The shale gas boom in the United States spurred a shift in electricity generation from coal to natural gas. Natural gas combined cycle units emit half of the CO2 to produce the same energy as a coal unit; therefore, the market trend is credited for a reduction in GHG emissions from the US power sector. However, methane that escapes the natural gas supply chain may undercut these relative climate benefits. In 2016, Canada, the United States and Mexico pledged to reduce methane emissions from the oil and natural gas sector 40–45% from 2012 levels by 2025. This article reviews the science-policy landscape of methane measurement and mitigation relevant for meeting this pledge, including changes in US policy following the 2016 presidential election. Considerable policy incoherence exists in all three countries. Reliable inventories remain elusive; despite government and private sector research efforts, the magnitude of methane emissions remains in dispute. Meanwhile, mitigation efforts vary significantly. A framework that integrates science and policy would enable actors to more effectively inform, leverage and pursue advances in methane measurement and mitigation. The framework is applied to North America, but could apply to other geographic contexts.
Key policy insights
The oil and gas sector’s contribution to atmospheric methane concentrations is becoming an increasingly prominent issue in climate policy.
Efforts to measure and control fugitive methane emissions do not presently proceed within a coherent framework that integrates science and policy.
In 2016, the governments of Canada, Mexico and the United States pledged to reduce methane emissions from the oil and natural gas sector 40–45% from 2012 levels by 2025.
The 2016 presidential election in the United States has halted American progress at the federal level, suggesting a heavier reliance on industry and subnational efforts in that country.
Collectively or individually, the countries, individual agencies, or private stakeholders could use the proposed North American Methane Reduction framework to direct research, enhance monitoring and evaluate mitigation efforts, and improve the chances that continental methane reduction targets will be achieved.
采用WRF(Weather Research and Forecasting)模式4种边界层参数化方案对青藏高原那曲地区边界层特征进行了数值模拟,并利用"第三次青藏高原大气科学试验"在青藏高原那曲地区5个站点的观测资料对模拟结果进行验证,分析不同参数化方案在那曲地区的适用性。研究表明,YSU、MYJ、ACM2和BouLac方案对2 m气温和地表温度的模拟偏低。BouLac方案模拟的地表温度偏差较小。通过对能量平衡各分量的对比分析发现,温度模拟偏低可能是向下长波辐射模拟偏低以及感热通量和潜热通量交换过强导致的。对于边界层风、位温和相对湿度垂直结构的模拟,局地方案的模拟效果均优于非局地方案。BouLac方案对那曲地区近地层温度、边界层内位温和相对湿度的垂直分布模拟效果较好。 相似文献