Giuseppe Etiope

Bio: Giuseppe Etiope is an academic researcher from National Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology. The author has contributed to research in topics: Methane & Mud volcano. The author has an hindex of 51, co-authored 201 publications receiving 10804 citations. Previous affiliations of Giuseppe Etiope include Sapienza University of Rome & IFREMER.

GEMS: Underwater spectrometer for long-term radioactivity measurements

Abstract: GEMS (Gamma Energy Marine Spectrometer) is a prototype of an autonomous radioactivity sensor for underwater measurements, developed in the framework for a development of a submarine telescope for neutrino detection (KM3NeT Design Study Project). The spectrometer is highly sensitive to gamma rays produced by 40 K decays but it can detect other natural (e.g., 238 U, 232 Th) and anthropogenic radio-nuclides (e.g., 137 Cs). GEMS was firstly tested and calibrated in the laboratory using known sources and it was successfully deployed for a long-term (6 months) monitoring at a depth of 3200 m in the Ionian Sea (Capo Passero, offshore Eastern Sicily). The instrument recorded data for the whole deployment period within the expected specifications. This monitoring provided, for the first time, a continuous time-series of radioactivity in deep-sea.

The global methane budget 2000–2017

Abstract: Understanding and quantifying the global methane (CH4) budget is important for assessing realistic pathways to mitigate climate change. Atmospheric emissions and concentrations of CH4 continue to increase, making CH4 the second most important human-influenced greenhouse gas in terms of climate forcing, after carbon dioxide (CO2). The relative importance of CH4 compared to CO2 depends on its shorter atmospheric lifetime, stronger warming potential, and variations in atmospheric growth rate over the past decade, the causes of which are still debated. Two major challenges in reducing uncertainties in the atmospheric growth rate arise from the variety of geographically overlapping CH4 sources and from the destruction of CH4 by short-lived hydroxyl radicals (OH). To address these challenges, we have established a consortium of multidisciplinary scientists under the umbrella of the Global Carbon Project to synthesize and stimulate new research aimed at improving and regularly updating the global methane budget. Following Saunois et al. (2016), we present here the second version of the living review paper dedicated to the decadal methane budget, integrating results of top-down studies (atmospheric observations within an atmospheric inverse-modelling framework) and bottom-up estimates (including process-based models for estimating land surface emissions and atmospheric chemistry, inventories of anthropogenic emissions, and data-driven extrapolations). For the 2008–2017 decade, global methane emissions are estimated by atmospheric inversions (a top-down approach) to be 576 Tg CH4 yr−1 (range 550–594, corresponding to the minimum and maximum estimates of the model ensemble). Of this total, 359 Tg CH4 yr−1 or ∼ 60 % is attributed to anthropogenic sources, that is emissions caused by direct human activity (i.e. anthropogenic emissions; range 336–376 Tg CH4 yr−1 or 50 %–65 %). The mean annual total emission for the new decade (2008–2017) is 29 Tg CH4 yr−1 larger than our estimate for the previous decade (2000–2009), and 24 Tg CH4 yr−1 larger than the one reported in the previous budget for 2003–2012 (Saunois et al., 2016). Since 2012, global CH4 emissions have been tracking the warmest scenarios assessed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Bottom-up methods suggest almost 30 % larger global emissions (737 Tg CH4 yr−1, range 594–881) than top-down inversion methods. Indeed, bottom-up estimates for natural sources such as natural wetlands, other inland water systems, and geological sources are higher than top-down estimates. The atmospheric constraints on the top-down budget suggest that at least some of these bottom-up emissions are overestimated. The latitudinal distribution of atmospheric observation-based emissions indicates a predominance of tropical emissions (∼ 65 % of the global budget, < 30∘ N) compared to mid-latitudes (∼ 30 %, 30–60∘ N) and high northern latitudes (∼ 4 %, 60–90∘ N). The most important source of uncertainty in the methane budget is attributable to natural emissions, especially those from wetlands and other inland waters. Some of our global source estimates are smaller than those in previously published budgets (Saunois et al., 2016; Kirschke et al., 2013). In particular wetland emissions are about 35 Tg CH4 yr−1 lower due to improved partition wetlands and other inland waters. Emissions from geological sources and wild animals are also found to be smaller by 7 Tg CH4 yr−1 by 8 Tg CH4 yr−1, respectively. However, the overall discrepancy between bottom-up and top-down estimates has been reduced by only 5 % compared to Saunois et al. (2016), due to a higher estimate of emissions from inland waters, highlighting the need for more detailed research on emissions factors. Priorities for improving the methane budget include (i) a global, high-resolution map of water-saturated soils and inundated areas emitting methane based on a robust classification of different types of emitting habitats; (ii) further development of process-based models for inland-water emissions; (iii) intensification of methane observations at local scales (e.g., FLUXNET-CH4 measurements) and urban-scale monitoring to constrain bottom-up land surface models, and at regional scales (surface networks and satellites) to constrain atmospheric inversions; (iv) improvements of transport models and the representation of photochemical sinks in top-down inversions; and (v) development of a 3D variational inversion system using isotopic and/or co-emitted species such as ethane to improve source partitioning.

