Articles | Volume 17, issue 20
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-12633-2017
© Author(s) 2017. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-12633-2017
© Author(s) 2017. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
Research article
| 
24 Oct 2017
Research article |
| 24 Oct 2017
What controls the seasonal cycle of columnar methane observed by GOSAT over different regions in India?
Faculty of Science, Nara Women's University, Kita-Uoya Nishimachi, Nara 630-8506, Japan
now at: Research and Development Center for Global Change, JAMSTEC, Yokohama 2360001, Japan
Sachiko Hayashida
Faculty of Science, Nara Women's University, Kita-Uoya Nishimachi, Nara 630-8506, Japan
Tazu Saeki
Department of Environmental Geochemical Cycle Research, JAMSTEC, Yokohama 2360001, Japan
now at: Center for Global Environmental Research, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba 305-8506, Japan
Prabir K. Patra
Department of Environmental Geochemical Cycle Research, JAMSTEC, Yokohama 2360001, Japan
Related authors
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Judith Hauck, Peter Landschützer, Corinne Le Quéré, Hongmei Li, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Are Olsen, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Almut Arneth, Vivek Arora, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Carla F. Berghoff, Henry C. Bittig, Laurent Bopp, Patricia Cadule, Katie Campbell, Matthew A. Chamberlain, Naveen Chandra, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Thomas Colligan, Jeanne Decayeux, Laique Djeutchouang, Xinyu Dou, Carolina Duran Rojas, Kazutaka Enyo, Wiley Evans, Amanda Fay, Richard A. Feely, Daniel J. Ford, Adrianna Foster, Thomas Gasser, Marion Gehlen, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Jens Heinke, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Andrew R. Jacobson, Atul Jain, Tereza Jarníková, Annika Jersild, Fei Jiang, Zhe Jin, Etsushi Kato, Ralph F. Keeling, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Zhu Liu, Junjie Liu, Lei Ma, Shamil Maksyutov, Gregg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Patrick McGuire, Nicolas Metzl, Natalie M. Monacci, Eric J. Morgan, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Craig Neill, Yosuke Niwa, Tobias Nützel, Lea Olivier, Tsuneo Ono, Paul I. Palmer, Denis Pierrot, Zhangcai Qin, Laure Resplandy, Alizée Roobaert, Thais M. Rosan, Christian Rödenbeck, Jörg Schwinger, T. Luke Smallman, Stephen Smith, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Tobias Steinhoff, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Roland Séférian, Shintaro Takao, Hiroaki Tatebe, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Olivier Torres, Etienne Tourigny, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido van der Werf, Rik Wanninkhof, Xuhui Wang, Dongxu Yang, Xiaojuan Yang, Zhen Yu, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Ning Zeng, and Jiye Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-519, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-519, 2024
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2024 describes the methodology, main results, and data sets used to quantify the anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land ecosystems, and the ocean over the historical period (1750–2024). These living datasets are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Judith Hauck, Peter Landschützer, Corinne Le Quéré, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Peter Anthoni, Leticia Barbero, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Bertrand Decharme, Laurent Bopp, Ida Bagus Mandhara Brasika, Patricia Cadule, Matthew A. Chamberlain, Naveen Chandra, Thi-Tuyet-Trang Chau, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Margot Cronin, Xinyu Dou, Kazutaka Enyo, Wiley Evans, Stefanie Falk, Richard A. Feely, Liang Feng, Daniel J. Ford, Thomas Gasser, Josefine Ghattas, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Jens Heinke, Richard A. Houghton, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Andrew R. Jacobson, Atul Jain, Tereza Jarníková, Annika Jersild, Fei Jiang, Zhe Jin, Fortunat Joos, Etsushi Kato, Ralph F. Keeling, Daniel Kennedy, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Arne Körtzinger, Xin Lan, Nathalie Lefèvre, Hongmei Li, Junjie Liu, Zhiqiang Liu, Lei Ma, Greg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Patrick C. McGuire, Galen A. McKinley, Gesa Meyer, Eric J. Morgan, David R. Munro, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Kevin M. O'Brien, Are Olsen, Abdirahman M. Omar, Tsuneo Ono, Melf Paulsen, Denis Pierrot, Katie Pocock, Benjamin Poulter, Carter M. Powis, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Thais M. Rosan, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, T. Luke Smallman, Stephen M. Smith, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Colm Sweeney, Shintaro Takao, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Erik van Ooijen, Rik Wanninkhof, Michio Watanabe, Cathy Wimart-Rousseau, Dongxu Yang, Xiaojuan Yang, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Jiye Zeng, and Bo Zheng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 5301–5369, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5301-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5301-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2023 describes the methodology, main results, and data sets used to quantify the anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land ecosystems, and the ocean over the historical period (1750–2023). These living datasets are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Naveen Chandra, Prabir K. Patra, Yousuke Niwa, Akihiko Ito, Yosuke Iida, Daisuke Goto, Shinji Morimoto, Masayuki Kondo, Masayuki Takigawa, Tomohiro Hajima, and Michio Watanabe
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 9215–9243, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9215-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9215-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper is intended to accomplish two goals: (1) quantify mean and uncertainty in non-fossil-fuel CO2 fluxes estimated by inverse modeling and (2) provide in-depth analyses of regional CO2 fluxes in support of emission mitigation policymaking. CO2 flux variability and trends are discussed concerning natural climate variability and human disturbances using multiple lines of evidence.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Judith Hauck, Are Olsen, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Corinne Le Quéré, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone Alin, Luiz E. O. C. Aragão, Almut Arneth, Vivek Arora, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Alice Benoit-Cattin, Henry C. Bittig, Laurent Bopp, Selma Bultan, Naveen Chandra, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Wiley Evans, Liesbeth Florentie, Piers M. Forster, Thomas Gasser, Marion Gehlen, Dennis Gilfillan, Thanos Gkritzalis, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Ian Harris, Kerstin Hartung, Vanessa Haverd, Richard A. Houghton, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Emilie Joetzjer, Koji Kadono, Etsushi Kato, Vassilis Kitidis, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Peter Landschützer, Nathalie Lefèvre, Andrew Lenton, Sebastian Lienert, Zhu Liu, Danica Lombardozzi, Gregg Marland, Nicolas Metzl, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Kevin O'Brien, Tsuneo Ono, Paul I. Palmer, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Ingunn Skjelvan, Adam J. P. Smith, Adrienne J. Sutton, Toste Tanhua, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Guido van der Werf, Nicolas Vuichard, Anthony P. Walker, Rik Wanninkhof, Andrew J. Watson, David Willis, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 3269–3340, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3269-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3269-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2020 describes the data sets and methodology used to quantify the emissions of carbon dioxide and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land, and ocean. These living data are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Marielle Saunois, Ann R. Stavert, Ben Poulter, Philippe Bousquet, Josep G. Canadell, Robert B. Jackson, Peter A. Raymond, Edward J. Dlugokencky, Sander Houweling, Prabir K. Patra, Philippe Ciais, Vivek K. Arora, David Bastviken, Peter Bergamaschi, Donald R. Blake, Gordon Brailsford, Lori Bruhwiler, Kimberly M. Carlson, Mark Carrol, Simona Castaldi, Naveen Chandra, Cyril Crevoisier, Patrick M. Crill, Kristofer Covey, Charles L. Curry, Giuseppe Etiope, Christian Frankenberg, Nicola Gedney, Michaela I. Hegglin, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Gustaf Hugelius, Misa Ishizawa, Akihiko Ito, Greet Janssens-Maenhout, Katherine M. Jensen, Fortunat Joos, Thomas Kleinen, Paul B. Krummel, Ray L. Langenfelds, Goulven G. Laruelle, Licheng Liu, Toshinobu Machida, Shamil Maksyutov, Kyle C. McDonald, Joe McNorton, Paul A. Miller, Joe R. Melton, Isamu Morino, Jurek Müller, Fabiola Murguia-Flores, Vaishali Naik, Yosuke Niwa, Sergio Noce, Simon O'Doherty, Robert J. Parker, Changhui Peng, Shushi Peng, Glen P. Peters, Catherine Prigent, Ronald Prinn, Michel Ramonet, Pierre Regnier, William J. Riley, Judith A. Rosentreter, Arjo Segers, Isobel J. Simpson, Hao Shi, Steven J. Smith, L. Paul Steele, Brett F. Thornton, Hanqin Tian, Yasunori Tohjima, Francesco N. Tubiello, Aki Tsuruta, Nicolas Viovy, Apostolos Voulgarakis, Thomas S. Weber, Michiel van Weele, Guido R. van der Werf, Ray F. Weiss, Doug Worthy, Debra Wunch, Yi Yin, Yukio Yoshida, Wenxin Zhang, Zhen Zhang, Yuanhong Zhao, Bo Zheng, Qing Zhu, Qiuan Zhu, and Qianlai Zhuang
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 1561–1623, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-1561-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-1561-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Understanding and quantifying the global methane (CH4) budget is important for assessing realistic pathways to mitigate climate change. We have established a consortium of multidisciplinary scientists under the umbrella of the Global Carbon Project to synthesize and stimulate new research aimed at improving and regularly updating the global methane budget. This is the second version of the review dedicated to the decadal methane budget, integrating results of top-down and bottom-up estimates.
Dmitry A. Belikov, Naoko Saitoh, Prabir K. Patra, and Naveen Chandra
Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2020-101, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2020-101, 2020
Preprint withdrawn
Pierre Friedlingstein, Matthew W. Jones, Michael O'Sullivan, Robbie M. Andrew, Judith Hauck, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Corinne Le Quéré, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Peter Anthoni, Leticia Barbero, Ana Bastos, Vladislav Bastrikov, Meike Becker, Laurent Bopp, Erik Buitenhuis, Naveen Chandra, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Kim I. Currie, Richard A. Feely, Marion Gehlen, Dennis Gilfillan, Thanos Gkritzalis, Daniel S. Goll, Nicolas Gruber, Sören Gutekunst, Ian Harris, Vanessa Haverd, Richard A. Houghton, George Hurtt, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Emilie Joetzjer, Jed O. Kaplan, Etsushi Kato, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Peter Landschützer, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Andrew Lenton, Sebastian Lienert, Danica Lombardozzi, Gregg Marland, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, Nicolas Metzl, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Craig Neill, Abdirahman M. Omar, Tsuneo Ono, Anna Peregon, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Roland Séférian, Jörg Schwinger, Naomi Smith, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Francesco N. Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Andrew J. Wiltshire, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 11, 1783–1838, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-1783-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-1783-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2019 describes the data sets and methodology used to quantify the emissions of carbon dioxide and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land, and ocean. These living data are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Judith Hauck, Peter Landschützer, Corinne Le Quéré, Hongmei Li, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Are Olsen, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Almut Arneth, Vivek Arora, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Carla F. Berghoff, Henry C. Bittig, Laurent Bopp, Patricia Cadule, Katie Campbell, Matthew A. Chamberlain, Naveen Chandra, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Thomas Colligan, Jeanne Decayeux, Laique Djeutchouang, Xinyu Dou, Carolina Duran Rojas, Kazutaka Enyo, Wiley Evans, Amanda Fay, Richard A. Feely, Daniel J. Ford, Adrianna Foster, Thomas Gasser, Marion Gehlen, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Jens Heinke, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Andrew R. Jacobson, Atul Jain, Tereza Jarníková, Annika Jersild, Fei Jiang, Zhe Jin, Etsushi Kato, Ralph F. Keeling, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Zhu Liu, Junjie Liu, Lei Ma, Shamil Maksyutov, Gregg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Patrick McGuire, Nicolas Metzl, Natalie M. Monacci, Eric J. Morgan, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Craig Neill, Yosuke Niwa, Tobias Nützel, Lea Olivier, Tsuneo Ono, Paul I. Palmer, Denis Pierrot, Zhangcai Qin, Laure Resplandy, Alizée Roobaert, Thais M. Rosan, Christian Rödenbeck, Jörg Schwinger, T. Luke Smallman, Stephen Smith, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Tobias Steinhoff, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Roland Séférian, Shintaro Takao, Hiroaki Tatebe, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Olivier Torres, Etienne Tourigny, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido van der Werf, Rik Wanninkhof, Xuhui Wang, Dongxu Yang, Xiaojuan Yang, Zhen Yu, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Ning Zeng, and Jiye Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-519, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-519, 2024
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2024 describes the methodology, main results, and data sets used to quantify the anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land ecosystems, and the ocean over the historical period (1750–2024). These living datasets are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Ana Maria Roxana Petrescu, Glen P. Peters, Richard Engelen, Sander Houweling, Dominik Brunner, Aki Tsuruta, Bradley Matthews, Prabir K. Patra, Dmitry Belikov, Rona L. Thompson, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Wenxin Zhang, Arjo J. Segers, Giuseppe Etiope, Giancarlo Ciotoli, Philippe Peylin, Frédéric Chevallier, Tuula Aalto, Robbie M. Andrew, David Bastviken, Antoine Berchet, Grégoire Broquet, Giulia Conchedda, Stijn N. C. Dellaert, Hugo Denier van der Gon, Johannes Gütschow, Jean-Matthieu Haussaire, Ronny Lauerwald, Tiina Markkanen, Jacob C. A. van Peet, Isabelle Pison, Pierre Regnier, Espen Solum, Marko Scholze, Maria Tenkanen, Francesco N. Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, and John R. Worden
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 4325–4350, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-4325-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-4325-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study provides an overview of data availability from observation- and inventory-based CH4 emission estimates. It systematically compares them and provides recommendations for robust comparisons, aiming to steadily engage more parties in using observational methods to complement their UNFCCC submissions. Anticipating improvements in atmospheric modelling and observations, future developments need to resolve knowledge gaps in both approaches and to better quantify remaining uncertainty.
