Search

Monitoring the spatial distribution and trends in surface greenhouse gas (GHG) fluxes, as well as flux attribution to natural and anthropogenic processes, is essential to track progress under the Paris Agreement and to inform its Global Stocktake. This study updates earlier syntheses (Petrescu et al., 2020, 2021, 2023) and provides a consolidated synthesis of CH4 emissions using bottom-up (BU) and top-down (TD) approaches for the European Union (EU) and seven additional countries with large anthropogenic and/or natural emissions (USA, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Russia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DR Congo)). The work utilizes updated National GHG Inventories (NGHGIs) reported by Annex I Parties under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 2023 and the latest available Biennial Update Reports (BURs) reported by non-Annex I Parties. The NGHGIs are considered in an integrated analysis that also relies on independent flux estimates from global inventory datasets, process-based models, inverse modeling and, when available, respective uncertainties. Whenever possible, it extends the period to 2021. Comparing NGHGIs with other approaches reveals that differences in the emission sources that are included in the estimate is a key source of divergence between approaches. A key system boundary difference is whether both anthropogenic and natural fluxes are included and, if they are, how fluxes belonging to these two sources are grouped/partitioned. Additionally, the natural fluxes are sensitive to the prior geospatial distribution of emissions in atmospheric inversions. Over the studied period, the total CH4 emissions in the EU, USA, and Russia show a steady decreasing trend since 1990, while for the non-EU emitters analyzed in this study, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, and DR Congo, CH4 emissions have generally increased. In the EU, the anthropogenic BU approaches are reporting relatively similar mean emissions over 2015 to 2020 of 18.5 ± 2.7 Tg CH4 yr-1 for EDGAR v7.0, 16 Tg CH4 yr-1 for GAINS and 19 Tg CH4 yr-1 for FAOSTAT, with the NGHGI estimates of 15 ± 1.8 Tg CH4 yr-1. Inversions give higher emission estimates as they include natural emissions. Over the same period, the three high-resolution regional inversions report a mean emission of 21 (19-25) Tg CH4 yr-1, while the mean of six coarser-resolution global inversions results in emission estimates of 24 (23-25) Tg CH4 yr-1. The magnitude of BU natural emissions (peatland and mineral soils, lakes and reservoirs, geological and biomass burning) accounts for 6.6 Tg CH4 yr-1 (Petrescu et al., 2023a) and explains the differences between the TD inversions and the BU estimates of anthropogenic emissions (including NGHGIs). For the other Annex I Parties in this study (USA and Russia), over 2015 to 2020, the mean of the four anthropogenic BU approaches reports 18.5 (13-27.9) Tg CH4 yr-1 for Russia and 29.1 (23.5- Tg CH4 yr-1 for the USA, against total TD mean estimates of 37 (30-43) Tg CH4 yr-1 and 43.4 (42-48) Tg CH4 yr-1, respectively. The averaged BU and TD natural emissions account for 16.2 Tg CH4 yr-1 for Russia and 14.6 Tg CH4 yr-1 for the USA, partly explaining the gap between the BU anthropogenic and total TD emissions. For the non-Annex I Parties, anthropogenic CH4 estimates from UNFCCC BURs show large differences with the other global inventory-based estimates and even more with atmospheric-based ones. This poses an important potential challenge to monitoring the progress of the global CH4 pledge and the Global Stocktake, not only from the availability of data but also its accuracy. By systematically comparing the BU with TD methods, this study provides recommendations for more robust comparisons of available data sources and hopes to steadily engage more Parties in using observational methods to complement their UNFCCC inventories, as well as considering their natural emissions. With anticipated improvements in atmospheric modeling and observations, as well as modeling of natural fluxes, future development needs to resolve knowledge gaps in both BU and TD approaches and to better quantify remaining uncertainty. Consequently, TD methods may emerge as a powerful tool for verifying emission inventories for CH4, and other GHGs and informing international climate policy. The referenced datasets related to figures are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10276087 (Petrescu et al., 2023b). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Knowledge of the spatial distribution of the fluxes of greenhouse gases and their temporal variability as well as flux attribution to natural and anthropogenic processes is essential to monitoring the progress in mitigating anthropogenic emissions under the Paris Agreement and to inform its Global Stocktake. This study provides a consolidated synthesis of CH4 and N2O emissions using bottom-up (BU) and top-down (TD) approaches for the European Union and UK (EU27+UK) and updates earlier syntheses (Petrescu et al., 2020, 2021). The work integrates updated emission inventory data, process-based model results, data-driven sector model results, inverse modelling estimates, and extends the previous period 1990-2017 to 2020. BU and TD products are compared with European National GHG Inventories (NGHGI) reported by Parties under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 2021. The uncertainties of NGHGIs were evaluated using the standard deviation obtained by varying parameters of inventory calculations, reported by the EU Member States following the guidelines of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and harmonized by gap-filling procedures. Variation in estimates produced with other methods, such as atmospheric inversion models (TD) or spatially disaggregated inventory datasets (BU), arise from diverse sources including within-model uncertainty related to parameterization as well as structural differences between models. By comparing NGHGIs with other approaches, the activities included are a key source of bias between estimates e.g. anthropogenic and natural fluxes, which, in atmospheric inversions are sensitive to the prior geospatial distribution of emissions. For CH4 emissions, over the updated 2015-2019 period, which covers a sufficiently robust number of overlapping estimates, and most importantly the NGHGIs, the anthropogenic BU approaches are directly comparable, accounting for mean emissions of 20.5 Tg CH4 yr-1 (EDGAR v6.0, last year 2018) and 18.4 Tg CH4 yr-1 (GAINS, 2015), close to the NGHGI estimates of 17.5 ± 2.1 Tg CH4 yr-1. TD inversions estimates give higher emission estimates, as they also detect natural emissions. Over the same period, high resolution regional TD inversions report a mean emission of 34 Tg CH4 yr-1. Coarser-resolution global-scale TD inversions result in emission estimates of 23 Tg CH4 yr-1 and 24 Tg CH4 yr-1 inferred from GOSAT and surface (SURF) network atmospheric measurements, respectively. The magnitude of natural peatland and mineral soils emissions from the JSBACH-HIMMELI model, natural rivers, lakes and reservoirs emissions, geological sources and biomass burning together could account for the gap between NGHGI and inversions and account for 8 Tg CH4 yr-1. For N2O emissions, over the 2015-2019 period, both BU products (EDGAR v6.0 and GAINS) report a mean value of anthropogenic emissions of 0.9 Tg N2O yr-1, close to the NGHGI data (0.8 ± 55 % Tg N2O yr-1). Over the same period, the mean of TD global and regional inversions was 1.4 Tg N2O yr-1 (excluding TOMCAT which reported no data). The TD and BU comparison method defined in this study can be 'operationalized' for future annual updates for the calculation of CH4 and N2O budgets at the national and EU27+UK scales. Future comparability will be enhanced with further steps involving analysis at finer temporal resolutions and estimation of emissions over intra-annual timescales, of great importance for CH4 and N2O, which may help identify sector contributions to divergence between prior and posterior estimates at the annual/inter-annual scale. Even if currently comparison between CH4 and N2O inversions estimates and NGHGIs is highly uncertain because of the large spread in the inversion results, TD inversions inferred from atmospheric observations represent the most independent data against which inventory totals can be compared. With anticipated improvements in atmospheric modelling and observations, as well as modelling of natural fluxes, TD inversions may arguably emerge as the most powerful tool for verifying emissions inventories for CH4, N2O and other GHGs. The referenced datasets related to figures are visualized at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6992472 (Petrescu et al., 2022). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reliable quantification of the sources and sinks of greenhouse gases, together with trends and uncertainties, is essential to monitoring the progress in mitigating anthropogenic emissions under the Paris Agreement. This study provides a consolidated synthesis of CH4 and N2O emissions with consistently derived state-of-the-art bottom-up (BU) and top-down (TD) data sources for the European Union and UK (EU27+UK). We integrate recent emission inventory data, ecosystem process-based model results, and inverse modelling estimates over the period 1990-2018. BU and TD products are compared with European National GHG Inventories (NGHGI) reported to the UN climate convention secretariat UNFCCC in 2019. For uncertainties, we used for NGHGI the standard deviation obtained by varying parameters of inventory calculations, reported by the Member States following the IPCC guidelines recommendations. For atmospheric inversion models (TD) or other inventory datasets (BU), we defined uncertainties from the spread between different model estimates or model specific uncertainties when reported. In comparing NGHGI with other approaches, a key source of bias is the activities included, e.g. anthropogenic versus anthropogenic plus natural fluxes. In inversions, the separation between anthropogenic and natural emissions is sensitive to the geospatial prior distribution of emissions. Over the 2011-2015 period, which is the common denominator of data availability between all sources, the anthropogenic BU approaches are directly comparable, reporting mean emissions of 20.8 Tg CH4 yr-1 (EDGAR v5.0) and 19.0 Tg CH4 yr-1 (GAINS), consistent with the NGHGI estimates of 18.9 ± 1.7 Tg CH4 yr-1. TD total inversions estimates give higher emission estimates, as they also include natural emissions. Over the same period regional TD inversions with higher resolution atmospheric transport models give a mean emission of 28.8 Tg CH4 yr-1. Coarser resolution global TD inversions are consistent with regional TD inversions, for global inversions with GOSAT satellite data (23.3 Tg CH4yr-1) and surface network (24.4 Tg CH4 yr-1). The magnitude of natural peatland emissions from the JSBACH-HIMMELI model, natural rivers and lakes emissions and geological sources together account for the gap between NGHGI and inversions and account for 5.2 Tg CH4 yr-1. For N2O emissions, over the 2011-2015 period, both BU approaches (EDGAR v5.0 and GAINS) give a mean value of anthropogenic emissions of 0.8 and 0.9 Tg N2O yr-1 respectively, agreeing with the NGHGI data (0.9 ± 0.6 Tg N2O yr-1). Over the same period, the average of the three total TD global and regional inversions was 1.3 ± 0.4 and 1.3 ± 0.1 Tg N2O yr-1 respectively, compared to 0.9 Tg N2O yr-1 from the BU data. The TU and BU comparison method defined in this study can be operationalized for future yearly updates for the calculation of CH4 and N2O budgets both at EU+UK scale and at national scale. The referenced datasets related to figures are visualized at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4288969 (Petrescu et al., 2020). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]