Burning of Traditional Biofuels and the Global Methane Budget

Understanding biomass burning is important for understanding atmospheric carbon budgets. The two main types of biomass burning are wildfires, and the burning of traditional biofuels. Both types of biomass burning produce methane, among other gases. Satellites in space help quantify area burned from wildfires. However, it is much more difficult to quantify the burning of traditional biofuels, such as animal waste, fuelwood, charcoal, crop material, and peat. Therefore, limited information is available regarding these process, and how they contribute to human caused climate change. Here, we have developed a global inventory of methane emissions from the burning of traditional biofuels over a 15 year time span. Using information from the UN Energy Statistics Database, a global upper estimate of annual methane emissions from this type of biomass burning was calculated for the years 2001-2015. The equation had three components: the final energy consumption of each of the considered sources, in each country, for each year; the relative smoldering or flaming of that material when burned; and the emission factor for methane gas specific to each material. Results show it is evident that on a global scale, methane emissions from the burning of traditional biofuels are increasing over this time span. In fact, the upper estimate calculated suggests a 17.5% increase in global methane emissions from 2001-2015 from this type of biomass burning. Charcoal production and consumption are leading these increases, specifically in tropical regions. By 2015, the estimate suggests 17.5 Tg of methane is being emitted from the burning of traditional biofuels. Thus, methane emissions from burning traditional biofuels are not negligible when evaluating the global methane budget. This information is crucial when assessing methane emissions from other sources such as microbial sources and fossil fuels

Detecting changes in Arctic methane emissions: limitations of the inter-polar difference of atmospheric mole fractions

We consider the utility of the annual inter-polar difference (IPD) as a metric for changes in Arctic emissions of methane (CH4). The IPD has been previously defined as the difference between weighted annual means of CH4 mole fraction data collected at stations from the two polar regions (defined as latitudes poleward of 53∘&thinsp;N and 53∘&thinsp;S, respectively). This subtraction approach (IPD) implicitly assumes that extra-polar CH4 emissions arrive within the same calendar year at both poles. We show using a continuous version of the IPD that the metric includes not only changes in Arctic emissions but also terms that represent atmospheric transport of air masses from lower latitudes to the polar regions. We show the importance of these atmospheric transport terms in understanding the IPD using idealized numerical experiments with the TM5 global 3-D atmospheric chemistry transport model that is run from 1980 to 2010. A northern mid-latitude pulse in January 1990, which increases prior emission distributions, arrives at the Arctic with a higher mole fraction and ≃12 months earlier than at the Antarctic. The perturbation at the poles subsequently decays with an e-folding lifetime of ≃4 years. A similarly timed pulse emitted from the tropics arrives with a higher value at the Antarctic ≃11 months earlier than at the Arctic. This perturbation decays with an e-folding lifetime of ≃7 years. These simulations demonstrate that the assumption of symmetric transport of extra-polar emissions to the poles is not realistic, resulting in considerable IPD variations due to variations in emissions and atmospheric transport. We assess how well the annual IPD can detect a constant annual growth rate of Arctic emissions for three scenarios, 0.5&thinsp;%, 1&thinsp;%, and 2&thinsp;%, superimposed on signals from lower latitudes, including random noise. We find that it can take up to 16 years to detect the smallest prescribed trend in Arctic emissions at the 95&thinsp;% confidence level. Scenarios with higher, but likely unrealistic, growth in Arctic emissions are detected in less than a decade. We argue that a more reliable measurement-driven approach would require data collected from all latitudes, emphasizing the importance of maintaining a global monitoring network to observe decadal changes in atmospheric greenhouse gases.</p

Upward revision of global fossil fuel methane emissions based on isotope database

Methane has the second-largest global radiative forcing impact of anthropogenic greenhouse gases after carbon dioxide, but our understanding of the global atmospheric methane budget is incomplete. The global fossil fuel industry (production and usage of natural gas, oil and coal) is thought to contribute 15 to 22 per cent of methane emissions to the total atmospheric methane budget. However, questions remain regarding methane emission trends as a result of fossil fuel industrial activity and the contribution to total methane emissions of sources from the fossil fuel industry and from natural geological seepage, which are often co-located. Here we re-evaluate the global methane budget and the contribution of the fossil fuel industry to methane emissions based on long-term global methane and methane carbon isotope records. We compile the largest isotopic methane source signature database so far, including fossil fuel, microbial and biomass-burning methane emission sources. We find that total fossil fuel methane emissions (fossil fuel industry plus natural geological seepage) are not increasing over time, but are 60 to 110 per cent greater than current estimates owing to large revisions in isotope source signatures. We show that this is consistent with the observed global latitudinal methane gradient. After accounting for natural geological methane seepage, we find that methane emissions from natural gas, oil and coal production and their usage are 20 to 60 per cent greater than inventories. Our findings imply a greater potential for the fossil fuel industry to mitigate anthropogenic climate forcing, but we also find that methane emissions from natural gas as a fraction of production have declined from approximately 8 per cent to approximately 2 per cent over the past three decades.Published88-916A. Geochimica per l'ambienteJCR Journa

Methane emissions from Alaska in 2012 from CARVE airborne observations

We determined methane (CH4) emissions from Alaska, USA using airborne measurements from the Carbon Arctic Reservoirs Vulnerability Experiment (CARVE). Atmospheric sampling was conducted between May and September 2012, and analyzed using a customized version of the Polar Weather Research and Forecast model linked to a Lagrangian particle dispersion model (Stochastic Time-Inverted Lagrangian Transport Model). We estimated growing season CH4 fluxes of 8 2 mg CH4 m 2 d 1 averaged over all of Alaska, corresponding to fluxes from wetlands of 56+22 13 20 mg CH4 m 2 d 1 if we assumed that wetlands are the only source from the land surface (all uncertainties are 95% confidence intervals from a bootstrapping analysis). Fluxes roughly doubled from May to July, then decreased gradually in August and September. Integrated emissions totaled 25 2:1 0:5 Tg CH4 for Alaska from May to September 2012, close to the average (2.3, range 0.7-6 Tg CH4) predicted by various land surface models and inversion analyses for the growing season. Methane emissions from boreal Alaska were larger than from the North Slope; the monthly regional flux estimates show no evidence of enhanced 30 emissions during early spring or late fall, although these bursts may be more localized in time and space than can be detected by our analysis. These results provide an important baseline to which future studies can be compared.Engineering and Applied Science

Maximum likelihood estimation of covariance parameters for Bayesian atmospheric trace gas surface flux inversions

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/94664/1/jgrd12182.pd

Designing the climate observing system of the future

© The Author(s), 2018. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Earth's Future 6 (2018): 80–102, doi:10.1002/2017EF000627.Climate observations are needed to address a large range of important societal issues including sea level rise, droughts, floods, extreme heat events, food security, and freshwater availability in the coming decades. Past, targeted investments in specific climate questions have resulted in tremendous improvements in issues important to human health, security, and infrastructure. However, the current climate observing system was not planned in a comprehensive, focused manner required to adequately address the full range of climate needs. A potential approach to planning the observing system of the future is presented in this article. First, this article proposes that priority be given to the most critical needs as identified within the World Climate Research Program as Grand Challenges. These currently include seven important topics: melting ice and global consequences; clouds, circulation and climate sensitivity; carbon feedbacks in the climate system; understanding and predicting weather and climate extremes; water for the food baskets of the world; regional sea-level change and coastal impacts; and near-term climate prediction. For each Grand Challenge, observations are needed for long-term monitoring, process studies and forecasting capabilities. Second, objective evaluations of proposed observing systems, including satellites, ground-based and in situ observations as well as potentially new, unidentified observational approaches, can quantify the ability to address these climate priorities. And third, investments in effective climate observations will be economically important as they will offer a magnified return on investment that justifies a far greater development of observations to serve society's needs

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

The global methane budget 2000–2017

Understanding and quantifying the global methane (CH4) budget is important for assessing realistic pathways to mitigate climate change. Atmospheric emissions and concentrations of CH4 continue to increase, making CH4 the second most important human-influenced greenhouse gas in terms of climate forcing, after carbon dioxide (CO2). The relative importance of CH4 compared to CO2 depends on its shorter atmospheric lifetime, stronger warming potential, and variations in atmospheric growth rate over the past decade, the causes of which are still debated. Two major challenges in reducing uncertainties in the atmospheric growth rate arise from the variety of geographically overlapping CH4 sources and from the destruction of CH4 by short-lived hydroxyl radicals (OH). To address these challenges, we have established a consortium of multidisciplinary scientists under the umbrella of the Global Carbon Project to synthesize and stimulate new research aimed at improving and regularly updating the global methane budget. Following Saunois et al. (2016), we present here the second version of the living review paper dedicated to the decadal methane budget, integrating results of top-down studies (atmospheric observations within an atmospheric inverse-modelling framework) and bottom-up estimates (including process-based models for estimating land surface emissions and atmospheric chemistry, inventories of anthropogenic emissions, and data-driven extrapolations). For the 2008–2017 decade, global methane emissions are estimated by atmospheric inversions (a top-down approach) to be 576 Tg CH4 yr−1 (range 550–594, corresponding to the minimum and maximum estimates of the model ensemble). Of this total, 359 Tg CH4 yr−1 or ∼ 60 % is attributed to anthropogenic sources, that is emissions caused by direct human activity (i.e. anthropogenic emissions; range 336–376 Tg CH4 yr−1 or 50 %–65 %). The mean annual total emission for the new decade (2008–2017) is 29 Tg CH4 yr−1 larger than our estimate for the previous decade (2000–2009), and 24 Tg CH4 yr−1 larger than the one reported in the previous budget for 2003–2012 (Saunois et al., 2016). Since 2012, global CH4 emissions have been tracking the warmest scenarios assessed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Bottom-up methods suggest almost 30 % larger global emissions (737 Tg CH4 yr−1, range 594–881) than top-down inversion methods. Indeed, bottom-up estimates for natural sources such as natural wetlands, other inland water systems, and geological sources are higher than top-down estimates. The atmospheric constraints on the top-down budget suggest that at least some of these bottom-up emissions are overestimated. The latitudinal distribution of atmospheric observation-based emissions indicates a predominance of tropical emissions (∼ 65 % of the global budget, < 30∘ N) compared to mid-latitudes (∼ 30 %, 30–60∘ N) and high northern latitudes (∼ 4 %, 60–90∘ N). The most important source of uncertainty in the methane budget is attributable to natural emissions, especially those from wetlands and other inland waters. Some of our global source estimates are smaller than those in previously published budgets (Saunois et al., 2016; Kirschke et al., 2013). In particular wetland emissions are about 35 Tg CH4 yr−1 lower due to improved partition wetlands and other inland waters. Emissions from geological sources and wild animals are also found to be smaller by 7 Tg CH4 yr−1 by 8 Tg CH4 yr−1, respectively. However, the overall discrepancy between bottom-up and top-down estimates has been reduced by only 5 % compared to Saunois et al. (2016), due to a higher estimate of emissions from inland waters, highlighting the need for more detailed research on emissions factors. Priorities for improving the methane budget include (i) a global, high-resolution map of water-saturated soils and inundated areas emitting methane based on a robust classification of different types of emitting habitats; (ii) further development of process-based models for inland-water emissions; (iii) intensification of methane observations at local scales (e.g., FLUXNET-CH4 measurements) and urban-scale monitoring to constrain bottom-up land surface models, and at regional scales (surface networks and satellites) to constrain atmospheric inversions; (iv) improvements of transport models and the representation of photochemical sinks in top-down inversions; and (v) development of a 3D variational inversion system using isotopic and/or co-emitted species such as ethane to improve source partitioning