![Hier klicken, um den Treffer aus der Auswahl zu entfernen](images/unchecked.gif) |
Titel |
Comparing satellite-retrieved atmospheric methane with a 3-D chemical transport model driven by bottom-up emission estimates. |
VerfasserIn |
Joe McNorton, Martyn Chipperfield, Chris Wilson, Emanuel Gloor, Rob Parker, Garry Hayman |
Konferenz |
EGU General Assembly 2013
|
Medientyp |
Artikel
|
Sprache |
Englisch
|
Digitales Dokument |
PDF |
Erschienen |
In: GRA - Volume 15 (2013) |
Datensatznummer |
250078530
|
|
|
|
Zusammenfassung |
Global methane accounts for approximately 20% of the total direct radiative forcing by
long-lived greenhouse gases (0.5Wm-2), making it the second largest contributor after
carbon dioxide. Variations in CH4 emissions are likely to be rapidly observable in the
atmospheric composition due to its relatively short lifetime (approximately 9 years). As a
result emission values can be estimated using atmospheric retrievals. By comparing satellite
retrievals (GOSAT) with various emission inventories put through a chemical transport model
(TOMCAT) a better understanding can be made as to the accuracy of the input fluxes.
Previous model experiments show that a large uncertainty in bottom-up CH4 fluxes occurs
over wetland regions.
The aim of this study is to investigate which inventory performs best over wetlands when
compared with satellite retrievals. The comparison will help to identify model errors, which
will allow for the development of model parameters. Improving modelled CH4 emissions will
improve understanding of regional CH4 sources and increase the accuracy of climate change
predictions.
We have used the TOMCAT off-line chemical transport model (CTM) to perform
simulations over the period 2002 to 2010. The model is forced by ECMWF ERA-Interim
reanalyses and run at a horizontal resolution of 2.8o x 2.8o with 60 levels from the surface to
~60km. The model simulates atmospheric CH4 based on surface emissions and atmospheric
loss rates based on specified OH and O(1D) fields. A number of CH4 tracers have been
included in the simulation based on different emission scenarios. These include scenarios
provided for the recent Transcom-CH4 study and bottom-up emissions provided by the UK
JULES land surface model.
The quality of the different emission scenarios has been assessed by comparing with
atmospheric observations. In addition to GOSAT retrievals, results have been compared
with surface in-situ data and NDACC/TCCON ground-based column observations. |
|
|
|
|
|