Submitted as: model experiment description paper |
| 19 Aug 2016
Status: this preprint was under review for the journal GMD. A revision for further review has not been submitted.
Development of CarbonTracker Europe-CH4 – Part 1: system set-up and sensitivity analyses
Aki Tsuruta,Tuula Aalto,Leif Backman,Janne Hakkarainen,Ingrid T. van der Laan-Luijkx,Maarten C. Krol,Renato Spahni,Sander Houweling,Marko Laine,Marcel van der Schoot,Ray Langenfelds,Raymond Ellul,and Wouter Peters
Abstract. CarbonTracker Europe-CH4 (CTE-CH4) inverse model versions 1.0 and 1.1 are presented. The model optimizes global surface methane emissions from biosphere and anthropogenic sources using an ensemble Kalman filter (EnKF) based optimization method, using the TM5 chemistry transport model as an observation operator, and assimilating global in-situ atmospheric methane mole fraction observations. In this study, we examine sensitivity of our CH4 emission estimates on the ensemble size, covariance matrix, prior estimates, observations to be assimilated, assimilation window length, convection scheme in TM5, and model structure in the emission estimates by performing CTE-CH4 with several set-ups. The analyses show that the model is sensitive to most of the parameters and inputs that were examined. Firstly, using a large enough ensemble size stabilises the results. Secondly, using an informative covariance matrix reduces uncertainty estimates. Thirdly, agreement with discrete observations became better when assimilating continuous observations. Finally, the posterior emissions were found sensitive to the choice of prior estimates, convection scheme and model structure, particularly to their spatial distribution. The distribution of posterior mole fractions derived from posterior emissions is consistent with the observations to the extent prescribed in the various covariance estimates, indicating a satisfactory performance of our system.
Received: 21 Jul 2016 – Discussion started: 19 Aug 2016
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Aki Tsuruta,Tuula Aalto,Leif Backman,Janne Hakkarainen,Ingrid T. van der Laan-Luijkx,Maarten C. Krol,Renato Spahni,Sander Houweling,Marko Laine,Marcel van der Schoot,Ray Langenfelds,Raymond Ellul,and Wouter Peters
Aki Tsuruta,Tuula Aalto,Leif Backman,Janne Hakkarainen,Ingrid T. van der Laan-Luijkx,Maarten C. Krol,Renato Spahni,Sander Houweling,Marko Laine,Marcel van der Schoot,Ray Langenfelds,Raymond Ellul,and Wouter Peters
Aki Tsuruta,Tuula Aalto,Leif Backman,Janne Hakkarainen,Ingrid T. van der Laan-Luijkx,Maarten C. Krol,Renato Spahni,Sander Houweling,Marko Laine,Marcel van der Schoot,Ray Langenfelds,Raymond Ellul,and Wouter Peters
Viewed
Total article views: 1,434 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML
PDF
XML
Total
BibTeX
EndNote
1,086
307
41
1,434
55
65
HTML: 1,086
PDF: 307
XML: 41
Total: 1,434
BibTeX: 55
EndNote: 65
Views and downloads (calculated since 19 Aug 2016)
Cumulative views and downloads
(calculated since 19 Aug 2016)
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Total article views: 1,300 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
Thereof 1,294 with geography defined
and 6 with unknown origin.
In this study, we found that methane emission estimates, driven by the CTE-CH4 model, depend on model setups and inputs, especially for regional estimates. An optimal setup makes the estimates stable, but inputs, such as emission estimates from inventories, and observations, also play significant role. The results can be used for an extended analysis on relative contributions of methane emissions to atmospheric methane concentration changes in recent decades.
In this study, we found that methane emission estimates, driven by the CTE-CH4 model, depend on...