1 / 20

TransCom Tsukuba, June 16, 2004 L. N. Yurganov

TransCom Tsukuba, June 16, 2004 L. N. Yurganov Frontier Research System for Global Change, Yokohama, Japan, in collaboration with:

sadah
Download Presentation

TransCom Tsukuba, June 16, 2004 L. N. Yurganov

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. TransCom Tsukuba, June 16, 2004 L. N. Yurganov Frontier Research System for Global Change, Yokohama, Japan, in collaboration with: T. Blumenstock(1), P. Dechatellet (2), D. P. Edwards (3), E. I. Grechko (4), E. Fokeeva (4), A. Dzhola (4), F. Hase (1), I. Kramer (1), E. Mahieu (2), J. Mellqvist (5) , P. C. Novelli (6), J. Notholt (7), H.-E. Scheel (8), A. Strandberg (5), R. Sussmann (8), H. Tanimoto (9), V. Velazco (7), J.R. Drummond (10), J.C. Gille (3) Carbon monoxide forest fires emissions in the Northern Hemisphere in 1996-2003 retrieved from total column ground-based and satellite measurements using a box model. (6) CMDL, NOAA, Boulder, Colorado, USA (7) University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany (8) IMK-IFU, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany (9) National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan (10) University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. (1) IMK-ISF, Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, Germany (2) University of Liège, Liège, Belgium (3) ACD, NCAR, Boulder, CO, USA (4) Obukhov Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Moscow, Russia (5) Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden

  2. The report is based on three publications that can be found at: http://www.jamstec.go.jp/frsgc/research/d4/papers.htm L. N. Yurganov, T. Blumenstock, E. I. Grechko, F. Hase, E. J. Hyer, E. S. Kasischke, M. Koike, Y. Kondo, I. Kramer, F.-Y. Leung, E. Mahieu, J. Mellqvist, J. Notholt, P. C. Novelli, C. P. Rinsland, H.E. Scheel, A. Schulz, A. Strandberg, R. Sussmann, H. Tanimoto, V. Velazco, R. Zander, and Y. Zhao, A Quantitative Assessment of the 1998 Carbon Monoxide Emission Anomaly in the Northern Hemisphere Based on Total Column and Surface Concentration Measurements, accepted by J. Geophys. Res D.P. Edwards, L.K. Emmons, D.A. Hauglustaine, A. Chu, J.C. Gille, Y. J. Kaufman, G. Petron, L.N. Yurganov, L. Giglio, M.N. Deeter, V. Yudin, D.C. Ziskin, J. Warner, J.-F. Lamarque, G. L. Francis, S. P. Ho, D. Mao, J. Chen, E.I. Grechko, and J.R. Drummond, Observations of Carbon Monoxide and Aerosols From the Terra Satellite: Northern Hemisphere Variability, accepted by J. Geophys. Res L. N. Yurganov, P. Duchatelet, A.V. Dzhola, D. P. Edwards, F. Hase, I. Kramer, E. Mahieu, J. Mellqvist, J. Notholt, P. C. Novelli, A. Rockmann, H. E. Scheel, M. Schneider, A. Schulz, A. Strandberg, R. Sussmann, H. Tanimoto, V. Velazco, J.R. Drummond, J.C. Gille, Increased Northern Hemispheric carbon monoxide burden in the troposphere in 2002 and 2003 detected from the ground and from space, submitted to Atmosp. Chem. Phys. Discuss.

  3. Why CO, not CO2? Extratropical forest fires emit normally [Andreae & Merlet, 2001]: CO: 68 Tg CH4: 3 Tg CO2:1004 Tg Global atmosphere contains: CO: 370 Tg CH4: 4800 Tg CO2: 2.2 millions (!) Tg But! Therefore, wild forest fires perturb the global atmosphere by: CO: 18% CH4: 0.06% CO2: 0.045% We may conclude that a detection of forest fire signal for CO is 300 times easier, that for CH4 and 400 times easier than for CO2. Why box model? It is simple, “transparent”, easily verifiable, and matches the experimental mode

  4. Measurements MOPITT 10 km mol/cm 2 FT FTIR 1.5 km Sampling BL BL

  5. LOCATIONS Location and methods NOAA CMDL Carbon Cycle Greenhouse Gases Other in situ programs Spectroscopic stations (Hokkaido until 2001, Tenerife after 1999) MOPITT – full coverage (operational since 1996 or earlier) FTIR spectrometers (7 sites) are parts of the NDSC (Network for Detection of Stratospheric Change).Grating spectrometer is in use at Zvenigorod, Russia, Data from two Japanese stations are supplied by Dr. H. Tanimoto (NIES) and Japanese Meteorological Agency, stations at Shetland Isl. and near Vancouver are managed by CSIRO, measurements at Zugspitze (Germany) are conducted by Dr. Scheel (FZK, IMK-IFU), in situ data from Jungfraujoch are supplied by EMPA. Most of the data are based on weekly sampling.

