Methane emissions in the United States, Canada, and Mexico: Evaluation of national methane emission inventories and sectoral trends by inverse analysis of in situ (GLOBALVIEWplus CH4 ObsPack) and satellite (GOSAT) atmospheric observations

Abstract. We quantify methane emissions and their 2010–2017 trends by sector in the contiguous United States (CONUS), Canada, and Mexico by inverse analysis of in situ (GLOBALVIEWplus CH4 ObsPack) and satellite (GOSAT) atmospheric methane observations. The inversion uses as prior estimate the national anthropogenic emission inventories for the three countries reported by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), and the Instituto Nacional de Ecologia y Cambio Climatico (INECC) in Mexico to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and thus serves as an evaluation of these inventories in terms of their magnitudes and trends. Emissions are optimized with a Gaussian mixture model (GMM) at 0.5° × 0.625° resolution and for individual years. Optimization is done analytically using log-normal error forms. This yields closed-form statistics of error estimates and information content on the posterior (optimized) estimates, allows better representation of the high tail of the emission distribution, and enables construction of a large ensemble of inverse solutions using different observations and assumptions. We find that GOSAT and in situ observations are largely consistent and complementary in the optimization of methane emissions for North America. Mean 2010–2017 anthropogenic emissions from our base GOSAT + in situ inversion, with ranges from the inversion ensemble, are 36.9 (32.5–37.8) Tg a−1 for CONUS, 5.3 (3.6–5.7) Tg a−1 for Canada, and 6.0 (4.7–6.1) Tg a−1 for Mexico. These are higher than the most recent reported national inventories of 26.0 Tg a−1 for the US (EPA), 4.0 Tg a−1 for Canada (ECCC), and 5.0 Tg a−1 for Mexico (INECC). The correction in all three countries is largely driven by a factor of 2 underestimate in emissions from the oil sector with major contributions from the south-central US, western Canada, and southeast Mexico. Total CONUS anthropogenic emissions in our inversion peak in 2014, in contrast to the EPA report of a steady decreasing trend over 2010–2017. This reflects combined effects of increases in emissions from the oil and landfill sectors, decrease from the gas, and flat emissions from the livestock and coal sectors. We find decreasing trends in Canadian and Mexican anthropogenic methane emissions over the 2010–2017 period, mainly driven by oil and gas emissions. Our best estimates of mean 2010–2017 wetland emissions are 8.4 (6.4–10.6) Tg a−1 for CONUS, 9.9 (7.8–12.0) Tg a−1 for Canada, and 0.6 (0.4–0.6) Tg a−1 for Mexico. Wetland emissions in CONUS show an increasing trend of 2.6 (1.7–3.8) % a−1 over 2010–2017 correlated with precipitation.

[1]  D. Jacob,et al.  A gridded inventory of Canada’s anthropogenic methane emissions , 2021, Environmental Research Letters.

[2]  Matthew R. Johnson,et al.  Where the Methane Is-Insights from Novel Airborne LiDAR Measurements Combined with Ground Survey Data. , 2021, Environmental science & technology.

[3]  J. Sheng,et al.  Unravelling a large methane emission discrepancy in Mexico using satellite observations , 2021, Remote Sensing of Environment.

[4]  Joseph W. Heckler,et al.  Intermittency of Large Methane Emitters in the Permian Basin , 2021 .

[5]  J. Maasakkers,et al.  Supplementary material to "Global distribution of methane emissions: a comparative inverse analysis of observations from the TROPOMI and GOSAT satellite instruments" , 2021, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[6]  J. Sheng,et al.  2010–2015 North American methane emissions, sectoral contributions, and trends: a high-resolution inversion of GOSAT observations of atmospheric methane , 2021 .

[7]  M. Omara,et al.  A tale of two regions: methane emissions from oil and gas production in offshore/onshore Mexico , 2021, Environmental Research Letters.

[8]  Dylan B. A. Jones,et al.  Estimating 2010–2015 Anthropogenic and Natural Methane Emissions in Canada using ECCC Surface and GOSAT Satellite Observations , 2021, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[9]  A. Bloom,et al.  Exploring constraints on a wetland methane emission ensemble (WetCHARTs) using GOSAT observations , 2020, Biogeosciences.

[10]  M. Ishizawa,et al.  Eight-Year Estimates of Methane Emissions from Oil and Gas Operations in Western Canada Are Nearly Twice Those Reported in Inventories. , 2020, Environmental science & technology.

[11]  M. Omara,et al.  New Mexico Permian Basin Measured Well Pad Methane Emissions Are a Factor of 5-9 Times Higher Than U.S. EPA Estimates. , 2020, Environmental science & technology.

[12]  J. Sheng,et al.  Attribution of the accelerating increase in atmospheric methane during 2010–2018 by inverse analysis of GOSAT observations , 2020, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[13]  J. Sheng,et al.  Global methane budget and trend, 2010–2017: complementarity of inverse analyses using in situ (GLOBALVIEWplus CH4 ObsPack) and satellite (GOSAT) observations , 2020, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[14]  E. Kort,et al.  Aircraft-based inversions quantify the importance of wetlands and livestock for Upper Midwest methane emissions , 2020, Atmospheric chemistry and physics.

[15]  Hartmut Boesch,et al.  A decade of GOSAT Proxy satellite CH4 observations , 2020, Earth System Science Data.

[16]  M. Omara,et al.  Quantifying methane emissions from the largest oil-producing basin in the United States from space , 2020, Science Advances.

[17]  J. Sheng,et al.  Global distribution of methane emissions, emission trends, and OH concentrations and trends inferred from an inversion of GOSAT satellite data for 2010–2015 , 2019, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[18]  C. Sweeney,et al.  Long‐Term Measurements Show Little Evidence for Large Increases in Total U.S. Methane Emissions Over the Past Decade , 2019, Geophysical Research Letters.

[19]  M. Barlaz,et al.  Evaluation of optimal model parameters for prediction of methane generation from selected U.S. landfills. , 2019, Waste management.

[20]  Ritesh Gautam,et al.  Satellite‐Observed Changes in Mexico's Offshore Gas Flaring Activity Linked to Oil/Gas Regulations , 2019, Geophysical Research Letters.

[21]  Hassan M. El-Houjeiri,et al.  Global carbon intensity of crude oil production , 2018, Science.

[22]  Daniel J. Jacob,et al.  Detecting high-emitting methane sources in oil/gas fields using satellite observations , 2018, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[23]  M. Omara,et al.  Assessment of methane emissions from the U.S. oil and gas supply chain , 2018, Science.

[24]  J. Sheng,et al.  Monitoring global tropospheric OH concentrations using satellite observations of atmospheric methane , 2018, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[25]  Shao-Meng Li,et al.  Quantification of methane sources in the Athabasca Oil Sands Region of Alberta by aircraft mass balance , 2017, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[26]  D. Risk,et al.  Mobile measurement of methane emissions from natural gas developments in northeastern British Columbia, Canada , 2017 .

[27]  Matthew R. Johnson,et al.  Comparisons of Airborne Measurements and Inventory Estimates of Methane Emissions in the Alberta Upstream Oil and Gas Sector. , 2017, Environmental science & technology.

[28]  J. Randerson,et al.  Global fire emissions estimates during 1997–2016 , 2017 .

[29]  Bin Zhao,et al.  The Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2). , 2017, Journal of climate.

[30]  Daniel J. Jacob,et al.  Modeling of Atmospheric Chemistry , 2017 .

[31]  D. Jacob,et al.  A global wetland methane emissions and uncertainty dataset for atmospheric chemical transport models (WetCHARTs version 1.0) , 2017 .

[32]  F. Murguia-Flores,et al.  Soil Methanotrophy Model (MeMo v1.0): a process-based model to quantify global uptake of atmospheric methane by soil , 2017, Geoscientific Model Development.

[33]  R. Dickerson,et al.  Methane emissions from the Marcellus Shale in southwestern Pennsylvania and northern West Virginia based on airborne measurements , 2017, Journal of geophysical research. Atmospheres : JGR.

[34]  D. Thompson,et al.  Airborne methane remote measurements reveal heavy-tail flux distribution in Four Corners region , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[35]  Thomas Kaminski,et al.  Global inverse modeling of CH4 sources and sinks: An overview of methods , 2016 .

[36]  V. Brovkin,et al.  The Global Methane Budget 2000–2017 , 2016, Earth System Science Data.

[37]  Henry Buijs,et al.  Update on GOSAT TANSO-FTS performance, operations, and data products after more than 6 years in space , 2016 .

[38]  Anthony J. Marchese,et al.  Reconciling divergent estimates of oil and gas methane emissions , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[39]  Anthony J. Marchese,et al.  Constructing a Spatially Resolved Methane Emission Inventory for the Barnett Shale Region. , 2015, Environmental science & technology.

[40]  Gabrielle Pétron,et al.  Aircraft-Based Estimate of Total Methane Emissions from the Barnett Shale Region. , 2015, Environmental science & technology.

[41]  Daniel J. Jacob,et al.  Balancing aggregation and smoothing errors in inverse models , 2015 .

[42]  Hartmut Boesch,et al.  Estimating global and North American methane emissions with high spatial resolution using GOSAT satellite data , 2015 .

[43]  Jeff Peischl,et al.  Quantifying atmospheric methane emissions from the Haynesville, Fayetteville, and northeastern Marcellus shale gas production regions , 2015 .

[44]  J. Koomey,et al.  Know Your Oil: Creating a Global Oil-Climate Index , 2015 .

[45]  John S. Kimball,et al.  Surface water inundation in the boreal-Arctic: potential impacts on regional methane emissions , 2014 .

[46]  Zhe Jiang,et al.  Mapping of North American methane emissions with high spatial resolution by inversion of SCIAMACHY satellite data , 2014 .

[47]  Scot M. Miller,et al.  Anthropogenic emissions of methane in the United States , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[48]  Peter Bergamaschi,et al.  Three decades of global methane sources and sinks , 2013 .

[49]  Scot M. Miller,et al.  Atmospheric inverse modeling with known physical bounds: an example from trace gas emissions , 2013 .

[50]  Xiaoming Wang,et al.  Using observed data to improve estimated methane collection from select U.S. landfills. , 2013, Environmental science & technology.

[51]  Y. Calisesi,et al.  Regridding of remote soundings: Formulation and application to ozone profile comparison , 2005 .

[52]  John C. Gille,et al.  Comparative inverse analysis of satellite (MOPITT) and aircraft (TRACE-P) observations to estimate Asian sources of carbon monoxide , 2004 .

[53]  Clive D Rodgers,et al.  Inverse Methods for Atmospheric Sounding: Theory and Practice , 2000 .

[54]  J. Sheng,et al.  2010-2016 methane trends over Canada, the United States, and Mexico observed by the GOSAT satellite: contributions from different source sectors , 2017 .

[55]  Liu Xinwu.  This is How the Discussion Started , 1981 .