Atmospheric methane grew very rapidly in 2014 (12.7 ± 0.5 ppb/year), 2015 (10.1 ± 0.7 ppb/year), 2016 (7.0 ± 0.7 ppb/year), and 2017 (7.7 ± 0.7 ppb/year), at rates not observed since the 1980s. The ...increase in the methane burden began in 2007, with the mean global mole fraction in remote surface background air rising from about 1,775 ppb in 2006 to 1,850 ppb in 2017. Simultaneously the 13C/12C isotopic ratio (expressed as δ13CCH4) has shifted, now trending negative for more than a decade. The causes of methane's recent mole fraction increase are therefore either a change in the relative proportions (and totals) of emissions from biogenic and thermogenic and pyrogenic sources, especially in the tropics and subtropics, or a decline in the atmospheric sink of methane, or both. Unfortunately, with limited measurement data sets, it is not currently possible to be more definitive. The climate warming impact of the observed methane increase over the past decade, if continued at >5 ppb/year in the coming decades, is sufficient to challenge the Paris Agreement, which requires sharp cuts in the atmospheric methane burden. However, anthropogenic methane emissions are relatively very large and thus offer attractive targets for rapid reduction, which are essential if the Paris Agreement aims are to be attained.
Plain Language Summary
The rise in atmospheric methane (CH4), which began in 2007, accelerated in the past 4 years. The growth has been worldwide, especially in the tropics and northern midlatitudes. With the rise has come a shift in the carbon isotope ratio of the methane. The causes of the rise are not fully understood, and may include increased emissions and perhaps a decline in the destruction of methane in the air. Methane's increase since 2007 was not expected in future greenhouse gas scenarios compliant with the targets of the Paris Agreement, and if the increase continues at the same rates it may become very difficult to meet the Paris goals. There is now urgent need to reduce methane emissions, especially from the fossil fuel industry.
Key Points
Atmospheric methane is rising; its carbon isotopic ratio has become more depleted in C‐13
The possible causes of the change include an increase in emissions, with changing relative proportions of source inputs, or a decline in methane destruction, or both
If this rise continues, there are significant consequences for the UN Paris Agreement
In this study we have analyzed whether tourist cruise ships have an influence on measured sulfur dioxide (SO2), ozone (O3), Aitken mode particle and equivalent black carbon (EBC) concentrations at Ny ...Ålesund and Zeppelin Mountain on Svalbard in the Norwegian Arctic during summer. We separated the measurement data set into periods when ships were present and periods when ships were not present in the Kongsfjord area, according to a long-term record of the number of passengers visiting Ny Ålesund. We show that when ships with more than 50 passengers cruise in the Kongsfjord, measured daytime mean concentrations of 60 nm particles and EBC in summer show enhancements of 72 and 45%, respectively, relative to values when ships are not present. Even larger enhancements of 81 and 72% were found for stagnant conditions. In contrast, O3 concentrations were 5% lower on average and 7% lower under stagnant conditions, due to titration of O3 with the emitted nitric oxide (NO). The differences between the two data subsets are largest for the highest measured percentiles, while relatively small differences were found for the median concentrations, indicating that ship plumes are sampled relatively infrequently even when ships are present although they carry high pollutant concentrations. We estimate that the ships increased the total summer mean concentrations of SO2, 60 nm particles and EBC by 15, 18 and 11%, respectively. Our findings have two important implications. Firstly, even at such a remote Arctic observatory as Zeppelin, the measurements can be influenced by tourist ship emissions. Careful data screening is recommended before summertime Zeppelin data is used for data analysis or for comparison with global chemistry transport models. However, Zeppelin remains as one of the most valuable Arctic observatories, as most other Arctic observatories face even larger local pollution problems. Secondly, given landing statistics of tourist ships on Svalbard, it is suspected that large parts of the Svalbard archipelago are affected by cruise ship emissions. Thus, our results may be taken as a warning signal of future pan-Arctic conditions if Arctic shipping becomes more frequent and emission regulations are not strict enough.
By comparison of the methane mixing ratio and the carbon isotope ratio (δ13CCH4) in Arctic air with regional background, the incremental input of CH4 in an air parcel and the source δ13CCH4 signature ...can be determined. Using this technique the bulk Arctic CH4 source signature of air arriving at Spitsbergen in late summer 2008 and 2009 was found to be −68‰, indicative of the dominance of a biogenic CH4 source. This is close to the source signature of CH4 emissions from boreal wetlands. In spring, when wetland was frozen, the CH4 source signature was more enriched in 13C at −53 ± 6‰ with air mass back trajectories indicating a large influence from gas field emissions in the Ob River region. Emissions of CH4 to the water column from the seabed on the Spitsbergen continental slope are occurring but none has yet been detected reaching the atmosphere. The measurements illustrate the significance of wetland emissions. Potentially, these may respond quickly and powerfully to meteorological variations and to sustained climate warming.
Key Points
Isotopic measurements have been used to identify major sources of Arctic methane
In late summer biogenic methane sources dominate the bulk Arctic source mix
Seabed emissions near Spitsbergen have not been detected reaching the atmosphere
We find that summer methane (CH4) release from seabed sediments west of Svalbard substantially increases CH4 concentrations in the ocean but has limited influence on the atmospheric CH4 levels. Our ...conclusion stems from complementary measurements at the seafloor, in the ocean, and in the atmosphere from land‐based, ship and aircraft platforms during a summer campaign in 2014. We detected high concentrations of dissolved CH4 in the ocean above the seafloor with a sharp decrease above the pycnocline. Model approaches taking potential CH4 emissions from both dissolved and bubble‐released CH4 from a larger region into account reveal a maximum flux compatible with the observed atmospheric CH4 mixing ratios of 2.4–3.8 nmol m−2 s−1. This is too low to have an impact on the atmospheric summer CH4 budget in the year 2014. Long‐term ocean observatories may shed light on the complex variations of Arctic CH4 cycles throughout the year.
Key Points
Summer CH4 release from seabed sediments west of Svalbard substantially increases concentrations in the ocean, but not in the atmosphere
The modeled flux is constrained to a maximum of 2.4 to 3.8 nmol m−2 s−1, compatible with the observed atmospheric CH4 from 20 June to 1 August 2014
Any ocean‐atmosphere flux of the CH4 accumulated beneath the pycnocline may only occur if physical processes remove this dynamic barrier
Several studies have reported an increased incidence of candidaemia and a redistribution of species, with a decrease in the number of Candida albicans isolates. In Norway, a prospective, national ...surveillance study of candidaemia has been ongoing since 1991. Data from the period 1991–2003 have been published previously. The aim of this study was to follow up the incidence, species distribution and antifungal susceptibility of Candida species isolates from blood cultures in the period 2004–2012, and compare them with the corresponding findings from the period 1991–2003. Blood culture isolates of Candida species from all medical microbiological laboratories in Norway were identified and susceptibility tested at the Norwegian Mycological Reference Laboratory. A total of 1724 isolates were recovered from 1653 patients in the period 2004–2012. Comparison of the two periods showed that the average incidence of candidaemia episodes per 100 000 inhabitants increased from 2.4 (1991–2003) to 3.9 (2004–2012). The increase in incidence in the latter period was significantly higher in patients aged >40 years (p 0.001), and a marked increase was observed in patients aged >60 years (p < 0.001). In conclusion, the average incidence in Norway over a period of 22 years modestly increased from 2.4 to 3.9 per 100 000 inhabitants, this being mainly accounted for by candidaemia in the elderly. The species distribution was stable, and the rate of acquired resistance was low.
During the summer of 2018, a widespread drought developed over Northern and Central Europe. The increase in temperature and the reduction of soil moisture have influenced carbon dioxide (CO
2
) ...exchange between the atmosphere and terrestrial ecosystems in various ways, such as a reduction of photosynthesis, changes in ecosystem respiration, or allowing more frequent fires. In this study, we characterize the resulting perturbation of the atmospheric CO
2
seasonal cycles. 2018 has a good coverage of European regions affected by drought, allowing the investigation of how ecosystem flux anomalies impacted spatial CO
2
gradients between stations. This density of stations is unprecedented compared to previous drought events in 2003 and 2015, particularly thanks to the deployment of the Integrated Carbon Observation System (ICOS) network of atmospheric greenhouse gas monitoring stations in recent years. Seasonal CO
2
cycles from 48 European stations were available for 2017 and 2018. Earlier data were retrieved for comparison from international databases or national networks. Here, we show that the usual summer minimum in CO
2
due to the surface carbon uptake was reduced by 1.4 ppm in 2018 for the 10 stations located in the area most affected by the temperature anomaly, mostly in Northern Europe. Notwithstanding, the CO
2
transition phases before and after July were slower in 2018 compared to 2017, suggesting an extension of the growing season, with either continued CO
2
uptake by photosynthesis and/or a reduction in respiration driven by the depletion of substrate for respiration inherited from the previous months due to the drought. For stations with sufficiently long time series, the CO
2
anomaly observed in 2018 was compared to previous European droughts in 2003 and 2015. Considering the areas most affected by the temperature anomalies, we found a higher CO
2
anomaly in 2003 (+3 ppm averaged over 4 sites), and a smaller anomaly in 2015 (+1 ppm averaged over 11 sites) compared to 2018.
This article is part of the theme issue ‘Impacts of the 2018 severe drought and heatwave in Europe: from site to continental scale'.
Understanding the recent evolution of methane emissions in the Arctic is necessary to interpret the global methane cycle. Emissions are affected by significant uncertainties and are sensitive to ...climate change, leading to potential feedbacks. A polar version of the CHIMERE chemistry-transport model is used to simulate the evolution of tropospheric methane in the Arctic during 2012, including all known regional anthropogenic and natural sources, in particular freshwater emissions which are often overlooked in methane modelling. CHIMERE simulations are compared to atmospheric continuous observations at six measurement sites in the Arctic region. In winter, the Arctic is dominated by anthropogenic emissions; emissions from continental seepages and oceans, including from the East Siberian Arctic Shelf, can contribute significantly in more limited areas. In summer, emissions from wetland and freshwater sources dominate across the whole region. The model is able to reproduce the seasonality and synoptic variations of methane measured at the different sites. We find that all methane sources significantly affect the measurements at all stations at least at the synoptic scale, except for biomass burning. In particular, freshwater systems play a decisive part in summer, representing on average between 11 and 26 % of the simulated Arctic methane signal at the sites. This indicates the relevance of continuous observations to gain a mechanistic understanding of Arctic methane sources. Sensitivity tests reveal that the choice of the land-surface model used to prescribe wetland emissions can be critical in correctly representing methane mixing ratios. The closest agreement with the observations is reached when using the two wetland models which have emissions peaking in August–September, while all others reach their maximum in June–July. Such phasing provides an interesting constraint on wetland models which still have large uncertainties at present. Also testing different freshwater emission inventories leads to large differences in modelled methane. Attempts to include methane sinks (OH oxidation and soil uptake) reduced the model bias relative to observed atmospheric methane. The study illustrates how multiple sources, having different spatiotemporal dynamics and magnitudes, jointly influence the overall Arctic methane budget, and highlights ways towards further improved assessments.
Methane stored in seabed reservoirs such as methane hydrates can reach the atmosphere in the form of bubbles or dissolved in water. Hydrates could destabilize with rising temperature further ...increasing greenhouse gas emissions in a warming climate. To assess the impact of oceanic emissions from the area west of Svalbard, where methane hydrates are abundant, we used measurements collected with a research aircraft (Facility for Airborne Atmospheric Measurements) and a ship (Helmer Hansen) during the Summer 2014 and for Zeppelin Observatory for the full year. We present a model‐supported analysis of the atmospheric CH4 mixing ratios measured by the different platforms. To address uncertainty about where CH4 emissions actually occur, we explored three scenarios: areas with known seeps, a hydrate stability model, and an ocean depth criterion. We then used a budget analysis and a Lagrangian particle dispersion model to compare measurements taken upwind and downwind of the potential CH4 emission areas. We found small differences between the CH4 mixing ratios measured upwind and downwind of the potential emission areas during the campaign. By taking into account measurement and sampling uncertainties and by determining the sensitivity of the measured mixing ratios to potential oceanic emissions, we provide upper limits for the CH4 fluxes. The CH4 flux during the campaign was small, with an upper limit of 2.5 nmol m−2 s−1 in the stability model scenario. The Zeppelin Observatory data for 2014 suggest CH4 fluxes from the Svalbard continental platform below 0.2 Tg yr−1. All estimates are in the lower range of values previously reported.
Key Points
Measurements around Svalbard show no atmospheric methane (CH4) enhancements from CH4 releases into seawater from the ocean floor
We provide an upper limit for oceanic CH4 emissions compatible with the lack of an observable atmospheric signal
Sea‐air emission fluxes of CH4 are small offshore Svalbard, both for transfer via bubbles and via diffusive flux of dissolved CH4
Two years of continuous in situ measurements of Arctic low‐level clouds have been made at the Mount Zeppelin Observatory (78°56′N, 11°53′E), in Ny‐Ålesund, Spitsbergen. The monthly median value of ...the cloud particle number concentration (Nc) showed a clear seasonal variation: Its maximum appeared in May–July (65 ± 8 cm−3), and it remained low between October and March (8 ± 7 cm−3). At temperatures warmer than 0 °C, a clear correlation was found between the hourly Nc values and the number concentrations of aerosols with dry diameters larger than 70 nm (N70), which are proxies for cloud condensation nuclei (CCN). When clouds were detected at temperatures colder than 0 °C, some of the data followed the summertime Nc to N70 relationship, while other data showed systematically lower Nc values. The lidar‐derived depolarization ratios suggested that the former (CCN‐controlled) and latter (CCN‐uncontrolled) data generally corresponded to clouds consisting of supercooled water droplets and those containing ice particles, respectively. The CCN‐controlled data persistently appeared throughout the year at Zeppelin. The aerosol‐cloud interaction index (ACI = dlnNc/(3dlnN70)) for the CCN‐controlled data showed high sensitivities to aerosols both in the summer (clean air) and winter–spring (Arctic haze) seasons (0.22 ± 0.03 and 0.25 ± 0.02, respectively). The air parcel model calculations generally reproduced these values. The threshold diameters of aerosol activation (Dact), which account for the Nc of the CCN‐controlled data, were as low as 30–50 nm when N70 was less than 30 cm−3, suggesting that new particle formation can affect Arctic cloud microphysics.
Key Points
Two years of in situ measurements of the number concentrations of Arctic cloud particles (Nc) show a clear seasonal variation with a maximum in summer
Aerosols with diameters as small as 30 nm likely serve as cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) due to the low CCN concentrations in the Arctic
The aerosol‐cloud interaction (ACI) index for CCN‐controlled clouds was estimated to be approximately 0.22, and it does not show a clear seasonal variation
PDF
