Articles | Volume 21, issue 3
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1717-2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1717-2021
Research article
 | 
09 Feb 2021
Research article |  | 09 Feb 2021

Atmospheric-methane source and sink sensitivity analysis using Gaussian process emulation

Angharad C. Stell, Luke M. Western, Tomás Sherwen, and Matthew Rigby

Related authors

Modelling the growth of atmospheric nitrous oxide using a global hierarchical inversion
Angharad C. Stell, Michael Bertolacci, Andrew Zammit-Mangion, Matthew Rigby, Paul J. Fraser, Christina M. Harth, Paul B. Krummel, Xin Lan, Manfredi Manizza, Jens Mühle, Simon O'Doherty, Ronald G. Prinn, Ray F. Weiss, Dickon Young, and Anita L. Ganesan
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 12945–12960, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12945-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12945-2022, 2022
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Gases | Research Activity: Atmospheric Modelling and Data Analysis | Altitude Range: Troposphere | Science Focus: Chemistry (chemical composition and reactions)
Representing improved tropospheric ozone distribution over the Northern Hemisphere by including lightning NOx emissions in CHIMERE
Sanhita Ghosh, Arineh Cholakian, Sylvain Mailler, and Laurent Menut
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 6273–6297, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-6273-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-6273-2025, 2025
Short summary
Assessing the ability to quantify the decrease in NOx anthropogenic emissions in 2019 compared to 2005 using OMI and TROPOMI satellite observations
Audrey Fortems-Cheiney, Grégoire Broquet, Elise Potier, Antoine Berchet, Isabelle Pison, Adrien Martinez, Robin Plauchu, Rimal Abeed, Aurélien Sicsik-Paré, Gaelle Dufour, Adriana Coman, Dilek Savas, Guillaume Siour, Henk Eskes, Hugo A. C. Denier van der Gon, and Stijn N. C. Dellaert
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 6047–6068, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-6047-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-6047-2025, 2025
Short summary
Tracking daily NOx emissions from an urban agglomeration based on TROPOMI NO2 and a local ensemble transform Kalman filter
Yawen Kong, Bo Zheng, and Yuxi Liu
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 5959–5976, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-5959-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-5959-2025, 2025
Short summary
Evaluation of O3, H2O, CO, and NOy climatologies simulated by four global models in the upper troposphere–lower stratosphere with IAGOS measurements
Yann Cohen, Didier Hauglustaine, Nicolas Bellouin, Marianne Tronstad Lund, Sigrun Matthes, Agnieszka Skowron, Robin Thor, Ulrich Bundke, Andreas Petzold, Susanne Rohs, Valérie Thouret, Andreas Zahn, and Helmut Ziereis
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 5793–5836, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-5793-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-5793-2025, 2025
Short summary
Source contribution to ozone pollution during June 2021 fire events in Arizona: insights from WRF-Chem-tagged O3 and CO
Yafang Guo, Mohammad Amin Mirrezaei, Armin Sorooshian, and Avelino F. Arellano
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 5591–5616, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-5591-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-5591-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Bergamaschi, P., Brenninkmeijer, C. A. M., Hahn, M., Röckmann, T., Scharffe, D. H., Crutzen, P. J., Elansky, N. F., Belikov, I. B., Trivett, N. B. A., and Worthy, D. E. J.: Isotope analysis based source identification for atmospheric CH4 and CO sampled across Russia using the Trans-Siberian railroad, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 103, 8227–8235, https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD03738, 1998. a
Bergamaschi, P., Houweling, S., Segers, A., Krol, M., Frankenberg, C., Scheepmaker, R. A., Dlugokencky, E., Wofsy, S. C., Kort, E. A., Sweeney, C., Schuck, T., Brenninkmeijer, C., Chen, H., Beck, V., and Gerbig, C.: Atmospheric CH4 in the first decade of the 21st century: Inverse modeling analysis using SCIAMACHY satellite retrievals and NOAA surface measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 7350–7369, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50480, 2013. a, b, c
Bloom, A. A., Bowman, K. W., Lee, M., Turner, A. J., Schroeder, R., Worden, J. R., Weidner, R., McDonald, K. C., and Jacob, D. J.: A global wetland methane emissions and uncertainty dataset for atmospheric chemical transport models (WetCHARTs version 1.0), Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 2141–2156, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-2141-2017, 2017. a, b
Bousquet, P., Ringeval, B., Pison, I., Dlugokencky, E. J., Brunke, E.-G., Carouge, C., Chevallier, F., Fortems-Cheiney, A., Frankenberg, C., Hauglustaine, D. A., Krummel, P. B., Langenfelds, R. L., Ramonet, M., Schmidt, M., Steele, L. P., Szopa, S., Yver, C., Viovy, N., and Ciais, P.: Source attribution of the changes in atmospheric methane for 2006–2008, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 3689–3700, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-3689-2011, 2011. a, b, c
Burkholder, J. B., Sander, S. P., Abbatt, J., Barker, J. R., Huie, R. E., Kolb, C. E., Kurylo, M. J., Orkin, V. L., Wilmouth, D. M., and Wine, P. H.: Chemical Kinetics and Photochemical Data for Use in Atmospheric Studies, Evaluation Number 18, Tech. Rep. 10, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, https://doi.org/10.1002/kin.550171010, 2015. a
Download
Short summary
Although it is the second-most important greenhouse gas, our understanding of the atmospheric-methane budget is limited. The uncertainty highlights the need for new tools to investigate sources and sinks. Here, we use a Gaussian process emulator to efficiently approximate the response of atmospheric-methane observations to changes in the most uncertain emission or loss processes. With this new method, we rigorously quantify the sensitivity of atmospheric observations to budget uncertainties.
Share
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint