Trace gas observations with Los Gatos ICOS Analyzers on the FZJ meteorological tower

USE OF THE DATA

The data here are provided free of charge and you are free to use them as you like, provided you confer to the following terms and conditions

The data have been carefully quality checked as described below. However, we do not give any guarantee whatsoever with respect to the accuracy of the data and information provided, and under no circumstances will we accept liability claims (if you do find or suspect errors or inconsistencies, please let us know and we will try to fix it).
The data are acquired and provided by Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Institute for Energy and Climate Research, IEK-7: Stratosphere, which should be acknowledged with any use of the data.
In case the data are used extensively (i.e. representing a major contribution) in a scientific publication, please consider offering co-authorship to those making the efforts to acquire and quality check these data.
CONTACT: Marc von Hobe, Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, IEK-7, Tel.: +49 2461 614620

100 m Platform, Fast Greenhouse Gas Analyzer, CO2, CH4, H2O

Near real time data of the past 24 hours can be viewed here.

Past data starting from February 2014 can be downloaded from the table below. Data are grouped in monthly files of 10-minute averages.
If you would like to get older data or data with higher time resolution, please contact Marc von Hobe.

Month	Graph	Data file	Accuracy¹	Precision²	Remarks
Nov 2017	fgga2017_11.png	fzj100m_2017_11.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-5.8 ppm	CO₂: 1.1 ppm CH₄: 0.006 ppm	Instrument was removed from FZJ Meteorological Tower on 17 November 2017 due to refurbishment of the Tower. ICOS instruments are expected to go back on the tower in early 2019.
Oct 2017	fgga2017_10.png	fzj100m_2017_10.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-6.8 ppm	CO₂: 1.0 ppm CH₄: 0.006 ppm
Sep 2017	fgga2017_09.png	fzj100m_2017_09.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-6.8 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Aug 2017	fgga2017_08.png	fzj100m_2017_08.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-6.8 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Jul 2017	fgga2017_07.png	fzj100m_2017_07.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-6.8 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Jun 2017	fgga2017_06.png	fzj100m_2017_06.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-6.8 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
May 2017	fgga2017_05.png	fzj100m_2017_05.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-6.8 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Apr 2017	fgga2017_04.png	fzj100m_2017_04.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-5.8 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Mar 2017	fgga2017_03.png	fzj100m_2017_03.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-4.8 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Feb 2017	fgga2017_02.png	fzj100m_2017_02.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-4.8 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Jan 2017	fgga2017_01.png	fzj100m_2017_01.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-4.8 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Dec 2016	fgga2016_12.png	fzj100m_2016_12.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-4.8 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Nov 2016	fgga2016_11.png	fzj100m_2016_11.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-3.9 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Oct 2016	fgga2016_10.png	fzj100m_2016_10.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-3.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm	Instrument failure from early September until 18 October
Sep 2016	fgga2016_09.png	fzj100m_2016_09.csv	CO₂: +6.3/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm	Instrument failure from early September until 18 October
Aug 2016	fgga2016_08.png	fzj100m_2016_08.csv	CO₂: +6.3/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Jul 2016	fgga2016_07.png	fzj100m_2016_07.csv	CO₂: +6.3/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm	Instrument failure from 16 to 19 Jul ~-
Jun 2016	fgga2016_06.png	fzj100m_2016_06.csv	~- CO₂: +6.3/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