  6. ● Our first task is to determine as accurately as possible the CO burden (total mass) in the HNH. We should use all available information about CO in the boundary layer, in the free troposphere and in the total column. ● We will consider anomalies of CO burden in spite of absolute burdens.

  7. Total column CO in the Northern Hemisphere measured from the ground and from space(mol/cm2, monthly averages, blue solid lines are averages over the reference period) Designates the reference period (March 2000 – February 2001). Swiss Alps Sweden Central Russia High Northern Hemisphere HNH = 30º N – 90º N

  8. Zonal average CO total column measured by MOPITT [Edwards et al., 2004] HNH LNH LSH HSH

  9. Relative anomalies of CO abundance, both total columns and BL mixing ratios Symbols are for spectroscopic total column measurements, orange line is for CMDL data in the BL, MOPITT total column measurements were averaged for 30º N – 90º N. 2.1 (Sept., 2002, Zvenigorod) Peat fires Peatland fires occurred near Moscow in July – September, 2002. Extreme values were omitted for hemispheric estimates of emissions. Reference period Hokkaido data until December 2001 according to [Yurganov et al., 2004]

  10. Simultaneous ground- and space-based measurements in Russia in period of peat fires Vertical sensitivities and a priori profiles MOPITT Ground-based spectrometer 1.5 km 17% 1.15 ppm in BL Peat fires Zvenigorod 60 km Moscow

  11. CO in situ anomalies for low altitude stations in HNH(Novelli et al., 2003, JGR; Yurganov et al., 2004, JGR, accepted) Reference period The anomaly of 1998 was clearly visible at most of BL locations, however, CO was perturbed at Japanese stations Rishiri and Ryori

  12. CO anomalies expressed as mean mixing ratio in selected boxes: boundary layer (below 1.5 km), free troposphere (1.5 – 10 km), and total column (0 – 10 km), 30º N – 90º N. Canada & Siberia ? Indonesia W. Russia & Siberia Siberia Mexico ?

  13. Alternatives to the biomass burning TOTAL GLOBAL EMISSIONS = 2780 Tg Various fuels = 700 Biomass burning = 700 Methane oxidation = 800 Non-methane HC oxidation = 400

  14. Box model High Northern Hemisphere (HNH) Low Northern Hemisphere (LNH) (volumes of two boxes are equal) CO + OH → CO2 + H MLNH MHNH Ltransp 90º N 10 km Equator 30º N 0 km P'HNH = dM'HNH/dt + M'HNH / TAU chem + (M'HNH – M'LNH)/ TAU trans TAU chem. = 1/ k [OH] k = 1.5 E-13 x (1+0.6 atm)cm3 mol-1 s-1 [Demore et al., 1997]; [OH] ~ [Spivakovsky et al. 2000] TAU trans was calculated using the GEOS-CHEM model

  15. TAUtrans was calculated by Fok-Yan-Leung (Harvard University) using GEOS-CHEM model for 1998 meteorology (Yurganov et al., 2004) TAUchem was calculated as 1/k [OH] with [OH] field according to Spivakovsky et al., 2000 These life-times were assumed valid for all years. A corresponding uncertainty was estimated less than ± 20% (Yurganov et al., 2004)

  16. Anomalies of total tropospheric CO burden in the HNH (top panel) were calculated from CMDL BL data added by FT data (both in situ and Alpine FTIRs), directly from low altitude FTIRs, and from MOPITT. Box model was applied and emission anomalies are displayed onbottom panel. (Yurganov et al.,ACPD, 2004, submitted) A comparison with GEOS-CHEM inversion by van der Werf et al., Science, 2004.

  17. Emission anomaly, can be converted in absolute emission if we assume some reference “normal” emissions, e.g., the inventory for MOZART-2 model (M.Schultz, personal communication) with 50.7 Tg CO emitted in 2000. A comparison of emissions during four years with strong fires. A comparison with 1998 inventories

  18. CO emission HNH anomaly

  19. ESTIMATES OF CARBON DIOXIDE AND METHANE BURDEN PERTURBATIONS. Forest fires emit directly 14.7 times more CO2, 22.7 times less CH4, and 400times less N2O than CO [Andreae and Merlet, 2001]. In 2002 – 2003 CO excess emission from NH boreal fires was (98 + 142) = 240 Tg. It was almost immediately chemically converted into 240 x 44/28 = 377 Tg CO2. Direct emission of CO2 was 3530 Tg. If we assume that 20% of CO2 was removed during two years, then global CO2 burden increased by 0.14%. Methane global burden was increased by 0.20%. Nitrous oxide global burden was increased by 0.03%.

  20. CONCLUSIONS ● A consideration of HNH burden anomalies allows one to estimate imbalance between sources and sinks. This imbalance is treated as a result of anomalies of CO source, namely, anomalies of boreal fire emissions. ● CO measurements from the ground and from space are a good tool for monitoring fire activity. Moreover, perturbations of other gases may be assessed using available information about their relative contributions into fire emissions.

More Related