WUWT reader Anna V. alerts us to the preliminary report from the JAXA GOSAT Project. According to the project website:
The Greenhouse gases Observing SATellite (GOSAT) Project is a joint effort promoted by the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), the National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES) and the Ministry of the Environment (MOE).
NIES organized the research team dedicated to the GOSAT project within its organization in April 2004, and since then has been working for the research and development with respect to GOSAT “IBUKI”.
For a complete description of how GOSAT works, please read their summary here (PDF)
First let’s have a look at Global Methane (CH4):
Note that the areas with the most concentration of methane are in China, Middle East, Southern Europe, and Africa.
The real surprise comes from the GOSAT CO2 data analysis. This first global CO2 map released from GOSAT is shown below:
While this is just a short data set comprising a few days from April 20-28th 2009, it does show some surprising features for hotspots of CO2 in the atmosphere over many of the same areas methane had higher concentrations. One difference is that some spots in the Eastern USA, presumably the larger cities, show CO2 hotspots also. From looking at the large CO2 map, it appears Atlanta, Charlotte, and NYC are the three cities in the USA with higher CO2 concentrations.
However, China, India, Southern Europe, the Mideast and Africa have the majority of the CO2 hotspots.
Here’s what JAXA has to say about their CO2 analysis:
Carbon dioxide column averaged dry air mole fractions (XCO2) for clear-sky scenes analyzed using observations at shortwave infrared bands (radiance spectrum uncalibrated data) from the IBUKI greenhouse gas observation sensor (TANSO-FTS). Clear-sky scenes at individual TANSO-FTS observation points are determined using measurements from the cloud/aerosol sensor (TANSO-CAI). Data are excluded where the associated radiance spectra are saturated, and where noise is relatively large due to weak ground surface reflection.
In the initial analysis, the late April observation data shows a hemispheric gradient, with larger values over the Northern Hemisphere (Note 1), consistent with other measurements. Derived XCO2 values are generally lower than model predictions (Note 2). This is thought to be due to the analysis involving uncalibrated radiance spectrum data and due to the parameter adjustment for the analysis method not being finalized. High concentrations are observed over continental China and Central Africa, which may be caused by measurement interference due to the presence of atmospheric dust. Asian dust (yellow sands) were observed over continental China during the observation period, and the existence of dust storm-like and smoke-like phenomena were observed in the relevant locations in Africa. Future investigation is required to understand these errors. Data calibration, processing parameter adjustment, and product validation required for quantitative discussion of the analysis results, will be carried out in the future.
(Note 1) The analysis showed Northern Hemisphere results to be on average around 10 ppm higher than Southern Hemisphere results. An atmospheric transport model calculation predicts the difference between north and south at this time to be 2-4 ppm.
(Note 2) Southern Hemisphere values were on average approximately 17 ppm lower than the model calculation, while Northern Hemisphere latitude band average values were approximately 7-12 ppm lower.
It will be very interesting to see if the hotspot CO2 distribution holds with more data from GOSAT. If it does we’ll be asking the question of why the USA seems to have less CO2 concentrations than other parts of the world. I’m sure it will fuel some political and policy debate.
We’ll be watching for releases of more complete data with better coverage.
It looks like values over the sea are filtered out, is there anywhere we can see these? Total global coverage would be far more usefull.
Also, are the readings calibrated to land based stations? As the stations record data in a way to make co2 levels consistant globally, if the satellite data is calibrated to this, it makes the data useless to science! I only hope the values are entirely independant and represent actual concentrations. Some detail on the methodology of measurement would be interesting i.e. changes greater than 1ppm over 6 hours are ignored etc….
Methane and CO2 concentrations are high over deserts. That has to be a coverage issue. If it isn’t then vegetated zones are much bigger carbon sinks than anyone thought.
No sign at all of all the methane supposedly emitted by New Zealand sheep and cattle and equally supposedly amounting to half of all New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions.
Seems to me that the data is very good at showing the worlds dry spots .ie. deserts and stuff. The data doesn’t seem to want to tell me much more than that in a general sense. But then I haven’t “adjusted” the data yet.
Does anyone know what became of the mini satellite built by the 16 year old looking linux whizzkid?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/02/27/canadian-mini-satellite-may-solve-carbon-puzzle/
It’d be nice to get some cross confirmation on this data.
The big red C02 dot just north of Baffin Island is either
1.) Al Gore’s Fortress of Solitude or
2.) The birth of a new Volcano or
3.) The Catilin Survey University homecoming bonfire
Anthony,
I think you mean Eastern and not Southern Europe.
As for Brazil, the green spots for CH4 and CO2 are over the Pantanal, which is the biggest wetland in the world. I would expect there to be these spots.
This is BS – can anyone show me a CO2 relationship in Australia.
http://tinyurl.com/kpxvbx
Interesting distribution of CO2 ‘hotspots’. NE China makes sense, as does the middle of the Arabian peninsula.
However, what is the cause in the middle of Africa, in the Sahara / sub-Sahara areas? Not somewhere known for huge amounts of greenhouse gas emissions, but similarly an area where the draw down (by biological activity and/or by wash out with rain) would be very restricted.
It’s also surprising that the eastern USA shows such high levels when the south-east of the UK doesn’t – I can’t imagine that London and surrounds is that much more ‘green’ than NYC, considering the population density in southern England. Suggests that what we are seeing is much more than just high emission locations
Certainly plenty of scope to keep watching, and to see what effects rain and plant growth have on the ‘anomalies’ in this early data.
I’d also be interested to see what happens over the oceans, and whether draw-down in the marine environment is more or less important than for land plants.
Re: crosspatch
I think they are validating and calibrating against ground truth, -not against models.
Re: masonmart
The satellite is measuring concentration averages in a vertical column. It is not CO2 flux. To get that you obviously need to know the advection. That will depend on models, but will be tied closely to observations (most likely a reanalysis product).
I think it is extremely premature to judge the product at this stage. A few days of data that most likely have not been validated very extensively.
Seems that Australia is being trumped by the Galapagos Islands!
[…]”This is thought to be due to the analysis involving uncalibrated radiance spectrum data and due to the parameter adjustment for the analysis method not being finalized.”[…]
So why not leave the data unadusted and just note the variances in CO2 concentrations over time at different locations?
“Adjustments” is starting to become a 4-letter word to me.
The red blob in the far north of canada, appears to be Devon Island, which Wiki says is the largest uninhabited island in the world!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devon_Island
NASA’s Haughton Mars Project is located there.
I’m fairly sure most of the flares in Brunei & Malaysia are out now, and Nigeria is also greatly reduced. Actually, I’d imagine that the jungle burning on Borneo contributes more CO2 than the gas / oil production.
Re: E.M.Smith (23:40:46) :
“We are just sucking one heck of a lot of CO2 out of the air with plants.”
Which we then bury to create new coal and oil?
I see that the SAHARA has always been densly populated unlike parts of South East Asia! Watts Up With That?
Who would guess barking antilopes in southern Sudan is a bigger problem than the civil war – or something. (Note: This comment isn’t peer reviewed.)
Allan M R MacRae (23:27:37)
The high CO2 (red dot) and moderate methane (green dot) in the Canadian Arctic is in the general vicinity of Arctic Bay and Nanisivik on Baffin Isand. Although there was a lead zinc mine at Nanisivik it closed down back in 2002. It is pretty hard to believe that an abandoned mine and a town of about 700 people could be responsible for results of those magnitudes.
One other thing caught my eye throughout the arctic there are very few methane readings. Yet the alarmists claim that melting of the permafrost is causing high methane emissions in the arctic. So what’s up with that ?
How do they measure CO2 concentrations? There was some mention of measuring short wave infrared radiation. This sounds a bit like “we calculate the CO2 concentration by measuring its greenhouse effect.”
But do they really know the greenhouse effect in the first place, or am I misunderstanding what’s going on?
There’s so much to learn about this. However, it may be that the CO2 concentrations came out lower than predicted, because the greenhouse effect is lower than predicted (if my reading of the methodology is correct, though it probably isn’t).
“While this is just a short data set comprising a few days from April 20-28th 2009”
Concerning the CO2 hotspots in the Northeastern US.
This area had some unusually high temperatures at the end of April, 2009.
Looking at the UK, I note that the largest area of carbon “pollution” is Wales. I know that Britain has lost a lot of industry, but can this be right?
Prediction – it will soon be announced that the measurement of those tiny amounts of methane will be influenced uncontrollably by the particulates in the air.
Allan M R MacRae (23:27:37) :
I have examined the 15fps AIRS data animation of global CO2 at
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a000000/a003500/a003562/carbonDioxideSequence2002_2008_at15fps.mp4
CO2 seem to rising from Nov to March, then dropping for the next 6 months. Is this CO2 tread due to plants or temperature?
I wonder what is the source of the single Arctic CO2 hot spot located in Northern Canada?
Funny that the two measurements on Northern Canada are in the opposite edges of the scale, one is dark red and the other dark blue.
Also, what are these XCO2 and XCH4 thingies? They hurt my organic chemistry trained eyes.