![]() |
||||||||||||||
|
Australia: The Land Where Time Began |
||||||||||||||
|
Atmospheric Methane Evolution the Last 40 Years
An increase in global mean surface methane (CH4) of about 180
parts per billion (ppb) (above 10%) of the period 1984-2012 has been
observed at surface sites. Large fluctuations in the annual growth rate
have been recorded over this period of time. In this paper Dalsøren et
al. report their
investigations of the atmospheric CH4 evolution over the
period 1970-2012 with the Oslo CTM3 global chemical transport model
(CTM) in a bottom-up approach. They assessed thoroughly data derived
from surface measurement sites in international networks and selected a
subset that was suited for comparisons with the output from CTM.
According to Dalsøren et al.
they compared model results and observations in order to understand the
causes of both long-term trends and short-term variations. They were
able to reproduce the seasonal and year-to-year variations and shifts
between years with consecutive growth and stagnation, at a global as
well as regional scale by using Oslo CTM3. Over the period the overall
CH4 trend is reproduced though the model does not reproduce
the strength of the growth for some periods. The growth that is observed
after 2006 is overestimated by the model in all regions. This appears to
be explained by an increase in anthropogenic emissions in Asia that is
overly strong, having a global impact. Other studies that question the
timing or strength of the changes in emission in Asia in the EDGAR v4.2
emission inventory over recent decades are questioned by the findings of
this study. Changes in sources not only control the evolution of CH4,
but also changes in the chemical loss in the atmosphere and uptake by
the soil. The lifetime of atmospheric CH4 is an indicator of
the loss of CH4. The lifetime of atmospheric CH4
decreases by more than 8 % from 1970-2012 in the simulations in this
study, which is a significant reduction of residence time of this
important greenhouse gas. Most of this is driven by changes in CO and NOx
emissions, specific humidity, and ozone column, and Dalsøren et
al. provide simple prognostic
equations for the relations between those and the lifetime of the CH4.
Substantial growth in the chemical CH4 loss, relative to its
burden, and dampens the growth of CH4.
Over the industrial era the abundance of atmospheric CH4 more
than doubled. The irradiative forcing that resulted is second after CO2
in terms of atmospheric forcing from greenhouse gases (Myhre et
al., 2013). A high degree of
uncertainty has remained regarding the contributions from
i)
specific sectors of source and regions to the CH4 emissions
(Neef et al., 2010; Kirschke
et al., 2013; Houweling et
al., 2014; Melton et
al., 2014; Melton et
al., 2013; Bruhwiler et
al., 2014: Schwietzke et
al., 2014; Bridgham et
al., 2013: Pison et
al., 2009; Ciais et
al., 2013),
ii)
The underlying factors that contribute to trends that are observed
(Dlugokencky et al., 2009,
2003; Wang et al., 2004;Kai
et al., 2011; Aydin et
al., 2011; Simpson et
al., 2012; Bousquet et
al., 2006, 2011; Pison et
al., 2013; Bergamaschi et
al., 2013; Monteil et
al., 2011; Ghosh et
al., 2015; Nisbet et.
al., 2014; Fiore et
al., 2006; Levin et
al., 2012), and
iii)
In feedbacks from the biosphere and permafrost (Bridgham et
al., 2013; Melton et
al., 2013; Isaksen et
al., 2011; O’Connor et
al., 2010).
The uncertainty in the understanding of current budgets, recent trends
and feedbacks limit the degree of confidence in the accuracy projecting
into the future evolution of CH4. Near-term warming, as a
result of its strong impact on climate on a 20 year time frame (Myhre et
al., 2013) would be
accelerated by increasing atmospheric CH4. The levels of
ozone in the surface air would also be increased by enhanced levels of
CH4 (Fiore et al.,
2008, 2012; West & Fiore, 2005; Isaksen et
al., 2014), and thereby
worsen the effects of air pollution on vegetation, crops, and human
health.
This study aimed to increase understanding of CH4 by
providing a detailed analysis on global and regional evolution of CH4
over the last 40 years. Essential natural and anthropogenic drivers that
control the atmospheric CH4 budget over the period, was
investigated by this study, with a particular focus on the last 15
years. The sinks are dependent on the capacity of the atmosphere for
oxidation, which is determined by complex chemical and meteorological
interactions. This study attempts to reveal the key chemical components
and meteorological factors which affect recent changes in the oxidation
capacity. This study compared model studies and observations in order to
understand causes for both long-term trends and short-term variations
(year-to-year). Reasons for differences between CH4 trends
were also addressed by this study. The study used the methods that are
described in Sect. 2. The results from the main analysis of this study
are presented in sect. 3 and they were discussed in a broader context
related to findings from other studies. The supplement presented
additional sensitivity studies. The findings of this study are
summarised in Sect. 4.
