Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “uncertain systems”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

1,051 records · Page 59

Probabalistic Risk Analysis and Thermal Margin Process for an Inflatable Aeroshell

Uncertainties always exist in atmospheric entry aeroheating environments and the thermal response of thermal protection system (TPS) material. These uncertainties are mitigated in the design by ap-plying margin and factors of safety to the TPS. Entry vehicle TPS is often conservatively over-sized for the heat loads that are experienced along the entry trajectory by stacking worst-case scenarios together. Additionally, the current TPS design and margin process used by NASA offers very little insight into the risk of over-temperature during flight and the reliability of the heat shield performance [1,3]. A probabilistic margin process can be used to calculate the amount of TPS margin necessary to survive a given entry heat load at a specified level of risk [2,3,4]. The vehicle’s initial entry state (entry velocity, flight path angle, and entry mass) determines the expected atmospheric entry environmental conditions and resulting heat load that the entry vehicle will experience. If there is flexibility in the entry state, then this process can be used to select an appropriate combination of entry state parameters and TPS size to target a desired reentry reliability. This probabilistic margin process allows engineers to make informed aeroshell design, entry-trajectory design, and TPS performance risk trades while preventing excessive TPS margin from being applied. The probabilistic TPS margin process has been performed to determine TPS thickness and entry heating constraints given an acceptable risk level for the Low Earth Orbit Flight Experiment of an Inflatable Decelerator (LOFTID) flight project. The process is used in a manner to size the entry heat load for a given flexible TPS (FTPS) thickness so that it meets project reliability standards while allowing the FTPS and the underlying inflatable structure (IS) to be pushed to adequately high temperatures. Since the LOFTID project is an experimental flight demonstration, it is de-sired to drive the FTPS and IS to temperatures that cover a large range of their thermal response models’ applicability. This will allow the thermal response models to be better improved and validated post-flight using LOFTID’s extensive instrumentation embedded within the aeroshell. The presentation demonstrates how uncertainty analysis is carried out using an end-to-end Monte Carlo process where three separate Monte Carlo simulations are run in sequence. The first Monte Carlo simulation operates on the entry trajectory model to generate trajectory parameter dispersions that are fed into the second Monte Carlo simulation. The second Monte Carlo simulation operates on the aerothermodynamics model to generate aeroheating parameter dispersions that are fed into the third Monte Carlo simulation. The third Monte Carlo simulation operates on the FTPS material thermal response model to generate the final FTPS/IS thermal response dispersions. The end-to-end Monte Carlo simulation propagates the uncertainties of each model into the next to quantify the resulting uncertainty of the FTPS/IS thermal response. The fractional contributions of the uncertain parameters in the trajectory, aerothermal, and thermal response models to the variance in the FTPS/IS thermal response is determined as a byproduct of the Monte Carlo analysis. The structural uncertainty of the FTPS thermal response model is evaluated by flight relevant ground testing and model error analysis using test measurements. This probabilistic TPS margin process had never been applied to an entry vehicle and it is one of the LOFTID project’s goals to demonstrate its merits.