Yosuke Niwa, Yasunori Tohjima, Yukio Terao, Tazu Saeki, Akihiko Ito, Taku Umezawa, Kyohei Yamada, Motoki Sasakawa, Toshinobu Machida, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Hideki Nara, Hiroshi Tanimoto, Hitoshi Mukai, Yukio Yoshida, Shinji Morimoto, Shinya Takatsuji, Kazuhiro Tsuboi, Yousuke Sawa, Hidekazu Matsueda, Kentaro Ishijima, Ryo Fujita, Daisuke Goto, Xin Lan, Kenneth Schuldt, Michal Heliasz, Tobias Biermann, Lukasz Chmura, Jarsolaw Necki, and Irène Xueref-Remy
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2457, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2457, 2024
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
Short summary
This study estimated regional and sectoral emission contributions to the unprecedented surge of atmospheric methane for 2020–2022. The methane is the second most important greenhouse gas and its emissions reduction is urgently required to mitigate the global warming. Numerical modeling-based estimates with three different sets of atmospheric observations consistently suggested large contributions of biogenic emissions from South Asia and Southeast Asia to the surge of atmospheric methane.
Hanqin Tian, Naiqing Pan, Rona L. Thompson, Josep G. Canadell, Parvadha Suntharalingam, Pierre Regnier, Eric A. Davidson, Michael Prather, Philippe Ciais, Marilena Muntean, Shufen Pan, Wilfried Winiwarter, Sönke Zaehle, Feng Zhou, Robert B. Jackson, Hermann W. Bange, Sarah Berthet, Zihao Bian, Daniele Bianchi, Alexander F. Bouwman, Erik T. Buitenhuis, Geoffrey Dutton, Minpeng Hu, Akihiko Ito, Atul K. Jain, Aurich Jeltsch-Thömmes, Fortunat Joos, Sian Kou-Giesbrecht, Paul B. Krummel, Xin Lan, Angela Landolfi, Ronny Lauerwald, Ya Li, Chaoqun Lu, Taylor Maavara, Manfredi Manizza, Dylan B. Millet, Jens Mühle, Prabir K. Patra, Glen P. Peters, Xiaoyu Qin, Peter Raymond, Laure Resplandy, Judith A. Rosentreter, Hao Shi, Qing Sun, Daniele Tonina, Francesco N. Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Nicolas Vuichard, Junjie Wang, Kelley C. Wells, Luke M. Western, Chris Wilson, Jia Yang, Yuanzhi Yao, Yongfa You, and Qing Zhu
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 2543–2604, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2543-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2543-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Atmospheric concentrations of nitrous oxide (N2O), a greenhouse gas 273 times more potent than carbon dioxide, have increased by 25 % since the preindustrial period, with the highest observed growth rate in 2020 and 2021. This rapid growth rate has primarily been due to a 40 % increase in anthropogenic emissions since 1980. Observed atmospheric N2O concentrations in recent years have exceeded the worst-case climate scenario, underscoring the importance of reducing anthropogenic N2O emissions.
Zhen Zhang, Benjamin Poulter, Joe R. Melton, William J. Riley, George H. Allen, David J. Beerling, Philippe Bousquet, Josep G. Canadell, Etienne Fluet-Chouinard, Philippe Ciais, Nicola Gedney, Peter O. Hopcroft, Akihiko Ito, Robert B. Jackson, Atul K. Jain, Katherine Jensen, Fortunat Joos, Thomas Kleinen, Sara Knox, Tingting Li, Xin Li, Xiangyu Liu, Kyle McDonald, Gavin McNicol, Paul A. Miller, Jurek Müller, Prabir K. Patra, Changhui Peng, Shushi Peng, Zhangcai Qin, Ryan M. Riggs, Marielle Saunois, Qing Sun, Hanqin Tian, Xiaoming Xu, Yuanzhi Yao, Xi Yi, Wenxin Zhang, Qing Zhu, Qiuan Zhu, and Qianlai Zhuang
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1584, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1584, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study assesses global methane emissions from wetlands between 2000 and 2020 using multiple models. We found that wetland emissions increased by 6–7 Tg CH4 per year in the 2010s compared to the 2000s. Rising temperatures primarily drove this increase, while changes in precipitation and CO2 levels also played roles. Our findings highlight the importance of wetlands in the global methane budget and the need for continuous monitoring to understand their impact on climate change.
Marielle Saunois, Adrien Martinez, Benjamin Poulter, Zhen Zhang, Peter Raymond, Pierre Regnier, Joseph G. Canadell, Robert B. Jackson, Prabir K. Patra, Philippe Bousquet, Philippe Ciais, Edward J. Dlugokencky, Xin Lan, George H. Allen, David Bastviken, David J. Beerling, Dmitry A. Belikov, Donald R. Blake, Simona Castaldi, Monica Crippa, Bridget R. Deemer, Fraser Dennison, Giuseppe Etiope, Nicola Gedney, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Meredith A. Holgerson, Peter O. Hopcroft, Gustaf Hugelius, Akihito Ito, Atul K. Jain, Rajesh Janardanan, Matthew S. Johnson, Thomas Kleinen, Paul Krummel, Ronny Lauerwald, Tingting Li, Xiangyu Liu, Kyle C. McDonald, Joe R. Melton, Jens Mühle, Jurek Müller, Fabiola Murguia-Flores, Yosuke Niwa, Sergio Noce, Shufen Pan, Robert J. Parker, Changhui Peng, Michel Ramonet, William J. Riley, Gerard Rocher-Ros, Judith A. Rosentreter, Motoki Sasakawa, Arjo Segers, Steven J. Smith, Emily H. Stanley, Joel Thanwerdas, Hanquin Tian, Aki Tsuruta, Francesco N. Tubiello, Thomas S. Weber, Guido van der Werf, Doug E. Worthy, Yi Xi, Yukio Yoshida, Wenxin Zhang, Bo Zheng, Qing Zhu, Qiuan Zhu, and Qianlai Zhuang
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-115, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-115, 2024
Revised manuscript under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
Methane (CH4) is the second most important human-influenced greenhouse gas in terms of climate forcing after carbon dioxide (CO2). A consortium of multi-disciplinary scientists synthesize and update the budget of the sources and sinks of CH4. This edition benefits from important progresses in estimating emissions from lakes and ponds, reservoirs, and streams and rivers. For the 2010s decade, global CH4 emissions are estimated at 575 Tg CH4 yr-1, including ~65 % from anthropogenic sources.
Astrid Müller, Hiroshi Tanimoto, Takafumi Sugita, Prabir K. Patra, Shin-ichiro Nakaoka, Toshinobu Machida, Isamu Morino, André Butz, and Kei Shiomi
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 1297–1316, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-1297-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-1297-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Satellite CH4 observations with high accuracy are needed to understand changes in atmospheric CH4 concentrations. But over oceans, reference data are limited. We combine various ship and aircraft observations with the help of atmospheric chemistry models to derive observation-based column-averaged mixing ratios of CH4 (obs. XCH4). We discuss three different approaches and demonstrate the applicability of the new reference dataset for carbon cycle studies and satellite evaluation.
Mounia Mostefaoui, Philippe Ciais, Matthew J. McGrath, Philippe Peylin, Prabir K. Patra, and Yolandi Ernst
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 245–275, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-245-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-245-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Our aim is to assess African anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions and removals by using different data products, including inventories and process-based models, and to compare their relative merits with inversion data coming from satellites. We show a good match among the various estimates in terms of overall trends at a regional level and on a decadal basis, but large differences exist even among similar data types, which is a limit to the possibility of verification of country-reported data.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Judith Hauck, Peter Landschützer, Corinne Le Quéré, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Peter Anthoni, Leticia Barbero, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Bertrand Decharme, Laurent Bopp, Ida Bagus Mandhara Brasika, Patricia Cadule, Matthew A. Chamberlain, Naveen Chandra, Thi-Tuyet-Trang Chau, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Margot Cronin, Xinyu Dou, Kazutaka Enyo, Wiley Evans, Stefanie Falk, Richard A. Feely, Liang Feng, Daniel J. Ford, Thomas Gasser, Josefine Ghattas, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Jens Heinke, Richard A. Houghton, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Andrew R. Jacobson, Atul Jain, Tereza Jarníková, Annika Jersild, Fei Jiang, Zhe Jin, Fortunat Joos, Etsushi Kato, Ralph F. Keeling, Daniel Kennedy, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Arne Körtzinger, Xin Lan, Nathalie Lefèvre, Hongmei Li, Junjie Liu, Zhiqiang Liu, Lei Ma, Greg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Patrick C. McGuire, Galen A. McKinley, Gesa Meyer, Eric J. Morgan, David R. Munro, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Kevin M. O'Brien, Are Olsen, Abdirahman M. Omar, Tsuneo Ono, Melf Paulsen, Denis Pierrot, Katie Pocock, Benjamin Poulter, Carter M. Powis, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Thais M. Rosan, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, T. Luke Smallman, Stephen M. Smith, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Colm Sweeney, Shintaro Takao, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Erik van Ooijen, Rik Wanninkhof, Michio Watanabe, Cathy Wimart-Rousseau, Dongxu Yang, Xiaojuan Yang, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Jiye Zeng, and Bo Zheng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 5301–5369, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5301-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5301-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2023 describes the methodology, main results, and data sets used to quantify the anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land ecosystems, and the ocean over the historical period (1750–2023). These living datasets are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Jagat S. H. Bisht, Prabir K. Patra, Masayuki Takigawa, Takashi Sekiya, Yugo Kanaya, Naoko Saitoh, and Kazuyuki Miyazaki
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 1823–1838, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1823-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1823-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we estimated CH4 fluxes using an advanced 4D-LETKF method. The system was tested and optimized using observation system simulation experiments (OSSEs), where a known surface emission distribution is retrieved from synthetic observations. The availability of satellite measurements has increased, and there are still many missions focused on greenhouse gas observations that have not yet launched. The technique being referred to has the potential to improve estimates of CH4 fluxes.
Ana Maria Roxana Petrescu, Chunjing Qiu, Matthew J. McGrath, Philippe Peylin, Glen P. Peters, Philippe Ciais, Rona L. Thompson, Aki Tsuruta, Dominik Brunner, Matthias Kuhnert, Bradley Matthews, Paul I. Palmer, Oksana Tarasova, Pierre Regnier, Ronny Lauerwald, David Bastviken, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Wilfried Winiwarter, Giuseppe Etiope, Tuula Aalto, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Vladislav Bastrikov, Antoine Berchet, Patrick Brockmann, Giancarlo Ciotoli, Giulia Conchedda, Monica Crippa, Frank Dentener, Christine D. Groot Zwaaftink, Diego Guizzardi, Dirk Günther, Jean-Matthieu Haussaire, Sander Houweling, Greet Janssens-Maenhout, Massaer Kouyate, Adrian Leip, Antti Leppänen, Emanuele Lugato, Manon Maisonnier, Alistair J. Manning, Tiina Markkanen, Joe McNorton, Marilena Muntean, Gabriel D. Oreggioni, Prabir K. Patra, Lucia Perugini, Isabelle Pison, Maarit T. Raivonen, Marielle Saunois, Arjo J. Segers, Pete Smith, Efisio Solazzo, Hanqin Tian, Francesco N. Tubiello, Timo Vesala, Guido R. van der Werf, Chris Wilson, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 1197–1268, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-1197-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-1197-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This study updates the state-of-the-art scientific overview of CH4 and N2O emissions in the EU27 and UK in Petrescu et al. (2021a). Yearly updates are needed to improve the different respective approaches and to inform on the development of formal verification systems. It integrates the most recent emission inventories, process-based model and regional/global inversions, comparing them with UNFCCC national GHG inventories, in support to policy to facilitate real-time verification procedures.
Brendan Byrne, David F. Baker, Sourish Basu, Michael Bertolacci, Kevin W. Bowman, Dustin Carroll, Abhishek Chatterjee, Frédéric Chevallier, Philippe Ciais, Noel Cressie, David Crisp, Sean Crowell, Feng Deng, Zhu Deng, Nicholas M. Deutscher, Manvendra K. Dubey, Sha Feng, Omaira E. García, David W. T. Griffith, Benedikt Herkommer, Lei Hu, Andrew R. Jacobson, Rajesh Janardanan, Sujong Jeong, Matthew S. Johnson, Dylan B. A. Jones, Rigel Kivi, Junjie Liu, Zhiqiang Liu, Shamil Maksyutov, John B. Miller, Scot M. Miller, Isamu Morino, Justus Notholt, Tomohiro Oda, Christopher W. O'Dell, Young-Suk Oh, Hirofumi Ohyama, Prabir K. Patra, Hélène Peiro, Christof Petri, Sajeev Philip, David F. Pollard, Benjamin Poulter, Marine Remaud, Andrew Schuh, Mahesh K. Sha, Kei Shiomi, Kimberly Strong, Colm Sweeney, Yao Té, Hanqin Tian, Voltaire A. Velazco, Mihalis Vrekoussis, Thorsten Warneke, John R. Worden, Debra Wunch, Yuanzhi Yao, Jeongmin Yun, Andrew Zammit-Mangion, and Ning Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 963–1004, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-963-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-963-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Changes in the carbon stocks of terrestrial ecosystems result in emissions and removals of CO2. These can be driven by anthropogenic activities (e.g., deforestation), natural processes (e.g., fires) or in response to rising CO2 (e.g., CO2 fertilization). This paper describes a dataset of CO2 emissions and removals derived from atmospheric CO2 observations. This pilot dataset informs current capabilities and future developments towards top-down monitoring and verification systems.
Naveen Chandra, Prabir K. Patra, Yousuke Niwa, Akihiko Ito, Yosuke Iida, Daisuke Goto, Shinji Morimoto, Masayuki Kondo, Masayuki Takigawa, Tomohiro Hajima, and Michio Watanabe
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 9215–9243, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9215-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9215-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper is intended to accomplish two goals: (1) quantify mean and uncertainty in non-fossil-fuel CO2 fluxes estimated by inverse modeling and (2) provide in-depth analyses of regional CO2 fluxes in support of emission mitigation policymaking. CO2 flux variability and trends are discussed concerning natural climate variability and human disturbances using multiple lines of evidence.
Philippe Ciais, Ana Bastos, Frédéric Chevallier, Ronny Lauerwald, Ben Poulter, Josep G. Canadell, Gustaf Hugelius, Robert B. Jackson, Atul Jain, Matthew Jones, Masayuki Kondo, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Prabir K. Patra, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Ana Maria Roxana Petrescu, Shilong Piao, Chunjing Qiu, Celso Von Randow, Pierre Regnier, Marielle Saunois, Robert Scholes, Anatoly Shvidenko, Hanqin Tian, Hui Yang, Xuhui Wang, and Bo Zheng
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 1289–1316, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1289-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1289-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The second phase of the Regional Carbon Cycle Assessment and Processes (RECCAP) will provide updated quantification and process understanding of CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions and sinks for ten regions of the globe. In this paper, we give definitions, review different methods, and make recommendations for estimating different components of the total land–atmosphere carbon exchange for each region in a consistent and complete approach.
Shohei Nomura, Manish Naja, M. Kawser Ahmed, Hitoshi Mukai, Yukio Terao, Toshinobu Machida, Motoki Sasakawa, and Prabir K. Patra
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 16427–16452, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-16427-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-16427-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Long-term measurements of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in India and Bangladesh unveiled specific characteristics in their variations in these regions. Plants including rice cultivated in winter and summer strongly affected seasonal variations and levels in CO2 and CH4. Long-term variability of GHGs showed quite different features in their growth rates from those in Mauna Loa. GHG trends in this region seemed to be hardly affected by El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO).
Astrid Müller, Hiroshi Tanimoto, Takafumi Sugita, Toshinobu Machida, Shin-ichiro Nakaoka, Prabir K. Patra, Joshua Laughner, and David Crisp
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 8255–8271, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-8255-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-8255-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Over oceans, high uncertainties in satellite CO2 retrievals exist due to limited reference data. We combine commercial ship and aircraft observations and, with the aid of model calculations, obtain column-averaged mixing ratios of CO2 (XCO2) data over the Pacific Ocean. This new dataset has great potential as a robust reference for XCO2 measured from space and can help to better understand changes in the carbon cycle in response to climate change using satellite observations.
Ana Maria Roxana Petrescu, Chunjing Qiu, Philippe Ciais, Rona L. Thompson, Philippe Peylin, Matthew J. McGrath, Efisio Solazzo, Greet Janssens-Maenhout, Francesco N. Tubiello, Peter Bergamaschi, Dominik Brunner, Glen P. Peters, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Pierre Regnier, Ronny Lauerwald, David Bastviken, Aki Tsuruta, Wilfried Winiwarter, Prabir K. Patra, Matthias Kuhnert, Gabriel D. Oreggioni, Monica Crippa, Marielle Saunois, Lucia Perugini, Tiina Markkanen, Tuula Aalto, Christine D. Groot Zwaaftink, Hanqin Tian, Yuanzhi Yao, Chris Wilson, Giulia Conchedda, Dirk Günther, Adrian Leip, Pete Smith, Jean-Matthieu Haussaire, Antti Leppänen, Alistair J. Manning, Joe McNorton, Patrick Brockmann, and Albertus Johannes Dolman
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 2307–2362, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-2307-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-2307-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study is topical and provides a state-of-the-art scientific overview of data availability from bottom-up and top-down CH4 and N2O emissions in the EU27 and UK. The data integrate recent emission inventories with process-based model data and regional/global inversions for the European domain, aiming at reconciling them with official country-level UNFCCC national GHG inventories in support to policy and to facilitate real-time verification procedures.
Stijn Naus, Stephen A. Montzka, Prabir K. Patra, and Maarten C. Krol
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 4809–4824, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4809-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4809-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Following up on previous box model studies, we employ a 3D transport model to estimate variations in the hydroxyl radical (OH) from observations of methyl chloroform (MCF). We derive small interannual OH variations that are consistent with variations in the El Niño–Southern Oscillation. We also find evidence for the release of MCF from oceans in atmospheric gradients of MCF. Both findings highlight the added value of a 3D transport model since box model studies did not identify these effects.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Judith Hauck, Are Olsen, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Corinne Le Quéré, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone Alin, Luiz E. O. C. Aragão, Almut Arneth, Vivek Arora, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Alice Benoit-Cattin, Henry C. Bittig, Laurent Bopp, Selma Bultan, Naveen Chandra, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Wiley Evans, Liesbeth Florentie, Piers M. Forster, Thomas Gasser, Marion Gehlen, Dennis Gilfillan, Thanos Gkritzalis, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Ian Harris, Kerstin Hartung, Vanessa Haverd, Richard A. Houghton, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Emilie Joetzjer, Koji Kadono, Etsushi Kato, Vassilis Kitidis, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Peter Landschützer, Nathalie Lefèvre, Andrew Lenton, Sebastian Lienert, Zhu Liu, Danica Lombardozzi, Gregg Marland, Nicolas Metzl, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Kevin O'Brien, Tsuneo Ono, Paul I. Palmer, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Ingunn Skjelvan, Adam J. P. Smith, Adrienne J. Sutton, Toste Tanhua, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Guido van der Werf, Nicolas Vuichard, Anthony P. Walker, Rik Wanninkhof, Andrew J. Watson, David Willis, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 3269–3340, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3269-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3269-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2020 describes the data sets and methodology used to quantify the emissions of carbon dioxide and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land, and ocean. These living data are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Marielle Saunois, Ann R. Stavert, Ben Poulter, Philippe Bousquet, Josep G. Canadell, Robert B. Jackson, Peter A. Raymond, Edward J. Dlugokencky, Sander Houweling, Prabir K. Patra, Philippe Ciais, Vivek K. Arora, David Bastviken, Peter Bergamaschi, Donald R. Blake, Gordon Brailsford, Lori Bruhwiler, Kimberly M. Carlson, Mark Carrol, Simona Castaldi, Naveen Chandra, Cyril Crevoisier, Patrick M. Crill, Kristofer Covey, Charles L. Curry, Giuseppe Etiope, Christian Frankenberg, Nicola Gedney, Michaela I. Hegglin, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Gustaf Hugelius, Misa Ishizawa, Akihiko Ito, Greet Janssens-Maenhout, Katherine M. Jensen, Fortunat Joos, Thomas Kleinen, Paul B. Krummel, Ray L. Langenfelds, Goulven G. Laruelle, Licheng Liu, Toshinobu Machida, Shamil Maksyutov, Kyle C. McDonald, Joe McNorton, Paul A. Miller, Joe R. Melton, Isamu Morino, Jurek Müller, Fabiola Murguia-Flores, Vaishali Naik, Yosuke Niwa, Sergio Noce, Simon O'Doherty, Robert J. Parker, Changhui Peng, Shushi Peng, Glen P. Peters, Catherine Prigent, Ronald Prinn, Michel Ramonet, Pierre Regnier, William J. Riley, Judith A. Rosentreter, Arjo Segers, Isobel J. Simpson, Hao Shi, Steven J. Smith, L. Paul Steele, Brett F. Thornton, Hanqin Tian, Yasunori Tohjima, Francesco N. Tubiello, Aki Tsuruta, Nicolas Viovy, Apostolos Voulgarakis, Thomas S. Weber, Michiel van Weele, Guido R. van der Werf, Ray F. Weiss, Doug Worthy, Debra Wunch, Yi Yin, Yukio Yoshida, Wenxin Zhang, Zhen Zhang, Yuanhong Zhao, Bo Zheng, Qing Zhu, Qiuan Zhu, and Qianlai Zhuang
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 1561–1623, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-1561-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-1561-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Understanding and quantifying the global methane (CH4) budget is important for assessing realistic pathways to mitigate climate change. We have established a consortium of multidisciplinary scientists under the umbrella of the Global Carbon Project to synthesize and stimulate new research aimed at improving and regularly updating the global methane budget. This is the second version of the review dedicated to the decadal methane budget, integrating results of top-down and bottom-up estimates.
Dmitry A. Belikov, Naoko Saitoh, Prabir K. Patra, and Naveen Chandra
Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2020-101, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2020-101, 2020
Preprint withdrawn
Pierre Friedlingstein, Matthew W. Jones, Michael O'Sullivan, Robbie M. Andrew, Judith Hauck, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Corinne Le Quéré, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Peter Anthoni, Leticia Barbero, Ana Bastos, Vladislav Bastrikov, Meike Becker, Laurent Bopp, Erik Buitenhuis, Naveen Chandra, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Kim I. Currie, Richard A. Feely, Marion Gehlen, Dennis Gilfillan, Thanos Gkritzalis, Daniel S. Goll, Nicolas Gruber, Sören Gutekunst, Ian Harris, Vanessa Haverd, Richard A. Houghton, George Hurtt, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Emilie Joetzjer, Jed O. Kaplan, Etsushi Kato, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Peter Landschützer, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Andrew Lenton, Sebastian Lienert, Danica Lombardozzi, Gregg Marland, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, Nicolas Metzl, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Craig Neill, Abdirahman M. Omar, Tsuneo Ono, Anna Peregon, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Roland Séférian, Jörg Schwinger, Naomi Smith, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Francesco N. Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Andrew J. Wiltshire, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 11, 1783–1838, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-1783-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-1783-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2019 describes the data sets and methodology used to quantify the emissions of carbon dioxide and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land, and ocean. These living data are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Leonardo Calle, Benjamin Poulter, and Prabir K. Patra
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 2611–2629, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-2611-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-2611-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Satellite observations of atmospheric carbon dioxide offer extraordinary insights into terrestrial ecosystem activity on Earth. The algorithm we present provides researchers with a great deal more information from these satellite data than has been available in the past. We hope the application of this algorithm and analyses tools provides insight into atmospheric dynamics of carbon dioxide and helps inform the development of global ecosystem models in the future.
Benjamin Gaubert, Britton B. Stephens, Sourish Basu, Frédéric Chevallier, Feng Deng, Eric A. Kort, Prabir K. Patra, Wouter Peters, Christian Rödenbeck, Tazu Saeki, David Schimel, Ingrid Van der Laan-Luijkx, Steven Wofsy, and Yi Yin
Biogeosciences, 16, 117–134, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-16-117-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-16-117-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
We have compared global carbon budgets calculated from numerical inverse models and CO2 observations, and evaluated how these systems reproduce vertical gradients in atmospheric CO2 from aircraft measurements. We found that available models have converged on near-neutral tropical total fluxes for several decades, implying consistent sinks in intact tropical forests, and that assumed fossil fuel emissions and predicted atmospheric growth rates are now the dominant axes of disagreement.
Corinne Le Quéré, Robbie M. Andrew, Pierre Friedlingstein, Stephen Sitch, Judith Hauck, Julia Pongratz, Penelope A. Pickers, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Glen P. Peters, Josep G. Canadell, Almut Arneth, Vivek K. Arora, Leticia Barbero, Ana Bastos, Laurent Bopp, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Philippe Ciais, Scott C. Doney, Thanos Gkritzalis, Daniel S. Goll, Ian Harris, Vanessa Haverd, Forrest M. Hoffman, Mario Hoppema, Richard A. Houghton, George Hurtt, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Truls Johannessen, Chris D. Jones, Etsushi Kato, Ralph F. Keeling, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Peter Landschützer, Nathalie Lefèvre, Sebastian Lienert, Zhu Liu, Danica Lombardozzi, Nicolas Metzl, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-ichiro Nakaoka, Craig Neill, Are Olsen, Tsueno Ono, Prabir Patra, Anna Peregon, Wouter Peters, Philippe Peylin, Benjamin Pfeil, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Matthias Rocher, Christian Rödenbeck, Ute Schuster, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Ingunn Skjelvan, Tobias Steinhoff, Adrienne Sutton, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Francesco N. Tubiello, Ingrid T. van der Laan-Luijkx, Guido R. van der Werf, Nicolas Viovy, Anthony P. Walker, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Rebecca Wright, Sönke Zaehle, and Bo Zheng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 10, 2141–2194, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-2141-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-2141-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2018 describes the data sets and methodology used to quantify the emissions of carbon dioxide and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land, and ocean. These living data are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Sandipan Mukherjee, K Chandra Sekar, Priyanka Lohani, Kireet Kumar, Prabir Patra, and Kentaro Ishijima
Biogeosciences Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-2018-299, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-2018-299, 2018
Preprint withdrawn
Maarten Krol, Marco de Bruine, Lars Killaars, Huug Ouwersloot, Andrea Pozzer, Yi Yin, Frederic Chevallier, Philippe Bousquet, Prabir Patra, Dmitry Belikov, Shamil Maksyutov, Sandip Dhomse, Wuhu Feng, and Martyn P. Chipperfield
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3109–3130, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3109-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3109-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
The TransCom inter-comparison project regularly carries out studies to quantify errors in simulated atmospheric transport. This paper presents the first results of an age of air (AoA) inter-comparison of six global transport models. Following a protocol, six models simulated five tracers from which atmospheric transport times can easily be deduced. Results highlight that inter-model differences associated with atmospheric transport are still large and require further analysis.
Sourish Basu, David F. Baker, Frédéric Chevallier, Prabir K. Patra, Junjie Liu, and John B. Miller
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 7189–7215, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-7189-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-7189-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
CO2 measurements from the global surface network and CO2 estimates from satellites such as the Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 (OCO-2) are currently used to quantify the surface sources and sinks of CO2, using what we know about atmospheric transport of gases. In this work, we quantify the uncertainties in those surface source/sink estimates that stem from errors in our atmospheric transport models, using an observing system simulation experiment (OSSE).
Tomohiro O. Sato, Takao M. Sato, Hideo Sagawa, Katsuyuki Noguchi, Naoko Saitoh, Hitoshi Irie, Kazuyuki Kita, Mona E. Mahani, Koji Zettsu, Ryoichi Imasu, Sachiko Hayashida, and Yasuko Kasai
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 1653–1668, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-1653-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-1653-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Air pollution is one of the world's greatest environmental health risks. Ozone adversely affects human health and agricultural production, and the tropospheric ozone has been increasing globally over the past few decades. We report an advanced method to derive the ozone amount in the lowermost troposphere using multi-spectral measurements (UV, thermal infrared and microwave). Combining the MW measurement with the UV and thermal infrared measurements certainly increased the sensitivity.
Marielle Saunois, Philippe Bousquet, Ben Poulter, Anna Peregon, Philippe Ciais, Josep G. Canadell, Edward J. Dlugokencky, Giuseppe Etiope, David Bastviken, Sander Houweling, Greet Janssens-Maenhout, Francesco N. Tubiello, Simona Castaldi, Robert B. Jackson, Mihai Alexe, Vivek K. Arora, David J. Beerling, Peter Bergamaschi, Donald R. Blake, Gordon Brailsford, Lori Bruhwiler, Cyril Crevoisier, Patrick Crill, Kristofer Covey, Christian Frankenberg, Nicola Gedney, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Misa Ishizawa, Akihiko Ito, Fortunat Joos, Heon-Sook Kim, Thomas Kleinen, Paul Krummel, Jean-François Lamarque, Ray Langenfelds, Robin Locatelli, Toshinobu Machida, Shamil Maksyutov, Joe R. Melton, Isamu Morino, Vaishali Naik, Simon O'Doherty, Frans-Jan W. Parmentier, Prabir K. Patra, Changhui Peng, Shushi Peng, Glen P. Peters, Isabelle Pison, Ronald Prinn, Michel Ramonet, William J. Riley, Makoto Saito, Monia Santini, Ronny Schroeder, Isobel J. Simpson, Renato Spahni, Atsushi Takizawa, Brett F. Thornton, Hanqin Tian, Yasunori Tohjima, Nicolas Viovy, Apostolos Voulgarakis, Ray Weiss, David J. Wilton, Andy Wiltshire, Doug Worthy, Debra Wunch, Xiyan Xu, Yukio Yoshida, Bowen Zhang, Zhen Zhang, and Qiuan Zhu
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 11135–11161, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-11135-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-11135-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Following the Global Methane Budget 2000–2012 published in Saunois et al. (2016), we use the same dataset of bottom-up and top-down approaches to discuss the variations in methane emissions over the period 2000–2012. The changes in emissions are discussed both in terms of trends and quasi-decadal changes. The ensemble gathered here allows us to synthesise the robust changes in terms of regional and sectorial contributions to the increasing methane emissions.
Sander Houweling, Peter Bergamaschi, Frederic Chevallier, Martin Heimann, Thomas Kaminski, Maarten Krol, Anna M. Michalak, and Prabir Patra
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 235–256, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-235-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-235-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
The aim of this paper is to present an overview of inverse modeling methods, developed over the years, for estimating the global sources and sinks of the greenhouse gas methane from atmospheric measurements. It provides insight into how techniques and estimates have evolved over time, what the remaining shortcomings are, new developments, and promising future directions.
Marielle Saunois, Philippe Bousquet, Ben Poulter, Anna Peregon, Philippe Ciais, Josep G. Canadell, Edward J. Dlugokencky, Giuseppe Etiope, David Bastviken, Sander Houweling, Greet Janssens-Maenhout, Francesco N. Tubiello, Simona Castaldi, Robert B. Jackson, Mihai Alexe, Vivek K. Arora, David J. Beerling, Peter Bergamaschi, Donald R. Blake, Gordon Brailsford, Victor Brovkin, Lori Bruhwiler, Cyril Crevoisier, Patrick Crill, Kristofer Covey, Charles Curry, Christian Frankenberg, Nicola Gedney, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Misa Ishizawa, Akihiko Ito, Fortunat Joos, Heon-Sook Kim, Thomas Kleinen, Paul Krummel, Jean-François Lamarque, Ray Langenfelds, Robin Locatelli, Toshinobu Machida, Shamil Maksyutov, Kyle C. McDonald, Julia Marshall, Joe R. Melton, Isamu Morino, Vaishali Naik, Simon O'Doherty, Frans-Jan W. Parmentier, Prabir K. Patra, Changhui Peng, Shushi Peng, Glen P. Peters, Isabelle Pison, Catherine Prigent, Ronald Prinn, Michel Ramonet, William J. Riley, Makoto Saito, Monia Santini, Ronny Schroeder, Isobel J. Simpson, Renato Spahni, Paul Steele, Atsushi Takizawa, Brett F. Thornton, Hanqin Tian, Yasunori Tohjima, Nicolas Viovy, Apostolos Voulgarakis, Michiel van Weele, Guido R. van der Werf, Ray Weiss, Christine Wiedinmyer, David J. Wilton, Andy Wiltshire, Doug Worthy, Debra Wunch, Xiyan Xu, Yukio Yoshida, Bowen Zhang, Zhen Zhang, and Qiuan Zhu
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 8, 697–751, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-697-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-697-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
An accurate assessment of the methane budget is important to understand the atmospheric methane concentrations and trends and to provide realistic pathways for climate change mitigation. The various and diffuse sources of methane as well and its oxidation by a very short lifetime radical challenge this assessment. We quantify the methane sources and sinks as well as their uncertainties based on both bottom-up and top-down approaches provided by a broad international scientific community.
Andreas Ostler, Ralf Sussmann, Prabir K. Patra, Sander Houweling, Marko De Bruine, Gabriele P. Stiller, Florian J. Haenel, Johannes Plieninger, Philippe Bousquet, Yi Yin, Marielle Saunois, Kaley A. Walker, Nicholas M. Deutscher, David W. T. Griffith, Thomas Blumenstock, Frank Hase, Thorsten Warneke, Zhiting Wang, Rigel Kivi, and John Robinson
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 9, 4843–4859, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-4843-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-4843-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
Our evaluation of column-averaged methane (XCH4) in models and TCCON reveals latitudinal biases between 0.4 % and 2.1 % originating from an inter-model spread in stratospheric CH4. Substituting model stratospheric CH4 fields by satellite data significantly reduces the large XCH4 bias observed for one model. For other models, showing only minor biases, the impact is ambiguous; i.e., the satellite uncertainty range hinders a more accurate model evaluation needed to improve inverse modeling.
R. Hossaini, P. K. Patra, A. A. Leeson, G. Krysztofiak, N. L. Abraham, S. J. Andrews, A. T. Archibald, J. Aschmann, E. L. Atlas, D. A. Belikov, H. Bönisch, L. J. Carpenter, S. Dhomse, M. Dorf, A. Engel, W. Feng, S. Fuhlbrügge, P. T. Griffiths, N. R. P. Harris, R. Hommel, T. Keber, K. Krüger, S. T. Lennartz, S. Maksyutov, H. Mantle, G. P. Mills, B. Miller, S. A. Montzka, F. Moore, M. A. Navarro, D. E. Oram, K. Pfeilsticker, J. A. Pyle, B. Quack, A. D. Robinson, E. Saikawa, A. Saiz-Lopez, S. Sala, B.-M. Sinnhuber, S. Taguchi, S. Tegtmeier, R. T. Lidster, C. Wilson, and F. Ziska
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 9163–9187, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-9163-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-9163-2016, 2016
Lisa R. Welp, Prabir K. Patra, Christian Rödenbeck, Rama Nemani, Jian Bi, Stephen C. Piper, and Ralph F. Keeling
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 9047–9066, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-9047-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-9047-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
Boreal and arctic ecosystems have been responding to elevated temperatures and atmospheric CO2 over the last decades. It is not clear if these ecosystems are sequestering more carbon or possibly becoming sources. This is an important feedback of the carbon cycle to global warming. We studied monthly biological land CO2 fluxes inferred from atmospheric CO2 concentrations using inverse models and found that net summer CO2 uptake increased, resulting in a small increase in annual CO2 uptake.
Naveen Chandra, Shyam Lal, S. Venkataramani, Prabir K. Patra, and Varun Sheel
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 6153–6173, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-6153-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-6153-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
About 70 % of man-made CO2 is emitted from the urban areas of the world. Measurements of CO2 and CO are carried out at an urban site, Ahmedabad, India. The observed time series are analysed using a global chemistry-transport model, and correlations between the two species. We have identified the impacts of land ecosystem, man-made emissions and atmospheric transport on CO2 variations. This study is aimed at drawing an effective emission mitigation policy for combating future climate change.
S. Hayashida, X. Liu, A. Ono, K. Yang, and K. Chance
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 9865–9881, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9865-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9865-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
The lower tropospheric ozone distribution maps were first obtained from the recent retrieval products of the Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) onboard the Earth Observing System (EOS) Aura satellite. We found significant enhancement of ozone in the lower troposphere over central and eastern China (CEC), with Shandong Province as its center, and most notable in June in any given year. Similar seasonal variations were observed throughout the 9-year OMI measurement period of 2005 to 2013.
A. Ostler, R. Sussmann, P. K. Patra, P. O. Wennberg, N. M. Deutscher, D. W. T. Griffith, T. Blumenstock, F. Hase, R. Kivi, T. Warneke, Z. Wang, M. De Mazière, J. Robinson, and H. Ohyama
Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/acpd-15-20395-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/acpd-15-20395-2015, 2015
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
We find that stratospheric model-transport errors are common for chemical transport models that are used for inverse estimates of CH4 emissions. These model-transport errors cause latitudinal as well as seasonal biases in simulated stratospheric and, hence, column-averaged CH4 mixing ratios (XCH4). Such a model bias corresponds to an overestimation of arctic and mid-latitude CH4 emissions if inversion studies do not apply an ad hoc bias correction before inverting fluxes from XCH4 observations.
A. Ghosh, P. K. Patra, K. Ishijima, T. Umezawa, A. Ito, D. M. Etheridge, S. Sugawara, K. Kawamura, J. B. Miller, E. J. Dlugokencky, P. B. Krummel, P. J. Fraser, L. P. Steele, R. L. Langenfelds, C. M. Trudinger, J. W. C. White, B. Vaughn, T. Saeki, S. Aoki, and T. Nakazawa
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 2595–2612, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-2595-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-2595-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
Atmospheric CH4 increased from 900ppb to 1800ppb during the period 1900–2010 at a rate unprecedented in any observational records. We use bottom-up emissions and a chemistry-transport model to simulate CH4. The optimized global total CH4 emission, estimated from the model–observation differences, increased at fastest rate during 1940–1990. Using δ13C of CH4 measurements we attribute this emission increase to biomass burning. Total CH4 lifetime is shortened by 4% over the simulation period.
M. Inoue, I. Morino, O. Uchino, Y. Miyamoto, T. Saeki, Y. Yoshida, T. Yokota, C. Sweeney, P. P. Tans, S. C. Biraud, T. Machida, J. V. Pittman, E. A. Kort, T. Tanaka, S. Kawakami, Y. Sawa, K. Tsuboi, and H. Matsueda
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 2987–3005, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-2987-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-2987-2014, 2014
R. L. Thompson, K. Ishijima, E. Saikawa, M. Corazza, U. Karstens, P. K. Patra, P. Bergamaschi, F. Chevallier, E. Dlugokencky, R. G. Prinn, R. F. Weiss, S. O'Doherty, P. J. Fraser, L. P. Steele, P. B. Krummel, A. Vermeulen, Y. Tohjima, A. Jordan, L. Haszpra, M. Steinbacher, S. Van der Laan, T. Aalto, F. Meinhardt, M. E. Popa, J. Moncrieff, and P. Bousquet
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 6177–6194, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-6177-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-6177-2014, 2014
E. Saikawa, R. G. Prinn, E. Dlugokencky, K. Ishijima, G. S. Dutton, B. D. Hall, R. Langenfelds, Y. Tohjima, T. Machida, M. Manizza, M. Rigby, S. O'Doherty, P. K. Patra, C. M. Harth, R. F. Weiss, P. B. Krummel, M. van der Schoot, P. J. Fraser, L. P. Steele, S. Aoki, T. Nakazawa, and J. W. Elkins
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 4617–4641, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-4617-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-4617-2014, 2014
R. L. Thompson, P. K. Patra, K. Ishijima, E. Saikawa, M. Corazza, U. Karstens, C. Wilson, P. Bergamaschi, E. Dlugokencky, C. Sweeney, R. G. Prinn, R. F. Weiss, S. O'Doherty, P. J. Fraser, L. P. Steele, P. B. Krummel, M. Saunois, M. Chipperfield, and P. Bousquet
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 4349–4368, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-4349-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-4349-2014, 2014
M. Ishii, R. A. Feely, K. B. Rodgers, G.-H. Park, R. Wanninkhof, D. Sasano, H. Sugimoto, C. E. Cosca, S. Nakaoka, M. Telszewski, Y. Nojiri, S. E. Mikaloff Fletcher, Y. Niwa, P. K. Patra, V. Valsala, H. Nakano, I. Lima, S. C. Doney, E. T. Buitenhuis, O. Aumont, J. P. Dunne, A. Lenton, and T. Takahashi
Biogeosciences, 11, 709–734, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-709-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-709-2014, 2014
T. Sugita, Y. Kasai, Y. Terao, S. Hayashida, G. L. Manney, W. H. Daffer, H. Sagawa, M. Suzuki, M. Shiotani, K. A. Walker, C. D. Boone, and P. F. Bernath
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 6, 3099–3113, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-3099-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-3099-2013, 2013
V. V. S. S. Sarma, A. Lenton, R. M. Law, N. Metzl, P. K. Patra, S. Doney, I. D. Lima, E. Dlugokencky, M. Ramonet, and V. Valsala
Biogeosciences, 10, 7035–7052, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-7035-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-7035-2013, 2013
P. Peylin, R. M. Law, K. R. Gurney, F. Chevallier, A. R. Jacobson, T. Maki, Y. Niwa, P. K. Patra, W. Peters, P. J. Rayner, C. Rödenbeck, I. T. van der Laan-Luijkx, and X. Zhang
Biogeosciences, 10, 6699–6720, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-6699-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-6699-2013, 2013
R. Locatelli, P. Bousquet, F. Chevallier, A. Fortems-Cheney, S. Szopa, M. Saunois, A. Agusti-Panareda, D. Bergmann, H. Bian, P. Cameron-Smith, M. P. Chipperfield, E. Gloor, S. Houweling, S. R. Kawa, M. Krol, P. K. Patra, R. G. Prinn, M. Rigby, R. Saito, and C. Wilson
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 9917–9937, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-9917-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-9917-2013, 2013
M. Inoue, I. Morino, O. Uchino, Y. Miyamoto, Y. Yoshida, T. Yokota, T. Machida, Y. Sawa, H. Matsueda, C. Sweeney, P. P. Tans, A. E. Andrews, S. C. Biraud, T. Tanaka, S. Kawakami, and P. K. Patra
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 9771–9788, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-9771-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-9771-2013, 2013
S. Maksyutov, H. Takagi, V. K. Valsala, M. Saito, T. Oda, T. Saeki, D. A. Belikov, R. Saito, A. Ito, Y. Yoshida, I. Morino, O. Uchino, R. J. Andres, and T. Yokota
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 9351–9373, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-9351-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-9351-2013, 2013
Y. Yoshida, N. Kikuchi, I. Morino, O. Uchino, S. Oshchepkov, A. Bril, T. Saeki, N. Schutgens, G. C. Toon, D. Wunch, C. M. Roehl, P. O. Wennberg, D. W. T. Griffith, N. M. Deutscher, T. Warneke, J. Notholt, J. Robinson, V. Sherlock, B. Connor, M. Rettinger, R. Sussmann, P. Ahonen, P. Heikkinen, E. Kyrö, J. Mendonca, K. Strong, F. Hase, S. Dohe, and T. Yokota
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 6, 1533–1547, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-1533-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-1533-2013, 2013
Y. Miyamoto, M. Inoue, I. Morino, O. Uchino, T. Yokota, T. Machida, Y. Sawa, H. Matsueda, C. Sweeney, P. P. Tans, A. E. Andrews, and P. K. Patra
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 5265–5275, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5265-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5265-2013, 2013
D. A. Belikov, S. Maksyutov, M. Krol, A. Fraser, M. Rigby, H. Bian, A. Agusti-Panareda, D. Bergmann, P. Bousquet, P. Cameron-Smith, M. P. Chipperfield, A. Fortems-Cheiney, E. Gloor, K. Haynes, P. Hess, S. Houweling, S. R. Kawa, R. M. Law, Z. Loh, L. Meng, P. I. Palmer, P. K. Patra, R. G. Prinn, R. Saito, and C. Wilson
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 1093–1114, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1093-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1093-2013, 2013
T. Saeki, R. Saito, D. Belikov, and S. Maksyutov
Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 81–100, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-81-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-81-2013, 2013
P. K. Patra, J. G. Canadell, R. A. Houghton, S. L. Piao, N.-H. Oh, P. Ciais, K. R. Manjunath, A. Chhabra, T. Wang, T. Bhattacharya, P. Bousquet, J. Hartman, A. Ito, E. Mayorga, Y. Niwa, P. A. Raymond, V. V. S. S. Sarma, and R. Lasco
Biogeosciences, 10, 513–527, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-513-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-513-2013, 2013
Related subject area
Subject: Gases | Research Activity: Remote Sensing | Altitude Range: Stratosphere | Science Focus: Physics (physical properties and processes)
Total ozone trends at three northern high-latitude stations
Case study on the influence of synoptic-scale processes on the paired H2O–O3 distribution in the UTLS across a North Atlantic jet stream
Dynamical linear modeling estimates of long-term ozone trends from homogenized Dobson Umkehr profiles at Arosa/Davos, Switzerland
Zonally asymmetric influences of the quasi-biennial oscillation on stratospheric ozone
Stratospheric ozone trends for 1984–2021 in the SAGE II–OSIRIS–SAGE III/ISS composite dataset
Analyzing ozone variations and uncertainties at high latitudes during sudden stratospheric warming events using MERRA-2
Impacts of tropical cyclones on the thermodynamic conditions in the tropical tropopause layer observed by A-Train satellites
Investigation and amelioration of long-term instrumental drifts in water vapor and nitrous oxide measurements from the Aura Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) and their implications for studies of variability and trends
3-D tomographic observations of Rossby wave breaking over the North Atlantic during the WISE aircraft campaign in 2017
Is there a direct solar proton impact on lower-stratospheric ozone?
Small-scale variability of stratospheric ozone during the sudden stratospheric warming 2018/2019 observed at Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard
Seasonal stratospheric ozone trends over 2000–2018 derived from several merged data sets
Evidence for energetic particle precipitation and quasi-biennial oscillation modulations of the Antarctic NO2 springtime stratospheric column from OMI observations
Stratospheric ozone trends for 1985–2018: sensitivity to recent large variability
Interannual variations of water vapor in the tropical upper troposphere and the lower and middle stratosphere and their connections to ENSO and QBO
Ground-based ozone profiles over central Europe: incorporating anomalous observations into the analysis of stratospheric ozone trends
Response of stratospheric water vapor and ozone to the unusual timing of El Niño and the QBO disruption in 2015–2016
Assessing stratospheric transport in the CMAM30 simulations using ACE-FTS measurements
Water vapour and methane coupling in the stratosphere observed using SCIAMACHY solar occultation measurements
Evidence for a continuous decline in lower stratospheric ozone offsetting ozone layer recovery
MLS measurements of stratospheric hydrogen cyanide during the 2015–2016 El Niño event
An “island” in the stratosphere – on the enhanced annual variation of water vapour in the middle and upper stratosphere in the southern tropics and subtropics
CCl4 distribution derived from MIPAS ESA v7 data: intercomparisons, trend, and lifetime estimation
Results from the validation campaign of the ozone radiometer GROMOS-C at the NDACC station of Réunion island
Trend analysis of the 20-year time series of stratospheric ozone profiles observed by the GROMOS microwave radiometer at Bern
Is there a solar signal in lower stratospheric water vapour?
