Methane budget estimates in Finland from the CarbonTracker Europe-CH4 data assimilation system

Aki Tsuruta; Tuula Aalto; Leif Backman; Maarten C. Krol; Wouter Peters; Sebastian Lienert; Fortunat Joos; Paul A. Miller; Wenxin Zhang; Tuomas Laurila; Juha Hatakka; Ari Leskinen; Kari E.J. Lehtinen; Olli Peltola; Timo Vesala; Janne Levula; Ed Dlugokencky; Martin Heimann; Elena Kozlova; Mika Aurela; Annalea Lohila; Mari Kauhaniemi; Angel J. Gomez-Pelaez

doi:10.1080/16000889.2018.1565030

Methane budget estimates in Finland from the CarbonTracker Europe-CH₄ data assimilation system

Aki Tsuruta^*, Tuula Aalto, Leif Backman, Maarten C. Krol, Wouter Peters, Sebastian Lienert, Fortunat Joos, Paul A. Miller, Wenxin Zhang, Tuomas Laurila, Juha Hatakka, Ari Leskinen, Kari E.J. Lehtinen, Olli Peltola, Timo Vesala, Janne Levula, Ed Dlugokencky, Martin Heimann, Elena Kozlova, Mika AurelaAnnalea Lohila, Mari Kauhaniemi, Angel J. Gomez-Pelaez

^*Corresponding author for this work

Geography

2 Citations (Scopus)

18 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

We estimated the CH₄ budget in Finland for 2004–2014 using the CTE-CH₄ data assimilation system with an extended atmospheric CH₄ observation network of seven sites from Finland to surrounding regions (Hyytiälä, Kjølnes, Kumpula, Pallas, Puijo, Sodankylä, and Utö). The estimated average annual total emission for Finland is 0.6 ± 0.5 Tg CH₄ yr⁻¹. Sensitivity experiments show that the posterior biospheric emission estimates for Finland are between 0.3 and 0.9 Tg CH₄ yr⁻¹, which lies between the LPX-Bern-DYPTOP (0.2 Tg CH₄ yr⁻¹) and LPJG-WHyMe (2.2 Tg CH₄ yr⁻¹) process-based model estimates. For anthropogenic emissions, we found that the EDGAR v4.2 FT2010 inventory (0.4 Tg CH₄ yr⁻¹) is likely to overestimate emissions in southernmost Finland, but the extent of overestimation and possible relocation of emissions are difficult to derive from the current observation network. The posterior emission estimates were especially reliant on prior information in central Finland. However, based on analysis of posterior atmospheric CH₄, we found that the anthropogenic emission distribution based on a national inventory is more reliable than the one based on EDGAR v4.2 FT2010. The contribution of total emissions in Finland to global total emissions is only about 0.13%, and the derived total emissions in Finland showed no trend during 2004–2014. The model using optimized emissions was able to reproduce observed atmospheric CH₄ at the sites in Finland and surrounding regions fairly well (correlation >0.75, bias (Formula presented.) ppb), supporting adequacy of the observations to be used in atmospheric inversion studies. In addition to global budget estimates, we found that CTE-CH₄ is also applicable for regional budget estimates, where small scale (1º × 1º in this case) optimization is possible with a dense observation network.

Original language	English
Article number	1445379
Journal	Tellus, Series B: Chemical and Physical Meteorology
Volume	71
Number of pages	21
ISSN	0280-6509
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/16000889.2018.1565030
Publication status	Published - 1 Jan 2019

Keywords

atmospheric CH
CH flux
data assimilation
Finland
flux estimation

Access to Document

10.1080/16000889.2018.1565030Licence: CC BY

Methane budget estimates in Finland from the CarbonTracker Europe-CH4 data assimilation systemFinal published version, 1.24 MBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

Tsuruta, A., Aalto, T., Backman, L., Krol, M. C., Peters, W., Lienert, S., Joos, F., Miller, P. A., Zhang, W., Laurila, T., Hatakka, J., Leskinen, A., Lehtinen, K. E. J., Peltola, O., Vesala, T., Levula, J., Dlugokencky, E., Heimann, M., Kozlova, E., ... Gomez-Pelaez, A. J. (2019). Methane budget estimates in Finland from the CarbonTracker Europe-CH₄ data assimilation system. Tellus, Series B: Chemical and Physical Meteorology, 71, Article 1445379. https://doi.org/10.1080/16000889.2018.1565030

