4.4 Article

Global geological methane emissions: An update of top-down and bottom-up estimates

Journal

ELEMENTA-SCIENCE OF THE ANTHROPOCENE
Volume 7, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

UNIV CALIFORNIA PRESS
DOI: 10.1525/elementa.383

Keywords

Geological methane; Seepage; Global emission estimates; Bottom-up; Top-down

Funding

  1. NASA [NNX17AK20G]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A wide body of literature suggests that geological gas emissions from Earth's degassing are a major methane (CH4) source to the atmosphere. These emissions are from gas-oil seeps, mud volcanoes, microseepage and submarine seepage in sedimentary (petroleum-bearing) basins, and geothermal and volcanic manifestations. Global bottom-up emission estimates, ranging from 30 to 76 Tg CH4 yr(-1), evolved in the last twenty years thanks to the increasing number of flux measurements, and improved knowledge of emission factors and area distribution (activity). Based on recent global grid maps and updated evaluations of mud volcano and microseepage emissions, the global geo-CH4 source is now (bottom-up) estimated to be 45 (27-63) Tg yr(-1), i.e., similar to 8% of total CH4 sources. Top-down verifications, based on independent approaches (including ethane and isotopic observations) from different authors, are consistent with the range of the bottom-up estimate. However, a recent top-down study, based on radiocarbon analyses in polar ice cores, suggests that geological, fossil (C-14-free) CH4 emissions about 11,600 years ago were much lower (<15 Tg yr(-1), 95% CI) and that this source strength could also be valid today. Here, we show that (i) this geo-CH4 downward revision implies a fossil fuel industry CH4 upward revision of at least 24-35%. (ii) The 95% CI estimates of the recent radiocarbon analysis do not overlap with those of 5 out of 6 other bottom-up and top-down studies (no overlap for the 90% CI estimates). (iii) The contrasting lines of evidence require further discussion, and research opportunities exist to help explain this gap.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available