Chrome Extension
WeChat Mini Program
Use on ChatGLM

Monitoring ffCO2 emission hotspots using atmospheric 14CO2 measurements

Samuel Hammer, Christoph Rieß,Fabian Maier, Tobias Kneuer, Julian Della Coletta,Susanne Preunkert,Ute Karstens,Ingeborg Levin

crossref(2020)

Cited 0|Views3
No score
Abstract
<p>Reliable estimates of fossil fuel CO<sub>2</sub> (ffCO<sub>2</sub>) emissions from high-emission regions or urban areas are currently in demand from a wide range of players. On the one hand, cities and municipalities themselves are interested in an independent validation of their ffCO<sub>2</sub> emissions. On the other hand, there is an increased interest in atmospheric science to merge independent emission estimate methods over different scales [Pinty et al. 2019]. <sup>14</sup>CO<sub>2</sub> has become the gold standard when it comes to the experimental splitting of atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> concentration into its biogenic and fossil components [e.g. Levin et al. 2003; 2011 or Turnbull et al. 2009].</p><p>Here we report on the identification of ffCO<sub>2</sub> emitted from the Mannheim/Ludwigshafen metropolitan region in the upper Rhine valley, Germany. Quantification of the regional ffCO<sub>2</sub> component requires knowledge of the composition of the background air. Thus, the emission area has been sampled by an upwind and a downwind station. We will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using local background measurements conducted at a dedicated upwind station of the emission area and compare this realisation of background estimate to regional background estimates derived from measurements at classical remote background sites. All CO<sub>2</sub> and <sup>14</sup>CO<sub>2</sub> observations have been performed as part of the European RINGO project. Furthermore, we investigate the suitability of using the total-CO<sub>2</sub> difference between the two stations as a proxy for fossil fuel CO<sub>2</sub> and the seasonal applicability of such a surrogate tracer. Finally, the observations of the total-CO<sub>2</sub> surrogate tracer will be compared with the predictions from STILT forward model runs.</p><p>&#160;</p><p>Ref.:</p><p>Levin, I., B. Kromer, M. Schmidt and H. Sartorius, 2003. A novel approach for independent budgeting of fossil fuels CO2 over Europe by 14CO2 observations. Geophys. Res. Lett. 30(23), 2194, doi. 10.1029/2003GL018477.</p><p>Levin, I., S. Hammer, E. Eichelmann, F. Vogel, 2011. Verification of greenhouse gas emission reductions: The prospect of atmospheric monitoring in polluted areas. Philosophical Transactions A 369, 1906-1924, doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0249.</p><p>Pinty B., P. Ciais, D. Dee, H. Dolman, M. Dowell, R. Engelen, K. Holmlund, G. Janssens-Maenhout, Y. Meijer, P. Palmer, M. Scholze, H. Denier van der Gon, M. Heimann, O. Juvyns, A. Kentarchos and H. Zunker (2019) An Operational Anthropogenic CO&#8322; Emissions Monitoring & Verification Support Capacity &#8211; Needs and high level requirements for in situ measurements, doi: 10.2760/182790, European Commission Joint Research Centre, EUR 29817 EN</p><p>Turnbull, J., Rayner, P., Miller, J., Naegler, T., Ciais, P., & Cozic, A. (2009). On the use of 14CO2 as a tracer for fossil fuel CO2: Quantifying uncertainties using an atmospheric transport model. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 114(D22).</p>
More
Translated text
AI Read Science
Must-Reading Tree
Example
Generate MRT to find the research sequence of this paper
Chat Paper
Summary is being generated by the instructions you defined