May 2016	fgga2016_05.png	fzj100m_2016_05.csv	CO₂: +3.6/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Apr 2016	fgga2016_04.png	fzj100m_2016_04.csv	CO₂: +3.6/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Mar 2016	fgga2016_03.png	fzj100m_2016_03.csv	CO₂: +4.6/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Feb 2016	fgga2016_02.png	fzj100m_2016_02.csv	CO₂: +4.6/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Jan 2016	fgga2016_01.png	fzj100m_2016_01.csv	CO₂: +4.6/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Dec 2015	fgga2015_12.png	fzj100m_2015_12.csv	CO₂: +4.6/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Nov 2015	fgga2015_11.png	fzj100m_2015_11.csv	CO₂: +4.0/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Oct 2015	fgga2015_10.png	fzj100m_2015_10.csv	CO₂: +4.0/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Sep 2015	fgga2015_09.png	fzj100m_2015_09.csv	CO₂: +3.5/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 1.0 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Aug 2015	fgga2015_08.png	fzj100m_2015_08.csv	CO₂: +5.5/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 1.0 ppm CH₄: 0.005 ppm
Jul 2015	fgga2015_07.png	fzj100m_2015_07.csv	CO₂: +6.5/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.004 ppm
Jun 2015	fgga2015_06.png	fzj100m_2015_06.csv	CO₂: +5.5/-5.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.9 ppm CH₄: 0.004 ppm
May 2015	fgga2015_05.png	fzj100m_2015_05.csv	CO₂: +5.5/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.7 ppm CH₄: 0.003 ppm
Apr 2015	fgga2015_04.png	fzj100m_2015_04.csv	CO₂: +4.5/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.7 ppm CH₄: 0.003 ppm
Mar 2015	fgga2015_03.png	fzj100m_2015_03.csv	CO₂: +3.5/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.7 ppm CH₄: 0.003 ppm
Feb 2015	fgga2015_02.png	fzj100m_2015_02.csv	CO₂: +3.5/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.7 ppm CH₄: 0.003 ppm
Jan 2015	fgga2015_01.png	fzj100m_2015_01.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.7 ppm CH₄: 0.003 ppm	At the calibration on 5 January, water droplets in the sampling line near the inlet were observed, and wet surfaces inside the instrument cannot be ruled out. Water vapour around 5000 ppm was measured with the standard that normally contains ~500 ppm. Therefore, the H2O measurements in December and January are likely erraneous (beyond the ~40 % low bias), and this should be taken into account when CO2 and CH4 are converted to dry mole fractions.
Dec 2014	fgga2014_12.png	fzj100m_2014_12.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.7 ppm CH₄: 0.003 ppm
Nov 2014	fgga2014_11.png	fzj100m_2014_11.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.7 ppm CH₄: 0.003 ppm
Oct 2014	fgga2014_10.png	fzj100m_2014_10.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.7 ppm CH₄: 0.003 ppm
Sep 2014	fgga2014_09.png	fzj100m_2014_09.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-4.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.7 ppm CH₄: 0.003 ppm
Aug 2014	fgga2014_08.png	fzj100m_2014_08.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-4.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.6 ppm CH₄: 0.003 ppm
Jul 2014	fgga2014_07.png	fzj100m_2014_07.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-4.0 ppm	CO₂: 0.7 ppm CH₄: 0.003 ppm
Jun 2014	fgga2014_06.png	fzj100m_2014_06.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-5.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.6 ppm CH₄: 0.003 ppm
May 2014	fgga2014_05.png	fzj100m_2014_05.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.6 ppm CH₄: 0.003 ppm
Apr 2014	fgga2014_04.png	fzj100m_2014_04.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-4.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.6 ppm CH₄: 0.003 ppm
Mar 2014	fgga2014_03.png	fzj100m_2014_03.csv	CO₂: +4.5/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.5 ppm CH₄: 0.003 ppm
Feb 2014	fgga2014_02.png	fzj100m_2014_02.csv	CO₂: +/- 4.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.6 ppm CH₄: 0.004 ppm

The FGGA is compared to a CO₂ standard gas approximately every two weeks. There are currently no standards for CH₄ and H₂O. For CH₄ , the accuracy is expected to fall within 2 %, because it is a direct spectroscopic method over entire absorption lines, and the CH₄ line seems to be well characterized. For H2O, differences to the standard relative humidity sensors on the meteorological tower and first tests in the laboratory suggest a low bias on the order of 40 %. This is currently under investigation.