Trajectory mapping of middle atmospheric water vapor by a mini network of NDACC instruments
Sunset–sunrise difference in solar occultation ozone measurements (SAGE II, HALOE, and ACE–FTS) and its relationship to tidal vertical winds
Tracing the second stage of ozone recovery in the Antarctic ozone-hole with a "big data" approach to multivariate regressions
Total ozone trends and variability during 1979–2012 from merged data sets of various satellites
Trends in stratospheric ozone derived from merged SAGE II and Odin-OSIRIS satellite observations
Evaluation of the use of five laboratory-determined ozone absorption cross sections in Brewer and Dobson retrieval algorithms
Decadal-scale responses in middle and upper stratospheric ozone from SAGE II version 7 data
Validation of ozone monthly zonal mean profiles obtained from the version 8.6 Solar Backscatter Ultraviolet algorithm
Stratospheric lifetimes of CFC-12, CCl4, CH4, CH3Cl and N2O from measurements made by the Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment-Fourier Transform Spectrometer (ACE-FTS)
Volcanic SO2 fluxes derived from satellite data: a survey using OMI, GOME-2, IASI and MODIS
Stratospheric ozone interannual variability (1995–2011) as observed by lidar and satellite at Mauna Loa Observatory, HI and Table Mountain Facility, CA
Chemical ozone losses in Arctic and Antarctic polar winter/spring season derived from SCIAMACHY limb measurements 2002–2009
Development of a climate record of tropospheric and stratospheric column ozone from satellite remote sensing: evidence of an early recovery of global stratospheric ozone
A-train CALIOP and MLS observations of early winter Antarctic polar stratospheric clouds and nitric acid in 2008
Ozone zonal asymmetry and planetary wave characterization during Antarctic spring
A global climatology of tropospheric and stratospheric ozone derived from Aura OMI and MLS measurements
Sulphur dioxide as a volcanic ash proxy during the April–May 2010 eruption of Eyjafjallajökull Volcano, Iceland
Analysis of HCl and ClO time series in the upper stratosphere using satellite data sets
Retrieval of atmospheric parameters from GOMOS data
Multi sensor reanalysis of total ozone
GOMOS data characterisation and error estimation
Technical Note: Time-dependent limb-darkening calibration for solar occultation instruments
Simultaneous measurements of OClO, NO2 and O3 in the Arctic polar vortex by the GOMOS instrument
Leonie Bernet, Tove Svendby, Georg Hansen, Yvan Orsolini, Arne Dahlback, Florence Goutail, Andrea Pazmiño, Boyan Petkov, and Arve Kylling
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 4165–4184, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4165-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4165-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
After the severe destruction of the ozone layer, the amount of ozone in the stratosphere is expected to increase again. At northern high latitudes, however, such a recovery has not been detected yet. To assess ozone changes in that region, we analyse the amount of ozone above specific locations (total ozone) measured at three stations in Norway. We found that total ozone increases significantly at two Arctic stations, which may be an indication of ozone recovery at northern high latitudes.
Andreas Schäfler, Michael Sprenger, Heini Wernli, Andreas Fix, and Martin Wirth
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 999–1018, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-999-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-999-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, airborne lidar profile measurements of H2O and O3 across a midlatitude jet stream are combined with analyses in tracer–trace space and backward trajectories. We highlight that transport and mixing processes in the history of the observed air masses are governed by interacting tropospheric weather systems on synoptic timescales. We show that these weather systems play a key role in the high variability of the paired H2O and O3 distributions near the tropopause.
Eliane Maillard Barras, Alexander Haefele, René Stübi, Achille Jouberton, Herbert Schill, Irina Petropavlovskikh, Koji Miyagawa, Martin Stanek, and Lucien Froidevaux
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 14283–14302, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-14283-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-14283-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Intercomparisons of three Dobson and three Brewer spectrophotometers at Arosa/Davos, Switzerland, are used for the homogenization of the longest Umkehr ozone profiles time series worldwide. Dynamic linear modeling (DLM) reveals a significant positive trend after 2004 in the upper stratosphere, a persistent negative trend between 25 and 30 km in the middle stratosphere, and a negative trend at 20 km in the lower stratosphere, with different levels of significance depending on the dataset.
Wuke Wang, Jin Hong, Ming Shangguan, Hongyue Wang, Wei Jiang, and Shuyun Zhao
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 13695–13711, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-13695-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-13695-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The ozone layer protects the life on the Earth by absorbing the ultraviolet (UV) radiation. Beside the long-term trend, there are strong interannual fluctuations in stratospheric ozone. The quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) is an important interannual mode in the stratosphere. We show some new zonally asymmetric features of its impacts on stratospheric ozone using satellite data, ERA5 reanalysis, and model simulations, which is helpful for predicting the regional UV radiation at the surface.
Kristof Bognar, Susann Tegtmeier, Adam Bourassa, Chris Roth, Taran Warnock, Daniel Zawada, and Doug Degenstein
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 9553–9569, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9553-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9553-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We quantify recent changes in stratospheric ozone (outside the polar regions) using a combination of three satellite datasets. We find that upper stratospheric ozone have increased significantly since 2000, although the recovery shows an unexpected pause in the Northern Hemisphere. Combined with the likely decrease in ozone in the lower stratosphere, this presents an interesting challenge for predicting the future of the ozone layer.
Shima Bahramvash Shams, Von P. Walden, James W. Hannigan, William J. Randel, Irina V. Petropavlovskikh, Amy H. Butler, and Alvaro de la Cámara
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 5435–5458, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5435-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5435-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Large-scale atmospheric circulation has a strong influence on ozone in the Arctic, and certain anomalous dynamical events, such as sudden stratospheric warmings, cause dramatic alterations of the large-scale circulation. A reanalysis model is evaluated and then used to investigate the impact of sudden stratospheric warmings on mid-atmospheric ozone. Results show that the position of the cold jet stream over the Arctic before these events influences the variability of ozone.
Jing Feng and Yi Huang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 15493–15518, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-15493-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-15493-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study conducts a comprehensive analysis of thermodynamic fields above tropical cyclones. Using a synergistic retrieval method, we develop the first infrared hyperspectra-based dataset of collocated temperature and water vapor profiles above deep convective clouds. It discloses the unique impacts of convective overshoots on the tropical tropopause layer (TTL). Challenging conventional views, our study suggests that convective hydration may be limited by the radiative balance above cyclones.
Nathaniel J. Livesey, William G. Read, Lucien Froidevaux, Alyn Lambert, Michelle L. Santee, Michael J. Schwartz, Luis F. Millán, Robert F. Jarnot, Paul A. Wagner, Dale F. Hurst, Kaley A. Walker, Patrick E. Sheese, and Gerald E. Nedoluha
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 15409–15430, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-15409-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-15409-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS), an instrument on NASA's Aura mission launched in 2004, measures vertical profiles of the temperature and composition of Earth's "middle atmosphere" (the region from ~12 to ~100 km altitude). We describe how, among the 16 trace gases measured by MLS, the measurements of water vapor (H2O) and nitrous oxide (N2O) have started to drift since ~2010. The paper also discusses the origins of this drift and work to ameliorate it in a new version of the MLS dataset.
Lukas Krasauskas, Jörn Ungermann, Peter Preusse, Felix Friedl-Vallon, Andreas Zahn, Helmut Ziereis, Christian Rolf, Felix Plöger, Paul Konopka, Bärbel Vogel, and Martin Riese
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 10249–10272, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10249-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10249-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
A Rossby wave (RW) breaking event was observed over the North Atlantic during the WISE measurement campaign in October 2017. Infrared limb sounding measurements of trace gases in the lower stratosphere, including high-resolution 3-D tomographic reconstruction, revealed complex spatial structures in stratospheric tracers near the polar jet related to previous RW breaking events. Backward-trajectory analysis and tracer correlations were used to study mixing and stratosphere–troposphere exchange.
Jia Jia, Antti Kero, Niilo Kalakoski, Monika E. Szeląg, and Pekka T. Verronen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 14969–14982, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-14969-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-14969-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Recent studies have reported up to a 10 % average decrease of lower stratospheric ozone at 20 km altitude following solar proton events (SPEs). Our study uses 49 events that occurred after the launch of Aura MLS (July 2004–now) and 177 events that occurred in the WACCM-D simulation period (Jan 1989–Dec 2012) to evaluate ozone changes following SPEs. The statistical and case-by-case studies show no solid evidence of SPE's direct impact on the lower stratospheric ozone.
Franziska Schranz, Jonas Hagen, Gunter Stober, Klemens Hocke, Axel Murk, and Niklaus Kämpfer
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 10791–10806, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10791-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10791-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We measured middle-atmospheric ozone, water vapour and zonal and meridional wind with two ground-based microwave radiometers which are located at Ny-Alesund, Svalbard, in the Arctic. In this article we present measurements of the small-scale horizontal ozone gradients during winter 2018/2019. We found a distinct seasonal variation of the ozone gradients which is linked to the planetary wave activity. We further present the signatures of the SSW in the ozone, water vapour and wind measurements.
Monika E. Szeląg, Viktoria F. Sofieva, Doug Degenstein, Chris Roth, Sean Davis, and Lucien Froidevaux
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 7035–7047, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-7035-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-7035-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We analyze seasonal dependence of stratospheric ozone trends over 2000–2018. We demonstrate that the mid-latitude upper stratospheric ozone recovery maximizes during local winters and equinoxes. In the tropics, a very strong seasonal dependence of ozone trends is observed at all altitudes. We found hemispheric asymmetry of summertime ozone trend patterns below 35 km. The seasonal dependence of ozone trends and stratospheric temperature trends shows a clear inter-relation of the trend patterns.
Emily M. Gordon, Annika Seppälä, and Johanna Tamminen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 6259–6271, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-6259-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-6259-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The Sun constantly emits high-energy charged particles that produce the ozone destroying chemical NOx in the polar atmosphere. NOx is transported to the stratosphere, where the ozone layer is. Satellite observations show that the NOx gases remain in the atmosphere longer than previously reported. This is influenced by the strength of atmospheric large-scale dynamics, suggesting that there are specific times when this type of solar influence on the Antarctic atmosphere becomes more pronounced.
William T. Ball, Justin Alsing, Johannes Staehelin, Sean M. Davis, Lucien Froidevaux, and Thomas Peter
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 12731–12748, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-12731-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-12731-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
We analyse long-term stratospheric ozone (60° S–60° N) trends over the 1985–2018 period. Previous work has suggested that lower stratosphere ozone declined over 1998–2016. We demonstrate that a large ozone upsurge in 2017 is likely related to QBO variability, but that lower stratospheric ozone trends likely remain lower in 2018 than in 1998. Tropical stratospheric ozone (30° S–30° N) shows highly probable decreases in both the lower stratosphere and in the integrated stratospheric ozone layer.
Edward W. Tian, Hui Su, Baijun Tian, and Jonathan H. Jiang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 9913–9926, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-9913-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-9913-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
We study the interannual (2–7-year) water vapor variations in the tropical upper troposphere and the lower and middle stratosphere and their connections to El Nino–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) using the Aura Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) data and time-lag regression analysis and composite analysis. We found that ENSO is more important in the upper troposphere and near the tropopause, while QBO is more important in the lower and middle stratosphere.
Leonie Bernet, Thomas von Clarmann, Sophie Godin-Beekmann, Gérard Ancellet, Eliane Maillard Barras, René Stübi, Wolfgang Steinbrecht, Niklaus Kämpfer, and Klemens Hocke
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 4289–4309, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-4289-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-4289-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
After severe ozone depletion, upper stratospheric ozone has started to recover in recent years. However, stratospheric ozone trends from various data sets still show differences. To partly explain such differences, we investigate how the trends are affected by different factors, for example, anomalies in the data. We show how trend estimates can be improved by considering such anomalies and present updated stratospheric ozone trends from ground data measured in central Europe.
Mohamadou Diallo, Martin Riese, Thomas Birner, Paul Konopka, Rolf Müller, Michaela I. Hegglin, Michelle L. Santee, Mark Baldwin, Bernard Legras, and Felix Ploeger
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 13055–13073, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-13055-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-13055-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
The unprecedented timing of an El Niño event aligned with the disrupted QBO in 2015–2016 caused a perturbation to the stratospheric circulation, affecting trace gases. This paper resolves the puzzling response of the lower stratospheric water vapor by showing that the QBO disruption reversed the lower stratosphere moistening triggered by the alignment of the El Niño event with a westerly QBO in early boreal winter.
