DOCSLIB.ORG

Detecting Changes in Arctic Methane Emissions: Limitations of the Inter-Polar Difference of Atmospheric Mole Fractions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Detecting Changes in Arctic Methane Emissions: Limitations of the Inter-Polar Difference of Atmospheric Mole Fractions Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 17895–17907, 2018 https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-17895-2018 © Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Detecting changes in Arctic methane emissions: limitations of the inter-polar difference of atmospheric mole fractions Oscar B. Dimdore-Miles1, Paul I. Palmer1, and Lori P. Bruhwiler2 1School of GeoSciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK 2National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Earth System Research Laboratory, Boulder, Colorado, USA Correspondence: Paul I. Palmer ([email protected]) Received: 15 November 2017 – Discussion started: 8 January 2018 Revised: 5 November 2018 – Accepted: 30 November 2018 – Published: 17 December 2018 Abstract. We consider the utility of the annual inter-polar dom noise. We find that it can take up to 16 years to detect difference (IPD) as a metric for changes in Arctic emissions the smallest prescribed trend in Arctic emissions at the 95 % of methane (CH4). The IPD has been previously defined as confidence level. Scenarios with higher, but likely unrealis- the difference between weighted annual means of CH4 mole tic, growth in Arctic emissions are detected in less than a fraction data collected at stations from the two polar regions decade. We argue that a more reliable measurement-driven (defined as latitudes poleward of 53◦ N and 53◦ S, respec- approach would require data collected from all latitudes, em- tively). This subtraction approach (IPD) implicitly assumes phasizing the importance of maintaining a global monitoring that extra-polar CH4 emissions arrive within the same cal- network to observe decadal changes in atmospheric green- endar year at both poles. We show using a continuous ver- house gases. sion of the IPD that the metric includes not only changes in Arctic emissions but also terms that represent atmospheric transport of air masses from lower latitudes to the polar re- gions. We show the importance of these atmospheric trans- 1 Introduction port terms in understanding the IPD using idealized numeri- cal experiments with the TM5 global 3-D atmospheric chem- Atmospheric methane (CH4) is the second most important istry transport model that is run from 1980 to 2010. A north- contributor to anthropogenic radiative forcing after carbon ern mid-latitude pulse in January 1990, which increases prior dioxide. Observed large-scale variations of atmospheric CH4 emission distributions, arrives at the Arctic with a higher (Nisbet et al., 2014) have evaded a definitive explanation due mole fraction and ' 12 months earlier than at the Antarc- to the sparseness of data (Kirschke et al., 2013; Rigby et al., tic. The perturbation at the poles subsequently decays with 2016; Turner et al., 2016; Schaefer et al., 2016; Saunois et al., an e-folding lifetime of ' 4 years. A similarly timed pulse 2016). Atmospheric CH4 is determined by anthropogenic emitted from the tropics arrives with a higher value at the and natural sources, as well as by loss from oxidation by the Antarctic ' 11 months earlier than at the Arctic. This pertur- hydroxyl radical (OH) with smaller loss terms from soil mi- bation decays with an e-folding lifetime of ' 7 years. These crobes and oxidation by Cl. This results in an atmospheric simulations demonstrate that the assumption of symmetric lifetime of ' 10 years. Anthropogenic CH4 sources include transport of extra-polar emissions to the poles is not realis- leakage from the production and transport of oil and gas, tic, resulting in considerable IPD variations due to variations coal mining, and biomass burning associated with agricul- in emissions and atmospheric transport. We assess how well tural practices and land use change. Microbial anthropogenic the annual IPD can detect a constant annual growth rate of sources include ruminants, landfills, and rice cultivation. The Arctic emissions for three scenarios, 0.5 %, 1 %, and 2 %, largest natural source is microbial emissions from wetlands, superimposed on signals from lower latitudes, including ran- with smaller but significant contributions from wild rumi- nants, termites, wildfires, landfills, and geologic emissions Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. 