Cargando…
Reconciling Assumptions in Bottom‐Up and Top‐Down Approaches for Estimating Aerosol Emission Rates From Wildland Fires Using Observations From FIREX‐AQ
Accurate fire emissions inventories are crucial to predict the impacts of wildland fires on air quality and atmospheric composition. Two traditional approaches are widely used to calculate fire emissions: a satellite‐based top‐down approach and a fuels‐based bottom‐up approach. However, these method...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9286562/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35865864 http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2021JD035692 |
_version_ | 1784748040714715136 |
---|---|
author | Wiggins, E. B. Anderson, B. E. Brown, M. D. Campuzano‐Jost, P. Chen, G. Crawford, J. Crosbie, E. C. Dibb, J. DiGangi, J. P. Diskin, G. S. Fenn, M. Gallo, F. Gargulinski, E. M. Guo, H. Hair, J. W. Halliday, H. S. Ichoku, C. Jimenez, J. L. Jordan, C. E. Katich, J. M. Nowak, J. B. Perring, A. E. Robinson, C. E. Sanchez, K. J. Schueneman, M. Schwarz, J. P. Shingler, T. J. Shook, M. A. Soja, A. J. Stockwell, C. E. Thornhill, K. L. Travis, K. R. Warneke, C. Winstead, E. L. Ziemba, L. D. Moore, R. H. |
author_facet | Wiggins, E. B. Anderson, B. E. Brown, M. D. Campuzano‐Jost, P. Chen, G. Crawford, J. Crosbie, E. C. Dibb, J. DiGangi, J. P. Diskin, G. S. Fenn, M. Gallo, F. Gargulinski, E. M. Guo, H. Hair, J. W. Halliday, H. S. Ichoku, C. Jimenez, J. L. Jordan, C. E. Katich, J. M. Nowak, J. B. Perring, A. E. Robinson, C. E. Sanchez, K. J. Schueneman, M. Schwarz, J. P. Shingler, T. J. Shook, M. A. Soja, A. J. Stockwell, C. E. Thornhill, K. L. Travis, K. R. Warneke, C. Winstead, E. L. Ziemba, L. D. Moore, R. H. |
author_sort | Wiggins, E. B. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Accurate fire emissions inventories are crucial to predict the impacts of wildland fires on air quality and atmospheric composition. Two traditional approaches are widely used to calculate fire emissions: a satellite‐based top‐down approach and a fuels‐based bottom‐up approach. However, these methods often considerably disagree on the amount of particulate mass emitted from fires. Previously available observational datasets tended to be sparse, and lacked the statistics needed to resolve these methodological discrepancies. Here, we leverage the extensive and comprehensive airborne in situ and remote sensing measurements of smoke plumes from the recent Fire Influence on Regional to Global Environments and Air Quality (FIREX‐AQ) campaign to statistically assess the skill of the two traditional approaches. We use detailed campaign observations to calculate and compare emission rates at an exceptionally high‐resolution using three separate approaches: top‐down, bottom‐up, and a novel approach based entirely on integrated airborne in situ measurements. We then compute the daily average of these high‐resolution estimates and compare with estimates from lower resolution, global top‐down and bottom‐up inventories. We uncover strong, linear relationships between all of the high‐resolution emission rate estimates in aggregate, however no single approach is capable of capturing the emission characteristics of every fire. Global inventory emission rate estimates exhibited weaker correlations with the high‐resolution approaches and displayed evidence of systematic bias. The disparity between the low‐resolution global inventories and the high‐resolution approaches is likely caused by high levels of uncertainty in essential variables used in bottom‐up inventories and imperfect assumptions in top‐down inventories. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9286562 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92865622022-07-19 Reconciling Assumptions in Bottom‐Up and Top‐Down Approaches for Estimating Aerosol Emission Rates From Wildland Fires Using Observations From FIREX‐AQ Wiggins, E. B. Anderson, B. E. Brown, M. D. Campuzano‐Jost, P. Chen, G. Crawford, J. Crosbie, E. C. Dibb, J. DiGangi, J. P. Diskin, G. S. Fenn, M. Gallo, F. Gargulinski, E. M. Guo, H. Hair, J. W. Halliday, H. S. Ichoku, C. Jimenez, J. L. Jordan, C. E. Katich, J. M. Nowak, J. B. Perring, A. E. Robinson, C. E. Sanchez, K. J. Schueneman, M. Schwarz, J. P. Shingler, T. J. Shook, M. A. Soja, A. J. Stockwell, C. E. Thornhill, K. L. Travis, K. R. Warneke, C. Winstead, E. L. Ziemba, L. D. Moore, R. H. J Geophys Res Atmos Research Article Accurate fire emissions inventories are crucial to predict the impacts of wildland fires on air quality and atmospheric composition. Two traditional approaches are widely used to calculate fire emissions: a satellite‐based top‐down approach and a fuels‐based bottom‐up approach. However, these methods often considerably disagree on the amount of particulate mass emitted from fires. Previously available observational datasets tended to be sparse, and lacked the statistics needed to resolve these methodological discrepancies. Here, we leverage the extensive and comprehensive airborne in situ and remote sensing measurements of smoke plumes from the recent Fire Influence on Regional to Global Environments and Air Quality (FIREX‐AQ) campaign to statistically assess the skill of the two traditional approaches. We use detailed campaign observations to calculate and compare emission rates at an exceptionally high‐resolution using three separate approaches: top‐down, bottom‐up, and a novel approach based entirely on integrated airborne in situ measurements. We then compute the daily average of these high‐resolution estimates and compare with estimates from lower resolution, global top‐down and bottom‐up inventories. We uncover strong, linear relationships between all of the high‐resolution emission rate estimates in aggregate, however no single approach is capable of capturing the emission characteristics of every fire. Global inventory emission rate estimates exhibited weaker correlations with the high‐resolution approaches and displayed evidence of systematic bias. The disparity between the low‐resolution global inventories and the high‐resolution approaches is likely caused by high levels of uncertainty in essential variables used in bottom‐up inventories and imperfect assumptions in top‐down inventories. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-12-10 2021-12-27 /pmc/articles/PMC9286562/ /pubmed/35865864 http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2021JD035692 Text en © 2021. The Authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Wiggins, E. B. Anderson, B. E. Brown, M. D. Campuzano‐Jost, P. Chen, G. Crawford, J. Crosbie, E. C. Dibb, J. DiGangi, J. P. Diskin, G. S. Fenn, M. Gallo, F. Gargulinski, E. M. Guo, H. Hair, J. W. Halliday, H. S. Ichoku, C. Jimenez, J. L. Jordan, C. E. Katich, J. M. Nowak, J. B. Perring, A. E. Robinson, C. E. Sanchez, K. J. Schueneman, M. Schwarz, J. P. Shingler, T. J. Shook, M. A. Soja, A. J. Stockwell, C. E. Thornhill, K. L. Travis, K. R. Warneke, C. Winstead, E. L. Ziemba, L. D. Moore, R. H. Reconciling Assumptions in Bottom‐Up and Top‐Down Approaches for Estimating Aerosol Emission Rates From Wildland Fires Using Observations From FIREX‐AQ |
title | Reconciling Assumptions in Bottom‐Up and Top‐Down Approaches for Estimating Aerosol Emission Rates From Wildland Fires Using Observations From FIREX‐AQ |
title_full | Reconciling Assumptions in Bottom‐Up and Top‐Down Approaches for Estimating Aerosol Emission Rates From Wildland Fires Using Observations From FIREX‐AQ |
title_fullStr | Reconciling Assumptions in Bottom‐Up and Top‐Down Approaches for Estimating Aerosol Emission Rates From Wildland Fires Using Observations From FIREX‐AQ |
title_full_unstemmed | Reconciling Assumptions in Bottom‐Up and Top‐Down Approaches for Estimating Aerosol Emission Rates From Wildland Fires Using Observations From FIREX‐AQ |
title_short | Reconciling Assumptions in Bottom‐Up and Top‐Down Approaches for Estimating Aerosol Emission Rates From Wildland Fires Using Observations From FIREX‐AQ |
title_sort | reconciling assumptions in bottom‐up and top‐down approaches for estimating aerosol emission rates from wildland fires using observations from firex‐aq |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9286562/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35865864 http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2021JD035692 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wigginseb reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT andersonbe reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT brownmd reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT campuzanojostp reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT cheng reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT crawfordj reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT crosbieec reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT dibbj reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT digangijp reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT diskings reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT fennm reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT gallof reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT gargulinskiem reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT guoh reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT hairjw reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT hallidayhs reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT ichokuc reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT jimenezjl reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT jordance reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT katichjm reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT nowakjb reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT perringae reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT robinsonce reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT sanchezkj reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT schuenemanm reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT schwarzjp reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT shinglertj reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT shookma reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT sojaaj reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT stockwellce reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT thornhillkl reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT traviskr reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT warnekec reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT winsteadel reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT ziembald reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq AT moorerh reconcilingassumptionsinbottomupandtopdownapproachesforestimatingaerosolemissionratesfromwildlandfiresusingobservationsfromfirexaq |