1. TransCom Tsukuba, June 16, 2004 L. N. Yurganov Frontier Research System for Global Change, Yokohama, Japan, in collaboration with: T. Blumenstock(1), P. Dechatellet (2), D. P. Edwards (3), E. I. Grechko (4), E. Fokeeva (4), A. Dzhola (4), F. Hase (1), I. Kramer (1), E. Mahieu (2), J. Mellqvist (5), P. C. Novelli (6), J. Notholt (7), H.-E. Scheel (8), A. Strandberg (5), R. Sussmann (8), H. Tanimoto (9), V. Velazco (7), J.R. Drummond (10), J.C. Gille (3) (1) IMK-ISF, Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, Germany (2) University of Liège, Liège, Belgium (3) ACD, NCAR, Boulder, CO, USA (4) Obukhov Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Moscow, Russia (5) Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden (6) CMDL, NOAA, Boulder, Colorado, USA (7) University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany (8) IMK-IFU, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany (9) National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan (10) University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. Carbon monoxide forest fires emissions in the Northern Hemisphere in 1996-2003 retrieved from total column ground-based and satellite measurements using a box model.

2. The report is based on three publications that can be found at: http://www.jamstec.go.jp/frsgc/research/d4/papers.htm L. N. Yurganov, T. Blumenstock, E. I. Grechko, F. Hase, E. J. Hyer, E. S. Kasischke, M. Koike, Y. Kondo, I. Kramer, F.-Y. Leung, E. Mahieu, J. Mellqvist, J. Notholt, P. C. Novelli, C. P. Rinsland, H.E. Scheel, A. Schulz, A. Strandberg, R. Sussmann, H. Tanimoto, V. Velazco, R. Zander, and Y. Zhao, A Quantitative Assessment of the 1998 Carbon Monoxide Emission Anomaly in the Northern Hemisphere Based on Total Column and Surface Concentration Measurements, accepted by J. Geophys. Res D.P. Edwards, L.K. Emmons, D.A. Hauglustaine, A. Chu, J.C. Gille, Y. J. Kaufman, G. Petron, L.N. Yurganov, L. Giglio, M.N. Deeter, V. Yudin, D.C. Ziskin, J. Warner, J.-F. Lamarque, G. L. Francis, S. P. Ho, D. Mao, J. Chen, E.I. Grechko, and J.R. Drummond, Observations of Carbon Monoxide and Aerosols From the Terra Satellite: Northern Hemisphere Variability, accepted by J. Geophys. Res L. N. Yurganov, P. Duchatelet, A.V. Dzhola, D. P. Edwards, F. Hase, I. Kramer, E. Mahieu, J. Mellqvist, J. Notholt, P. C. Novelli, A. Rockmann, H. E. Scheel, M. Schneider, A. Schulz, A. Strandberg, R. Sussmann, H. Tanimoto, V. Velazco, J.R. Drummond, J.C. Gille, Increased Northern Hemispheric carbon monoxide burden in the troposphere in 2002 and 2003 detected from the ground and from space, submitted to Atmosp. Chem. Phys. Discuss.

3. We may conclude that a detection of forest fire signal for CO is 300 times easier, that for CH4 and 400 times easier than for CO2. Why box model? It is simple, “transparent”, easily verifiable, and matches the experimental mode Why CO, not CO2? Extratropical forest fires emit normally [Andreae & Merlet, 2001]: CO: 68 Tg CH4: 3 Tg CO2:1004 Tg Global atmosphere contains: CO: 370 Tg CH4: 4800 Tg CO2: 2.2 millions (!) Tg Therefore, wild forest fires perturb the global atmosphere by: CO: 18% CH4: 0.06% CO2: 0.045% But!

4. Measurements mol/cm 2 BL FT BL FTIR Sampling 10 km 1.5 km MOPITT

5. Location and methods (operational since 1996 or earlier) NOAA CMDL Carbon Cycle Greenhouse GasesOther in situ programs Data from two Japanese stations are supplied by Dr. H. Tanimoto (NIES) and Japanese Meteorological Agency, stations at Shetland Isl. and near Vancouver are managed by CSIRO, measurements at Zugspitze (Germany) are conducted by Dr. Scheel (FZK, IMK-IFU), in situ data from Jungfraujoch are supplied by EMPA. Most of the data are based on weekly sampling. Spectroscopic stations (Hokkaido until 2001, Tenerife after 1999) FTIR spectrometers (7 sites) are parts of the NDSC (Network for Detection of Stratospheric Change). Grating spectrometer is in use at Zvenigorod, Russia, LOCATIONS MOPITT – full coverage

6. ● Our first task is to determine as accurately as possible the CO burden (total mass) in the HNH. We should use all available information about CO in the boundary layer, in the free troposphere and in the total column. ● We will consider anomalies of CO burden in spite of absolute burdens.

7. Total column CO in the Northern Hemisphere measured from the ground and from space (mol/cm 2, monthly averages, blue solid lines are averages over the reference period) HNH = 30º N – 90º N Designates the reference period (March 2000 – February 2001). SwedenSwiss Alps Central RussiaHigh Northern Hemisphere

8. Zonal average CO total column measured by MOPITT [Edwards et al., 2004] HNH LNH LSH HSH

9. Relative anomalies of CO abundance, both total columns and BL mixing ratios Symbols are for spectroscopic total column measurements, orange line is for CMDL data in the BL, MOPITT total column measurements were averaged for 30º N – 90º N. 2.1 (Sept., 2002, Zvenigorod) Peatland fires occurred near Moscow in July – September, 2002. Extreme values were omitted for hemispheric estimates of emissions. Hokkaido data until December 2001 according to [Yurganov et al., 2004] Reference period Peat fires

10. 17% 1.15 ppm in BL 1.5 km 60 km Simultaneous ground- and space-based measurements in Russia in period of peat firesZvenigorod Moscow Peat fires MOPITT Ground-based spectrometer Vertical sensitivities and a priori profiles

11. CO in situ anomalies for low altitude stations in HNH (Novelli et al., 2003, JGR; Yurganov et al., 2004, JGR, accepted) Reference period The anomaly of 1998 was clearly visible at most of BL locations, however, CO was perturbed at Japanese stations Rishiri and Ryori

12. CO anomalies expressed as mean mixing ratio in selected boxes: boundary layer (below 1.5 km), free troposphere (1.5 – 10 km), and total column (0 – 10 km), 30º N – 90º N. I ndonesia Mexico Canada & Siberia ? W. Russia & SiberiaSiberia ?

13. Alternatives to the biomass burning TOTAL GLOBAL EMISSIONS = 2780 Tg Various fuels = 700 Methane oxidation = 800 Biomass burning = 700 Non-methane HC oxidation = 400

14. Box model Low Northern Hemisphere (LNH) (volumes of two boxes are equal) High Northern Hemisphere (HNH) M LNH M HNH 0 km 10 km Equator 90º N 30º N L transp CO + OH → CO 2 + H P' HNH = dM' HNH /dt + M' HNH / TAU chem + (M' HNH – M' LNH )/ TAU trans TAU chem. = 1/ k [OH] k = 1.5 E-13 x (1+0.6 atm)cm 3 mol -1 s -1 [Demore et al., 1997]; [OH] ~ [Spivakovsky et al. 2000] TAU trans was calculated using the GEOS-CHEM model

15. TAU trans was calculated by Fok-Yan- Leung (Harvard University) using GEOS-CHEM model for 1998 meteorology (Yurganov et al., 2004) TAU chem was calculated as 1/k [OH] with [OH] field according to Spivakovsky et al., 2000 These life-times were assumed valid for all years. A corresponding uncertainty was estimated less than ± 20% (Yurganov et al., 2004)

16. Anomalies of total tropospheric CO burden in the HNH (top panel) were calculated from CMDL BL data added by FT data (both in situ and Alpine FTIRs), directly from low altitude FTIRs, and from MOPITT. Box model was applied and emission anomalies are displayed on bottom panel. (Yurganov et al.,ACPD, 2004, submitted) A comparison with GEOS- CHEM inversion by van der Werf et al., Science, 2004.

17. Emission anomaly, can be converted in absolute emission if we assume some reference “normal” emissions, e.g., the inventory for MOZART-2 model (M.Schultz, personal communication) with 50.7 Tg CO emitted in 2000. A comparison of emissions during four years with strong fires. A comparison with 1998 inventories

18. CO emission HNH anomaly

19. ESTIMATES OF CARBON DIOXIDE AND METHANE BURDEN PERTURBATIONS. Forest fires emit directly 14.7 times more CO 2, 22.7 times less CH 4, and 400 times less N2O than CO [Andreae and Merlet, 2001]. In 2002 – 2003 CO excess emission from NH boreal fires was (98 + 142) = 240 Tg. It was almost immediately chemically converted into 240 x 44/28 = 377 Tg CO 2. Direct emission of CO 2 was 3530 Tg. If we assume that 20% of CO 2 was removed during two years, then global CO 2 burden increased by 0.14%. Methane global burden was increased by 0.20%. Nitrous oxide global burden was increased by 0.03%.

20. CONCLUSIONS ● A consideration of HNH burden anomalies allows one to estimate imbalance between sources and sinks. This imbalance is treated as a result of anomalies of CO source, namely, anomalies of boreal fire emissions. ● CO measurements from the ground and from space are a good tool for monitoring fire activity. Moreover, perturbations of other gases may be assessed using available information about their relative contributions into fire emissions.