Continuous CH4 and delta(CH4)-C-13 measurements in London demonstrate under-reported natural gas leakage
File(s)acp-22-3595-2022.pdf (12.73 MB)
Published version
Author(s)
Saboya, Eric
Zazzeri, Giulia
Graven, Heather
Manning, Alistair J
Michel, Sylvia Englund
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
Top-down greenhouse gas measurements can be used to independently assess the accuracy of bottom-up emission estimates. We report atmospheric methane (CH4) mole fractions and δ13CH4 measurements from Imperial College London from early 2018 onwards using a Picarro G2201-i analyser. Measurements from March 2018 to October 2020 were compared to simulations of CH4 mole fractions and δ13CH4 produced using the NAME (Numerical Atmospheric-dispersion Modelling Environment) dispersion model coupled with the UK National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory, UK NAEI, and a global inventory, the Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR), with model spatial resolutions of ∼ 2, ∼ 10, and ∼ 25 km. Simulation–measurement comparisons are used to evaluate London emissions and the source apportionment in the global (EDGAR) and UK national (NAEI) emission inventories. Observed mole fractions were underestimated by 30 %–35 % in the NAEI simulations. In contrast, a good correspondence between observations and EDGAR simulations was seen. There was no correlation between the measured and simulated δ13CH4 values for either NAEI or EDGAR, however, suggesting the inventories' sectoral attributions are incorrect. On average, natural gas sources accounted for 20 %–28 % of the above background CH4 in the NAEI simulations and only 6 %–9 % in the EDGAR simulations. In contrast, nearly 84 % of isotopic source values calculated by Keeling plot analysis (using measurement data from the afternoon) of individual pollution events were higher than −45 ‰, suggesting the primary CH4 sources in London are actually natural gas leaks. The simulation–observation comparison of CH4 mole fractions suggests that total emissions in London are much higher than the NAEI estimate (0.04 Tg CH4 yr−1) but close to, or slightly lower than, the EDGAR estimate (0.10 Tg CH4 yr−1). However, the simulation–observation comparison of δ13CH4 and the Keeling plot results indicate that emissions due to natural gas leaks in London are being underestimated in both the UK NAEI and EDGAR.
Date Issued
2022-03-17
Date Acceptance
2022-02-04
Citation
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2022, 22 (5), pp.3595-3613
ISSN
1680-7316
Publisher
Copernicus Publications
Start Page
3595
End Page
3613
Journal / Book Title
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
Volume
22
Issue
5
Copyright Statement
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
License URL
Sponsor
Commission of the European Communities
Natural Environment Research Council (NERC)
Identifier
http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000772230800001&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=1ba7043ffcc86c417c072aa74d649202
Grant Number
679103
NE/S005277/1
Subjects
Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Physical Sciences
Environmental Sciences
Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences
Environmental Sciences & Ecology
METHANE EMISSIONS
SOURCE SIGNATURES
CARBON-DIOXIDE
FOSSIL-FUEL
CO2
VARIABILITY
ANALYZERS
MODEL
Publication Status
Published
Date Publish Online
2022-03-17