17896 O. B. Dimdore-Miles et al.: Detecting Arctic CH4 emissions (Kirschke et al., 2013; Saunois et al., 2016). Here, we focus inter-polar source (mass CH4 per unit time) emitted at posi- on our ability to quantify changes in Arctic emissions using tion r and time t. The IPDC is given by polar atmospheric mole fraction data. 90 −53 Warming trends over the Arctic, approximately twice the 1 Z 1 Z IPDC.t/ D c.r;t/dr − c.r;t/dr; (1) global mean (AMAP, 2015), are eventually expected to re- 1r 1r sult in thawing of permafrost. Observational evidence shows rD53 r=−90 that permafrost coverage has begun to shrink (Christensen et al., 2004; Reagan and Moridis, 2007). Arctic soils store where 1r is the graduation in latitude in the model and c.r;t/ an estimated 1700 GtC (Tarnocai et al., 2009). As the soil denotes atmospheric CH4 mole fraction (ppb) at latitude r organic material thaws and decomposes it is expected that and time t that includes influences from all other latitudes some fraction of this carbon will be released to the atmo- and previous times. The mole fraction can then be described as sphere as CH4, depending on soil hydrology. Current under- standing is that permafrost carbon will enter the atmosphere t0Dt 90 Z Z slowly over the next century, reaching a cumulative emis- 0 0 0 0 t0−t 0 0 c.r;t/ D k.r ;t /S.r ;t /H 0 dr dt ; (2) sion of 130–160 PgC (Schuur et al., 2015). If only 2 % of r −r t0=−∞ r0=−90 this carbon is emitted as CH4, annual Arctic emissions could approximately double by the end of the century from current where S.r0;t0/ denotes the surface emission fluxes −1 0 estimates of 25 Tg CH4 year inferred from atmospheric in- −2 −1 t −t (g cm s ); Hr0−r denotes the fraction of emissions versions (AMAP, 2015). At present, using data from the cur- from location r0 at initial time t0 that contributes to the rent observing network there is no strong evidence to sug- concentration at location r and a later time t, which includes gest large-scale changes in Arctic emissions (Sweeney et al., atmospheric chemistry and transport; and k.r0;t0/ (cm3 g−1) 2016). describes the conversion between emissions and atmospheric The inter-polar difference (IPD) has been proposed as a mole fraction (parts per billion, ppb) and takes the form sensitive indicator of changes in Arctic emissions that can be Na k.r;t/ D , where Na and Mw denote Avogadro’s derived directly from network observations of atmospheric Mwρ.r;t/ constant (molecules mole−1) and the molar weight of CH CH mole fraction. The IPD, as previously defined (Dlu- 4 4 (g mole−1), respectively, and ρ.r;t/ denotes the number gokencky et al., 2003), is the difference between weighted density of air (molec cm−3). annual means of CH mole fraction data collected at polar 4 Our expression for IPDC can be reformulated as the dif- stations (those poleward of ±53◦ > latitude) such as those ference between values determined at time t and a refer- from the NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory (ESRL) ence time t . The reader is referred to AppendixA for a full network (https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/dv/site/site_table2. 0 derivation of the expressions used in this introduction. Equa- php, last access: 10 December 2018). Data from individual tion (3) describes the IPD using the assumptions previously sites are weighted inversely by the cosine of the station lat- used (e.g. Dlugokencky et al., 2003): (1) the southern polar itude and by the standard deviation of the data at a particu- region contains no local sources, and (2) emissions from the lar site. Dlugokencky et al.(2003) reported an abrupt drop northern polar region are too diffuse after transport between in IPD during the early 1990s. They suggested this magni- poles to significantly affect mole fractions at the southern po- tude of change was indicative of a 10 Tg CH year−1 reduc- 4 lar region. tion, which they attribute to the collapse of fossil fuel pro- duction in Russia following the 1991 breakup of the Soviet C C IPD .t/ − IPD .t0/ D Union (Dlugokencky et al., 2011). In more recent work, Dlu- t0Dt 90 90 gokencky et al.