Connecting Climate and Air Quality: The Contribution of Methane to Hemispheric Ozone Pollution Arlene M.
Download ReportTranscript Connecting Climate and Air Quality: The Contribution of Methane to Hemispheric Ozone Pollution Arlene M.
Connecting Climate and Air Quality: The Contribution of Methane to Hemispheric Ozone Pollution Arlene M. Fiore ([email protected]) Acknowledgments: Larry Horowitz, Chip Levy (NOAA/GFDL) Jason West, Vaishali Naik (Princeton University) Ellen Baum, Joe Chaisson (Clean Air Task Force) Frank Dentener, Kees Cuvelier (JRC, Italy) The TF HTAP Modeling Team Funding from Luce Foundation via Clean Air Task Force Center for Atmosphere Ocean Science, New York University March 28, 2007 The U.S. ozone smog problem is spatially widespread, affecting >100 million people Nonattainment Areas (2001-2003 data) 4th highest daily max 8-hr mean O3 > 84 ppbv U.S. EPA, 2006 Radiative forcing of climate (1750 to present): Important contributions from methane and ozone IPCC, 2007 Air quality-Climate Linkage: CH4, O3 are greenhouse gases CH4 contributes to background O3 in surface air Stratospheric O3 Stratosphere ~12 km hn O3 NO2 NO OH HO2 Free Troposphere Hemispheric Pollution Direct Intercontinental Transport Boundary layer (0-3 km) VOC, CH4, CO NOx VOC air pollution (smog) O3 air pollution (smog) CONTINENT 1 OCEAN NOx VOC CONTINENT 2 O3 A.M. Fiore IPCC [2001] scenarios project future growth Projections of future CH4 emissions (Tg CH4) to 2100 Change in 10-model mean surface O3 2100 SRES A2 - 2000 Attributed mainly to increases in methane and NOx [Prather et al., 2003] Rising background O3 has implications for attaining air quality standards Recent observational analyses suggest that surface O3 background is rising [e.g. Lin et al., 2000; Jaffe et al., 2003, 2005; Vingarzan, 2004; EMEP/CCC-Report 1/2005 ] Pre-industrial background 20 Europe seasonal 40 Current background WHO/Europe 8-hr average 60 U.S. 8-hr average 80 100 O3 (ppbv) Future background? A.M. Fiore Ozone abatement strategies evolve as our understanding of the ozone problem advances O3 smog recognized as an URBAN problem: Los Angeles, Haagen-Smit identifies chemical mechanism Smog as REGIONAL problem; role of NOx and biogenic VOCs recognized 1950s Abatement Strategy: NMVOCs A GLOBAL perspective: role of intercontinental transport, background Present 1980s + NOx + CH4?? “Methane (and CO) emission control is an effective way of simultaneously meeting air quality standards and abating global warming” --- EMEP/CCC-Report 1/2005 A.M. Fiore Radiative Forcing* (W m-2) Double dividend of Methane Controls: Decreased greenhouse warming and improved air quality Number of U.S. summer gridsquare days with O3 > 80 ppbv 50% 50% 50% 2030 2030 1995 50% 50% 50% 2030 2030 anth. anth. anth. A1 B1 (base) anth. anth.anth. A1 B1 VOC CH4 NOx VOC CH4 NOx GEOS-Chem Model (4°x5°) IPCC scenario Anthrop. NOx emissions (2030 vs. present) Global U.S. Methane emissions (2030 vs. present) A1 +80% -20% +30% B1 -5% -50% +12% CH4 links air quality & climate via background O3 Fiore et al., GRL, 2002 Impacts of O3 precursor reductions on U.S. summer afternoon surface O3 frequency distributions GEOS-Chem Model Simulations (4°x5°) NOx controls strongly decrease the highest O3 (regional pollution episodes) CH4 controls affect the entire O3 distribution similarly (background) Results add linearly when both methane and NOx are reduced Fiore et al., 2002; West & Fiore, ES&T, 2005 Methane trends and linkages with chemistry, climate, and ozone pollution 1) Climate and air quality benefits from CH4 controls Characterize the ozone response to CH4 control Incorporate methane controls into a future emission scenario 2) Recent methane trends (1990 to 2004) Are emission inventories consistent with observed CH4 trends? Role of changing sources vs. sinks? Research Tool: MOZART-2 Global Chemical Transport Model [Horowitz et al., 2003] NCEP, 1.9°x1.9°, 28 vertical levels Fully represent methane-OH relationship Test directly with observations 3D model structure A.M. Fiore More than half of global methane emissions are influenced by human activities ~300 Tg CH4 yr-1 Anthropogenic [EDGAR 3.2 Fast-Track 2000; Olivier et al., 2005] ~200 Tg CH4 yr-1 Biogenic sources [Wang et al., 2004] >25% uncertainty in total emissions Clathrates? Melting permafrost? PLANTS? BIOMASS BURNING + BIOFUEL ANIMALS 30 WETLANDS 90 180 60-240 Keppler et al., 2006 85 Sanderson et al., 2006 10-60 Kirschbaum et al., 2006 0-46 Ferretti et al., 2006 GLOBAL METHANE SOURCES (Tg CH4 yr-1) TERMITES RICE 40 20 LANDFILLS + WASTEWATER 50 GAS + OIL 60 COAL 30 A.M. Fiore Characterizing the methane-ozone relationship with idealized model simulations Reduce global anthropogenic CH emissions by 30% Surface Methane Tropospheric O34burden 0 0 -50 Surface Methane Abundance (ppb) -2 -100 -4 -150 -200 -6 -250 -8 -300 Tropospheric O3 Burden (Tg) -10 -350 -400 -12 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 Simulation Year Model approaches a new steady-state after 30 years of simulation Is the O3 response sensitive to the location of CH4 emission controls? A.M. Fiore Change in July surface O3 from 30% decrease in anthropogenic CH4 emissions Globally uniform emission reduction Percentage Difference: Asia – uniform Asia Emission reduction in Asia Enhanced effect in source region <10% other NH source regions < 5% rest of NH <1% most of SH Target cheapest controls worldwide A.M. Fiore Decrease in summertime U.S. surface ozone from 30% reductions in anthrop. CH4 emissions MAXIMUM DIFFERENCE (Composite max daily afternoon mean ozone JJA) NO ASIAN ANTH. CH4 Largest decreases in NOx-saturated regions A.M. Fiore Tropospheric O3 responds approximately linearly to anthropogenic CH4 emission changes across models MOZART-2 [West et al., PNAS 2006; this work] TM3 [Dentener et al., ACP, 2005] GISS [Shindell et al., GRL, 2005] X GEOS-CHEM [Fiore et al., GRL, 2002] IPCC TAR [Prather et al., 2001] Anthropogenic CH4 contributes ~50 Tg (~15%) to tropospheric O3 burden ~5 ppbv to global surface O3 A.M. Fiore Multi-model study shows similar surface ozone decreases over NH continents when global methane is reduced AN N U AL ME AN O ZO N E D E C R E AS E FR O M 20% AN N U AL M E AN S U R F AC E O ZO N E D E C R E AS E D U E T O D2 0E%CGRLEOAS LO TH AN E B ALEM IN E T HG AN E RBEAL D U CME T IO N 2 2 Full range of 12 individual models ppbv ppbv 1 .5 1.5 1 1 0 .5 0.5 0 0 EUROPE EU EU N. AMER. NA NA S.SASIA A Re c e p to r r e g io n SA E.EASIA A EA >1 ppbv O3 decrease over all NH receptor regions Consistent with prior studies TF HTAP 2007 Interim report draft available at www.htap.org A.M. Fiore How much methane can be reduced? O z o n e re d u c tio n (p p b ) C o s t-s a v in g 0.7 N o rth A m e ric a R e s t o f A nne x I (industrialized nations) re d u c tio n s R e s t o f W o rld 1.4 <$ 1 0 / to n C O 2 eq. 1.9 A ll id e n tifie d re d u c tio n s 10% of anth. emissions 00 20% of anth. emissions 20 40 60 80 1100 00 1120 20 20 40 60 80 -1 M e th a n e re d u c tio n ppotential o te n tia l (M to n CCH H 4 yryr)-1) Methane reduction (Mton 4 IEA [2003] for 5 industrial sectors Comparison: Clean Air Interstate Rule (proposed NOx control) reduces 0.86 ppb over the eastern US, at $0.88 billion yr-1 West & Fiore, ES&T, 2005 Will methane emissions increase in the future? Anthropogenic CH4 emissions (Tg yr-1) Dentener et al., ACP, 2005 A2 B2 MFR Current Legislation (CLE) Scenario PHOTOCOMP for IPCC AR-4 used CLE, MFR, A2 scenarios for all O3 precursors [Dentener et al., 2006ab; Stevenson et al., 2006; van Noije et al., 2006; Shindell et al., 2006] Our approach: use CLE as a baseline scenario & apply methane controls Emission Trajectories in Future Scenarios (2005 to 2030) Anthropogenic CH4 Emissions (Tg yr-1) Surface NOx Emissions 2030:2005 ratio CLE Baseline A B C 0.3 0.8 1.4 1.9 2.5 Control scenarios reduce 2030 CH4 emissions relative to CLE by: A) -75 Tg (18%) – cost-effective now B) -125 Tg (29%) – possible with current technologies C) -180 Tg (42%) – requires new technologies Additional 2030 simulation where CH4 = 700 ppbv (“zero-out anthrop. CH4”) A.M. Fiore Reducing tropospheric ozone via methane controls decreases radiative forcing (2030-2005) +0.16 Net Forcing (W m-2) +0.08 0.00 -0.08 -0.58 OZONE METHANE CLE A B C CH4=700 ppb Methane Control Scenario More aggressive CH4 control scenarios offset baseline CLE forcing A.M. Fiore Future air quality improvements from CH4 emission controls USA Percentage of grid-square days > 70 ppb Percentage of model grid-cell days where surface ozone > 70 ppbv CLE2005 CLE2030 A2030 B2030 C2030 CH4_700 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 DJF 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Controls on global CH4 reduce incidence of O3 > 70 ppbv USA MAM Europe JJA SON Cost-effective CLE2005 controls prevent CLE2030 increased A2030 occurrence of B2030 O3 > 70 ppbv in 2030 C2030 relative to 2005 CH4_700 Europe DJF MAM JJA SON 2030 European high-O3 events under CLE emissions scenario show stronger sensitivity to CH4 than in USA A.M. Fiore Summary: Connecting climate and air quality via O3 & CH4 O z o n e re d u c tio n (p p b ) N o rth A me ric a C o s t-s a v in g R e s t o f A nne x I re d u c tio n s R e s t o f W o rld • Independent of reduction location (but depends on NOx) Target cheapest controls worldwide <$ 1 0 / to n C O 2 eq. A ll id e n tifie d re d u c tio n s 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 -1 M e th a n e re d u c tio n p o te n tia l (M to n C H 4 yr ) Anthrop. CH4 emissions CLE A B C Tg yr-1 CLIMATE AND AIR QUALITY BENEFITS FROM CH4 CONTROL • Robust response over NH continents across models ~1 ppbv surface O3 for a 20% decrease in anthrop. CH4 • Complementary to NOx, NMVOC controls • Decreases hemispheric background O3 Opportunity for international air quality management How well do we understand recent trends in atmospheric methane? How will future changes in emissions interact with a changing climate? A.M. Fiore Observed trend in surface CH4 (ppb) 1990-2004 Global Mean CH4 (ppb) Hypotheses for leveling off discussed in the literature: 1790 1780 1. Approach to steady-state 1770 1760 NOAA GMD Network 1750 1740 1730 1720 2. Source Changes Anthropogenic Wetlands/plants (Biomass burning) 3. (Transport) 1710 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 Data from 42 GMD stations with 8-yr minimum record is area-weighted, after averaging in bands 60-90N, 30-60N, 0-30N, 0-30S, 30-90S 4. Sink (CH4+OH) Humidity Temperature OH precursor emissions overhead O3 columns Can the model capture the observed trend (and be used for attribution)? A.M. Fiore BASE simulation EDGAR 2.0 emissions held constant 1790 1780 Global Mean Surface Methane (ppb) OBSERVED MOZART-2 1770 1760 Mean Bias (ppb) Bias and correlation vs. observed surface CH4: 1990-2004 Overestimates interhemispheric gradient 1750 1740 1730 1720 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 Overestimates 1990-1997 but matches trend Captures flattening post1998 but underestimates abundance r2 1710 Correlates poorly at high N latitudes S Latitude N Biomass Burning Ruminants Estimates for changing methane sources in the 1990s Rice Biogenic Wastewater Inter-annually varying wetland emissions Biomass Burning Landfills 1990-1998 from Wang et al. [2004] Ruminants Energy (Tg CH4 yr-1); different distribution Rice Biogenic adjusted to maintain 270 constant total source Wastewater 260 Landfills 547 Energy 1995 500v3.2 2000 v3.2 250 Tg CH4 yr-1 240 Biogenic 2 3Biomass 0 Burning Ruminants 220 Rice 2 1Wastewater 0 Landfills 200 Energy 1990 1995 400 300 200 100 2000 2005 Apply climatological mean (224 Tg yr-1) post-1998 0 1990 v2.0 1990 v3.2 1995 v3.2 2000 v3.2 BASE ANTH EDGAR anthropogenic inventory ANTH + BIO A.M. Fiore Bias & Correlation vs. GMD CH4 observations: 1990-2004 Mean Bias (ppb) Global Mean Surface Methane (ppb) 1790 1780 1770 1760 1750 OBS BASE ANTH ANTH+BIO 1740 1730 1720 1710 1990 1995 2000 2005 ANTH+BIO simulation with timevarying EDGAR 3.2 + wetland emissions improves: Global mean surface conc. Interhemispheric gradient Correlation at high N latitudes Fiore et al., GRL, 2006 r2 S Latitude N How does meteorology influence methane abundances? Why does BASE run with constant emissions level off post-1998? Examine sink CH4 Lifetime (t) against Tropospheric OH t= [ CH 4 ] k [ OH ][ CH 4 ] t Temperature (88% of CH4 loss is below 500 hPa ) Humidity Photolysis Lightning NOx t = 0.17 yr = 1.6%) What drives the change in methane lifetime in the model? A.M. Fiore Small increases in temperature and OH shorten the methane lifetime against tropospheric OH tOH 0 .1 8 Deconstruct t (-0.17 years) from 1991-1995 to 2000-2004 into individual contributions by varying OH and temperature separately 0 .1 6 0 .1 4 0 .1 2 0 .1 0 .0 8 + 0 .0 6 = 0 .0 4 0 .0 2 Lightning NOx 3.4 Global Lightning NOx (TgN yr-1) 0 T(+0.3K) c lim T OH(+1.2%) c lim O H BASE BASE 3.2 LNOx (TgN/y) 3 2.8 An increase in lightning NOx drives the OH increase in the model 2.6 2.4 2.2 But lightning NOx is highly parameterized …how robust is this result? 2 1.8 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 Year 2000 2002 2004 A.M. Fiore Additional evidence for a global lightning NOx increase? Estimate lightning NOx changes using options available in the GFDL Atmospheric General Circulation Model: • Convection schemes (RAS vs. Donner-deep) • Meteorology (free-running vs. nudged to NCEP reanalysis) Lightning NOx NOx change, 1991-95 to 2000-04 Lightning change, 1991-95 to 2000-04 20% 20% Lightning NOx % change (91-95 to 00-04) RAS Donner MOZART 18% 18% More physically-based lightning NOx scheme [Petersen et al., 2005] 16% 16% Evidence from observations? 14% 14% MOZART-2 MOZART-2 10% 10% AM2 AM2 % change 12% 12% 8% 8% 6% 6% 4% 4% 2% 2% 0% 0% AM2-D AM2-D NCEP(nudged) free-running GCM Lightning NOx increase robust; magnitude depends on meteorology c/o L.W. Horowitz LIS/OTD Flash counts Magnetic field variations in the lower ELF range [e.g. Williams, 1992; Füllekrug and FraserSmith, 1997; Price, 2000] Negev Desert Station, Israel A.M. Fiore Summary: Connecting climate and air quality via O3 & CH4 O z o n e re d u c tio n (p p b ) N o rth A me ric a C o s t-s a v in g R e s t o f A nne x I re d u c tio n s R e s t o f W o rld CLIMATE AND AIR QUALITY BENEFITS FROM CH4 CONTROL • Independent of reduction location (but depends on NOx) Target cheapest controls worldwide <$ 1 0 / to n C O 2 eq. A ll id e n tifie d re d u c tio n s 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 -1 M e th a n e re d u c tio n p o te n tia l (M to n C H 4 yr ) Tg yr-1 Anthrop. CH4 emissions CLE A B • Robust response over NH continents across models ~1 ppbv surface O3 for a 20% decrease in anthrop. CH4 • Complementary to NOx, NMVOC controls • Decreases hemispheric background O3 Opportunity for international air quality management C Methane (ppb) 1790 1780 1770 1760 OBS BASE ANTH ANTH+BIO 1750 1740 1730 1720 1710 1990 0 .1 8 1995 2000 METHANE TRENDS FROM 1990 TO 2004 • Simulation with time-varying emissions and meteorology best captures observed CH4 distribution 2005 tOH 91-95 to 01-04 0 .1 6 • Model trend driven by increasing T, OH • Trends in global lightning activity? 0 .1 4 0 .1 2 0 .1 0 .0 8 0 .0 6 + 0 .0 4 0 .0 2 0 T c lim T Potential for climate feedbacks (on sources and sinks) = OH c lim O H BASE BASE A.M. Fiore