and ground transportation fuel use in megacities grew at approximately half the rate of GDP growth

A global agenda for household water security: Measurement, monitoring, and management

Water scholarship has advanced considerably in recent decades. Despite this remarkable progress, water challenges may be growing more quickly than our capacity to solve them. While much progress has been made toward achieving Sustainable Development Goal 6 — water and sanitation for all — new stressors have emerged to threaten this progress. Far from being a problem of the Global South, recent research shows that water insecurity is very much a global phenomenon — and one that has been, until recently, seriously neglected in the Global North. This indicates a strong need for innovative measurement of who experiences water insecurity, new approaches for monitoring the efficacy of water interventions, and more effective management of complex, mobile, and multiple water infrastructures to achieve water security. In this paper, we introduce the Household Water Insecurity approach to addressing these concerns. First, we suggest ways to improve the measurement of water insecurity — pinpointing problems at the household and individual levels — in ways that can inform policymaking with improved precision. Second, we discuss ways that new information and communication technology can improve monitoring and indicate where water infrastructure repairs and investments are most needed. Third, we highlight the need for new approaches to managing complex water infrastructures in more inclusive and democratic ways