4.7 Article

Methane Emission Estimates by the Global High-Resolution Inverse Model Using National Inventories

Journal

REMOTE SENSING
Volume 11, Issue 21, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/rs11212489

Keywords

methane emissions; NTFVAR; GOSAT; EDGARv4.3.2; UNFCCC reports

Funding

  1. GOSAT project at the National Institute for Environmental Studies, Japan [12288]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present a global 0.1 degrees x 0.1 degrees high-resolution inverse model, NIES-TM-FLEXPART-VAR (NTFVAR), and a methane emission evaluation using the Greenhouse Gas Observing Satellite (GOSAT) satellite and ground-based observations from 2010-2012. Prior fluxes contained two variants of anthropogenic emissions, Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR) v4.3.2 and adjusted EDGAR v4.3.2 which were scaled to match the country totals by national reports to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), augmented by biomass burning emissions from Global Fire Assimilation System (GFASv1.2) and wetlands Vegetation Integrative Simulator for Trace Gases (VISIT). The ratio of the UNFCCC-adjusted global anthropogenic emissions to EDGAR is 98%. This varies by region: 200% in Russia, 84% in China, and 62% in India. By changing prior emissions from EDGAR to UNFCCC-adjusted values, the optimized total emissions increased from 36.2 to 46 Tg CH4 yr(-1) for Russia, 12.8 to 14.3 Tg CH4 yr(-1) for temperate South America, and 43.2 to 44.9 Tg CH4 yr(-1) for contiguous USA, and the values decrease from 54 to 51.3 Tg CH4 yr(-1) for China, 26.2 to 25.5 Tg CH4 yr(-1) for Europe, and by 12.4 Tg CH4 yr(-1) for India. The use of the national report to scale EDGAR emissions allows more detailed statistical data and country-specific emission factors to be gathered in place compared to those available for EDGAR inventory. This serves policy needs by evaluating the national or regional emission totals reported to the UNFCCC.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available