MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7112028882

Integration of bottom-up and top-down methods to evaluate national methane emission inventories

2021· article· en· W7112028882 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasMethaneEmission inventoryNational GridFossil fuelClimate changeFugitive emissionsCoal
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Individual countries estimate emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, in national inventories. These inventories are used to report emissions to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and are used as the basis for national climate policy including the establishment of methane mitigation targets. The national inventories use ‘bottom-up’ methods that apply an emission factor to source activity data to estimate emissions but these estimates have large uncertainties, especially for fossil fuels. ‘Top-down’ information from observations of atmospheric methane can help to evaluate and improve the bottom-up national inventories through inverse modeling. This requires spatial information on emissions but national inventories typical only provide emissions on the national scale. We present 0.1° x 0.1° resolution gridded inventories that spatially represent the national emissions reported to the UNFCCC. This includes a global gridded inventory of methane emissions from oil, gas, and coal exploitation and national gridded inventories of anthropogenic methane emissions from Canada and Mexico. For the global inventory an array of databases is used to spatially allocate national emissions to infrastructure including wells, pipelines, oil refineries, gas processing plants, gas compressor stations, gas storage facilities, and coal mines. The national inventories are constructed in collaboration with national agencies to ensure agreement with policy-relevant national inventories. Spatial allocation is done using an ensemble of national datasets for methane-emitting activities resolving individual municipalities and point sources for both countries. For Mexico, we identify 16 hotspots on the 0.1° x 0.1° grid with individual emissions higher than 20 Gg a-1 (2.3 tons h-1) including large landfills, offshore oil Thesis advisor: Professor Daniel Jacob Tia Scarpelli iv production, coal mines in northern Mexico, a gas processing complex, and a cattle processing facility. We find that emissions in Canada are more widely distributed, with only 8 hotspots emitting more than 1 ton h-1 on the 0.1º x 0.1º grid. We use the detailed emissions information and geospatial data embedded in the bottom-up inventories to interpret the results from inversions of atmospheric observations. Our interpretation of differences between top-down and bottom-up estimates can be used to improve understanding of national emissions.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University)Same topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207