7
IRUS Total
Downloads
  Altmetric

Continuous CH4 and delta(CH4)-C-13 measurements in London demonstrate under-reported natural gas leakage

File Description SizeFormat 
acp-22-3595-2022.pdfPublished version13.04 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Title: Continuous CH4 and delta(CH4)-C-13 measurements in London demonstrate under-reported natural gas leakage
Authors: Saboya, E
Zazzeri, G
Graven, H
Manning, AJ
Michel, SE
Item 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.
Issue Date: 17-Mar-2022
Date of Acceptance: 4-Feb-2022
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/96288
DOI: 10.5194/acp-22-3595-2022
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.
Sponsor/Funder: Commission of the European Communities
Natural Environment Research Council (NERC)
Funder's Grant Number: 679103
NE/S005277/1
Keywords: 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
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
Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences
0201 Astronomical and Space Sciences
0401 Atmospheric Sciences
Publication Status: Published
Open Access location: https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/3595/2022/acp-22-3595-2022.html
Online Publication Date: 2022-03-17
Appears in Collections:Space and Atmospheric Physics
Physics



This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons