| 3. |
- Saunois, Marielle, et al.
(författare)
-
The Global Methane Budget 2000–2017
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Earth System Science Data. - : Copernicus GmbH. - 1866-3516 .- 1866-3508. ; 12:3, s. 1561-1623
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Understanding and quantifying the global methane (CH4) budget is important for assessing realistic pathways to mitigate climate change. Atmospheric emissions and concentrations of CH4 continue to increase, making CH4 the second most important human-influenced greenhouse gas in terms of climate forcing, after carbon dioxide (CO2). The relative importance of CH4 compared to CO2 depends on its shorter atmospheric lifetime, stronger warming potential, and variations in atmospheric growth rate over the past decade, the causes of which are still debated. Two major challenges in reducing uncertainties in the atmospheric growth rate arise from the variety of geographically overlapping CH4 sources and from the destruction of CH4 by short-lived hydroxyl radicals (OH). To address these challenges, 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. Following Saunois et al. (2016), we present here the second version of the living review paper dedicated to the decadal methane budget, integrating results of top-down studies (atmospheric observations within an atmospheric inverse-modelling framework) and bottom-up estimates (including process-based models for estimating land surface emissions and atmospheric chemistry, inventories of anthropogenic emissions, and data-driven extrapolations).For the 2008–2017 decade, global methane emissions are estimated by atmospheric inversions (a top-down approach) to be 576 Tg CH4 yr−1 (range 550–594, corresponding to the minimum and maximum estimates of the model ensemble). Of this total, 359 Tg CH4 yr−1 or ∼ 60 % is attributed to anthropogenic sources, that is emissions caused by direct human activity (i.e. anthropogenic emissions; range 336–376 Tg CH4 yr−1 or 50 %–65 %). The mean annual total emission for the new decade (2008–2017) is 29 Tg CH4 yr−1 larger than our estimate for the previous decade (2000–2009), and 24 Tg CH4 yr−1 larger than the one reported in the previous budget for 2003–2012 (Saunois et al., 2016). Since 2012, global CH4 emissions have been tracking the warmest scenarios assessed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Bottom-up methods suggest almost 30 % larger global emissions (737 Tg CH4 yr−1, range 594–881) than top-down inversion methods. Indeed, bottom-up estimates for natural sources such as natural wetlands, other inland water systems, and geological sources are higher than top-down estimates. The atmospheric constraints on the top-down budget suggest that at least some of these bottom-up emissions are overestimated. The latitudinal distribution of atmospheric observation-based emissions indicates a predominance of tropical emissions (∼ 65 % of the global budget, < 30∘ N) compared to mid-latitudes (∼ 30 %, 30–60∘ N) and high northern latitudes (∼ 4 %, 60–90∘ N). The most important source of uncertainty in the methane budget is attributable to natural emissions, especially those from wetlands and other inland waters.Some of our global source estimates are smaller than those in previously published budgets (Saunois et al., 2016; Kirschke et al., 2013). In particular wetland emissions are about 35 Tg CH4 yr−1 lower due to improved partition wetlands and other inland waters. Emissions from geological sources and wild animals are also found to be smaller by 7 Tg CH4 yr−1 by 8 Tg CH4 yr−1, respectively. However, the overall discrepancy between bottom-up and top-down estimates has been reduced by only 5 % compared to Saunois et al. (2016), due to a higher estimate of emissions from inland waters, highlighting the need for more detailed research on emissions factors. Priorities for improving the methane budget include (i) a global, high-resolution map of water-saturated soils and inundated areas emitting methane based on a robust classification of different types of emitting habitats; (ii) further development of process-based models for inland-water emissions; (iii) intensification of methane observations at local scales (e.g., FLUXNET-CH4 measurements) and urban-scale monitoring to constrain bottom-up land surface models, and at regional scales (surface networks and satellites) to constrain atmospheric inversions; (iv) improvements of transport models and the representation of photochemical sinks in top-down inversions; and (v) development of a 3D variational inversion system using isotopic and/or co-emitted species such as ethane to improve source partitioning.The data presented here can be downloaded from https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-CH4-2019 (Saunois et al., 2020) and from the Global Carbon Project.
|
|
| 4. |
- Souto, Diogo, et al.
(författare)
-
Stellar Characterization of M Dwarfs from the APOGEE Survey : A Calibrator Sample for M-dwarf Metallicities
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Astrophysical Journal. - : Institute of Physics (IOP). - 0004-637X .- 1538-4357. ; 890:2
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- We present spectroscopic determinations of the effective temperatures, surface gravities, and metallicities for 21 M dwarfs observed at high resolution (R similar to 22,500) in the H band as part of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS)-IV Apache Point Observatory Galactic Evolution Experiment (APOGEE) survey. The atmospheric parameters and metallicities are derived from spectral syntheses with 1D LTE plane-parallel MARCS models and the APOGEE atomic/molecular line list, together with up-to-date H2O and FeH molecular line lists. Our sample range in T-eff from similar to 3200 to 3800 K, where 11 stars are in binary systems with a warmer (FGK) primary, while the other 10 M dwarfs have interferometric radii in the literature. We define an M-KS-radius calibration based on our M-dwarf radii derived from the detailed analysis of APOGEE spectra and Gaia DR2 distances, as well as a mass-radius relation using the spectroscopically derived surface gravities. A comparison of the derived radii with interferometric values from the literature finds that the spectroscopic radii are slightly offset toward smaller values, with Delta= -0.01 +/- 0.02 R star/R-circle dot. In addition, the derived M-dwarf masses based upon the radii and surface gravities tend to be slightly smaller (by similar to 5%-10%) than masses derived for M-dwarf members of eclipsing binary systems for a given stellar radius. The metallicities derived for the 11 M dwarfs in binary systems, compared to metallicities obtained for their hotter FGK main-sequence primary stars from the literature, show excellent agreement, with a mean difference of [Fe/H](M dwarf - FGK primary) = +0.04 +/- 0.18 dex, confirming the APOGEE metallicity scale derived here for M dwarfs.
|
|
