using satellites to estimate us methane emissions
DESCRIPTION
Daniel J. Jacob. Using satellites to estimate US methane emissions. with Kevin Wecht , Alex Turner, Melissa Sulprizio. with support from the NASA Carbon Monitoring System. Importance of methane for climate policy. Present-day emission-based forcing of methane is 0.95 W m -2 , - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Using satellites to estimate US methane emissions
Daniel J. Jacob
with Kevin Wecht, Alex Turner, Melissa Sulprizio
with support from the NASA Carbon Monitoring System
Importance of methane for climate policy
• Present-day emission-based forcing of methane is 0.95 W m-2 , compared to 1.8 W m-2 for CO2 (IPCC AR5)
• Climate impact of methane is comparable to CO2 over 20-year horizon
• Methane emission control is a low-cost option for climate policy
• Increases in natural gas production/use, hydrofracking have potential to increase US source of methane
• Methane is a central piece of the President’s Climate Action Plan
Building a methane monitoring system for N America
EDGAR emissionInventory for methane
Can we use satellites together with suborbital observations of methane to monitor methane emissions on the continental scale and test/improve emission inventories in a manner useful to stakeholders?
Methane bottom-up emission inventories for N. America: EDGAR 4.2 (anthropogenic), LPJ (wetlands)
N American totals in Tg a-1
Surface/aircraft studies suggest that these emissions are too low by ~factor 2
AIRS, TES, IASI
Methane observing system in North America
Satellites
2002 2006 2009 20015 2018
Thermal IR
SCIAMACHY 6-day
GOSAT3-day, sparse
TROPOMI GCIRI 1-day geoShortwave IR
Suborbital
CalNex
INTEX-A
SEAC4RS
1/2ox2/3o grid of GEOS-Chem chemical transport model (CTM)
High-resolution inverse analysis system for quantifying methane emissions in North America
GEOS-Chem CTM and its adjoint50 km resolution over N. America
nested in 4ox5o global domain
Observations
Bayesianinversion
Optimized emissionsat 50 km resolution
Validation Verification
EDGAR 4.2 + LPJa priori bottom-up emissions
The same inverse analysis system is used at JPL for CO2 (K. Bowman, PI)
North American methane emission estimatesoptimized by SCIAMACHY + INTEX-A data (Jul-Aug 2004)
1700 1800ppb
SCIAMACHY column methane mixing ratio Correction factors to EDGAR emissions
Livestock Oil & Gas Landfills Coal Mining Other0
5
10
15US anthropogenic emissions (Tg a-1)
EDGAR v4.2 26.6
EPA 28.3
This work 32.7
Wecht et al., in prep.
1000 clusters
Livestock emissions are underestimated by EPA, oil/gas emissions are not
GOSAT methane column mixing ratios, Oct 2009-2010
Retrieval from U. Leicester
Inversion of GOSAT Oct 2009-2010 methane
Nested inversionwith 50x50 km2 resolution
Correction factors to prior emissions (EDGAR 4.2 + LPJ)
Alex Turner, Harvard
Next step: clustering of emissions in the inversion, use new NASA retrieval
Testing the information content of satellite datawith CalNex inversion of methane emissions
CalNex observations GEOS-Chem w/EDGAR v4.2 Correction factors to EDGAR
1800 2000ppb
May-Jun2010
Wecht et al., in prep.
S. Wofsy (Harvard)
Livestock Gas/oil Landfills Other0
0.4
0.8
1.2California emissions (Tg a-1) EDGAR v4.2 1.92
CARB 1.51
This work 2.86
GOSAT observations of methane are too sparseto constrain California emissions
GOSAT data (CalNex period)) Correction factors to EDGAR emissions
Each point =1-10 observations
0.5 1.5
Wecht et al., in prep.
…but they do provide qualitative indication of corrections to emission inventories
TROPOMI (2015 launch) will constrain methane emissions as well as a CalNex-type aircraft campaign
Wecht et al., in prep.
Correction factors to EDGAR emissionsin observation system simulation experiment (OSSE) inversions for CalNex period
A geostationary mission (several current proposals) would allow fine-scale monitoring
Working with stakeholders at the US state level
State-by-state analysis of SCIAMACHY correction factors to EDGARv4.2 emissions
with Iowa Dept. of Natural Resources (Marnie Stein)
State emissions computed w/EPA tools too low by x3.5;now investigating EPA livestock emission factors
with New York Attorney General Office (John Marschilok)State-computed emissions too high by x0.6,reflects overestimate of gas/waste/landfill emissions
Melissa Sulprizio and Kevin Wecht, Harvard
Hog manure?