Felicia Kolonjari, David A. Plummer, Kaley A. Walker, Chris D. Boone, James W. Elkins, Michaela I. Hegglin, Gloria L. Manney, Fred L. Moore, Diane Pendlebury, Eric A. Ray, Karen H. Rosenlof, and Gabriele P. Stiller
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 6801–6828, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-6801-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-6801-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
We used satellite observations and model simulations of CFC-11, CFC-12, and N2O to investigate stratospheric transport, which is important for predicting the recovery of the ozone layer and future climate. We found that sampling can impact results and that the model consistently overestimates concentrations of these gases in the lower stratosphere, consistent with a too rapid Brewer–Dobson circulation. An issue with mixing in the tropical lower stratosphere in June–July–August was also found.
Stefan Noël, Katja Weigel, Klaus Bramstedt, Alexei Rozanov, Mark Weber, Heinrich Bovensmann, and John P. Burrows
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 4463–4476, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-4463-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-4463-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
The combined analysis of stratospheric methane and water vapour data derived from SCIAMACHY solar occultation measurements shows the expected anti-correlation and a clear temporal variation related to waves in equatorial zonal winds. Above about 20 km most of the additional water vapour is attributed to the oxidation of methane. The SCIAMACHY data confirm that at lower altitudes water vapour and methane are transported from the tropics to higher latitudes.
William T. Ball, Justin Alsing, Daniel J. Mortlock, Johannes Staehelin, Joanna D. Haigh, Thomas Peter, Fiona Tummon, Rene Stübi, Andrea Stenke, John Anderson, Adam Bourassa, Sean M. Davis, Doug Degenstein, Stacey Frith, Lucien Froidevaux, Chris Roth, Viktoria Sofieva, Ray Wang, Jeannette Wild, Pengfei Yu, Jerald R. Ziemke, and Eugene V. Rozanov
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 1379–1394, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-1379-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-1379-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Using a robust analysis, with artefact-corrected ozone data, we confirm upper stratospheric ozone is recovering following the Montreal Protocol, but that lower stratospheric ozone (50° S–50° N) has continued to decrease since 1998, and the ozone layer as a whole (60° S–60° N) may be lower today than in 1998. No change in total column ozone may be due to increasing tropospheric ozone. State-of-the-art models do not reproduce lower stratospheric ozone decreases.
Hugh C. Pumphrey, Norbert Glatthor, Peter F. Bernath, Christopher D. Boone, James W. Hannigan, Ivan Ortega, Nathaniel J. Livesey, and William G. Read
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 691–703, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-691-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-691-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
The Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) is a satellite instrument that has been measuring the amount of various gases in the atmosphere since 2004. In late 2015 and 2016 it observed unusual amounts of hydrogen cyanide (HCN), a gas produced when vegetation is burned. We compare the MLS observations to similar observations from other instruments. The excess HCN is shown to come from fires in Indonesia. There are more fires than usual in 2015–16 due to a drought caused by an El Niño event.
Stefan Lossow, Hella Garny, and Patrick Jöckel
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 11521–11539, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-11521-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-11521-2017, 2017
Massimo Valeri, Flavio Barbara, Chris Boone, Simone Ceccherini, Marco Gai, Guido Maucher, Piera Raspollini, Marco Ridolfi, Luca Sgheri, Gerald Wetzel, and Nicola Zoppetti
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 10143–10162, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-10143-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-10143-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Atmospheric emissions of CCl4 are regulated by the Montreal Protocol due to its role as a strong ozone-depleting substance. The molecule is the subject of recent increased interest as a consequence of the discrepancy between atmospheric observations and reported production and consumption. We use MIPAS/ENVISAT data (2002–2012) to estimate CCl4 trends and lifetime. At 50 hPa we find a decline of about 30–35 % per decade. In the lower stratosphere our lifetime estimate is 47 (39–61) years.
Susana Fernandez, Rolf Rüfenacht, Niklaus Kämpfer, Thierry Portafaix, Françoise Posny, and Guillaume Payen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 7531–7543, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-7531-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-7531-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
We present a new ground based microwave radiometer for campaigns, GROMOS-C. It measures the vertical distribution of ozone in the middle atmosphere by observing spectra at 110.836 GHz. The paper presents a validation campaign that took place on La Réunion Island. The ozone retrieved profiles are validated against ozone profiles from the Microwave Limb Sounder, the ozone lidar located in the observatory, ozone profiles from weekly radiosondes and with ECMWF model data.
L. Moreira, K. Hocke, E. Eckert, T. von Clarmann, and N. Kämpfer
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 10999–11009, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-10999-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-10999-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
GROMOS (GROund-based Millimeter-wave Ozone Spectrometer) has provided ozone profiles for the NDACC (Network for the Detection of Atmospheric Composition Change) at Bern since 1994. We performed a trend analysis of our 20-year time series of stratospheric ozone profiles with a multilinear parametric trend estimation method. With our estimated ozone trends we are able to support the stratospheric ozone turnaround, besides a statistically significant negative trend in the lower mesosphere.
T. Schieferdecker, S. Lossow, G. P. Stiller, and T. von Clarmann
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 9851–9863, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9851-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9851-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
A merged data set of HALOE and MIPAS lower stratospheric water vapour has been constructed. Multivariate linear regression shows that the merged time series can best be explained if a proxy for the 11-year solar cycle is considered. The amplitude of the solar cycle signal in water vapour is slightly higher than that which can be explained by the known solar cycle variation of cold-point temperatures.
M. Lainer, N. Kämpfer, B. Tschanz, G. E. Nedoluha, S. Ka, and J. J. Oh
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 9711–9730, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9711-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9711-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
We use water vapor profiles from ground-based microwave radiometers at five locations distributed over the Northern Hemisphere and operated in the frame of NDACC (Network for the Detection of Atmospheric Composition Change) to generate hemispheric water vapor maps based on the so-called trajectory mapping technique. The novelty is to show that a mini network of instruments is capable of providing information about the hemispheric distribution of water vapor under most conditions.
T. Sakazaki, M. Shiotani, M. Suzuki, D. Kinnison, J. M. Zawodny, M. McHugh, and K. A. Walker
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 829–843, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-829-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-829-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
The solar occultation measurements measure the atmosphere at sunrise (SR) and sunset (SS). It has been reported that there is a significant difference in the observed amount of stratospheric ozone between SR and SS. This study first revealed that this difference can be largely explained by diurnal variations in ozone, particularly those caused by vertical transport by the atmospheric tidal winds. Our results would be helpful for the construction of combined data sets from SR and SS profiles.
A. T. J. de Laat, R. J. van der A, and M. van Weele
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 79–97, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-79-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-79-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
Recent research suggests the Antarctic ozone hole has started to shrink due to decreasing ozone-depleting substances. Because it could be questioned how robust these results are, we provide an assessment of uncertainties in both the underlying ozone observational records and the detection-attribution method. Although Antarctic ozone concentrations are definitely increasing slowly, the formal identification of recovery is not yet justified, although this will likely become possible this decade.
W. Chehade, M. Weber, and J. P. Burrows
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 7059–7074, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-7059-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-7059-2014, 2014
A. E. Bourassa, D. A. Degenstein, W. J. Randel, J. M. Zawodny, E. Kyrölä, C. A. McLinden, C. E. Sioris, and C. Z. Roth
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 6983–6994, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-6983-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-6983-2014, 2014
A. Redondas, R. Evans, R. Stuebi, U. Köhler, and M. Weber
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 1635–1648, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-1635-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-1635-2014, 2014
E. E. Remsberg
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 1039–1053, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-1039-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-1039-2014, 2014
N. A. Kramarova, S. M. Frith, P. K. Bhartia, R. D. McPeters, S. L. Taylor, B. L. Fisher, G. J. Labow, and M. T. DeLand
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 6887–6905, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-6887-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-6887-2013, 2013
A. T. Brown, C. M. Volk, M. R. Schoeberl, C. D. Boone, and P. F. Bernath
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 6921–6950, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-6921-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-6921-2013, 2013
N. Theys, R. Campion, L. Clarisse, H. Brenot, J. van Gent, B. Dils, S. Corradini, L. Merucci, P.-F. Coheur, M. Van Roozendael, D. Hurtmans, C. Clerbaux, S. Tait, and F. Ferrucci
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 5945–5968, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5945-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5945-2013, 2013
G. Kirgis, T. Leblanc, I. S. McDermid, and T. D. Walsh
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 5033–5047, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5033-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5033-2013, 2013
T. Sonkaew, C. von Savigny, K.-U. Eichmann, M. Weber, A. Rozanov, H. Bovensmann, J. P. Burrows, and J.-U. Grooß
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 1809–1835, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1809-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1809-2013, 2013
J. R. Ziemke and S. Chandra
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 5737–5753, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-5737-2012, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-5737-2012, 2012
A. Lambert, M. L. Santee, D. L. Wu, and J. H. Chae
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 2899–2931, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-2899-2012, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-2899-2012, 2012
I. Ialongo, V. Sofieva, N. Kalakoski, J. Tamminen, and E. Kyrölä
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 2603–2614, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-2603-2012, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-2603-2012, 2012
J. R. Ziemke, S. Chandra, G. J. Labow, P. K. Bhartia, L. Froidevaux, and J. C. Witte
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 9237–9251, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-9237-2011, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-9237-2011, 2011
H. E. Thomas and A. J. Prata
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 6871–6880, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-6871-2011, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-6871-2011, 2011
A. Jones, J. Urban, D. P. Murtagh, C. Sanchez, K. A. Walker, N. J. Livesey, L. Froidevaux, and M. L. Santee
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 5321–5333, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-5321-2011, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-5321-2011, 2011
E. Kyrölä, J. Tamminen, V. Sofieva, J. L. Bertaux, A. Hauchecorne, F. Dalaudier, D. Fussen, F. Vanhellemont, O. Fanton d'Andon, G. Barrot, M. Guirlet, A. Mangin, L. Blanot, T. Fehr, L. Saavedra de Miguel, and R. Fraisse
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 11881–11903, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-11881-2010, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-11881-2010, 2010
R. J. van der A, M. A. F. Allaart, and H. J. Eskes
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 11277–11294, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-11277-2010, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-11277-2010, 2010
J. Tamminen, E. Kyrölä, V. F. Sofieva, M. Laine, J.-L. Bertaux, A. Hauchecorne, F. Dalaudier, D. Fussen, F. Vanhellemont, O. Fanton-d'Andon, G. Barrot, A. Mangin, M. Guirlet, L. Blanot, T. Fehr, L. Saavedra de Miguel, and R. Fraisse
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 9505–9519, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-9505-2010, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-9505-2010, 2010
S. P. Burton, L. W. Thomason, and J. M. Zawodny
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 1–8, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-1-2010, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-1-2010, 2010
C. Tétard, D. Fussen, C. Bingen, N. Capouillez, E. Dekemper, N. Loodts, N. Mateshvili, F. Vanhellemont, E. Kyrölä, J. Tamminen, V. Sofieva, A. Hauchecorne, F. Dalaudier, J.-L. Bertaux, O. Fanton d'Andon, G. Barrot, M. Guirlet, T. Fehr, and L. Saavedra
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 7857–7866, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-7857-2009, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-7857-2009, 2009
Cited articles
Baker, A. K., Schuck, T. J., Brenninkmeijer, C. A. M., Rauthe-Schöch, A., Slemr, F., van Velthoven, P. F. J., and Lelieveld, J.: Estimating the contribution of monsoon-related biogenic production to methane emissions from South Asia using CARIBIC observations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L10813, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051756, 2012.
Cao, M., Gregson, K., and Marshall, S.: Global methane emission from wetlands and its sensitivity to climate change, Atmos. Environ., 32, 3293–3299, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(98)00105-8, 1998.
Chandra, N., Venkataramani, S., Lal, S., Sheel, V. and Pozzer, A.: Effects of convection and long-range transport on the distribution of carbon monoxide in the troposphere over India, Atmos. Pollut. Res., 7, 775–785, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apr.2016.03.005, 2016.
Crutzen, P. J., Aselmann, I., and Seiler, W.: Methane production by domestic animals, wild ruminants other herbivorous fauna and humans, Tellus B, 38, 271–284, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.1986.tb00193.x, 1986.
Dlugokencky, E. J., Nisbet, E. G., Fisher, R., and Lowry, D.: Global atmospheric methane: budget, changes, and dangers, Philos. T. Roy. Soc. A, 369, 2058–2072, 2011.