The global methane budget 2000–2012

Abstract: . The global methane (CH4) budget is becoming an increasingly important component for managing realistic pathways to mitigate climate change. This relevance, due to a shorter atmospheric lifetime and a stronger warming potential than carbon dioxide, is challenged by the still unexplained changes of atmospheric CH4 over the past decade. Emissions and concentrations of CH4 are continuing to increase, making CH4 the second most important human-induced greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide. Two major difficulties in reducing uncertainties come from the large variety of diffusive CH4 sources that overlap geographically, and from the destruction of CH4 by the very short-lived hydroxyl radical (OH). To address these difficulties, we have established a consortium of multi-disciplinary scientists under the umbrella of the Global Carbon Project to synthesize and stimulate research on the methane cycle, and producing regular (∼ biennial) updates of the global methane budget. This consortium includes atmospheric physicists and chemists, biogeochemists of surface and marine emissions, and socio-economists who study anthropogenic emissions. Following Kirschke et al. (2013), we propose here the first version of a living review paper that integrates results of top-down studies (exploiting atmospheric observations within an atmospheric inverse-modelling framework) and bottom-up models, inventories and data-driven approaches (including process-based models for estimating land surface emissions and atmospheric chemistry, and inventories for anthropogenic emissions, data-driven extrapolations). For the 2003–2012 decade, global methane emissions are estimated by top-down inversions at 558 Tg CH4 yr−1, range 540–568. About 60 % of global emissions are anthropogenic (range 50–65 %). Since 2010, the bottom-up global emission inventories have been closer to methane emissions in the most carbon-intensive Representative Concentrations Pathway (RCP8.5) and higher than all other RCP scenarios. Bottom-up approaches suggest larger global emissions (736 Tg CH4 yr−1, range 596–884) mostly because of larger natural emissions from individual sources such as inland waters, natural wetlands and geological sources. Considering the atmospheric constraints on the top-down budget, it is likely that some of the individual emissions reported by the bottom-up approaches are overestimated, leading to too large global emissions. Latitudinal data from top-down emissions indicate a predominance of tropical emissions (∼ 64 % of the global budget, The most important source of uncertainty on the methane budget is attributable to emissions from wetland and other inland waters. We show that the wetland extent could contribute 30–40 % on the estimated range for wetland emissions. Other priorities for improving the methane budget include the following: (i) the development of process-based models for inland-water emissions, (ii) the intensification of methane observations at local scale (flux measurements) to constrain bottom-up land surface models, and at regional scale (surface networks and satellites) to constrain top-down inversions, (iii) improvements in the estimation of atmospheric loss by OH, and (iv) improvements of the transport models integrated in top-down inversions. The data presented here can be downloaded from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center ( http://doi.org/10.3334/CDIAC/GLOBAL_METHANE_BUDGET_2016_V1.1 ) and the Global Carbon Project.

Abiotic methane on earth

Abstract: [1] Over the last 30 years, geochemical research has demonstrated that abiotic methane (CH4), formed by chemical reactions which do not directly involve organic matter, occurs on Earth in several specific geologic environments. It can be produced by either high-temperature magmatic processes in volcanic and geothermal areas, or via low-temperature (<100°C) gas-water-rock reactions in continental settings, even at shallow depths. The isotopic composition of C and H is a first step in distinguishing abiotic from biotic (including either microbial or thermogenic) CH4. Herein we demonstrate that integrated geochemical diagnostic techniques, based on molecular composition of associated gases, noble gas isotopes, mixing models, and a detailed knowledge of the geologic and hydrogeologic context are necessary to confirm the occurrence of abiotic CH4 in natural gases, which are frequently mixtures of multiple sources. Although it has been traditionally assumed that abiotic CH4 is mainly related to mantle-derived or magmatic processes, a new generation of data is showing that low-temperature synthesis related to gas-water-rock reactions is more common than previously thought. This paper reviews the major sources of abiotic CH4 and the primary approaches for differentiating abiotic from biotic CH4, including novel potential tools such as clumped isotope geochemistry. A diagnostic approach for differentiation is proposed.

A Large and Persistent Carbon Sink in the World’s Forests

Abstract: The terrestrial carbon sink has been large in recent decades, but its size and location remain uncertain. Using forest inventory data and long-term ecosystem carbon studies, we estimate a total forest sink of 2.4 ± 0.4 petagrams of carbon per year (Pg C year–1) globally for 1990 to 2007. We also estimate a source of 1.3 ± 0.7 Pg C year–1 from tropical land-use change, consisting of a gross tropical deforestation emission of 2.9 ± 0.5 Pg C year–1 partially compensated by a carbon sink in tropical forest regrowth of 1.6 ± 0.5 Pg C year–1. Together, the fluxes comprise a net global forest sink of 1.1 ± 0.8 Pg C year–1, with tropical estimates having the largest uncertainties. Our total forest sink estimate is equivalent in magnitude to the terrestrial sink deduced from fossil fuel emissions and land-use change sources minus ocean and atmospheric sinks.

Couplings between changes in the climate system and biogeochemistry

Abstract: Couplings Between Changes in the Climate System and Biogeochemistry Coordinating Lead Authors: Kenneth L. Denman (Canada), Guy Brasseur (USA, Germany) Lead Authors: Amnat Chidthaisong (Thailand), Philippe Ciais (France), Peter M. Cox (UK), Robert E. Dickinson (USA), Didier Hauglustaine (France), Christoph Heinze (Norway, Germany), Elisabeth Holland (USA), Daniel Jacob (USA, France), Ulrike Lohmann (Switzerland), Srikanthan Ramachandran (India), Pedro Leite da Silva Dias (Brazil), Steven C. Wofsy (USA), Xiaoye Zhang (China) Contributing Authors: D. Archer (USA), V. Arora (Canada), J. Austin (USA), D. Baker (USA), J.A. Berry (USA), R. Betts (UK), G. Bonan (USA), P. Bousquet (France), J. Canadell (Australia), J. Christian (Canada), D.A. Clark (USA), M. Dameris (Germany), F. Dentener (EU), D. Easterling (USA), V. Eyring (Germany), J. Feichter (Germany), P. Friedlingstein (France, Belgium), I. Fung (USA), S. Fuzzi (Italy), S. Gong (Canada), N. Gruber (USA, Switzerland), A. Guenther (USA), K. Gurney (USA), A. Henderson-Sellers (Switzerland), J. House (UK), A. Jones (UK), C. Jones (UK), B. Karcher (Germany), M. Kawamiya (Japan), K. Lassey (New Zealand), C. Le Quere (UK, France, Canada), C. Leck (Sweden), J. Lee-Taylor (USA, UK), Y. Malhi (UK), K. Masarie (USA), G. McFiggans (UK), S. Menon (USA), J.B. Miller (USA), P. Peylin (France), A. Pitman (Australia), J. Quaas (Germany), M. Raupach (Australia), P. Rayner (France), G. Rehder (Germany), U. Riebesell (Germany), C. Rodenbeck (Germany), L. Rotstayn (Australia), N. Roulet (Canada), C. Sabine (USA), M.G. Schultz (Germany), M. Schulz (France, Germany), S.E. Schwartz (USA), W. Steffen (Australia), D. Stevenson (UK), Y. Tian (USA, China), K.E. Trenberth (USA), T. Van Noije (Netherlands), O. Wild (Japan, UK), T. Zhang (USA, China), L. Zhou (USA, China) Review Editors: Kansri Boonpragob (Thailand), Martin Heimann (Germany, Switzerland), Mario Molina (USA, Mexico) This chapter should be cited as: Denman, K.L., G. Brasseur, A. Chidthaisong, P. Ciais, P.M. Cox, R.E. Dickinson, D. Hauglustaine, C. Heinze, E. Holland, D. Jacob, U. Lohmann, S Ramachandran, P.L. da Silva Dias, S.C. Wofsy and X. Zhang, 2007: Couplings Between Changes in the Climate System and Biogeochemistry. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

Carbon and Other Biogeochemical Cycles

Abstract: For base year 2010, anthropogenic activities created ~210 (190 to 230) TgN of reactive nitrogen Nr from N2. This human-caused creation of reactive nitrogen in 2010 is at least 2 times larger than the rate of natural terrestrial creation of ~58 TgN (50 to 100 TgN yr−1) (Table 6.9, Section 1a). Note that the estimate of natural terrestrial biological fixation (58 TgN yr−1) is lower than former estimates (100 TgN yr−1, Galloway et al., 2004), but the ranges overlap, 50 to 100 TgN yr−1 vs. 90 to 120 TgN yr−1, respectively). Of this created reactive nitrogen, NOx and NH3 emissions from anthropogenic sources are about fourfold greater than natural emissions (Table 6.9, Section 1b). A greater portion of the NH3 emissions is deposited to the continents rather than to the oceans, relative to the deposition of NOy, due to the longer atmospheric residence time of the latter. These deposition estimates are lower limits, as they do not include organic nitrogen species. New model and measurement information (Kanakidou et al., 2012) suggests that incomplete inclusion of emissions and atmospheric chemistry of reduced and oxidized organic nitrogen components in current models may lead to systematic underestimates of total global reactive nitrogen deposition by up to 35% (Table 6.9, Section 1c). Discharge of reactive nitrogen to the coastal oceans is ~45 TgN yr−1 (Table 6.9, Section 1d). Denitrification converts Nr back to atmospheric N2. The current estimate for the production of atmospheric N2 is 110 TgN yr−1 (Bouwman et al., 2013).

Global Carbon Budget 2020

Abstract: Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere in a changing climate – the “global carbon budget” – is important to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe and synthesize data sets and methodology to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFOS) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC), mainly deforestation, are based on land use and land-use change data and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly and its growth rate (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) and terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) are estimated with global process models constrained by observations. The resulting carbon budget imbalance (BIM), the difference between the estimated total emissions and the estimated changes in the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere, is a measure of imperfect data and understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the last decade available (2010–2019), EFOS was 9.6 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 excluding the cement carbonation sink (9.4 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 when the cement carbonation sink is included), and ELUC was 1.6 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1. For the same decade, GATM was 5.1 ± 0.02 GtC yr−1 (2.4 ± 0.01 ppm yr−1), SOCEAN 2.5 ± 0.6 GtC yr−1, and SLAND 3.4 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1, with a budget imbalance BIM of −0.1 GtC yr−1 indicating a near balance between estimated sources and sinks over the last decade. For the year 2019 alone, the growth in EFOS was only about 0.1 % with fossil emissions increasing to 9.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 excluding the cement carbonation sink (9.7 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 when cement carbonation sink is included), and ELUC was 1.8 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1, for total anthropogenic CO2 emissions of 11.5 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1 (42.2 ± 3.3 GtCO2). Also for 2019, GATM was 5.4 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1 (2.5 ± 0.1 ppm yr−1), SOCEAN was 2.6 ± 0.6 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 3.1 ± 1.2 GtC yr−1, with a BIM of 0.3 GtC. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 409.85 ± 0.1 ppm averaged over 2019. Preliminary data for 2020, accounting for the COVID-19-induced changes in emissions, suggest a decrease in EFOS relative to 2019 of about −7 % (median estimate) based on individual estimates from four studies of −6 %, −7 %, −7 % (−3 % to −11 %), and −13 %. Overall, the mean and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2019, but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC yr−1 persist for the representation of semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from diverse approaches and observations shows (1) no consensus in the mean and trend in land-use change emissions over the last decade, (2) a persistent low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, and (3) an apparent discrepancy between the different methods for the ocean sink outside the tropics, particularly in the Southern Ocean. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understanding of the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this data set (Friedlingstein et al., 2019; Le Quere et al., 2018b, a, 2016, 2015b, a, 2014, 2013). The data presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/gcp-2020 (Friedlingstein et al., 2020).