Uncertainty assessment of TROPOMI NO <sub>2</sub> over Europe using ground-based remote sensing observations

Abstract. Satellite observations of NO2 are crucial for tracking air pollution and its impacts on health and climate on the global scale. However, these measurements are affected by uncertainties arising from instrumental limitations, retrieval assumptions, and representation errors, making quantification of uncertainties critical for reliable data use. In this study, we assess key sources of uncertainty in tropospheric NO2 columns from the TROPOMI satellite instrument by studying the retrieval steps, and by comparing with Pandora and MAX-DOAS ground-based observations. For this assessment, we make use of high-resolution model simulations available for Europe and the Netherlands. Systematic errors in the stratosphere–troposphere partitioning of NO2 are identified, with TROPOMI overestimating stratospheric columns by up to 0.15 Pmolec cm−2 at high northern latitudes during winter, corresponding to tropospheric biases of up to 1.5 Pmolec cm−2, linked to limitations in the TM5-MP assimilation and magnified by large air-mass factor ratios in winter. In comparing satellite and ground-based observations, representation errors due to sub-pixel horizontal gradients are assessed using high-resolution LOTOS-EUROS simulations, resulting in uncertainties of approximately 6 % at polluted locations. Furthermore, major differences in vertical sensitivity between TROPOMI and MAX-DOAS lead to smoothing errors reaching up to 20 %. Comparisons of TROPOMI with Pandora direct sun measurements show a good seasonal agreement. The negative bias obtained when using the default TM5-MP a-priori profiles is partly mitigated with high-resolution CAMS-European a-priori profiles. A further reduction of this comparison bias is obtained when kilometer-scale simulations over the Netherlands are used, indicating the crucial role of the a-priori spatial resolution in the comparisons. Significant differences in absolute value and seasonality are observed between the MAX-DOAS FRM4DOAS, Pandora direct-sun, and Pandora sky-scan, indicative of the uncertainties in the ground-based remote sensing observations. Finally, uncertainties derived from the histogram of differences between TROPOMI and ground-based measurements generally still exceed expectations from the combination of all estimated uncertainty contributions, indicating that current estimates are likely still optimistic.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Atmospheric measurement techniques
Published
2026-04-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-19-2437-2026
Primary Topic
Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Uncertainty assessment of TROPOMI NO 2 over Europe using ground-based remote sensing observations

Martina M. Friedrich, Ankie Piters, John Douros, Felipe Cifuentes et al.
Atmospheric measurement techniques
Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
article

Uncertainty assessment of TROPOMI NO 2 over Europe using ground-based remote sensing observations

Martina M. Friedrich, Ankie Piters, John Douros, Felipe Cifuentes, Henk Eskes, Enrico Dammers, Gaïa Pinardi, Manuel Gebetsberger, K. F. Boersma, Julian Gomez
article en

Abstract

Abstract. Satellite observations of NO2 are crucial for tracking air pollution and its impacts on health and climate on the global scale. However, these measurements are affected by uncertainties arising from instrumental limitations, retrieval assumptions, and representation errors, making quantification of uncertainties critical for reliable data use. In this study, we assess key sources of uncertainty in tropospheric NO2 columns from the TROPOMI satellite instrument by studying the retrieval steps, and by comparing with Pandora and MAX-DOAS ground-based observations. For this assessment, we make use of high-resolution model simulations available for Europe and the Netherlands. Systematic errors in the stratosphere–troposphere partitioning of NO2 are identified, with TROPOMI overestimating stratospheric columns by up to 0.15 Pmolec cm−2 at high northern latitudes during winter, corresponding to tropospheric biases of up to 1.5 Pmolec cm−2, linked to limitations in the TM5-MP assimilation and magnified by large air-mass factor ratios in winter. In comparing satellite and ground-based observations, representation errors due to sub-pixel horizontal gradients are assessed using high-resolution LOTOS-EUROS simulations, resulting in uncertainties of approximately 6 % at polluted locations. Furthermore, major differences in vertical sensitivity between TROPOMI and MAX-DOAS lead to smoothing errors reaching up to 20 %. Comparisons of TROPOMI with Pandora direct sun measurements show a good seasonal agreement. The negative bias obtained when using the default TM5-MP a-priori profiles is partly mitigated with high-resolution CAMS-European a-priori profiles. A further reduction of this comparison bias is obtained when kilometer-scale simulations over the Netherlands are used, indicating the crucial role of the a-priori spatial resolution in the comparisons. Significant differences in absolute value and seasonality are observed between the MAX-DOAS FRM4DOAS, Pandora direct-sun, and Pandora sky-scan, indicative of the uncertainties in the ground-based remote sensing observations. Finally, uncertainties derived from the histogram of differences between TROPOMI and ground-based measurements generally still exceed expectations from the combination of all estimated uncertainty contributions, indicating that current estimates are likely still optimistic.

Atmospheric measurement techniquesVol. 19(7)
Leiden University (NL), Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (NL), Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (NL), Universität Innsbruck (AT), Royal Belgian Institute for Space Aeronomy (BE), Wageningen University & Research (NL)
Ministerie van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.