~- ¹Accuracy is given here in terms of the maximum deviation between FGGA and the CO₂ standard, combined with the 2.5 ppm uncertainty of the standard.
²Instrument presision is determined as the standard deviation determined during the standard measurements.

Full specifications of the Fast Greenhouse Gas Analyzer are found here (note that ours is the 2009 model, not the current one).

20 m Platform, Mid Infrared Cavity Enhanced Spectrometer (MICA) CO2, CO, H2O

Month	Graph	Data file	Accuracy¹	Precision²	Remarks
Feb 2015 -					There are currently no measurements on the 20 m platform due to the instrument being in service
Jan 2015	ccia2015_01.png	fzj20m_2015_01.csv	series issues with calibrations, analysis in progress	CO₂: 0.3 ppm	Due to the temporary absence of the MICA instrument (for a ship cruise in the Indian Ocean), CO₂ measurements from 2. April, 12:35 utc have been made by a Carbon Dioxide Isotope Analyzer (2009 model). Starting in mid-May, there have been problems with the internal pressure regulation. The resulting CO2 bias has been experimentally determined and data have been corrected, introducing an additional uncertainty of about 2 ppm, which has been added to the accuracy in this table. Because pressure changes are slow, precision is not affected. At cavity pressure below 22 hPa, the corrections function is not well understood, and data were discarded when the pressure dropped below this value.
Dec 2014	ccia2014_12.png	fzj20m_2014_12.csv	series issues with calibrations, analysis in progress	CO₂: 0.3 ppm
Nov 2014	ccia2014_11.png	fzj20m_2014_11.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-6.0 ppm	CO₂: 0.3 ppm
Oct 2014	ccia2014_10.png	fzj20m_2014_10.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-6.0 ppm	CO₂: 0.3 ppm
Sep 2014	ccia2014_09.png	fzj20m_2014_09.csv	CO₂: +4.5/-7.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.3 ppm
Aug 2014	ccia2014_08.png	fzj20m_2014_08.csv	CO₂: +4.5/-7.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.3 ppm
Jul 2014	ccia2014_07.png	fzj20m_2014_07.csv	CO₂: +4.5/-7.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.3 ppm
Jun 2014	ccia2014_06.png	fzj20m_2014_06.csv	CO₂: +7.5/-4.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.3 ppm
May 2014	ccia2014_05.png	fzj20m_2014_05.csv	CO₂: +4.5/-12.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.4 ppm
Apr 2014	ccia2014_04.png	fzj20m_2014_04.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-6.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.4 ppm
Mar 2014	mica2014_03.png	fzj20m_2014_03.csv	CO₂: +2.5/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.4 ppm CO: 2.3 ppb
Feb 2014	mica2014_02.png	fzj20m_2014_02.csv	CO₂: +3.5/-2.5 ppm	CO₂: 0.5 ppm CO: 2.3 ppb

The instrument is compared to a CO₂ standard gas approximately every two weeks. There are currently no standards for CO and H₂O. However, because it is a direct spectroscopic method over entire absorption lines with known line characteristics, accuracy for all gases is expected to fall within 2 %.
¹Accuracy is given here in terms of the maximum deviation between MICA and the CO₂ standard, combined with the 2.5 ppm uncertainty of the standard.
²Instrument presision is determined as the standard deviation determined during the standard measurements.

Meteorological data

An overview of the meteorological data measured at the FZJ tower is given at http://www.fz-juelich.de/gs/DE/UeberUns/Organisation/S-U/Meteorologie/wetter/wetterdaten_node.html. These data are also archived in 10-minute-averages and can be obtained from Dr. Axel Knaps.

Our Team

Current operation and maintenance of ICOS instruments: MarcVonHobe, CorinnaKloss, NicoleSpelten, AnneRichter (all IEK-7)

Special thanks to former IEK-7 student Stephanie Schrade, who carried out the original installations of the analyzers at the meteorological tower

AMICA: TowerObservations (zuletzt geändert am 2017-11-24 13:49:58 durch MarcVonHobe)