Novel method to locate and quantify point-source methane emissions using time series of ground-based column observations
Abstract. Identifying and quantifying local methane emitters remains a major challenge for atmospheric monitoring. We present a novel top-down method to estimate both the upwind location and emission strength of an unknown atmospheric source from a time series of concentration observations. The approach employs backward trajectories from a Lagrangian Particle Dispersion Model (LPDM) to derive a characteristic transfer function for each potential source region. The transfer function that best reproduces the observed enhancement identifies the most likely source location. In a second step, the emission strength is inferred from the particle ensemble and its corresponding surface footprint.
The method was developed and tested using data from a six-week measurement campaign in the San Francisco Bay Area, where six EM27/SUN near-infrared Fourier transform spectrometers were operated as part of a collaborative effort to quantify greenhouse gas emissions. At the UC Berkeley site, one instrument recorded a strictly periodic methane enhancement of approximately 10 ppb occurring every 12 minutes. Since co-emitted species showed no correlation with this pattern, the signal was attributed to a single, point-like, puff-emitting methane source.
Favourable meteorological conditions enabled the analysis of several enhancement peaks. The retrieved average emission strength during the emission episodes was 0.8–78 g CH4 s-1 (equivalent to 2.1–190 metric tons yr-1). Although the exact source could not be identified in the field, the emission characteristics are consistent with periodic natural-gas venting from a heating system with an installed power output of approximately 500–1000 kW installed power. The study demonstrates the potential of this approach for detecting and characterising local methane emitters from ground-based remote-sensing observations.
General Comments:
This manuscript by Klappenbach et al. uses a top-down approach to quantify the emission strength and upwind location of an unknown atmospheric source from a time series of concentration observations. They use a Lagrangian Particle Dispersion Model. Data from six Fourier transform spectrometers (EM27/SUN) from a six-week long campaign in the San Francisco Bay Area were used to develop and test the method. An EM27/SUN at UC Berkeley recorded periodic methane enhancements, attributing the signal to a single point-like, puff-emitting methane source. The study shows how this approach can be used to detect and characterize local methane emitters from ground-based remote-sensing observations.
This manuscript is well-written and adequately supported by figures. This manuscript may be relevant for publication after addressing the changes suggested below. The analysis uses an older PROFFAST subversion (v2.2). The authors must consider updating the analysis to the latest PROFFAST v2.4.1 subversion.
The data availability is currently listed as “can be provided upon request.” This may not guarantee a timeline for when the data can be made available to the reader who requested them. For complete transparency, I would strongly recommend the data used in the analysis to be made publicly available either in its original format or as a subset that can be used to remake the figures or reproduce the analysis by the reader, should they choose to do so.
Specific Comments:
L19: Please capitalize G,W, and P, if capitalizing in the acronym.
L24: Please add citations/references.
L30: Here and in other places, is the order of the citations alphabetical or chronological?
L30: Please change “by” to “using”.
L33: Just citing the previously published works without listing them as "e.g." should also be fine.
L63: Please expand on this explanation further.
L75: Isn't PROFFAST v2.4.1 the latest version? Can the analysis be updated to this PROFFAST version?
L89: Please change “encapsulates” to “represents”.
Figure 2: Can a different color palette be used? It appears that different altitudes are being represented by the same/very similar colors (e.g., brown).
L118: Please remove “,” after “thickness” and put “we use 10 m” within parentheses.
Figure 3: Can a color besides green, such as red or pink be used here? The green and black lines appear to blend into each other.
L168: “This uncertainty can significantly increase….” - Please explain how.
L200: “Nevertheless, uncertainties remain substantial, mainly due to wind-field errors and observational noise. “ - Please be quantitative.
L205: “… a high uncertainty” – Of what value?
L207: “…method tends to overestimate” – By how much?
Figure 6: Could a different color palette be used with the circle edge colors being something bright? The current color scheme blends into the background image. Please add a colormap. Please change the color of the purple and white site markers to something bright to distinguish from the background and marker colors.
L215: Please ensure that the codes are available at the time of publication.
Data Availability: Please ensure that the data are publicly available so the reader can recreate the figures, if needed. The authors must consider either sharing the data in their original format, or a subset that can be used by the reader to recreate the figures, with the data being publicly available.
L228: Please remove “is”. It occurs twice.
L229: Please change to “trajectories discussed in Lin et al. (2003).”
L244: Given “an” observed …
L245: Please put” rmax” within parentheses.
Please move the Author contributions, Competing interests, and Acknowledgements after Figure G6. These seem to appear between different figures. The Acknowledgements seem to have been split in the footers of pages 20 and 21. Please correct this.