Articles | Volume 20, issue 20
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11855-2020
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11855-2020
Research article
 | 
22 Oct 2020
Research article |  | 22 Oct 2020

Errors in top-down estimates of emissions using a known source

Wayne M. Angevine, Jeff Peischl, Alice Crawford, Christopher P. Loughner, Ilana B. Pollack, and Chelsea R. Thompson

Related authors

Increased Dynamic Efficiency in Mesoscale Organized Trade Wind Cumulus Clouds
Isabel L. McCoy, Sunil Baidar, Paquita Zuidema, Jan Kazil, W. Alan Brewer, Wayne M. Angevine, and Graham Feingold
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-520,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-520, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
Demistify: a large-eddy simulation (LES) and single-column model (SCM) intercomparison of radiation fog
Ian Boutle, Wayne Angevine, Jian-Wen Bao, Thierry Bergot, Ritthik Bhattacharya, Andreas Bott, Leo Ducongé, Richard Forbes, Tobias Goecke, Evelyn Grell, Adrian Hill, Adele L. Igel, Innocent Kudzotsa, Christine Lac, Bjorn Maronga, Sami Romakkaniemi, Juerg Schmidli, Johannes Schwenkel, Gert-Jan Steeneveld, and Benoît Vié
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 319–333, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-319-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-319-2022, 2022
Short summary
Intercomparison of atmospheric trace gas dispersion models: Barnett Shale case study
Anna Karion, Thomas Lauvaux, Israel Lopez Coto, Colm Sweeney, Kimberly Mueller, Sharon Gourdji, Wayne Angevine, Zachary Barkley, Aijun Deng, Arlyn Andrews, Ariel Stein, and James Whetstone
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 2561–2576, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-2561-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-2561-2019, 2019
Short summary
In situ vertical profiles of aerosol extinction, mass, and composition over the southeast United States during SENEX and SEAC4RS: observations of a modest aerosol enhancement aloft
N. L. Wagner, C. A. Brock, W. M. Angevine, A. Beyersdorf, P. Campuzano-Jost, D. Day, J. A. de Gouw, G. S. Diskin, T. D. Gordon, M. G. Graus, J. S. Holloway, G. Huey, J. L. Jimenez, D. A. Lack, J. Liao, X. Liu, M. Z. Markovic, A. M. Middlebrook, T. Mikoviny, J. Peischl, A. E. Perring, M. S. Richardson, T. B. Ryerson, J. P. Schwarz, C. Warneke, A. Welti, A. Wisthaler, L. D. Ziemba, and D. M. Murphy
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 7085–7102, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-7085-2015,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-7085-2015, 2015
Short summary
Uncertainty in Lagrangian pollutant transport simulations due to meteorological uncertainty from a mesoscale WRF ensemble
W. M. Angevine, J. Brioude, S. McKeen, and J. S. Holloway
Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 2817–2829, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2817-2014,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2817-2014, 2014
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Gases | Research Activity: Atmospheric Modelling and Data Analysis | Altitude Range: Troposphere | Science Focus: Physics (physical properties and processes)
The importance of moist thermodynamics on neutral buoyancy height for plumes from anthropogenic sources
Sepehr Fathi, Paul Makar, Wanmin Gong, Junhua Zhang, Katherine Hayden, and Mark Gordon
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2385–2405, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2385-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2385-2025, 2025
Short summary
Partitioning anthropogenic and natural methane emissions in Finland during 2000–2021 by combining bottom-up and top-down estimates
Maria K. Tenkanen, Aki Tsuruta, Hugo Denier van der Gon, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Antti Leppänen, Tiina Markkanen, Ana Maria Roxana Petrescu, Maarit Raivonen, Hermanni Aaltonen, and Tuula Aalto
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2181–2206, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2181-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2181-2025, 2025
Short summary
The role of OCO-3 XCO2 retrievals in estimating global terrestrial net ecosystem exchanges
Xingyu Wang, Fei Jiang, Hengmao Wang, Zhengqi Zhang, Mousong Wu, Jun Wang, Wei He, Weimin Ju, and Jing M. Chen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 867–880, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-867-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-867-2025, 2025
Short summary
The improved Trajectory-mapped Ozonesonde dataset for the Stratosphere and Troposphere (TOST): update, validation and applications
Zhou Zang, Jane Liu, David Tarasick, Omid Moeini, Jianchun Bian, Jinqiang Zhang, Anne M. Thompson, Roeland Van Malderen, Herman G. J. Smit, Ryan M. Stauffer, Bryan J. Johnson, and Debra E. Kollonige
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 13889–13912, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13889-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13889-2024, 2024
Short summary
Tracing the origins of stratospheric ozone intrusions: direct vs. indirect pathways and their impacts on Central and Eastern China in spring–summer 2019
Kai Meng, Tianliang Zhao, Yongqing Bai, Ming Wu, Le Cao, Xuewei Hou, Yuehan Luo, and Yongcheng Jiang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 12623–12642, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-12623-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-12623-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Angevine, W. M.: Supporting data, https://esrl.noaa.gov/csl/groups/csl4/modeldata/, last access: 9 October 2020. 
Angevine, W. M., Brioude, J., McKeen, S., and Holloway, J. S.: Uncertainty in Lagrangian pollutant transport simulations due to meteorological uncertainty from a mesoscale WRF ensemble, Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 2817–2829, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2817-2014, 2014. 
Gao, Z., Liu, H., Li, D., Katul, G. G., and Blanken, P. D.: Enhanced temperature-humidity similarity caused by entrainment processes with increased wind shear, J. Geophys. Res., 123, 4110–4121, https://doi.org/10.1029/2017JD028195, 2018. 
Hsu, Y.-K., VanCuren, T., Park, S., Jakober, C., Herner, J., FitzGibbon, M., Blake, D. R., and Parrish, D. D.: Methane emissions inventory verification in southern California, Atmos. Environ., 44, 1–7, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.10.002, 2010. 
Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology: JCGM 100 – Evaluation of measurement data – Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement, JCGM, 120 pp., 2008. 
Download
Short summary
Emissions of air pollutants must be known for a wide variety of applications. Different methods of estimating emissions often disagree substantially. In this study, we apply standard methods to a well-known source, a power plant. We explore the uncertainty implied by the different answers that come from the different methods, different samples taken over several years, and different pollutants. We find that the overall uncertainty of emissions estimates is about 30 %.
Share
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint