Literature DB >> 32818124

High-resolution atmospheric inversion of urban CO2 emissions during the dormant season of the Indianapolis Flux Experiment (INFLUX).

Thomas Lauvaux1,2, Natasha L Miles1, Aijun Deng1, Scott J Richardson1, Maria O Cambaliza3,4, Kenneth J Davis1, Brian Gaudet1, Kevin R Gurney5, Jianhua Huang5, Darragh O'Keefe5, Yang Song5, Anna Karion6, Tomohiro Oda7,8, Risa Patarasuk5, Igor Razlivanov5, Daniel Sarmiento1, Paul Shepson9, Colm Sweeney6, Jocelyn Turnbull9,10,11, Kai Wu1.   

Abstract

Based on a uniquely dense network of surface towers measuring continuously the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs), we developed the first comprehensive monitoring systems of CO2 emissions at high resolution over the city of Indianapolis. The urban inversion evaluated over the 2012-2013 dormant season showed a statistically significant increase of about 20% (from 4.5 to 5.7 MtC ± 0.23 MtC) compared to the Hestia CO2 emission estimate, a state-of-the-art building-level emission product. Spatial structures in prior emission errors, mostly undetermined, appeared to affect the spatial pattern in the inverse solution and the total carbon budget over the entire area by up to 15%, while the inverse solution remains fairly insensitive to the CO2 boundary inflow and to the different prior emissions (i.e., ODIAC). Preceding the surface emission optimization, we improved the atmospheric simulations using a meteorological data assimilation system also informing our Bayesian inversion system through updated observations error variances. Finally, we estimated the uncertainties associated with undetermined parameters using an ensemble of inversions. The total CO2 emissions based on the ensemble mean and quartiles (5.26-5.91 MtC) were statistically different compared to the prior total emissions (4.1 to 4.5 MtC). Considering the relatively small sensitivity to the different parameters, we conclude that atmospheric inversions are potentially able to constrain the carbon budget of the city, assuming sufficient data to measure the inflow of GHG over the city, but additional information on prior emission error structures are required to determine the spatial structures of urban emissions at high resolution.

Year:  2016        PMID: 32818124      PMCID: PMC7430513          DOI: 10.1002/2015JD024473

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Geophys Res Atmos        ISSN: 2169-897X            Impact factor:   4.261


  8 in total

1.  Atmospheric science. Top-down versus bottom-up.

Authors:  Euan Nisbet; Ray Weiss
Journal:  Science       Date:  2010-06-04       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Assessment of ground-based atmospheric observations for verification of greenhouse gas emissions from an urban region.

Authors:  Kathryn McKain; Steven C Wofsy; Thomas Nehrkorn; Janusz Eluszkiewicz; James R Ehleringer; Britton B Stephens
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-05-18       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Evaluating atmospheric CO2 inversions at multiple scales over a highly inventoried agricultural landscape.

Authors:  Andrew E Schuh; Thomas Lauvaux; Tristram O West; A Scott Denning; Kenneth J Davis; Natasha Miles; Scott Richardson; Marek Uliasz; Erandathie Lokupitiya; Daniel Cooley; Arlyn Andrews; Stephen Ogle
Journal:  Glob Chang Biol       Date:  2013-03-12       Impact factor: 10.863

4.  Aircraft-Based Estimate of Total Methane Emissions from the Barnett Shale Region.

Authors:  Anna Karion; Colm Sweeney; Eric A Kort; Paul B Shepson; Alan Brewer; Maria Cambaliza; Stephen A Conley; Ken Davis; Aijun Deng; Mike Hardesty; Scott C Herndon; Thomas Lauvaux; Tegan Lavoie; David Lyon; Tim Newberger; Gabrielle Pétron; Chris Rella; Mackenzie Smith; Sonja Wolter; Tara I Yacovitch; Pieter Tans
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2015-07-07       Impact factor: 9.028

5.  Quantification of fossil fuel CO2 emissions on the building/street scale for a large U.S. city.

Authors:  Kevin R Gurney; Igor Razlivanov; Yang Song; Yuyu Zhou; Bedrich Benes; Michel Abdul-Massih
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2012-10-09       Impact factor: 9.028

6.  High resolution fossil fuel combustion CO2 emission fluxes for the United States.

Authors:  Kevin R Gurney; Daniel L Mendoza; Yuyu Zhou; Marc L Fischer; Chris C Miller; Sarath Geethakumar; Stephane de la Rue du Can
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2009-07-15       Impact factor: 9.028

7.  An atmospheric perspective on North American carbon dioxide exchange: CarbonTracker.

Authors:  Wouter Peters; Andrew R Jacobson; Colm Sweeney; Arlyn E Andrews; Thomas J Conway; Kenneth Masarie; John B Miller; Lori M P Bruhwiler; Gabrielle Pétron; Adam I Hirsch; Douglas E J Worthy; Guido R van der Werf; James T Randerson; Paul O Wennberg; Maarten C Krol; Pieter P Tans
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2007-11-27       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Inferring biogenic and anthropogenic carbon dioxide sources across an urban to rural gradient.

Authors:  D E Pataki; T Xu; Y Q Luo; J R Ehleringer
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2007-02-14       Impact factor: 3.298

  8 in total
  7 in total

1.  Assessment of Planetary Boundary Layer parametrizations and urban heat island comparison: Impacts and implications for tracer transport.

Authors:  Israel Lopez-Coto; Micheal Hicks; Anna Karion; Ricardo K Sakai; Belay Demoz; Kuldeep Prasad; James Whetstone
Journal:  J Appl Meteorol Climatol       Date:  2020       Impact factor: 2.923

2.  Large and seasonally varying biospheric CO2 fluxes in the Los Angeles megacity revealed by atmospheric radiocarbon.

Authors:  John B Miller; Scott J Lehman; Kristal R Verhulst; Charles E Miller; Riley M Duren; Vineet Yadav; Sally Newman; Christopher D Sloop
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-10-12       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  On the Impact of Granularity of Space-based Urban CO2 Emissions in Urban Atmospheric Inversions: A Case Study for Indianapolis, IN.

Authors:  Tomohiro Oda; Thomas Lauvaux; Dengsheng Lu; Preeti Rao; Natasha L Miles; Scott J Richardson; Kevin R Gurney
Journal:  Elementa (Wash D C)       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 6.053

4.  Worldwide Evaluation of CAMS-EGG4 CO2 Data Re-Analysis at the Surface Level.

Authors:  Danilo Custódio; Carlos Borrego; Hélder Relvas
Journal:  Toxics       Date:  2022-06-17

5.  Fluxes of Atmospheric Greenhouse-Gases in Maryland (FLAGG-MD): Emissions of Carbon Dioxide in the Baltimore, MD-Washington, D.C. area.

Authors:  D Y Ahn; J R Hansford; S T Howe; X R Ren; R J Salawitch; N Zeng; M D Cohen; B Stunder; O E Salmon; P B Shepson; K R Gurney; T Oda; I Lopez-Coto; J Whetstone; R R Dickerson
Journal:  J Geophys Res Atmos       Date:  2020       Impact factor: 4.261

6.  Greenhouse gas observations from the Northeast Corridor tower network.

Authors:  Anna Karion; William Callahan; Michael Stock; Steve Prinzivalli; Kristal R Verhulst; Jooil Kim; Peter K Salameh; Israel Lopez-Coto; James Whetstone
Journal:  Earth Syst Sci Data       Date:  2020       Impact factor: 11.333

7.  Emerging reporting and verification needs under the Paris Agreement: How can the research community effectively contribute?

Authors:  Lucia Perugini; Guido Pellis; Giacomo Grassi; Philippe Ciais; Han Dolman; Joanna I House; Glen P Peters; Pete Smith; Dirk Günther; Philippe Peylin
Journal:  Environ Sci Policy       Date:  2021-08       Impact factor: 5.581

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.