Assessing the bias and uncertainties in the aircraft mass balance technique for the determination of carbon dioxide emission rates

Author:

Hajny Kristian D.12ORCID,Lyon David R.3,Armstrong Austin1,Floerchinger Cody R.4,Jayarathne Thilina15,Kaeser Robert1,Lavoie Tegan1,Salmon Olivia E.1,Stirm Brian H.6,Stuff Andrew A.1,Tomlin Jay M.1,Wulle Bernard1,Lopez-Coto Israel27,Shepson Paul B.12

Affiliation:

1. 1Department of Chemistry, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA

2. 2School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA

3. 3Environmental Defense Fund, Austin, TX, USA

4. 4Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA

5. 5Current address: Bristol Myers Squibb, New Brunswick, NJ, USA

6. 6School of Aviation and Transportation Technology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA

7. 7Special Programs Office, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, USA

Abstract

Urban areas are the major sources of greenhouse gas emissions but also leaders in emission reduction efforts. Appropriate techniques to quantify emissions and any potential reductions over time are necessary to effectively inform these mitigation efforts. The aircraft mass balance experiment (MBE) is an established technique used for such a purpose. In this work, we use a series of 55 MBEs downwind of power plants to assess the technique’s bias and precision. In addition, we investigate what factors drive the absolute error, determined as the absolute difference between observed and reported emission rates, in individual experiments using multilinear regressions. Power plants are required to monitor their carbon dioxide emissions with an hourly resolution, and these publicly available reported emissions can be directly compared to the mass balance estimates as a pseudo-known release. To quantify the bias we calculated the mean error, which was 10 ± 240 Mg·h−1 (1σ), regressed mass balance emission rates against reported emission rates to yield a slope of 0.967 ± 0.062, and compared the sum across all mass balance emission rates, 31,000 ± 1,000 Mg·h−1, to the sum across all reported emissions, 30,660 ± 740 Mg·h−1. All three of these approaches suggest no systematic bias. Then to quantify the precision for individual determinations we calculated the slope of a regression between the standard deviation across repeated MBEs and the corresponding average emission rate, which is 30.7% ± 6.7%. The main drivers of the absolute error were sparse sampling of the plume, poor horizontal and vertical mixing of the plume, and smaller signal-to-noise ratios. Quantifying the capabilities of this technique provides context for previous analyses and allows stakeholders and researchers to make informed decisions when choosing quantification methods. Identifying the factors that drive the absolute error also allows us to adjust flight design to minimize it and potentially improve uncertainty estimates.

Publisher

University of California Press

Subject

Atmospheric Science,Geology,Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology,Ecology,Environmental Engineering,Oceanography

Reference43 articles.

1. Ahn, DY, Hansford, JR, Howe, ST, Ren, XR, Salawitch, RJ, Zeng, N, Cohen, MD, Stunder, B, Salmon, OE, Shepson, PB, Gurney, KR, Oda, T, Lopez-Coto, I, Whetstone, J, Dickerson, RR. 2020. Fluxes of atmospheric greenhouse-gases in Maryland (FLAGG-MD): Emissions of carbon dioxide in the Baltimore, MD-Washington, D.C. Area. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres125(9): e2019JD032004. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2019JD032004.

2. Alfieri, S, Amato, U, Carfora, M, Esposito, M, Magliulo, V.2010. Quantifying trace gas emissions from composite landscapes: A mass-budget approach with aircraft measurements. Atmospheric Environment44(15): 1866–1876. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.02.026.

3. Angevine, WM, Peischl, J, Crawford, A, Loughner, CP, Pollack, IB, Thompson, CR.2020. Errors in top-down estimates of emissions using a known source. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics20(20): 11855–11868. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11855-2020.

4. C40 Cities. 2022. C40 Cities are making faster progress on the climate crisis than most others, but it’s not enough. Available athttps://www.c40.org/news/c40-cities-are-making-faster-progress-on-the-climate-crisis-than-most-others-but-its-not-enough/. Accessed January 16, 2023.

5. Cambaliza, MOL, Shepson, PB, Bogner, J, Caulton, DR, Stirm, B, Sweeney, C, Montzka, SA, Gurney, KR, Spokas, K, Salmon, OE, Lavoie, TN, Hendricks, A, Mays, K, Turnbull, J, Miller, BR, Lauvaux, T, Davis, K, Karion, A, Moser, B, Miller, C, Obermeyer, C, Whetstone, J, Prasad, K, Miles, N, Richardson, S.2015. Quantification and source apportionment of the methane emission flux from the city of Indianapolis. Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene3: 000037. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12952/journal.elementa.000037.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3