Evaluation of methods for estimating atmospheric emissivity in Mato-Grossense Cerrado

  • Jonh Billy Silva Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso (UFMT), Cuiabá, MT, Brasil Programa de Pós-Graduação em Física Ambiental (PPGFA). Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso (UFMT), Coxipó, MT, Brasil Instituto de Física.
  • Denilton Carlos Gaio Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso (UFMT), Cuiabá, MT, Brasil Programa de Pós-Graduação em Física Ambiental (PPGFA). Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso (UFMT), Coxipó, MT, Brasil Instituto de Física.
  • Leone Francisco Amorim Curado Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso (UFMT), Cuiabá, MT, Brasil Programa de Pós-Graduação em Física Ambiental (PPGFA). Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso (UFMT), Coxipó, MT, Brasil Instituto de Física.
  • José de Souza Nogueira Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso (UFMT), Cuiabá, MT, Brasil Programa de Pós-Graduação em Física Ambiental (PPGFA). Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso (UFMT), Coxipó, MT, Brasil Instituto de Física.
  • Luiz Claudio Galvão Valle Júnior Universidade Federal do Mato Grosso do Sul (UFMS), Campo Grande, MT, Brasil Programa de Pós-Graduação em Tecnologias Ambientais (PGTA).
  • Thiago Rangel Rodrigues Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul (UFMS), Campo Grande, MT, Brasil Laboratório de Ciências Atmosféricas (LCA).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4136/ambi-agua.2288
Keywords: air temperature, campo sujo Cerrado, water vapor pressure.

Abstract

This study analyzed the performance of the Brunt (1932), Swinbank, (1963), Idso and Jackson (1969), Brutsaert (1975), Idso (1981), and Bignami et al. (1995) methods to estimate atmospheric emissivity under grass-dominated savannas (known as campo sujo Cerrado), in the region of Baixada Cuiabana. The estimates were compared with data obtained by energy balance equation in two seasons, dry season (May to August), and wet season (September to December) of 2009. The Swinbank and Idso and Jackson methods, that consider only air temperature, show better performances for the wet season. However, methods that consider water vapor pressure and air temperature (Brunt, Brutsaert, Bignami and Idso) show good performances for the dry season. The Idso and Brutsaert methods show the highest index of agreement and are recommended to estimate atmospheric emissivity for the region.


Published
26/04/2019
Issue
Vol. 14 No. 3 (2019)
Section
Papers

Authors maintain the copyrights for their work. However, they grant rights of first publication to Ambiente e Agua - An Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Science. In compensation, the journal can transfer the copyrights, allowing non-commercial use of the article including the right of sending the article to other data bases or publication media. The journal uses the CC BY 4.0 license"