 |
| Titel |
Comment on "Radiative forcings for 28 potential Archean greenhouse gases" by Byrne and Goldblatt (2014) |
| VerfasserIn |
R. V. Kochanov, I. E. Gordon, L. S. Rothman, S. W. Sharpe, T. J. Johnson, R. L. Sams |
| Medientyp |
Artikel
|
| Sprache |
Englisch
|
| ISSN |
1814-9324
|
| Digitales Dokument |
URL |
| Erschienen |
In: Climate of the Past ; 11, no. 8 ; Nr. 11, no. 8 (2015-08-25), S.1097-1105 |
| Datensatznummer |
250117390
|
| Publikation (Nr.) |
 copernicus.org/cp-11-1097-2015.pdf |
|
|
|
|
|
| Zusammenfassung |
| In the recent article by Byrne and Goldblatt,
"Radiative forcing for 28 potential Archean greenhouse
gases", Clim. Past. 10, 1779–1801 (2014), the authors
employ the HITRAN2012 spectroscopic database to evaluate
the radiative forcing of 28 Archean gases. As part of
the evaluation of the status of the spectroscopy of
these gases in the selected spectral region
(50–1800 cm−1), the cross sections generated
from the HITRAN line-by-line parameters were compared
with those of the PNNL database of experimental cross
sections recorded at moderate resolution. The authors
claimed that for NO2, HNO3,
H2CO, H2O2, HCOOH, C2H4,
CH3OH and CH3Br there exist
large or sometimes severe disagreements between the
databases. In this work we show that for only three of
these eight gases a modest discrepancy does exist
between the two databases and we explain the origin of
the differences. For the other five gases, the
disagreements are not nearly at the scale suggested by
the authors, while we explain some of the differences
that do exist. In summary, the agreement between the
HITRAN and PNNL databases is very good, although not
perfect. Typically differences do not exceed 10 %,
provided that HITRAN data exist for the
bands/wavelengths of interest. It appears that
a molecule-dependent combination of errors has affected
the conclusions of the authors. In at least one case it
appears that they did not take the correct file from
PNNL (N2O4 (dimer)+ NO2 was used in
place of the monomer). Finally, cross sections of
HO2 from HITRAN (which do not have a PNNL
counterpart) were not calculated correctly in BG, while
in the case of HF misleading discussion was presented there based
on the confusion by foreign or noise features in the experimental
PNNL spectra. |
| |
|
| Teil von |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|