EDGAR42FT: Global emissions EDGAR v4.2FT2010, available at http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/overview.php?v=42FT2010, last access: October 2013.
Frankenberg, C., Bergamaschi, P., Butz, A., Houweling, S., Meirink, J. F., Notholt, J., Petersen, A. K., Schrijver, H., Warneke, T., and Aben, I.: Tropical methane emissions: a revised view from SCIAMACHY onboard ENVISAT, Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L15811, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008gl034300, 2008.
Frankenberg, C., Aben, I., Bergamaschi, P., Dlugokencky, E. J., van Hees, R., Houweling, S., van der Meer, P., Snel, R., and Tol, P.: Global column-averaged methane mixing ratios from 2003 to 2009 as derived from SCIAMACHY: trends and variability, J. Geophys. Res., 116, D04302, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014849, 2011.
Fung, I., John, J., Lerner, J., Matthews, E., Prather, M., Steele, L. P., and Fraser, P. J.: Three-dimensional model synthesis of the global methane cycle, J. Geophys. Res., 96, 13033–13065, https://doi.org/10.1029/91JD01247, 1991.
Gillett, N. P. and Matthews, H. D.: Accounting for carbon cycle feedbacks in a comparison of the global warming effects of greenhouse gases, Environ. Res. Lett., 5, 034011, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/5/3/034011, 2010.
Hayashida, S., Ono, A., Yoshizaki, S., Frankenberg, C., Takeuchi, W., and Yan, X.: Methane concentrations over Monsoon Asia as observed by SCIAMACHY: signals of methane emission from rice cultivation, Remote Sens. Environ., 139, 246–256, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2013.08.008, 2013.
Kar, J., Deeter, M. N., Fishman, J., Liu, Z., Omar, A., Creilson, J. K., Trepte, C. R., Vaughan, M. A., and Winker, D. M.: Wintertime pollution over the Eastern Indo-Gangetic Plains as observed from MOPITT, CALIPSO and tropospheric ozone residual data, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 12273–12283, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-12273-2010, 2010.
Kavitha, M. and Nair, P. R.: Region-dependent seasonal pattern of methane over Indian region as observed by SCIAMACHY, Atmos. Environ., 131, 316–325, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.02.008, 2016.
Kuze, A., Suto, H., Nakajima, M., and Hamazaki, T.: Thermal and near infrared sensor for carbon observation fourier transform spectrometer on the greenhouse gases observing satellite for greenhouse gases monitoring, Appl. Optics, 48, 6716–6733, https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.48.006716, 2009.
Lal, S., Venkataramani, S., Chandra, N., Cooper, O. R., Brioude, J., and Naja, M.: Transport effects on the vertical distribution of tropospheric ozone over western India, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 10012–10026, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021854, 2014.
Matthews, E. and Fung, I.: Methane emissions from natural wetlands: global distribution, area and environmental characteristics of sources, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 1, 61–86, 1987.
Minami, K. and Neue, H. U.: Rice paddies as a methane source, Climatic Change, 27, 13–26, 1994.
Morino, I., Uchino, O., Inoue, M., Yoshida, Y., Yokota, T., Wennberg, P. O., Toon, G. C., Wunch, D., Roehl, C. M., Notholt, J., Warneke, T., Messerschmidt, J., Griffith, D. W. T., Deutscher, N. M., Sherlock, V., Connor, B., Robinson, J., Sussmann, R., and Rettinger, M.: Preliminary validation of column-averaged volume mixing ratios of carbon dioxide and methane retrieved from GOSAT short-wavelength infrared spectra, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 4, 1061–1076, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-1061-2011, 2011.
Myhre, G., Shindell, D., Bréon, F.-M., Collins, W., Fuglestvedt, J., Huang, J., Koch, D., Lamarque, J.-F., Lee, D., Mendoza, B., Nakajima, T., Robock, A., Stephens, G., Takemura, T., and Zhang, H.: Anthropogenic and Natural Radiative Forcing, in: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Stocker, T. F., Qin, D., Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M., Allen, S. K., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex, V., and Midgley, P. M., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 659–740, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.018, 2013.
Olivier, J. G. J., Aardenne, J. A. V., Dentener, F., Ganzeveld, L. N., and Peters, J. A. H. W.: Recent trends in global greenhouse gas emissions: regional trends and spatial distribution of key sources, in: Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gases (NCGG-4), edited by: van Amstel, A., Millpress, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 325–330, 2005.
Onogi, K., Tsutsui, J., Koide, H., Sakamoto, M., Kobayashi, S., Hatsushika, H., Matsumoto, T., Yamazaki, N., Kamahori, H., Takahashi, K., Kadokura, S., Wada, K., Kato, K., Oyama, R., Ose, T., Mannoji, N., and Taira, R.: The JRA-25 reanalysis, J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn., 85, 369–432, 2007.
Park, M., Randel, W. J., Kinnison, D. E., Garcia, R. R., and Choi, W.: Seasonal variation of methane, water vapor, and nitrogen oxides near the tropopause: satellite observations and model simulations, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D03302, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003706, 2004.
Patra, P. K., Takigawa, M., Ishijima, K., Choi, B. C., Cunnold, D., Dlugokencky, E. J., Fraser, P., Gomez-Pelaez, A. J., Goo, T. Y., Kim, J. S., Krummel, P., Langenfelds, R., Meinhardt, F., Mukai, H., O'Doherty, S., Prinn, R. G., Simmonds, P., Steele, P., Tohjima, Y., Tsuboi, K., Uhse, K., Weiss, R., Worthy, D., and Nakazawa, T.: Growth rate, seasonal, synoptic, diurnal variations and budget of methane in lower atmosphere, J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn., 87, 635–663, https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.87.635, 2009.
Patra, P. K., Houweling, S., Krol, M., Bousquet, P., Belikov, D., Bergmann, D., Bian, H., Cameron-Smith, P., Chipperfield, M. P., Corbin, K., Fortems-Cheiney, A., Fraser, A., Gloor, E., Hess, P., Ito, A., Kawa, S. R., Law, R. M., Loh, Z., Maksyutov, S., Meng, L., Palmer, P. I., Prinn, R. G., Rigby, M., Saito, R., and Wilson, C.: TransCom model simulations of CH4 and related species: linking transport, surface flux and chemical loss with CH4 variability in the troposphere and lower stratosphere, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 12813–12837, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-12813-2011, 2011a.
Patra, P. K., Niwa, Y., Schuck, T. J., Brenninkmeijer, C. A. M., Machida, T., Matsueda, H., and Sawa, Y.: Carbon balance of South Asia constrained by passenger aircraft CO2 measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 4163–4175, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-4163-2011, 2011b.
Patra, P. K., Canadell, J. G., Houghton, R. A., Piao, S. L., Oh, N.-H., Ciais, P., Manjunath, K. R., Chhabra, A., Wang, T., Bhattacharya, T., Bousquet, P., Hartman, J., Ito, A., Mayorga, E., Niwa, Y., Raymond, P. A., Sarma, V. V. S. S., and Lasco, R.: The carbon budget of South Asia, Biogeosciences, 10, 513–527, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-513-2013, 2013.
Patra, P. K., Krol, M. C., Montzka, S. A., Arnold, T., Atlas, E. L., Lintner, B. R., Stephens, B. B., Xiang, B., Elkins, J. W., Fraser, P. J., Ghosh, A., Hintsa, E. J., Hurst, D. F., Ishijima, K., Krummel, P. B., Miller, B. R., Miyazaki, K., Moore, F. L., Mühle, J., O'Doherty, S., Prinn, R. G., Steele, L. P., Takigawa, M., Wang, H. J., Weiss, R. F., Wofsy, S. C., and Young, D.: Observational evidence for interhemispheric hydroxyl parity, Nature, 513, 219–223, 2014.
Patra, P. K., Saeki, T., Dlugokencky, E. J., Ishijima, K., Umezawa, T., Ito, A., Aoki, S., Morimoto, S., Kort, E. A., Crotwell, A., Kumar, R., and Nakazawa, T.: Regional methane emission estimation based on observed atmospheric concentrations (2002–2012), J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn., 94, 91–113, https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.2016-006, 2016.
Randel, W. J. and Park, M.: Deep convective influence on the Asian summer monsoon anticyclone and associated tracer variability observed with Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS), J. Geophys. Res., 111, D12314, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006490, 2006.
Rao, Y. P.: Southwest Monsoon: Synoptic Meteorology, Meteor. Monogr., No. 1/1976, India Meteorological Department, New Delhi, 367 pp., 1976.
Schuck, T. J., Ishijima, K., Patra, P. K., Baker, A. K., Machida, T., Matsueda, H., Sawa, Y., Umezawa, T., Brenninkmeijer, C. A. M., and Lelieveld, J.: Distribution of methane in the tropical upper troposphere measured by CARIBIC and CONTRAIL aircraft, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D19304, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD018199, 2012.
Shindell, D. T., Faluvegi, G., Koch, D. M., Schmidt, G. A., Unger, N., and Bauer, S. E.: Improved attribution of climate forcing to emissions, Science, 326, 716–718, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1174760, 2009.
Spivakovsky, C. M., Logan, J. A., Montzka, S. A., Balkanski, Y. J., Foreman-Fowler, M., Jones, D. B. A., Horowitz, L. W., Fusco, A. C., Brenninkmeijer, C. A. M., Prather, M. J., Wofsy, S. C., and McElroy, M. B.: Three-dimensional climatological distribution of tropospheric OH: update and evaluation, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 8931–8980, https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD901006, 2000.
Sugimoto, A., Inoue, T., Kirtibutr, N., and Abe, T.: Methane oxidation by termite mounds estimated by the carbon isotopic composition of methane, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 12, 595–605, https://doi.org/10.1029/98GB02266, 1998.
Umezawa, T., Machida, T., Ishijima, K., Matsueda, H., Sawa, Y., Patra, P. K., Aoki, S., and Nakazawa, T.: Carbon and hydrogen isotopic ratios of atmospheric methane in the upper troposphere over the Western Pacific, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 8095–8113, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-8095-2012, 2012.
Wunch, D., Toon, G. C., Blavier, J.-F. L., Washenfelder, R. A., Notholt, J., Connor, B. J., Griffith, D. W. T., Sherlock, V., and Wennberg, P. O.: The total carbon column observing network, Philos. T. R. Soc. A, 369, 2087–2112, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2010.0240, 2011.
Xiong, X., Houweling, S., Wei, J., Maddy, E., Sun, F., and Barnet, C.: Methane plume over south Asia during the monsoon season: satellite observation and model simulation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 783–794, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-783-2009, 2009.
Yan, X., Akiyama, H., Yagi, K., and Akimoto, H.: Global estimations of the inventory and mitigation potential of methane emissions from rice cultivation conducted using the 2006 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Guidelines, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 23, GB2002, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GB003299, 2009.
Yoshida, Y., Ota, Y., Eguchi, N., Kikuchi, N., Nobuta, K., Tran, H., Morino, I., and Yokota, T.: Retrieval algorithm for CO2 and CH4 column abundances from short-wavelength infrared spectral observations by the Greenhouse gases observing satellite, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 4, 717–734, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-717-2011, 2011.
Yoshida, Y., Kikuchi, N., Morino, I., Uchino, O., Oshchepkov, S., Bril, A., Saeki, T., Schutgens, N., Toon, G. C., Wunch, D., Roehl, C. M., Wennberg, P. O., Griffith, D. W. T., Deutscher, N. M., Warneke, T., Notholt, J., Robinson, J., Sherlock, V., Connor, B., Rettinger, M., Sussmann, R., Ahonen, P., Heikkinen, P., Kyrö, E., Mendonca, J., Strong, K., Hase, F., Dohe, S., and Yokota, T.: Improvement of the retrieval algorithm for GOSAT SWIR XCO2 and XCH4 and their validation using TCCON data, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 6, 1533–1547, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-1533-2013, 2013.
Short summary
This study shows difficulties in interpreting columnar dry-air mole fractions of methane (XCH4) for surface emissions of CH4 over the South Asia region, without separating the role of chemistry and transport. Using a chemistry-transport model, we suggest that a link between surface emissions and higher levels of XCH4 is not always valid in this region of complex monsoonal meteorology, although there is often a fair correlation between the seasonal variations in surface emissions and XCH4.
This study shows difficulties in interpreting columnar dry-air mole fractions of methane (XCH4)...
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint