the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Towards near-real time air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions: lessons learned from multiple estimates during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Abstract. The 2020 COVID-19 crisis caused an unprecedented drop in anthropogenic emissions of air pollutants and greenhouse gases. Given that emissions estimates from official national inventories for the year 2020 were not reported until two years later, new and non-traditional datasets to estimate near-real time emissions became particularly relevant and widely used in international monitoring and modelling activities during the pandemic. This study investigates the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on 2020 European (the 27 EU Member States and the UK) emissions by comparing a selection of such near-real time emission estimates, with the official inventories that were subsequently reported in 2022 under the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP) and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Results indicate that annual changes in total 2020 emissions reported by official and near-real time estimates are fairly in line for most of the chemical species, with NOx and fossil fuel CO2 being reported as the ones that experienced the largest reduction in Europe in all cases. However, large discrepancies arise between the official and non-official datasets when comparing annual results at the sector and country level, indicating that caution should be exercised when estimating changes in emissions using specific near-real time activity datasets, such as time mobility data derived from smartphones. Main examples of these differences are observed for manufacturing industry NOx (relative changes ranging between -21.4 % and -5.4 %) and road transport CO2 (relative changes ranging between -29.3 % and 5.6 %) total European emissions. Additionally, significant discrepancies are observed between the quarterly and monthly distribution of emissions drops reported by the various near-real time inventories, with differences up to a factor of 1.5 for total NOx during April 2020, when restrictions were at their maximum. For residential combustion, shipping and public energy industry, results indicate that changes in emissions that occurred between 2019 and 2020 were mainly dominated by non-COVID-19 factors including meteorology, the implementation of the Global Sulphur Cap and the shutdown of coal-fired power plants as part of national decarbonization efforts, respectively. The potential increase in NMVOC emissions from the intensive use of personal protective equipment such as hand sanitizer gels is considered in a heterogeneous way across countries in official reported inventories, indicating the need for some countries to base their calculations on more advanced methods. The findings of this study can be used to better understand the uncertainties of near-real time emissions and how such emissions could be used in the future to provide timely updates to emission datasets that are critical for modelling and monitoring applications.
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(3687 KB)
-
Supplement
(325 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(3687 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(325 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-186', Anonymous Referee #1, 21 Apr 2023
Review of the article “Towards near-real time air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions: lessons learned from multiple estimates during the COVID-19 Pandemic” by M. Guevara et al.
This is an interesting piece of work comparing European emission inventories for the year 2020 and how they reflect the impact of the emission reductions caused by lockdown measures taken to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 virus. The idea behind the analysis is that lessons can be learned about the construction of near-real-time emission inventories that will be able to reflect large unexpected short term changes in emissions. This is a very valuable exercise and the conclusions that the authors draw are worth to be published and brought to a wider audience.
I recommend publication of this work after few smaller modifications.
Detailed comments:
Line 32: between -29.3 and -5.6 %
Line 73: give examples which countries reported quarterly and monthly emission estimates.
Line 151 -154: reformulate this sentence. It can be read as if you use shipping mobility statistics for aviation emission. It remains also unclear what exactly shipping mobility statistics is and where the data can be found.
Table 2: For Forster et al the emission changes in aviation and shipping are given to be based on a previous publication by Le Quéré et al. Could you say how they derived their adjustment factors for these sectors?
Line 189 – 191: It would be nice if you could say more about the differences for the shipping sector. If some authors report only global changes, this means that they apply the same reductions in Europe and you should be able to compare those to the factors calculated with the STEAM model.
Figure 1: Would be good to include GNFR sector names in addition to the letters, similar to Tables 3 and 4.
Line 262: omit one “slightly”
Line 373 – 385, section 3.1.6 Road transport: CO2 from road transport is shown in Figure 5d, however, this sub-figure is never mentioned in the text, and its contents is only touched upon. You might write a bit more about Figure 5d and also make clearer when you talk about NOx and when about CO2.
Line 415: Figure 3a and 3b don’t fit together into one. They show very different things and are mentioned at very different places in the text.
Line 589/590: how difficult it is
References:
give last access date for Kinsey (2020)
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-186-RC1 -
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-186', Anonymous Referee #2, 22 Apr 2023
The paper "Towards near-real time air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions: lessons learned from multiple estimates during the COVID-19 Pandemic" by Guevara et al. provides a very useful comparison of several "real time" estimates and official inventory data.
The paper is well written and provides a very useful and informative analysis. I have only two comments.
