Search

The ongoing development of the Global Carbon Project (GCP) global methane (CH4 ) budget shows a continuation of increasing CH4 emissions and CH4 accumulation in the atmosphere during 2000-2017. Here, we decompose the global budget into 19 regions (18 land and 1 oceanic) and five key source sectors to spatially attribute the observed global trends. A comparison of top-down (TD) (atmospheric and transport model-based) and bottom-up (BU) (inventory- and process model-based) CH4 emission estimates demonstrates robust temporal trends with CH4 emissions increasing in 16 of the 19 regions. Five regions-China, Southeast Asia, USA, South Asia, and Brazil-account for >40% of the global total emissions (their anthropogenic and natural sources together totaling >270 Tg CH4  yr-1 in 2008-2017). Two of these regions, China and South Asia, emit predominantly anthropogenic emissions (>75%) and together emit more than 25% of global anthropogenic emissions. China and the Middle East show the largest increases in total emission rates over the 2000 to 2017 period with regional emissions increasing by >20%. In contrast, Europe and Korea and Japan show a steady decline in CH4 emission rates, with total emissions decreasing by ~10% between 2000 and 2017. Coal mining, waste (predominantly solid waste disposal) and livestock (especially enteric fermentation) are dominant drivers of observed emissions increases while declines appear driven by a combination of waste and fossil emission reductions. As such, together these sectors present the greatest risks of further increasing the atmospheric CH4 burden and the greatest opportunities for greenhouse gas abatement.

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), provides a consolidated synthesis of CH 4 emissions using bottom-up (BU) and top-down (TD) approaches for the European Union (EU), and is expanded to include seven additional countries with large anthropogenic and/or natural emissions (the USA, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Russia, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DR Congo)). Our aim is to demonstrate the use of different emission estimates to help improve national GHG emission inventories for a diverse geographical range of stakeholders. We use 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. Comparing NGHGIs with other approaches highlights that different system boundaries are a key source of divergence. A key system boundary difference is whether anthropogenic and natural fluxes are included and, if they are, how fluxes belonging to these two sources are partitioned. Over the studied period, the total CH 4 emission estimates in the EU, the USA, and Russia show a steady decreasing trend since 1990, while for the non-Annex I emitters analyzed in this study, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, and DR Congo, CH 4 emissions have generally increased. Quantitatively, in the EU the mean of 2015–2020 anthropogenic UNFCCC NGHGIs (15±1.8 Tg CH 4 yr -1) and the mean of the BU CH 4 emissions (17.8 (16–19) Tg CH 4 yr -1) generally agree on the magnitude, while inversions show higher emission estimates (medians of 21 (19–22) Tg CH 4 yr -1 and 24 (22–25) Tg CH 4 yr -1 for the three regional and six global inversions, respectively), as they include natural emissions, which for the EU were quantified at 6.6 Tg CH 4 yr -1 (Petrescu et al., 2023). Similarly, for the other Annex I parties in this study (the USA and Russia), the gap between the BU anthropogenic and total TD emissions is partly explained by the natural emissions. For the non-Annex I parties, anthropogenic CH 4 estimates from UNFCCC BURs show large differences compared to the other global-inventory-based estimates and even more compared to atmospheric ones. This poses an important potential challenge to monitoring the progress of the global CH 4 pledge and the global stocktake. Our analysis provides a useful baseline to prepare for the influx of inventories from non-Annex I parties as regular reporting starts under the enhanced transparency framework of the Paris Agreement. By systematically comparing the BU and 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 the BU and TD approaches and to better quantify the remaining uncertainty. TD methods may emerge as a powerful tool to help improve NGHGIs of CH 4 emissions, but further confidence is needed in the comparability and robustness of the estimates. The referenced datasets related to figures are available at 10.5281/zenodo.12818506 (Petrescu et al., 2024). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Meteorological fields calculated by numerical weather prediction (NWP) models drive offline chemical transport models (CTMs) to solve the transport, chemical reactions, and atmospheric interaction over the geographical domain of interest. HARMONIE (HIRLAM ALADIN Research on Mesoscale Operational NWP in Euromed) is a state-of-the-art non-hydrostatic NWP community model used at several European weather agencies to forecast weather at the local and/or regional scale. In this work, the HARMONIE WINS50 (cycle 43 cy43) reanalysis dataset at a resolution of 0.025° × 0.025° covering an area surrounding the North Sea for the years 2019–2021 was coupled offline to the LOTOS-EUROS (LOng-Term Ozone Simulation-EURopean Operational Smog model, v2.2.002) CTM. The impact of using either meteorological fields from HARMONIE or from ECMWF on LOTOS-EUROS simulations of NO2 has been evaluated against ground-level observations and TROPOMI tropospheric NO2 vertical columns. Furthermore, the difference between crucial meteorological input parameters such as the boundary layer height and the vertical diffusion coefficient between the hydrostatic ECMWF and non-hydrostatic HARMONIE data has been studied, and the vertical profiles of temperature, humidity, and wind are evaluated against meteorological observations at Cabauw in The Netherlands. The results of these first evaluations of the LOTOS-EUROS model performance in both configurations are used to investigate current uncertainties in air quality forecasting in relation to driving meteorological parameters and to assess the potential for improvements in forecasting pollution episodes at high resolutions based on the HARMONIE NWP model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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]

Dust storms pose significant threats to human health and property. Accurate forecasting is crucial for taking precautionary measures. Dust models have suffered from uncertainties from emission and transport factors. Data assimilation can help refine biased models by incorporating available observations, leading to improved analyses and forecasts. The Ensemble Kalman Filter (EnKF) is a widely-used assimilation algorithm that effectively tunes models, particularly in terms of intensity adjustment. However, when the position of the simulation does not align consistently with the observations which is referred to as position error, the EnKF algorithm struggles. This is because its background covariance normally represents intensity uncertainty, while the positional errors in the long distance transport are difficult to be quantified and were usually neglected. In this paper, we propose a novel Neighboring Time Ensemble Kalman Filter (NTEnKF). In addition to the original ensembles quantifying dust loading variation, this methodology introduces extra ensembles from neighboring time for describing the potential spread of dust position. The enlarged ensemble captures both intensity and positional errors, allowing observations to be thoroughly resolved into the assimilation calculations. We tested this method on three major dust storm events that occurred in spring 2021. The results show that position error significantly degraded dust forecasting in terms of RMSE and NMB, and hindered the EnKF from assimilating valid observations. In contrast, the NTEnKF yielded substantial improvements in both dust analysis fields and forecasts compared to the EnKF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]