Large EDGAR source from gas+landfillsis just not there
0 1 2correction factor
What next?
• Develop a clustering algorithm to extract the maximum information from the GOSAT satellite data
• Impose a temperature dependence on livestock emissions (can we assume no seasonality for oil/gas emissions?)
• Conduct a 2009-present inversion of GOSAT data together with surface observations (NOAA, TCCON), interpret results
• Interact with stakeholders (API!) on the implications of results and to guide future work
• Get ready for TROPOMI!
satellites
suborbital platforms
models
AQAST
Pollution monitoringExposure assessmentAQ forecastingSource attribution Quantifying emissionsExternal influencesAQ processesClimate interactions
AQAST
AQAST members
• Daniel Jacob (leader), Loretta Mickley (Harvard)• Tracey Holloway (deputy leader), Steve Ackerman (U. Wisconsin); Bart Sponseller (Wisconsin DNR)• Greg Carmichael (U. Iowa)• Dan Cohan (Rice U.)• Russ Dickerson (U. Maryland)• Bryan Duncan, Yasuko Yoshida, Melanie Follette-Cook (NASA/GSFC); Jennifer Olson (NASA/LaRC)• David Edwards (NCAR) • Arlene Fiore (Columbia Univ.); Meiyun Lin (Princeton)• Jack Fishman, Ben de Foy (Saint Louis U.)• Daven Henze, Jana Milford (U. Colorado)• Edward Hyer, Jeff Reid, Doug Westphal, Kim Richardson (NRL)• Pius Lee, Tianfeng Chai (NOAA/NESDIS)• Yang Liu, Matthew Strickland (Emory U.), Bin Yu (UC Berkeley)• Richard McNider, Arastoo Biazar (U. Alabama – Huntsville)• Brad Pierce (NOAA/NESDIS)• Ted Russell, Yongtao Hu, Talat Odman (Georgia Tech); Lorraine Remer (NASA/GSFC)• David Streets (Argonne)• Jim Szykman (EPA/ORD/NERL)• Anne Thompson, William Ryan, Suellen Haupt (Penn State U.)
What makes AQAST unique?
All AQAST projects connect Earth Science and air quality management: active partnerships with air quality managers with deliverables/outcomes self-organizing to respond quickly to demands flexibility in how it allocates its resources INVESTIGATOR PROJECTS (IPs): members adjust work plans each year to
meet evolving AQ needs “TIGER TEAM” PROJECTS (TTs): multi-member efforts to address
emerging, pressing problems requiring coordinated activity
Recently selected Tiger Team projects include:• Web-enabled AQ management tools• AQ reanalysis• Dynamical natural inputs for AQ models • Source attribution for O3 and PM events over EUS• Oil & gas emissions• Satellite-derived NOx emissions and trends
www.aqast.org: click on “projects” for brief descriptions + link to pdf describing each project
Scope of current AQAST projects
AQ agency
• Local: RAQC, BAAQD• State: TCEQ, MDE, Wisconsin DNR, CARB, Iowa DNR, GAEPD, GFC• Regional: LADCO, EPA Region 8 • National: EPA, NOAA, NPS
Theme
SIP
Mo
del
ing
A
Q p
roce
sses
Mo
nit
ori
ng
A
Q-C
limat
e
B
ackg
rou
nd
IC
/BC
fo
r A
Q m
od
els
Fo
reca
stin
g
E
mis
sio
ns
F
utu
re s
atel
lites
Earth Science resource
Satellites: MODIS, MISR, MOPITT, AIRS, OMI, TES, GOES, GOME-2
Suborbital: ARCTAS, DISCOVER-AQ, ozonesondes, PANDORA
Models: MOZART, CAM, AM-3, GEOS-Chem, RAQMS, STEM, GISS, CMIP
We need to findIndustry partners!
To subscribe to newsletter, send email to [email protected](leave subject and body blank)
Semiannual AQAST meetings• Share knowledge and experience in using Earth Science data and tools
for serving AQ management• Educate AQ managers in the use of Earth Science data and tools,
educate Earth scientists on AQ needs• Hear about pressing AQ management issues, and determine how
AQAST can help
AQAST meeting at U. Maryland (June 9-11, 2013)
Next meeting (AQAST 6) is January 15-17 in Houston:http://acmg.seas.harvard.edu/aqast/meetings/2014_janWe hope to have API members attend, and present!