Summary and conclusions
It has been made hard for bottom-up and well as top-down studies to
settle the global CH4 budget, untangle the causes for recent
trends and predict evolution of CH4 in the future, by
uncertainties in physical and chemical processes in models, data that is
input on emissions and meteorology, and limited spatial and temporal
coverage of measurement data (Ciais et
al., 2013; Kirschke et
al., 2013; Nisbet et
al., 2014).
The chances of understanding
more pieces in the big puzzle increase as the level of quality and
detail of models, input data, and measurement data increase. According
to Dalsøren et al. this study
is an effort in such a perspective.
In the bottom-up approach of this model, a global chemical transport
model (CTM) was used in order to study the evolution of atmospheric CH4
over the period 1970-2012. A thorough comparison with CH4
measurements from surface stations that cover all the regions of the
Earth is included in this study. At most stations the seasonal
variations are reproduced. The observed evolution of CH4 on
interannual as well as decadal time scales was reproduced in the model.
Major drivers for year-to-year variation of CH4 are
variations in wetland emissions. With regard to trends, the causes have
been much debated, as has been discussed in previous sections. There is
no consensus on the relative contributions from individual emission
sectors, or the share of natural vs. anthropogenic sources. The fact the
much of the regional changes that have been observed is captured in the
simulations of this study indicates that the transport and chemistry
schemes of Dalsøren et al.
perform well and that emission inventories that were applied are
reasonable with regard to temporal, spatial, sectoral, and natural vs.
anthropogenic distribution of emissions. There are, however, some large
discrepancies in the performance of the model which questions the
accuracy of the CH4 emission data in certain regions and
periods. For recent years potential flaws have been pinpointed when the
model simulations are more complete with regard to input data (e.g.
emissions, variable meteorology etc.) and more measurements are
available for comparison. Following
a period from 2000 to 2006, which was a period of stable CH4
levels, increasing levels are shown from 2006 in both hemispheres.
Beginning in 2006, the model overestimates the growth in all regions, in
Asia in particular. In most regions of the world the CH4
trends are influenced by large growth of emissions in Asia. Other
studies are supported by the findings of this study that suggest that
recent growth in anthropogenic emissions in Asia is too high in the
EDGAR v4.2 inventory. Dalsøren et
al. say they also question the emission trends in Asia in the 1990s
and the beginning of the 2000s in the EDGAR v4.2 inventory, based on the
results from their model and comparison between ECLIPSE and EDGAR v4.2
emissions, Though the limited number of measurement sites in Asia makes
it difficult to validate this.
The evolution of CH4 that is modelled also depends on changes
in the atmospheric CH4 loss. The lifetime of the atmospheric
CH4 is an indicator of the loss of CH4. In the
simulations of Dalsøren et al.,
the lifetime of CH4 decreases by more than 8% from 1970 to
2012. Increased capacity of the atmosphere for oxidation is the reason
for the large change. In theory, such large changes are driven by
complex interactions between a number of chemical components and
meteorological factors. The analysis of Dalsøren et
al. reveals, however, that
changes in specific humidity, NOx/CO emission ratio, and
total ozone column, are key factors for the development. Predicting the
lifetime of CH4 by a combination of these parameters in a
simple equation is statistically valid. The change that is calculated in
the lifetime of atmospheric CH4 is within the range that is
reported by most other bottom-up models. Findings from these studies do
not, however, agree fully with top-down approaches that use observations
of CH3CCL3 or 14CO.
The growth in CH4 over the last decades would have been much
higher without the calculated increase in oxidation capacity. It is also
likely that the loss of CH4 contributed to the stagnation of
the CH4 growth between 2001 and 2006. Over the last few
years, however, the loss has deviated from its steady increase over the
previous decades. It appears that much of this deviation is caused by
variation in meteorology. It was revealed by simulations in this study
that the accounting for variation in meteorology has a strong effect on
the loss of CH4. In turn, this affects inter-annual and
long-term changes in CH4 burden. A stabilisation of loss of
CH4, which resulted mainly from meteorological variability,
is likely to have contributed to a continuing increase (2009-2012) in CH4
burden following high emission years in 2007 and 2008. This could also
contribute to growth of CH4 in the future due to the long
response time. There are extra uncertainties in the results of the
model, however, after 2009 that are the result of a lack of
comprehensive emission inventories. It would have been a very valuable
piece for model studies that try to close the gaps in the CH4
puzzle if there was a new inventory or update of existing ones with
sector[-vice?] separation of emission for recent years (2009-2015).
Dalsøren et al. suggest it
will also provide important fundament for predictions that are more
accurate of future CH4 levels and various mitigation studies.
|
Author: M. H. Monroe
|
|||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
| Author: M.H.Monroe Email: admin@austhrutime.com Sources & Further reading | ||||||||||||||