MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000829452 · doi:10.3390/rs12030375

Country-Scale Analysis of Methane Emissions with a High-Resolution Inverse Model Using GOSAT and Surface Observations

2020· article· en· W3000829452 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rajesh Janardanan, Shamil Maksyutov, Aki Tsuruta, Fenjuan Wang, Yogesh K. Tiwari, Vinu Valsala, Akihiko Ito, Yukio Yoshida, Johannes W. Kaiser, Greet Janssens‐Maenhout, Mikhail Arshinov, Motoki Sasakawa, Yasunori Tohjima, Douglas E. J. Worthy, E. J. Dlugokencky, Michel Ramonet, Jgor Arduini, Jošt V. Lavrič, Salvatore Piacentino, Paul B. Krummel, R. L. Langenfelds, Ivan Mammarella, Tsuneo Matsunaga

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersNational Institute for Environmental StudiesMinistry of Earth Sciences
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceGreenhouse gasMethaneBiomass burningAtmospheric sciencesWetlandClimatologyTrace gasEmission inventoryAtmospheric methaneSink (geography)United Nations Framework Convention on Climate ChangeMeteorologyGeographyKyoto ProtocolAerosolChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We employed a global high-resolution inverse model to optimize the CH4 emission using Greenhouse gas Observing Satellite (GOSAT) and surface observation data for a period from 2011–2017 for the two main source categories of anthropogenic and natural emissions. We used the Emission Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR v4.3.2) for anthropogenic methane emission and scaled them by country to match the national inventories reported to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Wetland and soil sink prior fluxes were simulated using the Vegetation Integrative Simulator of Trace gases (VISIT) model. Biomass burning prior fluxes were provided by the Global Fire Assimilation System (GFAS). We estimated a global total anthropogenic and natural methane emissions of 340.9 Tg CH4 yr−1 and 232.5 Tg CH4 yr−1, respectively. Country-scale analysis of the estimated anthropogenic emissions showed that all the top-emitting countries showed differences with their respective inventories to be within the uncertainty range of the inventories, confirming that the posterior anthropogenic emissions did not deviate from nationally reported values. Large countries, such as China, Russia, and the United States, had the mean estimated emission of 45.7 ± 8.6, 31.9 ± 7.8, and 29.8 ± 7.8 Tg CH4 yr−1, respectively. For natural wetland emissions, we estimated large emissions for Brazil (39.8 ± 12.4 Tg CH4 yr−1), the United States (25.9 ± 8.3 Tg CH4 yr−1), Russia (13.2 ± 9.3 Tg CH4 yr−1), India (12.3 ± 6.4 Tg CH4 yr−1), and Canada (12.2 ± 5.1 Tg CH4 yr−1). In both emission categories, the major emitting countries all had the model corrections to emissions within the uncertainty range of inventories. The advantages of the approach used in this study were: (1) use of high-resolution transport, useful for simulations near emission hotspots, (2) prior anthropogenic emissions adjusted to the UNFCCC reports, (3) combining surface and satellite observations, which improves the estimation of both natural and anthropogenic methane emissions over spatial scale of countries.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.436

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.193 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations72
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207