(2011) proposed that the IPD metric is po- Z Z Z 1 0 0 0 0 t0−t 0 tentially sensitive to changes in Arctic emissions as small k.r ;t /S.r ;t /Hr0−r dr − 1r 1 0 0 as 3 Tg CH4 year , representing a value of 10 % of north- t Dt0 rD53 r D53 ern wetland emissions. However, studies have reported little 53 Z or no increase in IPD between 1995 and 2010 (Fig.1, Dlu- 0 0 0 0 t0−t 0 C k.r ;t /S.r ;t /H 0 dr dr gokencky et al., 2011, 2003), a period during which rising r −r Arctic temperatures were expected to lead to an increase in r0=−53 −53 53 emissions (Mauritsen, 2016; McGuire et al., 2017). In this Z Z 0 0 0 0 t0−t 0 0 work, we examine how sensitive the IPD is to changing CH4 − k.r ;t /S.r ;t /Hr0−r dr dr dt (3) emissions by using model simulations guided by results from r=−90 r0=−53 an analytical approach. First, we derive the continuous version of the IPDC to in- The first integral in Eq.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Minimal Geological Methane Emissions During the Younger Dryas-Preboreal Abrupt Warming Event
    UC San Diego UC San Diego Previously Published Works Title Minimal geological methane emissions during the Younger Dryas-Preboreal abrupt warming event. Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1j0249ms Journal Nature, 548(7668) ISSN 0028-0836 Authors Petrenko, Vasilii V Smith, Andrew M Schaefer, Hinrich et al. Publication Date 2017-08-01 DOI 10.1038/nature23316 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California LETTER doi:10.1038/nature23316 Minimal geological methane emissions during the Younger Dryas–Preboreal abrupt warming event Vasilii V. Petrenko1, Andrew M. Smith2, Hinrich Schaefer3, Katja Riedel3, Edward Brook4, Daniel Baggenstos5,6, Christina Harth5, Quan Hua2, Christo Buizert4, Adrian Schilt4, Xavier Fain7, Logan Mitchell4,8, Thomas Bauska4,9, Anais Orsi5,10, Ray F. Weiss5 & Jeffrey P. Severinghaus5 Methane (CH4) is a powerful greenhouse gas and plays a key part atmosphere can only produce combined estimates of natural geological in global atmospheric chemistry. Natural geological emissions and anthropogenic fossil CH4 emissions (refs 2, 12). (fossil methane vented naturally from marine and terrestrial Polar ice contains samples of the preindustrial atmosphere and seeps and mud volcanoes) are thought to contribute around offers the opportunity to quantify geological CH4 in the absence of 52 teragrams of methane per year to the global methane source, anthropogenic fossil CH4. A recent study used a combination of revised 13 13 about 10 per cent of the total, but both bottom-up methods source δ C isotopic signatures and published ice core δ CH4 data to 1 −1 2 (measuring emissions) and top-down approaches (measuring estimate natural geological CH4 at 51 ±​ 20 Tg CH4 yr (1σ range) , atmospheric mole fractions and isotopes)2 for constraining these in agreement with the bottom-up assessment of ref.
    [Show full text]
  • Reduced Net Methane Emissions Due to Microbial Methane Oxidation in a Warmer Arctic
    LETTERS https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-0734-z Reduced net methane emissions due to microbial methane oxidation in a warmer Arctic Youmi Oh 1, Qianlai Zhuang 1,2,3 ✉ , Licheng Liu1, Lisa R. Welp 1,2, Maggie C. Y. Lau4,9, Tullis C. Onstott4, David Medvigy 5, Lori Bruhwiler6, Edward J. Dlugokencky6, Gustaf Hugelius 7, Ludovica D’Imperio8 and Bo Elberling 8 Methane emissions from organic-rich soils in the Arctic have bacteria (methanotrophs) and the remainder is mostly emitted into been extensively studied due to their potential to increase the atmosphere (Fig. 1a). The methanotrophs in these wet organic the atmospheric methane burden as permafrost thaws1–3. soils may be low-affinity methanotrophs (LAMs) that require However, this methane source might have been overestimated >600 ppm of methane (by moles) for their growth and mainte- without considering high-affinity methanotrophs (HAMs; nance23. But in dry mineral soils, the dominant methanotrophs are methane-oxidizing bacteria) recently identified in Arctic min- high-affinity methanotrophs (HAMs), which can survive and grow 4–7 eral soils . Herein we find that integrating the dynamics of at a level of atmospheric methane abundance ([CH4]atm) of about HAMs and methanogens into a biogeochemistry model8–10 1.8 ppm (Fig. 1b)24. that includes permafrost soil organic carbon dynamics3 leads Quantification of the previously underestimated HAM-driven −1 to the upland methane sink doubling (~5.5 Tg CH4 yr ) north of methane sink is needed to improve our understanding of Arctic 50 °N in simulations from 2000–2016. The increase is equiva- methane budgets.
    [Show full text]
  • Is Rapid Climate Change in the Arctic a Planetary Emergency? Peter Carter, November 2013 Updated 2019
    Is Rapid Climate Change in the Arctic a Planetary Emergency? Peter Carter, November 2013 updated 2019. Introduction This paper presents a compelling case, supported by the climate change research, that the combination of: • global inaction on greenhouse gas emissions, • climate system inertias, and • multiple enormous Arctic sources of amplifying feedbacks (covered in this paper) constitutes an extreme-risk planetary emergency, for the survival of civilization, the human race and most life Research on climate change and the Arctic shows that we face a catastrophic risk of uncontrollable, accelerating global warming due to several amplifying feedbacks from enormous feedback sources in the Arctic. These include the Arctic snow/ice-albedo feedback and greenhouse gas feedbacks (methane, nitrous oxide, and carbon dioxide). Under global warming, the Arctic is changing far faster than other regions of Earth. Numerous – and extremely large – Arctic sources of amplifying feedbacks are already responding (have been triggered in response) to rapid Arctic warming. These Arctic feedbacks, if not addressed in time (now) and with the appropriate degree of mitigation, can only be expected to accelerate the rate of global warming. They constitute a very large risk of planetary catastrophic consequences, including Arctic greenhouse gas feedback so-called "runaway" chaotic climate disruption / runaway global heating/ hot house Earth. This paper describes global warming positive feedbacks already operant in the Arctic, and explains the large risk of planetary
    [Show full text]
  • Working Towards a Just Peace in the Middle East
    KAIROS Policy Briefing Papers are written to help inform public debate on key domestic and foreign policy issues No. 41 April 2015 Hopeful Signs, Alarming Realities on the Road to Climate Justice By John Dillon Ecological Economy Program Coordinator “Climate change for us is a matter of life or death.”1 waiting for the Paris conference to make decisions These stark words were spoken by Rev. Tafue Lu- that, in most cases, will take effect only in 2020. sama, General Secretary of the Tuvalu Christian Church, in September 2014 at an interfaith summit in New York. How prophetic they were in March 2015 when Super Cyclone Pam wreaked havoc on the Pa- cific island state, killing dozens and destroying thou- sands of homes in neighbouring Vanuatu. Rising sea levels and warmer water temperatures have increased the frequency and intensity of tropical storms like this one and Typhoon Haiyan, which struck the Philip- pines in 2013. Yet, although climate change is already devastating the lives of millions of vulnerable people, Rev. Olav Cyclone Pam survivors survey damage in Vanuatu. Tveit, General Secretary of the World Council of Churches, reminds us: “Despite all the negative condi- Hopeful signs include initiatives being undertaken tions, we have the right to hope, not as a passive wait- by some Canadian provinces such as putting a price ing but as an active process towards justice and on carbon emissions and declaring moratoria on hy- peace.”2 This Briefing Paper examines some hopeful draulic fracturing (fracking) to extract shale gas. As signs of progress in the struggle for climate justice, well, a number of civil society groups, such as Cli- despite major obstacles.
    [Show full text]
  • Greenhouse Carbon Balance of Wetlands: Methane Emission Versus Carbon Sequestration
    T ellus (2001), 53B, 521–528 Copyright © Munksgaard, 2001 Printed in UK. All rights reserved TELLUS ISSN 0280–6509 Greenhouse carbon balance of wetlands: methane emission versus carbon sequestration By GARY J. WHITING1* and JEFFREY P. CHANTON2, 1Department of Biology, Chemistry, and Environmental Science, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, V irginia 23606, USA; 2Department of Oceanography, Florida State University, T allahassee, Florida 32306, USA (Manuscript received 1 August 2000; in final form 18 April 2001) ABSTRACT Carbon fixation under wetland anaerobic soil conditions provides unique conditions for long- term storage of carbon into histosols. However, this carbon sequestration process is intimately linked to methane emission from wetlands. The potential contribution of this emitted methane ff to the greenhouse e ect can be mitigated by the removal of atmospheric CO2 and storage into peat. The balance of CH4 and CO2 exchange can provide an index of a wetland’s greenhouse gas (carbon) contribution to the atmosphere. Here, we relate the atmospheric global warming potential of methane (GWPM) with annual methane emission/carbon dioxide exchange ratio of wetlands ranging from the boreal zone to the near-subtropics. This relationship permits one to determine the greenhouse carbon balance of wetlands by their contribution to or attenuation ff of the greenhouse e ect via CH4 emission or CO2 sink, respectively. We report annual measure- ments of the relationship between methane emission and net carbon fixation in three wetland ecosystems. The ratio of methane released to annual net carbon fixed varies from 0.05 to 0.20 on a molar basis. Although these wetlands function as a sink for CO2, the 21.8-fold greater infrared absorptivity of CH4 relative to CO2 (GWPM) over a relatively short time horizon (20 years) would indicate that the release of methane still contributes to the overall greenhouse ff e ect.
    [Show full text]
  • The Interplay Between Sources of Methane And
    THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN SOURCES OF METHANE AND BIOGENIC VOCS IN GLACIAL-INTERGLACIAL FLUCTUATIONS IN ATMOSPHERIC GREENHOUSE GAS CONCENTRATIONS AND THE GLOBAL CARBON CYCLE Jed O. Kaplan1, Gerd Folberth2, and Didier A. Hauglustaine3 1Institute of Plant Sciences, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; [email protected] 2School of Earth and Ocean Sciences, University of Victoria, Victoria BC, Canada; [email protected] 3Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l’Environnement, Gif-sur-Yvette, France ; [email protected] ABSTRACT Recent analyses of ice core methane concentrations have suggested that methane emissions from wetlands were the primary driver for prehistoric changes in atmospheric methane. However, these data conflict as to the location of wetlands, magnitude of emissions, and the environmental controls on methane oxidation. The flux of other reactive trace gases to the atmosphere also controls apparent atmospheric methane concentrations because these compounds compete for the hydroxyl radical (OH), which is the primary atmospheric sink for methane. In a series of coupled biosphere-atmosphere chemistry-climate modelling experiments, we simulate the methane and biogenic volatile organic compound emissions from the terrestrial biosphere from the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) to present. Using an atmospheric chemistry-climate model, we simulate the atmospheric concentrations of methane, the hydroxyl radical, and numerous other reactive trace gas species. Over the past 21,000 years methane emissions from wetlands increased slightly to the end of the Pleistocene, but then decreased again, reaching levels at the preindustrial Holocene that were similar to the LGM. Global wetland area decreased by 14% from LGM to preindustrial. However, emissions of biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs) nearly doubled over the same period of time.
    [Show full text]
  • FIRST-ORDER DRAFT IPCC WGII AR5 Chapter 19 Do Not Cite, Quote
