Articles | Volume 9, issue 9
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3213-2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3213-2016
Development and technical paper
 | 
19 Sep 2016
Development and technical paper |  | 19 Sep 2016

Estimation of trace gas fluxes with objectively determined basis functions using reversible-jump Markov chain Monte Carlo

Mark F. Lunt, Matt Rigby, Anita L. Ganesan, and Alistair J. Manning

Related authors

Evaluating urban methane emissions and their attributes in a megacity, Osaka, Japan, via mobile and eddy covariance measurements
Masahito Ueyama, Taku Umezawa, Yukio Terao, Mark Lunt, and James Lawrence France
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3926,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3926, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
Greenhouse gas column observations from a portable spectrometer in Uganda
Neil Humpage, Hartmut Boesch, William Okello, Jia Chen, Florian Dietrich, Mark F. Lunt, Liang Feng, Paul I. Palmer, and Frank Hase
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 5679–5707, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-5679-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-5679-2024, 2024
Short summary
Verifying national inventory-based combustion emissions of CO2 across the UK and mainland Europe using satellite observations of atmospheric CO and CO2
Tia R. Scarpelli, Paul I. Palmer, Mark Lunt, Ingrid Super, and Arjan Droste
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 10773–10791, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-10773-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-10773-2024, 2024
Short summary
Methane emissions are predominantly responsible for record-breaking atmospheric methane growth rates in 2020 and 2021
Liang Feng, Paul I. Palmer, Robert J. Parker, Mark F. Lunt, and Hartmut Bösch
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 4863–4880, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4863-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4863-2023, 2023
Short summary
Evaluation of wetland CH4 in the Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES) land surface model using satellite observations
Robert J. Parker, Chris Wilson, Edward Comyn-Platt, Garry Hayman, Toby R. Marthews, A. Anthony Bloom, Mark F. Lunt, Nicola Gedney, Simon J. Dadson, Joe McNorton, Neil Humpage, Hartmut Boesch, Martyn P. Chipperfield, Paul I. Palmer, and Dai Yamazaki
Biogeosciences, 19, 5779–5805, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-5779-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-5779-2022, 2022
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
Accurate space-based NOx emission estimates with the flux divergence approach require fine-scale model information on local oxidation chemistry and profile shapes
Felipe Cifuentes, Henk Eskes, Enrico Dammers, Charlotte Bryan, and Folkert Boersma
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 621–649, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-621-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-621-2025, 2025
Short summary
Exploring a high-level programming model for the NWP domain using ECMWF microphysics schemes
Stefano Ubbiali, Christian Kühnlein, Christoph Schär, Linda Schlemmer, Thomas C. Schulthess, Michael Staneker, and Heini Wernli
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 529–546, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-529-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-529-2025, 2025
Short summary
Quantifying uncertainties in satellite NO2 superobservations for data assimilation and model evaluation
Pieter Rijsdijk, Henk Eskes, Arlene Dingemans, K. Folkert Boersma, Takashi Sekiya, Kazuyuki Miyazaki, and Sander Houweling
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 483–509, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-483-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-483-2025, 2025
Short summary
ML-AMPSIT: Machine Learning-based Automated Multi-method Parameter Sensitivity and Importance analysis Tool
Dario Di Santo, Cenlin He, Fei Chen, and Lorenzo Giovannini
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 433–459, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-433-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-433-2025, 2025
Short summary
Coupling the urban canopy model TEB (SURFEXv9.0) with the radiation model SPARTACUS-Urbanv0.6.1 for more realistic urban radiative exchange calculation
Robert Schoetter, Robin James Hogan, Cyril Caliot, and Valéry Masson
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 405–431, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-405-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-405-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Berchet, A., Pison, I., Chevallier, F., Bousquet, P., Conil, S., Geever, M., Laurila, T., Lavric, J., Lopez, M., Moncrieff, J., Necki, J., Ramonet, M., Schmidt, M., Steinbacher, M., and Tarniewicz, J.: Towards better error statistics for atmospheric inversions of methane surface fluxes, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 7115–7132, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-7115-2013, 2013.
Berchet, A., Pison, I., Chevallier, F., Bousquet, P., Bonne, J.-L., and Paris, J.-D.: Objectified quantification of uncertainties in Bayesian atmospheric inversions, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 1525–1546, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1525-2015, 2015.
Bocquet, M.: Toward Optimal Choices of Control Space Representation for Geophysical Data Assimilation, Mon. Weather Rev., 137, 2331–2348, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009MWR2789.1, 2009.
Bocquet, M., Wu, L., and Chevallier, F.: Bayesian design of control space for optimal assimilation of observations. Part I: Consistent multiscale formalism, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 137, 1340–1356, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.837, 2011.
Bodin, T. and Sambridge, M.: Seismic tomography with the reversible jump algorithm, Geophys. J. Int., 178, 1411–1436, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2009.04226.x, 2009.
Download
Short summary
Bayesian inversions can be used to estimate emissions of gases from atmospheric data. We present an inversion framework that objectively defines the basis functions, which describe regions of emissions. The framework allows for the uncertainty in the choice of basis functions to be propagated through to the posterior emissions distribution in a single-step process, and provides an alternative to using a single set of basis functions.
Share