4 ms·
Nah, I'm not disappointed, just trying to understand the limits of current sensors. I also don't think it needs to be extremely accurate - maybe there's even pr
by m_mueller 9y ago
Nah, I'm not disappointed, just trying to understand the limits of current sensors. I also don't think it needs to be extremely accurate - maybe there's even proxies that could be used, like the shade of green on cloudless days for land coordinates, however this opens up a lot of abusive avenues of course.
Btw. how about something like OCO-2? I couldn't find anything about its spatial resolution, but it seems to allow ground measurements of carbon sinks and sources.
https://oco.jpl.nasa.gov/science/MeasurementApproach/ https://oco.jpl.nasa.gov/science/MeasurementApproach/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbiting_Carbon_Observatory_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbiting_Carbon_Observatory_2
- falsedan 9y agoIts spacial resolution is on the linked page: > OCO-2 records how much sunlight is reflected off the CO 2 molecules in an air column. OCO-2 makes measurements in three different spectral bands over four to eight different footprints of approximately 1.29 km × 2.25 km (0.80 mi × 1.40 mi) each. It's air columns, so again you would have a hard time proving that the source of the detected pollutants came from the area & excluding the case that they drifted into the area at a higher altitude.