Tsuruta, A, Aalto, T, Backman, L, Krol, MC, Peters, W, Lienert, S, Joos, F, Miller, PA, Zhang, W, Laurila, T, Hatakka, J, Leskinen, A, Lehtinen, KEJ, Peltola, O, Vesala, T, Levula, J, Dlugokencky, E, Heimann, M, Kozlova, E, Aurela, M, Lohila, A, Kauhaniemi, M & Gomez-Pelaez, AJ 2019, 'Methane budget estimates in Finland from the CarbonTracker Europe-CH₄ data assimilation system', Tellus, Series B: Chemical and Physical Meteorology, vol. 71, 1445379. https://doi.org/10.1080/16000889.2018.1565030

@article{880ef999927f4bbba82b1e52eaf853b5,

title = "Methane budget estimates in Finland from the CarbonTracker Europe-CH4 data assimilation system",

abstract = "We estimated the CH4 budget in Finland for 2004–2014 using the CTE-CH4 data assimilation system with an extended atmospheric CH4 observation network of seven sites from Finland to surrounding regions (Hyyti{\"a}l{\"a}, Kj{\o}lnes, Kumpula, Pallas, Puijo, Sodankyl{\"a}, and Ut{\"o}). The estimated average annual total emission for Finland is 0.6 ± 0.5 Tg CH4 yr−1. Sensitivity experiments show that the posterior biospheric emission estimates for Finland are between 0.3 and 0.9 Tg CH4 yr−1, which lies between the LPX-Bern-DYPTOP (0.2 Tg CH4 yr−1) and LPJG-WHyMe (2.2 Tg CH4 yr−1) process-based model estimates. For anthropogenic emissions, we found that the EDGAR v4.2 FT2010 inventory (0.4 Tg CH4 yr−1) is likely to overestimate emissions in southernmost Finland, but the extent of overestimation and possible relocation of emissions are difficult to derive from the current observation network. The posterior emission estimates were especially reliant on prior information in central Finland. However, based on analysis of posterior atmospheric CH4, we found that the anthropogenic emission distribution based on a national inventory is more reliable than the one based on EDGAR v4.2 FT2010. The contribution of total emissions in Finland to global total emissions is only about 0.13%, and the derived total emissions in Finland showed no trend during 2004–2014. The model using optimized emissions was able to reproduce observed atmospheric CH4 at the sites in Finland and surrounding regions fairly well (correlation >0.75, bias (Formula presented.) ppb), supporting adequacy of the observations to be used in atmospheric inversion studies. In addition to global budget estimates, we found that CTE-CH4 is also applicable for regional budget estimates, where small scale (1º × 1º in this case) optimization is possible with a dense observation network.",

keywords = "atmospheric CH, CH flux, data assimilation, Finland, flux estimation",

author = "Aki Tsuruta and Tuula Aalto and Leif Backman and Krol, {Maarten C.} and Wouter Peters and Sebastian Lienert and Fortunat Joos and Miller, {Paul A.} and Wenxin Zhang and Tuomas Laurila and Juha Hatakka and Ari Leskinen and Lehtinen, {Kari E.J.} and Olli Peltola and Timo Vesala and Janne Levula and Ed Dlugokencky and Martin Heimann and Elena Kozlova and Mika Aurela and Annalea Lohila and Mari Kauhaniemi and Gomez-Pelaez, {Angel J.}",

note = "CENPERMOA[2019]",

year = "2019",

month = jan,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1080/16000889.2018.1565030",

language = "English",

volume = "71",

journal = "Tellus, Series B: Chemical and Physical Meteorology",

issn = "0280-6509",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Methane budget estimates in Finland from the CarbonTracker Europe-CH4 data assimilation system

AU - Tsuruta, Aki

AU - Aalto, Tuula

AU - Backman, Leif

AU - Krol, Maarten C.

AU - Peters, Wouter

AU - Lienert, Sebastian

AU - Joos, Fortunat

AU - Miller, Paul A.

AU - Zhang, Wenxin

AU - Laurila, Tuomas

AU - Hatakka, Juha

AU - Leskinen, Ari

AU - Lehtinen, Kari E.J.

