Search

Methane is the second most important greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide, and accounts for around 10 % of total European Union greenhouse gases emissions. Given that the atmospheric methane budget over a region depends on its terrestrial and aquatic methane sources, inverse modeling techniques appear as a powerful tools for identifying critical areas that can later be submitted to emission mitigation strategies. In this regard, an inverse modeling system of methane emissions for Europe is being implemented based on the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model: the Aarhus University Methane Inversion Algorithm (AUMIA) v1.0. The forward modeling component of AUMIA consists of the WRF model coupled to a multipurpose global database of methane anthropogenic emissions. To assure transport consistency during the inversion process, the backward modeling component will be based on the WRF model coupled to a lagrangian particle dispersion module. A description of the modeling tools, input data sets and one-year forward modeling evaluation from April 01, 2018 to March 31, 2019 is provided in this paper. The a posteriori methane emission estimates, including a more focused inverse modeling for Denmark, will be provided in a second paper. A good general agreement is found between the modeling results and observations based on the TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI) onboard the Sentinel-5 Precursor satellite. Model-observation discrepancies for summer peak season are in line with previous studies conducted over urban areas in central Europe, with relative differences between simulated concentrations and observational data in this study ranging from 1 to 2%. Domain-wide correlation coefficients and root-mean-square-errors for summer months ranged from 0.4 to 0.5 and from 27 to 30 ppb, respectively. For winter months, otherwise, model-observation discrepancies show a significant overestimation of anthropogenic emissions over the study region, with relative differences ranging from 2 to 3%. Domain-wide correlation coefficients and root-mean-square-errors in this case ranged from 0.1 to 0.4 and from 33 to 50 ppb, respectively, indicating that a more refined inverse analysis assessment will be required for this season. According to modeling results, the methane enhancement above the background concentrations came almost entirely from anthropogenicsources; however, these sources contributed with only up to 2 % to the methane total column concentration. Contributions from natural sources (wetlands and termites) and biomass burning were not relevant during the study period. The results found in this study contribute with a new model evaluation of methane concentrations over Europe, and demonstrate a huge and under explored potential for methane inverse modeling using improved TROPOMI products in large-scale applications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]