Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Morino, Isamu

Publications and source records attributed to Morino, Isamu.

National CO 2 budgets (2015–2020) inferred from atmospheric CO 2 observations in support of the global stocktake

Accurate accounting of emissions and removals of CO 2 is critical for the planning and verification of emission reduction targets in support of the Paris Agreement. Here, we present a pilot dataset of country-specific net carbon exchange (NCE; fossil plus terrestrial ecosystem fluxes) and terrestrial carbon stock changes aimed at informing countries' carbon budgets. These estimates are based on “top-down” NCE outputs from the v10 Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO-2) modeling intercomparison project (MIP), wherein an ensemble of inverse modeling groups conducted standardized experiments assimilating OCO-2 column-averaged dry-air mole fraction (X CO 2 ) retrievals (ACOS v10), in situ CO 2 measurements or combinations of these data. The v10 OCO-2 MIP NCE estimates are combined with “bottom-up” estimates of fossil fuel emissions and lateral carbon fluxes to estimate changes in terrestrial carbon stocks, which are impacted by anthropogenic and natural drivers. These flux and stock change estimates are reported annually (2015–2020) as both a global 1° x 1° gridded dataset and a country-level dataset and are available for download from the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites' (CEOS) website. Across the v10 OCO-2 MIP experiments, we obtain increases in the ensemble median terrestrial carbon stocks of 3.29–4.58 Pg CO2 yr -1 (0.90–1.25 Pg C yr -1 ). This is a result of broad increases in terrestrial carbon stocks across the northern extratropics, while the tropics generally have stock losses but with considerable regional variability and differences between v10 OCO-2 MIP experiments. We discuss the state of the science for tracking emissions and removals using top-down methods, including current limitations and future developments towards top-down monitoring and verification systems.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

The Global Methane Budget 2000–2017

Understanding and quantifying the global methane (CH 4 ) budget is important for assessing realistic pathways to mitigate climate change. Atmospheric emissions and concentrations of CH 4 are continuing to increase, making CH 4 the second most important human-influenced greenhouse gas in terms of climate forcing, after carbon dioxide (CO 2 ). Assessing the relative importance of CH 4 in comparison to CO 2 is complicated by its shorter atmospheric lifetime, stronger warming potential, and atmospheric growth rate variations over the past decade, the causes of which are still debated. Two major difficulties in reducing uncertainties arise from the variety of geographically overlapping CH 4 sources and from the destruction of CH 4 by short-lived hydroxyl radicals (OH). To address these difficulties, we have established a consortium of multi-disciplinary 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).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Variability and Quasi-Decadal Changes in the Methane Budget over the Period 2000-2012

Following the recent Global Carbon Project (GCP) synthesis of the decadal methane (CH4) budget over 2000- 2012, we analyse here the same dataset with a focus on quasi-decadal and inter-annual variability in CH4 emissions. The GCP dataset integrates results from top-down studies (exploiting atmospheric observations within an atmospheric inverse-modelling framework) and bottom-up models (including process-based models for estimating land surface emissions and atmospheric chemistry), inventories of anthropogenic emissions, and data-driven approaches. The annual global methane emissions from top-down studies, which by construction match the observed methane growth rate within their uncertainties, all show an increase in total methane emissions over the period 2000-2012, but this increase is not linear over the 13 years. Despite differences between individual studies, the mean emission anomaly of the top-down ensemble shows no significant trend in total methane emissions over the period 2000-2006, during the plateau of atmospheric methane mole fractions, and also over the period 2008-2012, during the renewed atmospheric methane increase. However, the top-down ensemble mean produces an emission shift between 2006 and 2008, leading to 22 [16-32] Tg CH4 yr(exp -1) higher methane emissions over the period 2008-2012 compared to 2002-2006. This emission increase mostly originated from the tropics, with a smaller contribution from mid-latitudes and no significant change from boreal regions. The regional contributions remain uncertain in top-down studies. Tropical South America and South and East Asia seem to contribute the most to the emission increase in the tropics. However, these two regions have only limited atmospheric measurements and remain therefore poorly constrained. The sectorial partitioning of this emission increase between the periods 2002-2006 and 2008-2012 differs from one atmospheric inversion study to another. However, all top-down studies suggest smaller changes in fossil fuel emissions (from oil, gas, and coal industries) compared to the mean of the bottom-up inventories included in this study. This difference is partly driven by a smaller emission change in China from the top-down studies compared to the estimate in the Emission Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGARv4.2) inventory, which should be revised to smaller values in a near future. We apply isotopic signatures to the emission changes estimated for individual studies based on five emission sectors and find that for six individual top-down studies (out of eight) the average isotopic signature of the emission changes is not consistent with the observed change in atmospheric 13CH4. However, the partitioning in emission change derived from the ensemble mean is consistent with this isotopic constraint. At the global scale, the top-down ensemble mean suggests that the dominant contribution to the resumed atmospheric CH4 growth after 2006 comes from microbial sources (more from agriculture and waste sectors than from natural wetlands), with an uncertain but smaller contribution from fossil CH4 emissions. In addition, a decrease in biomass burning emissions (in agreement with the biomass burning emission databases) makes the balance of sources consistent with atmospheric 13CH4 observations. In most of the top-down studies included here, OH concentrations are considered constant over the years (seasonal variations but without any inter-annual variability). As a result, the methane loss (in particular through OH oxidation) varies mainly through the change in methane concentrations and not its oxidants. For these reasons, changes in the methane loss could not be properly investigated in this study, although it may play a significant role in the recent atmospheric methane changes as briefly discussed at the end of the paper.

Saunois, Marielle↗

Validation of OCO-2 and ACOS-GOSAT using HIPPO and TCCON

Consistent validation of satellite CO2 estimates is a prerequisite for using multiple satellite CO2measurements for joint flux inversion and establishing a long-term atmospheric CO2 data record. Wevalidate recent satellite observation of OCO-2 v7 and ACOS-GOSAT v7.3 using similar analysis as previouswork (Kulawik et al. (2016) and Frankenberg et al. (2106)) through comparisons to the HIAPER Pole-to-Pole Observations (HIPPO) and the Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON) to estimate biasesand errors affecting the understanding of carbon cycle science. CarbonTracker RT is also compared tothe validation data, and additionally used to evaluate the mismatch between the HIPPO observationtimeframe and the OCO-2 record, which are offset by 3-7 years. Some key metrics that are validatedinclude the seasonal cycle phase and amplitude, latitudinal gradient by season, regional biases, anderrors with respect to averaging.

Kulawik, Susan S.↗