Articles | Volume 16, issue 14
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-9089-2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-9089-2016
Research article
 | 
25 Jul 2016
Research article |  | 25 Jul 2016

Can we detect regional methane anomalies? A comparison between three observing systems

Cindy Cressot, Isabelle Pison, Peter J. Rayner, Philippe Bousquet, Audrey Fortems-Cheiney, and Frédéric Chevallier

Related authors

Natural and anthropogenic methane fluxes in Eurasia: a mesoscale quantification by generalized atmospheric inversion
A. Berchet, I. Pison, F. Chevallier, J.-D. Paris, P. Bousquet, J.-L. Bonne, M. Y. Arshinov, B. D. Belan, C. Cressot, D. K. Davydov, E. J. Dlugokencky, A. V. Fofonov, A. Galanin, J. Lavrič, T. Machida, R. Parker, M. Sasakawa, R. Spahni, B. D. Stocker, and J. Winderlich
Biogeosciences, 12, 5393–5414, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-5393-2015,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-5393-2015, 2015
Sensitivity of the recent methane budget to LMDz sub-grid-scale physical parameterizations
R. Locatelli, P. Bousquet, M. Saunois, F. Chevallier, and C. Cressot
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 9765–9780, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9765-2015,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9765-2015, 2015
On the consistency between global and regional methane emissions inferred from SCIAMACHY, TANSO-FTS, IASI and surface measurements
C. Cressot, F. Chevallier, P. Bousquet, C. Crevoisier, E. J. Dlugokencky, A. Fortems-Cheiney, C. Frankenberg, R. Parker, I. Pison, R. A. Scheepmaker, S. A. Montzka, P. B. Krummel, L. P. Steele, and R. L. Langenfelds
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 577–592, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-577-2014,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-577-2014, 2014

Related subject area

Subject: Gases | Research Activity: Atmospheric Modelling and Data Analysis | Altitude Range: Troposphere | Science Focus: Chemistry (chemical composition and reactions)
Technical note: A comparative study of chemistry schemes for volcanic sulfur dioxide in Lagrangian transport simulations – a case study of the 2019 Raikoke eruption
Mingzhao Liu, Lars Hoffmann, Jens-Uwe Grooß, Zhongyin Cai, Sabine Grießbach, and Yi Heng
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 4403–4418, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-4403-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-4403-2025, 2025
Short summary
Revisiting the high tropospheric ozone over southern Africa: role of biomass burning and anthropogenic emissions
Yufen Wang, Ke Li, Xi Chen, Zhenjiang Yang, Minglong Tang, Pascoal M. D. Campos, Yang Yang, Xu Yue, and Hong Liao
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 4455–4475, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-4455-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-4455-2025, 2025
Short summary
Monoterpene oxidation pathways initiated by acyl peroxy radical addition
Dominika Pasik, Thomas Golin Almeida, Emelda Ahongshangbam, Siddharth Iyer, and Nanna Myllys
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 4313–4331, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-4313-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-4313-2025, 2025
Short summary
Local and transboundary contributions to NOy loadings across East Asia using CMAQ-ISAM and a GEMS-informed emission inventory during the winter–spring transition
Jincheol Park, Yunsoo Choi, and Sagun Kayastha
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 4291–4311, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-4291-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-4291-2025, 2025
Short summary
Estimating the variability in NOx emissions from Wuhan with TROPOMI NO2 data during 2018 to 2023
Qianqian Zhang, K. Folkert Boersma, Chiel van der Laan, Alba Mols, Bin Zhao, Shengyue Li, and Yuepeng Pan
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 3313–3326, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-3313-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-3313-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Berchet, A., Pison, I., Chevallier, F., Bousquet, P., Bonne, J.-L., and Paris, J.-D.: Objectified quantification of uncertainties in Bayesian atmospheric inversions, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 1525–1546, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1525-2015, 2015.
Bergamaschi, P., Frankenberg, C., Meirink, J., Krol, M., Dentener, F., Wagner, T., Platt, U., Kaplan, J., Körner, S., Heimann, M., Dlugokencky, E. J., and Goede, A.: Satellite chartography of atmospheric methane from SCIAMACHY on board ENVISAT: 2. Evaluation based on inverse model simulations, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 112, D02304, https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007268, 2007.
Bergamaschi, P., Houweling, S., Segers, A., Krol, M., Frankenberg, C., Scheepmaker, R., Dlugokencky, E., Wofsy, S., Kort, E., Sweeney, C., Schuck, T., Brenninkmeijer, C., Chen, H., Beck, V., and Gerbig, C.: Atmospheric CH4 in the first decade of the 21st century: Inverse modeling analysis using SCIAMACHY satellite retrievals and NOAA surface measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 7350–7369, 2013.
Download
Short summary
Several hypothesis have been made to attribute current trends in atmospheric methane to particular regions. In this context, this work aims at evaluating how well anomalies in methane emissions can be detected at the regional scale with currently available observing systems: two space-borne instruments and a surface network. Our results show that inter-annual analyses of methane emissions inferred by atmospheric inversions should always include an uncertainty assessment.
Share
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint