Search

The Planetary Boundary Layer height (PBLH) is essential for studying PBL and ocean‐atmosphere interactions. Marine PBL is usually defined to include a mixed layer (ML) and a capping inversion layer. The ML height (MLH) estimated from the measurements of aerosol backscatter by a lidar was usually compared with PBLH determined from radiosondes/dropsondes in the past, as the PBLH is usually similar to MLH in nature. However, PBLH can be much greater than MLH for decoupled PBL. Here we evaluate the retrieved MLH from an airborne lidar (HSRL‐2) by utilizing 506 co‐located dropsondes during the ACTIVATE field campaign over the Northwest Atlantic from 2020 to 2022. First, we define and determine the MLH and PBLH from the temperature and humidity profiles of each dropsonde, and find that the MLH values from HSRL‐2 and dropsondes agree well with each other, with a coefficient of determination of 0.66 and median difference of 18 m. In contrast, the HSRL‐2 MLH data do not correspond to dropsonde‐derived PBLH, with a median difference of −47 m. Therefore, we modify the current operational and automated HSRL‐2 wavelet‐based algorithm for PBLH retrieval, decreasing the median difference significantly to −8 m. Further data analysis indicates that these conclusions remain the same for cases with higher or lower cloud fractions, and for decoupled PBLs. These results demonstrate the potential of using HSRL‐2 aerosol backscatter data to estimate both marine MLH and PBLH and suggest that lidar‐derived MLH should be compared with radiosonde/dropsonde‐determined MLH (not PBLH) in general. Plain Language Summary: The Planetary Boundary Layer Height (PBLH) is essential for studying the lower atmosphere and its interaction with the surface. Usually, it contains a mixed layer (ML) with vertically well‐mixed (i.e., nearly constant) specific humidity and potential temperature. Over the ocean, the PBL is usually coupled (vertically well‐mixed) and the ML height (MLH) is usually close to PBLH, hence the MLH estimated from the measurements of aerosol backscatter by a lidar is traditionally compared with PBLH determined from radiosondes/dropsondes. However, when the PBL is decoupled (not vertically well mixed), the MLH differs from the PBLH. Here we used dropsondes' thermodynamic profile to evaluate the airborne High‐Spectral‐Resolution Lidar—Generation 2 (HSRL‐2) estimation of MLH and PBLH in airborne field campaign over the northwestern Atlantic (ACTIVATE) from 2020 to 2022. We show that the HSRL‐2 has excellent MLH estimation compared to the dropsondes. We also improved the HSRL‐2 estimation of PBLH. Further data analysis indicates that these conclusions remain the same for cases with different cloud fractions, and for decoupled PBLs. These results demonstrate the potential of using HSRL‐2 aerosol backscatter data to estimate both marine MLH and PBLH and suggest that lidar‐derived MLH should be compared with radiosonde/dropsonde‐determined MLH (not PBLH) in general. Key Points: Dropsondes over the northwest Atlantic are used to determine mixed layer height (MLH) and boundary layer height (PBLH)HSRL‐2 lidar MLH product compares well with dropsonde‐derived MLH but does not correspond to PBLH for decoupled PBLThe current operational HSRL‐2 algorithm is modified to include retrieval of the PBLH for decoupled PBL [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ACT‐America project is a NASA Earth Venture Suborbital‐2 mission designed to study the transport and fluxes of greenhouse gases. The open and freely available ACT‐America data sets provide airborne in situ measurements of atmospheric carbon dioxide, methane, trace gases, aerosols, clouds, and meteorological properties, airborne remote sensing measurements of aerosol backscatter, atmospheric boundary layer height and columnar content of atmospheric carbon dioxide, tower‐based measurements, and modeled atmospheric mole fractions and regional carbon fluxes of greenhouse gases over the Central and Eastern United States. We conducted 121 research flights during five campaigns in four seasons during 2016–2019 over three regions of the US (Mid‐Atlantic, Midwest and South) using two NASA research aircraft (B‐200 and C‐130). We performed three flight patterns (fair weather, frontal crossings, and OCO‐2 underflights) and collected more than 1,140 h of airborne measurements via level‐leg flights in the atmospheric boundary layer, lower, and upper free troposphere and vertical profiles spanning these altitudes. We also merged various airborne in situ measurements onto a common standard sampling interval, which brings coherence to the data, creates geolocated data products, and makes it much easier for the users to perform holistic analysis of the ACT‐America data products. Here, we report on detailed information of data sets collected, the workflow for data sets including storage and processing of the quality controlled and quality assured harmonized observations, and their archival and formatting for users. Finally, we provide some important information on the dissemination of data products including metadata and highlights of applications of ACT‐America data sets. Plain Language Summary: We describe the data collected and produced by the Atmospheric Carbon and Transport – America mission, including airborne and tower‐based measurements of greenhouse gases (e.g., carbon dioxide and methane) and modeled atmospheric mole fractions and regional carbon fluxes of greenhouse gases over North America. In this paper, we briefly describe the data collections and archival including the instruments and methodology used to generate, manage, and distribute the data, and the significance of these new measurements for the study of the North American carbon cycle. Key Points: Atmospheric Carbon and Transport – America (ACT‐America) provides a unique, weather‐oriented collection of atmospheric CO2, CH4, trace gases, and meteorological properties measurementsACT‐America data are free and open to the public from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Distributed Active Archive Center (ORNL DAAC)ACT‐America data are uniquely suited to improve the accuracy and precision of regional inverse greenhouse gas (GHG) flux estimates [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]