AU - Peltola, Olli

AU - Vesala, Timo

AU - Levula, Janne

AU - Dlugokencky, Ed

AU - Heimann, Martin

AU - Kozlova, Elena

AU - Aurela, Mika

AU - Lohila, Annalea

AU - Kauhaniemi, Mari

AU - Gomez-Pelaez, Angel J.

N1 - CENPERMOA[2019]

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - We estimated the CH4 budget in Finland for 2004–2014 using the CTE-CH4 data assimilation system with an extended atmospheric CH4 observation network of seven sites from Finland to surrounding regions (Hyytiälä, Kjølnes, Kumpula, Pallas, Puijo, Sodankylä, and Utö). The estimated average annual total emission for Finland is 0.6 ± 0.5 Tg CH4 yr−1. Sensitivity experiments show that the posterior biospheric emission estimates for Finland are between 0.3 and 0.9 Tg CH4 yr−1, which lies between the LPX-Bern-DYPTOP (0.2 Tg CH4 yr−1) and LPJG-WHyMe (2.2 Tg CH4 yr−1) process-based model estimates. For anthropogenic emissions, we found that the EDGAR v4.2 FT2010 inventory (0.4 Tg CH4 yr−1) is likely to overestimate emissions in southernmost Finland, but the extent of overestimation and possible relocation of emissions are difficult to derive from the current observation network. The posterior emission estimates were especially reliant on prior information in central Finland. However, based on analysis of posterior atmospheric CH4, we found that the anthropogenic emission distribution based on a national inventory is more reliable than the one based on EDGAR v4.2 FT2010. The contribution of total emissions in Finland to global total emissions is only about 0.13%, and the derived total emissions in Finland showed no trend during 2004–2014. The model using optimized emissions was able to reproduce observed atmospheric CH4 at the sites in Finland and surrounding regions fairly well (correlation >0.75, bias (Formula presented.) ppb), supporting adequacy of the observations to be used in atmospheric inversion studies. In addition to global budget estimates, we found that CTE-CH4 is also applicable for regional budget estimates, where small scale (1º × 1º in this case) optimization is possible with a dense observation network.

AB - We estimated the CH4 budget in Finland for 2004–2014 using the CTE-CH4 data assimilation system with an extended atmospheric CH4 observation network of seven sites from Finland to surrounding regions (Hyytiälä, Kjølnes, Kumpula, Pallas, Puijo, Sodankylä, and Utö). The estimated average annual total emission for Finland is 0.6 ± 0.5 Tg CH4 yr−1. Sensitivity experiments show that the posterior biospheric emission estimates for Finland are between 0.3 and 0.9 Tg CH4 yr−1, which lies between the LPX-Bern-DYPTOP (0.2 Tg CH4 yr−1) and LPJG-WHyMe (2.2 Tg CH4 yr−1) process-based model estimates. For anthropogenic emissions, we found that the EDGAR v4.2 FT2010 inventory (0.4 Tg CH4 yr−1) is likely to overestimate emissions in southernmost Finland, but the extent of overestimation and possible relocation of emissions are difficult to derive from the current observation network. The posterior emission estimates were especially reliant on prior information in central Finland. However, based on analysis of posterior atmospheric CH4, we found that the anthropogenic emission distribution based on a national inventory is more reliable than the one based on EDGAR v4.2 FT2010. The contribution of total emissions in Finland to global total emissions is only about 0.13%, and the derived total emissions in Finland showed no trend during 2004–2014. The model using optimized emissions was able to reproduce observed atmospheric CH4 at the sites in Finland and surrounding regions fairly well (correlation >0.75, bias (Formula presented.) ppb), supporting adequacy of the observations to be used in atmospheric inversion studies. In addition to global budget estimates, we found that CTE-CH4 is also applicable for regional budget estimates, where small scale (1º × 1º in this case) optimization is possible with a dense observation network.

KW - atmospheric CH

KW - CH flux

KW - data assimilation

KW - Finland

KW - flux estimation

U2 - 10.1080/16000889.2018.1565030

DO - 10.1080/16000889.2018.1565030

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:85060927978

SN - 0280-6509

VL - 71

JO - Tellus, Series B: Chemical and Physical Meteorology

JF - Tellus, Series B: Chemical and Physical Meteorology

M1 - 1445379

ER -