One minor point that should be added is that the official inventory estimates for 2020 are also approximations of actual emissions. There are two components of this. Of course all inventories may contain errors. However, more relevant for this comparison, is that inventory estimates for the last year published often change in subsequent revisions as underlying data (such as energy statistics) and other information is updated or revised. I suspect this won't impact the comparisons for the most part, but occasionally (for some country/sector combinations) this might have a signifiant impact.
The collection of these various inventory data took some signifiant work and, while all the data are publicly available, it would be laborious for someone to replicate the work done by the authors. The authors should, as a supplmental data file, supply the following information: annual emissions and/or adjustment factors (as appropriate) by country/sector/year, and the same data by month (where available). This would make the analysis in this paper more readily useful to the community since the comparisons could then easily be extract for any country/sector of interest for use in subsequent analysis.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-186-RC2 -
AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-186', Marc Guevara, 30 May 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-186/egusphere-2023-186-AC1-supplement.pdf
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-186', Anonymous Referee #1, 21 Apr 2023
Review of the article “Towards near-real time air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions: lessons learned from multiple estimates during the COVID-19 Pandemic” by M. Guevara et al.
This is an interesting piece of work comparing European emission inventories for the year 2020 and how they reflect the impact of the emission reductions caused by lockdown measures taken to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 virus. The idea behind the analysis is that lessons can be learned about the construction of near-real-time emission inventories that will be able to reflect large unexpected short term changes in emissions. This is a very valuable exercise and the conclusions that the authors draw are worth to be published and brought to a wider audience.
I recommend publication of this work after few smaller modifications.
Detailed comments:
Line 32: between -29.3 and -5.6 %
Line 73: give examples which countries reported quarterly and monthly emission estimates.
Line 151 -154: reformulate this sentence. It can be read as if you use shipping mobility statistics for aviation emission. It remains also unclear what exactly shipping mobility statistics is and where the data can be found.
Table 2: For Forster et al the emission changes in aviation and shipping are given to be based on a previous publication by Le Quéré et al. Could you say how they derived their adjustment factors for these sectors?
Line 189 – 191: It would be nice if you could say more about the differences for the shipping sector. If some authors report only global changes, this means that they apply the same reductions in Europe and you should be able to compare those to the factors calculated with the STEAM model.
Figure 1: Would be good to include GNFR sector names in addition to the letters, similar to Tables 3 and 4.
Line 262: omit one “slightly”
Line 373 – 385, section 3.1.6 Road transport: CO2 from road transport is shown in Figure 5d, however, this sub-figure is never mentioned in the text, and its contents is only touched upon. You might write a bit more about Figure 5d and also make clearer when you talk about NOx and when about CO2.
Line 415: Figure 3a and 3b don’t fit together into one. They show very different things and are mentioned at very different places in the text.
Line 589/590: how difficult it is
References:
give last access date for Kinsey (2020)
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-186-RC1 -
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-186', Anonymous Referee #2, 22 Apr 2023
The paper "Towards near-real time air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions: lessons learned from multiple estimates during the COVID-19 Pandemic" by Guevara et al. provides a very useful comparison of several "real time" estimates and official inventory data.
The paper is well written and provides a very useful and informative analysis. I have only two comments.
One minor point that should be added is that the official inventory estimates for 2020 are also approximations of actual emissions. There are two components of this. Of course all inventories may contain errors. However, more relevant for this comparison, is that inventory estimates for the last year published often change in subsequent revisions as underlying data (such as energy statistics) and other information is updated or revised. I suspect this won't impact the comparisons for the most part, but occasionally (for some country/sector combinations) this might have a signifiant impact.
The collection of these various inventory data took some signifiant work and, while all the data are publicly available, it would be laborious for someone to replicate the work done by the authors. The authors should, as a supplmental data file, supply the following information: annual emissions and/or adjustment factors (as appropriate) by country/sector/year, and the same data by month (where available). This would make the analysis in this paper more readily useful to the community since the comparisons could then easily be extract for any country/sector of interest for use in subsequent analysis.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-186-RC2 -
AC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-186', Marc Guevara, 30 May 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-186/egusphere-2023-186-AC1-supplement.pdf
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
423 | 151 | 18 | 592 | 40 | 9 | 13 |
- HTML: 423
- PDF: 151
- XML: 18
- Total: 592
- Supplement: 40
- BibTeX: 9
- EndNote: 13
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1
Hervé Petetin
Oriol Jorba
Hugo Denier van der Gon
Jeroen Kuenen
Ingrid Super
Claire Granier
Thierno Doumbia
Philippe Ciais
Robin D. Lamboll
Sabine Schindlbacher
Bradley Matthews
Carlos Pérez García-Pando
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(3687 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(325 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper