Quantifying methane emissions from the global scale down to point sources using satellite observations of atmospheric methane
-
Published:2022-07-29
Issue:14
Volume:22
Page:9617-9646
-
ISSN:1680-7324
-
Container-title:Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Atmos. Chem. Phys.
Author:
Jacob Daniel J., Varon Daniel J.ORCID, Cusworth Daniel H., Dennison Philip E., Frankenberg ChristianORCID, Gautam Ritesh, Guanter LuisORCID, Kelley John, McKeever Jason, Ott Lesley E., Poulter BenjaminORCID, Qu Zhen, Thorpe Andrew K.ORCID, Worden John R., Duren Riley M.
Abstract
Abstract. We review the capability of current and scheduled satellite
observations of atmospheric methane in the shortwave infrared (SWIR) to
quantify methane emissions from the global scale down to point sources. We
cover retrieval methods, precision and accuracy requirements, inverse and
mass balance methods for inferring emissions, source detection thresholds,
and observing system completeness. We classify satellite instruments as area
flux mappers and point source imagers, with complementary attributes. Area
flux mappers are high-precision (<1 %) instruments with 0.1–10 km
pixel size designed to quantify total methane emissions on regional to
global scales. Point source imagers are fine-pixel (<60 m)
instruments designed to quantify individual point sources by imaging of the
plumes. Current area flux mappers include GOSAT (2009–present), which
provides a high-quality record for interpretation of long-term methane
trends, and TROPOMI (2018–present), which provides global continuous daily
mapping to quantify emissions on regional scales. These instruments already
provide a powerful resource to quantify national methane emissions in
support of the Paris Agreement. Current point source imagers include the
GHGSat constellation and several hyperspectral and multispectral land
imaging sensors (PRISMA, Sentinel-2, Landsat-8/9, WorldView-3), with
detection thresholds in the 100–10 000 kg h−1 range that enable
monitoring of large point sources. Future area flux mappers, including
MethaneSAT, GOSAT-GW, Sentinel-5, GeoCarb, and CO2M, will increase the
capability to quantify emissions at high resolution, and the MERLIN lidar
will improve observation of the Arctic. The averaging times required by area
flux mappers to quantify regional emissions depend on pixel size, retrieval
precision, observation density, fraction of successful retrievals, and
return times in a way that varies with the spatial resolution desired. A
similar interplay applies to point source imagers between detection
threshold, spatial coverage, and return time, defining an observing system
completeness. Expanding constellations of point source imagers including
GHGSat and Carbon Mapper over the coming years will greatly improve
observing system completeness for point sources through dense spatial
coverage and frequent return times.
Funder
Earth Sciences Division
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Subject
Atmospheric Science
Reference144 articles.
1. Alexe, M., Bergamaschi, P., Segers, A., Detmers, R., Butz, A., Hasekamp, O., Guerlet, S., Parker, R., Boesch, H., Frankenberg, C., Scheepmaker, R. A., Dlugokencky, E., Sweeney, C., Wofsy, S. C., and Kort, E. A.: Inverse modelling of CH4 emissions for 2010–2011 using different satellite retrieval products from GOSAT and SCIAMACHY, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 113–133, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-113-2015, 2015. 2. Allen, D. T., Cardoso-Saldaña, F., and Kimura, Y.: Variability in
spatially and temporally resolved emissions and hydrocarbon source
fingerprints for oil and gas sources in shale gas production regions,
Environ. Sci. Technol., 51, 12016–12026,
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.7b02202, 2017. 3. Allen, D. T., Cardoso-Saldaña, F. J., Kimura, Y., Chen, Q., Xiang, Z.,
Zimmerle, D., Bell, C., Lute, C., Duggan, J., and Harrison, M.: A Methane
Emission Estimation Tool (MEET) for predictions of emissions from upstream
oil and gas well sites with fine scale temporal and spatial resolution:
Model structure and applications, Sci. Total Environ., 829, 154277,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154277, 2022. 4. Angevine, W. M., Peischl, J., Crawford, A., Loughner, C. P., Pollack, I. B., and Thompson, C. R.: Errors in top-down estimates of emissions using a known source, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 11855–11868, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-11855-2020, 2020. 5. Ayasse, A. K., Thorpe, A. K., Roberts, D. A., Funk, C. C., Dennison, P. E.,
Frankenberg, C., Steffke, A., and Aubrey, A. D.: Evaluating the effects of
surface properties on methane retrievals using a synthetic airborne
visible/infrared imaging spectrometer next generation (AVIRIS-NG) image,
Remote Sens. Environ., 215, 386–397,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2018.06.018, 2018.
Cited by
55 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
|
|