Mitigation of Methane Emissions: A Rapid and Cost-Effective Response to Climate Change

Methane is a major anthropogenic greenhouse gas, second only to carbon dioxide (CO2) in its impact on climate change. Methane (CH4) has a high global warming potential that is 25 times as large as the one of CO2 on a 100 year time horizon according to the latest IPCC report. Thus, CH4 contributes significantly to anthropogenic radiative forcing, although it has a relatively short atmospheric perturbation lifetime of 12 years. CH4 has a variety of sources that can be small, geographically dispersed, and not related to energy sectors. In this report, we analyze methane emission abatement options in five different sectors and identify economic mitigation potentials for different CO2 prices. While mitigation potentials are generally large, there are substantial potentials at low marginal abatement costs. Drawing on different assumptions on the social costs of carbon, we calculate benefit/cost ratios for different sectors and mitigation levels. We recommend an economically efficient global methane mitigation portfolio for the year 2020 that includes the sectors of livestock and manure, rice management, solid waste, coal mine methane and natural gas. Depending on assumptions of social costs of carbon, this portfolio leads to global CH4 mitigation levels of 1.5 or 1.9 GtCO2-eq at overall costs of around $14 billion or$30 billion and benefit/cost ratios of 1.4 and 3.0, respectively. We also develop an economically less efficient alternative portfolio that excludes cost-effective agricultural mitigation options. It leads to comparable abatement levels, but has higher costs and lower benefit/cost ratios. If the global community wanted to spend an even larger amount of money - say, $250 billion - on methane mitigation, much larger mitigation potentials could be realized, even such with very high marginal abatement costs. Nonetheless, this approach would be economically inefficient. If the global community wanted to spend such an amount, we recommend spreading the effort cost-effectively over different greenhouse gases. While methane mitigation alone will not suffice to solve the climate problem, it is a vital part of a cost-effective climate policy. Due to the short atmospheric lifetime, CH4 emission reductions have a rapid effect. Methane mitigation is indispensable for realizing ambitious emission scenarios like IPCC's "B1", which leads to a global temperature increase of less than 2°C by the year 2100. Policy makers should put more emphasis on methane mitigation and aim for realizing low-cost methane mitigation potentials by providing information to all relevant actors and by developing appropriate regulatory and market frameworks. We also recommend including methane in emissions trading schemes.Methane, mitigation, climate change, cost-benefit analysis

A large-scale methane model by incorporating the surface water transport

Author Posting. © American Geophysical Union, 2016. This article is posted here by permission of American Geophysical Union for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences 121 (2016): 1657–1674, doi:10.1002/2016JG003321.The effect of surface water movement on methane emissions is not explicitly considered in most of the current methane models. In this study, a surface water routing was coupled into our previously developed large-scale methane model. The revised methane model was then used to simulate global methane emissions during 2006–2010. From our simulations, the global mean annual maximum inundation extent is 10.6 ± 1.9 km2 and the methane emission is 297 ± 11 Tg C/yr in the study period. In comparison to the currently used TOPMODEL-based approach, we found that the incorporation of surface water routing leads to 24.7% increase in the annual maximum inundation extent and 30.8% increase in the methane emissions at the global scale for the study period, respectively. The effect of surface water transport on methane emissions varies in different regions: (1) the largest difference occurs in flat and moist regions, such as Eastern China; (2) high-latitude regions, hot spots in methane emissions, show a small increase in both inundation extent and methane emissions with the consideration of surface water movement; and (3) in arid regions, the new model yields significantly larger maximum flooded areas and a relatively small increase in the methane emissions. Although surface water is a small component in the terrestrial water balance, it plays an important role in determining inundation extent and methane emissions, especially in flat regions. This study indicates that future quantification of methane emissions shall consider the effects of surface water transport.The finacial support for this work is from the Open Fund of State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science of China (OFSLRSS201501); 2 Supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (20720160109).2016-12-2

Variability and quasi-decadal changes in the methane budget overthe period 2000–2012

Following the recent Global Carbon Project (GCP) synthesis of the decadal methane (CH4/ budget over 2000– 2012 (Saunois et al., 2016), we analyse here the same dataset with a focus on quasi-decadal and inter-annual variability in CH4 emissions. The GCP dataset integrates results from topdown studies (exploiting atmospheric observations within an atmospheric inverse-modelling framework) and bottom-up models (including process-based models for estimating land surface emissions and atmospheric chemistry), inventories of anthropogenic emissions, and data-driven approaches.The annual global methane emissions from top-down studies, which by construction match the observed methane growth rate within their uncertainties, all show an increase in total methane emissions over the period 2000–2012, but this increase is not linear over the 13 years. Despite differences between individual studies, the mean emission anomaly of the top-down ensemble shows no significant trend in total methane emissions over the period 2000–2006, during the plateau of atmospheric methane mole fractions, and also over the period 2008–2012, during the renewed atmospheric methane increase. However, the top-down ensemble mean produces an emission shift between 2006 and 2008, leading to 22 [16–32] Tg CH4 yr1 higher methane emissions over the period 2008–2012 compared to 2002–2006. This emission increase mostly originated from the tropics, with a smaller contribution from mid-latitudes and no significant change from boreal regions. The regional contributions remain uncertain in top-down studies. Tropical South America and South and East Asia seem to contribute the most to the emission increase in the tropics. However, these two regions have only limited atmospheric measurements and remain therefore poorly constrained. The sectorial partitioning of this emission increase between the periods 2002–2006 and 2008–2012 differs from one atmospheric inversion study to another. However, all topdown studies suggest smaller changes in fossil fuel emissions (from oil, gas, and coal industries) compared to the mean of the bottom-up inventories included in this study. This difference is partly driven by a smaller emission change in China from the top-down studies compared to the estimate in the Emission Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGARv4.2) inventory, which should be revised to smaller values in a near future. We apply isotopic signatures to the emission changes estimated for individual studies based on five emission sectors and find that for six individual top-down studies (out of eight) the average isotopic signature of the emission changes is not consistent with the observed change in atmospheric 13CH4. However, the partitioning in emission change derived from the ensemble mean is consistent with this isotopic constraint. At the global scale, the top-down ensemble mean suggests that the dominant contribution to the resumed atmospheric CH4 growth after 2006 comes from microbial sources (more from agriculture and waste sectors than from natural wetlands), with an uncertain but smaller contribution from fossil CH4 emissions. In addition, a decrease in biomass burning emissions (in agreement with the biomass burning emission databases) makes the balance of sources consistent with atmospheric 13CH4 observations. In most of the top-down studies included here, OH concentrations are considered constant over the years (seasonal variations but without any inter-annual variability). As a result, the methane loss (in particular through OH oxidation) varies mainly through the change in methane concentrations and not its oxidants. For these reasons, changes in the methane loss could not be properly investigated in this study, although it may play a significant role in the recent atmospheric methane changes as briefly discussed at the end of the paper.Published11135–111616A. Geochimica per l'ambienteJCR Journa

Implementation and evaluation of a new methane model within a dynamic global vegetation model: LPJ-WHyMe v1.3.1

For the first time, a model that simulates methane emissions from northern peatlands is incorporated directly into a dynamic global vegetation model. The model, LPJ-WHyMe (LPJ <B>W</B>etland <B>Hy</B>drology and <B>Me</B>thane), was previously modified in order to simulate peatland hydrology, permafrost dynamics and peatland vegetation. LPJ-WHyMe simulates methane emissions using a mechanistic approach, although the use of some empirical relationships and parameters is unavoidable. The model simulates methane production, three pathways of methane transport (diffusion, plant-mediated transport and ebullition) and methane oxidation. A sensitivity test was conducted to identify the most important factors influencing methane emissions, followed by a parameter fitting exercise to find the best combination of parameter values for individual sites and over all sites. A comparison of model results to observations from seven sites resulted in normalised root mean square errors (NRMSE) of 0.40 to 1.15 when using the best site parameter combinations and 0.68 to 1.42 when using the best overall parameter combination

Present state of global wetland extent and wetland methane modelling: conclusions from a model inter-comparison project (WETCHIMP)

Global wetlands are believed to be climate sensitive, and are the largest natural emitters of methane (CH4). Increased wetland CH4 emissions could act as a positive feedback to future warming. The Wetland and Wetland CH4 Inter-comparison of Models Project (WETCHIMP) investigated our present ability to simulate large-scale wetland characteristics and corresponding CH4 emissions. To ensure inter-comparability, we used a common experimental protocol driving all models with the same climate and carbon dioxide (CO2) forcing datasets. The WETCHIMP experiments were conducted for model equilibrium states as well as transient simulations covering the last century. Sensitivity experiments investigated model response to changes in selected forcing inputs (precipitation, temperature, and atmospheric CO2 concentration). Ten models participated, covering the spectrum from simple to relatively complex, including models tailored either for regional or global simulations. The models also varied in methods to calculate wetland size and location, with some models simulating wetland area prognostically, while other models relied on remotely sensed inundation datasets, or an approach intermediate between the two. Four major conclusions emerged from the project. First, the suite of models demonstrate extensive disagreement in their simulations of wetland areal extent and CH4 emissions, in both space and time. Simple metrics of wetland area, such as the latitudinal gradient, show large variability, principally between models that use inundation dataset information and those that independently determine wetland area. Agreement between the models improves for zonally summed CH4 emissions, but large variation between the models remains. For annual global CH4 emissions, the models vary by ±40% of the all-model mean (190 Tg CH4 yr−1). Second, all models show a strong positive response to increased atmospheric CO2 concentrations (857 ppm) in both CH4 emissions and wetland area. In response to increasing global temperatures (+3.4 °C globally spatially uniform), on average, the models decreased wetland area and CH4 fluxes, primarily in the tropics, but the magnitude and sign of the response varied greatly. Models were least sensitive to increased global precipitation (+3.9 % globally spatially uniform) with a consistent small positive response in CH4 fluxes and wetland area. Results from the 20th century transient simulation show that interactions between climate forcings could have strong non-linear effects. Third, we presently do not have sufficient wetland methane observation datasets adequate to evaluate model fluxes at a spatial scale comparable to model grid cells (commonly 0.5°). This limitation severely restricts our ability to model global wetland CH4 emissions with confidence. Our simulated wetland extents are also difficult to evaluate due to extensive disagreements between wetland mapping and remotely sensed inundation datasets. Fourth, the large range in predicted CH4 emission rates leads to the conclusion that there is both substantial parameter and structural uncertainty in large-scale CH4 emission models, even after uncertainties in wetland areas are accounted for