    FIRST-ORDER DRAFT IPCC WGII AR5 Chapter 19 1 Chapter 19. Emergent Risks and Key Vulnerabilities 2 3 Coordinating Lead Authors 4 Michael Oppenheimer (USA), Maximiliano Campos (Costa Rica) 5 6 Lead Authors 7 Joern Birkmann (Germany), George Luber (USA), Brian O’Neill (USA), Kiyoshi Takahashi (Japan), Rachel Warren 8 (UK) 9 10 Contributing Authors 11 Franz Berkhout (Netherlands), Pauline Dube (Botswana), Wendy Foden (South Africa), Stefan Greiving (Germany), 12 Solomon Hsiang (USA), Klaus Keller (USA), Joan Kleypas (USA), Robert Kopp (USA), Carlos Peres (UK), Jeff 13 Price (UK), Alan Robock (USA), Wolfram Schlenker (USA), Richard Tol (UK) 14 15 Review Editors 16 Mike Brklacich (Canada), Sergey Semenov (Russian Federation) 17 18 Chapter Scientist 19 Solomon Hsiang (USA) 20 21 22 Contents 23 24 Executive Summary 25 26 19.1. Purpose, Scope, and Structure of the Chapter 27 19.1.1. Historical Development of this Chapter 28 19.1.2. The Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate 29 Change Adaptation (SREX) 30 19.1.3. New Developments in this Chapter 31 32 19.2. Framework for Identifying Key Vulnerabilities, Key Risks, and Emergent Risks 33 19.2.1. Risk and Vulnerability 34 19.2.2. Criteria for Identifying Key Vulnerabilities and Key Risks 35 19.2.2.1. Criteria for Identifying Key Vulnerabilities 36 19.2.2.2. Criteria for Identifying Key Risks 37 19.2.3. Criteria for Identifying Emergent Risks 38 19.2.4. Identifying Key and Emergent Risks under Alternative Development Pathways 39 19.2.5. Assessing Key Vulnerabilities and Emergent Risks 40 41 19.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Information on Selected Climate and Climate-Change Issues
    INFORMATION ON SELECTED CLIMATE AND CLIMATE-CHANGE ISSUES By Harry F. Lins, Eric T. Sundquist, and Thomas A. Ager U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 88-718 Reston, Virginia 1988 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL MODEL, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information Copies of this report can be write to: purchased from: Office of the Director U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Books and Open-File Reports Section Reston, Virginia 22092 Box 25425 Federal Center, Bldg. 810 Denver, Colorado 80225 PREFACE During the spring and summer of 1988, large parts of the Nation were severely affected by intense heat and drought. In many areas agricultural productivity was significantly reduced. These events stimulated widespread concern not only for the immediate effects of severe drought, but also for the consequences of potential climatic change during the coming decades. Congress held hearings regarding these issues, and various agencies within the Executive Branch of government began preparing plans for dealing with the drought and potential climatic change. As part of the fact-finding process, the Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Water and Science asked the Geological Survey to prepare a briefing that would include basic information on climate, weather patterns, and drought; the greenhouse effect and global warming; and climatic change. The briefing was later updated and presented to the Secretary of the Interior. The Secretary then requested the Geological Survey to organize the briefing material in text form. The material contained in this report represents the Geological Survey response to the Secretary's request.
    [Show full text]
  • Wetlands, Carbon and Climate Change
    Wetlands, Carbon and Climate Change William J. Mitsch Everglades Wetland Research Park, Florida Gulf Coast University, Naples Florida with collaboration of: Blanca Bernal, Amanda M. Nahlik, Ulo Mander, Li Zhang, Christopher Anderson, Sven E. Jørgensen, and Hans Brix Florida Gulf Coast University (USA), U.S. EPA, Tartu University (Estonia), Auburn University (USA), Copenhagen University (Denmark), and Aarhus University (Denmark) Old Global Carbon Budget with Wetlands Featured Pools: Pg (=1015 g) Fluxes: Pg/yr Source:Mitsch and Gosselink, 2007 Wetlands offer one of the best natural environments for sequestration and long-term storage of carbon…. …… and yet are also natural sources of greenhouse gases (GHG) to the atmosphere. Both of these processes are due to the same anaerobic condition caused by shallow water and saturated soils that are features of wetlands. Bloom et al./ Science (10 January 2010) suggested that wetlands and rice paddies contribute 227 Tg of CH4 and that 52 to 58% of methane emissions come from the tropics. They furthermore conclude that an increase in methane seen from 2003 to 2007 was due primarily due to warming in Arctic and mid-latitudes over that time. Bloom et al. 2010 Science 327: 322 Comparison of methane emissions and carbon sequestration in 18 wetlands around the world 140 120 y = 0.1418x + 11.855 Methane R² = 0.497 emissions, 100 g-C m-2 yr-1 80 60 40 20 0 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Carbon sequestration, g-C m-2 yr-1 • On average, methane emitted from wetlands, as carbon, is 14% of the wetland’s carbon sequestration.
    [Show full text]
  • Disproportionate CH4 Sink Strength from an Endemic, Sub-Alpine Australian Soil Microbial Community
    microorganisms Article Disproportionate CH4 Sink Strength from an Endemic, Sub-Alpine Australian Soil Microbial Community Marshall D. McDaniel 1,2,*,† , Marcela Hernández 3,4,*,† , Marc G. Dumont 3,5, Lachlan J. Ingram 1 and Mark A. Adams 1,6 1 Centre for Carbon Water and Food, Sydney Institute of Agriculture, University of Sydney, Brownlow Hill 2570, Australia; [email protected] (L.J.I.); [email protected] (M.A.A.) 2 Department of Agronomy, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA 3 Department of Biogeochemistry, Max Planck Institute for Terrestrial Microbiology, D-35037 Marburg, Germany; [email protected] 4 School of Environmental Sciences, Norwich Research Park, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK 5 School of Biological Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK 6 School of Science, Engineering and Technology, University of Swinburne, Melbourne 3122, Australia * Correspondence: [email protected] (M.D.M.); [email protected] (M.H.); Tel.: +1-515-294-7947 (M.D.M.) † These authors contributed equally to this work. Abstract: Soil-to-atmosphere methane (CH4) fluxes are dependent on opposing microbial processes of production and consumption. Here we use a soil–vegetation gradient in an Australian sub-alpine ecosystem to examine links between composition of soil microbial communities, and the fluxes of greenhouse gases they regulate. For each soil/vegetation type (forest, grassland, and bog), we Citation: McDaniel, M.D.; measured carbon dioxide (CO2) and CH4 fluxes and their production/consumption at 5 cm intervals −2 −1 Hernández, M.; Dumont, M.G.; to a depth of 30 cm.
    [Show full text]
  • Stolerov Arctic Meth
    Critical Review pubs.acs.org/est Review of Methane Mitigation Technologies with Application to Rapid Release of Methane from the Arctic Joshuah K. Stolaroff,* Subarna Bhattacharyya, Clara A. Smith, William L. Bourcier, Philip J. Cameron-Smith, and Roger D. Aines Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California, United States *S Supporting Information ABSTRACT: Methane is the most important greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide, with particular influence on near-term climate change. It poses increasing risk in the future from both direct anthropogenic sources and potential rapid release from the Arctic. A range of mitigation (emissions control) technologies have been developed for anthropogenic sources that can be developed for further application, including to Arctic sources. Significant gaps in understanding remain of the mechanisms, magnitude, and likelihood of rapid methane release from the Arctic. Methane may be released by several pathways, including lakes, wetlands, and oceans, and may be either uniform over large areas or concentrated in patches. Across Arctic sources, bubbles originating in the sediment are the most important mechanism for methane to reach the atmosphere. Most known technologies operate on confined gas streams of 0.1% methane or more, and may be applicable to limited Arctic sources where methane is concentrated in pockets. However, some mitigation strategies developed for rice paddies and agricultural soils are promising for Arctic wetlands and thawing permafrost. Other mitigation strategies specific to the Arctic have been proposed but have yet to be studied. Overall, we identify four avenues of research and development that can serve the dual purposes of addressing current methane sources and potential Arctic sources: (1) methane release detection and quantification, (2) mitigation units for small and remote methane streams, (3) mitigation methods for dilute (<1000 ppm) methane streams, and (4) understanding methanotroph and methanogen ecology.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Elevated Atmospheric CO2, Prolonged Summer Drought and Temperature Increase on N2O and CH4 Fluxes in a Temperate Heathland
    Downloaded from orbit.dtu.dk on: Sep 28, 2021 Effects of elevated atmospheric CO2, prolonged summer drought and temperature increase on N2O and CH4 fluxes in a temperate heathland Carter, Mette Sustmann; Ambus, Per; Albert, Kristian Rost; Larsen, Klaus Steenberg; Andersson, Michael; Priemé, Anders; van der Linden, Leon Gareth; Beier, Claus Published in: Soil Biology & Biochemistry Link to article, DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2011.04.003 Publication date: 2011 Link back to DTU Orbit Citation (APA): Carter, M. S., Ambus, P., Albert, K. R., Larsen, K. S., Andersson, M., Priemé, A., van der Linden, L. G., & Beier, C. (2011). Effects of elevated atmospheric CO2, prolonged summer drought and temperature increase on N2O and CH4 fluxes in a temperate heathland. Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 43(8), 1660-1670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2011.04.003 General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
    [Show full text]