Steven A. Tobin↗

Postural tachycardia syndrome: time frequency mapping

Orthostatic tachycardia is common but its specificity remains uncertain. Our preliminary work suggested that using autonomic function testing in conjunction with time-frequency mapping (TFM), it might be possible to characterize a subset of the postural tachycardia syndrome (POTS), that is due to a restricted autonomic neuropathy. We describe 20 patients (17 women and 3 men, aged 14-43 years) with florid POTS and 20 controls (14 women and 6 men, aged 20-41 years). Autonomic failure was quantified by its distribution (cardiovagal, adrenergic and sudomotor) and severity, a symptom profile was generated, and spectral indices, based on modified Wigner distribution during rest and head-up tilt (80 degrees) were evaluated. During tilt-up POTS patients differed from controls by an excessive heart rate (> 130 bpm) (P < 0.001), and higher diastolic pressure (P < 0.01). During rest, cardiovagal oscillations (at respiratory frequencies [RF]) and slow rhythms at nonrespiratory frequencies (NONRF) (from 0.01 to 0.07 Hz) in R-R intervals (RRI) (P < 0.01) were reduced. Both RF and NONRF rhythms in RRI were further blunted with tilt-up (P < 0.001). Slow adrenergic vasomotor rhythms in blood pressure (BP) (approximately 0.07 Hz) surged with tilt-up and returned to normal levels afterwards. The index of sympatho-vagal balance (NONRF-Systolic BP (SBP)/RF-RRI) was dramatically increased in POTS (P < 0.001). Distal postganglionic sudomotor failure was observed, and impairment of the BP responses to the Valsalva maneuver (phase II) suggested peripheral adrenergic dysfunction. Persistent orthostatic dizziness, tiredness, gastrointestinal symptoms and palpitations were common in POTS patients. It is possible to identify a subset of POTS patients who have a length-dependent autonomic neuropathy, affecting the peripheral adrenergic and cardiovagal fibers, with relative preservation of cardiac adrenergic fibers.

NASA Discipline Number 14-10↗

Stratospheric aerosol forcing for CMIP7 – Part 1: optical properties for pre-industrial, historical, and scenario simulations

Stratospheric aerosols, most of which originate from explosive volcanic sulfur emissions into the stratosphere, are a key natural driver of climate variability. They are thus a forcing provided by the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) Climate Forcings Task Team to climate modelling groups participating in phase 7 of CMIP. For the historical period, we provide two datasets covering 1750–2023: (i) a volcanic upper tropospheric-stratospheric sulfur emission dataset, documented in a companion paper; and (ii) a stratospheric sulfate aerosol optical property dataset, documented in this paper. For the satellite era (from 1979 onwards), stratospheric aerosol optical properties are derived from the Global Space-based Stratospheric Aerosol Climatology (GloSSAC) dataset. For the pre-satellite era (1750–1978), optical properties are derived from our volcanic SO 2 emission dataset using a new version of the reduced-complexity volcanic aerosol model Easy Volcanic Aerosol (Height) (EVA_H v2). A background, non-volcanic stratospheric aerosol climatology is derived from the 1998–2001 period with a trend over 1850–1978 accounting for increasing anthropogenic aerosols. A monthly stratospheric aerosol climatology is derived from the 1850–2021 average for both pre-industrial and scenario (future) simulations, with a 9-year ramp over 2022–2030 for scenario simulations to ensure a smooth transition from the historical period. CMIP7 simulations should use version 2.2.1 of our pre-industrial and historical datasets, and version 2.2.2 of our scenario dataset. Our methodology to produce historical aerosol optical properties significantly differs from CMIP6 for the pre-satellite era, and the resulting forcings in turn largely differ. In particular, the CMIP6 dataset was mostly based on the sparse and uncertain pyrheliometer record, which resulted in strongly underrepresented emissions from small-to-moderate magnitude eruptions. The resulting bias is addressed in CMIP7, which is entirely emission-derived in the pre-satellite era and uses more recent ice-core-based volcanic sulfur emission inventories than CMIP6. Our approach results in an overall larger volcanic aerosol forcing for CMIP7, with the 1850–2014 mean mid-visible global mean stratospheric aerosol optical depth (SAOD) in CMIP7 (0.0138) being 29 % higher than in CMIP6 (0.0107). The pre-industrial mean of the same variable is 26 % higher in CMIP7 (0.0135, derived from the historical 1850–2021) than CMIP6 (0.0107, derived from the historical 1850–2014 mean). Using a reduced-complexity climate model, we simulate a global mean surface temperature that is 0.07 °C colder for 1850–1900 when using the CMIP7 dataset instead of CMIP6, whereas 2000–2014 is 0.03 °C warmer in CMIP7. Our dataset also exhibits lower forcing for 1960–1980, resulting in temperatures 0.06 °C warmer when averaged over 1960–1990, a period for which CMIP6 climate models exhibit a cold bias. Given the large uncertainties characterizing the dataset, in particular for the pre-satellite era, we advise against treating the CMIP7 or CMIP6 dataset as uniquely superior for any specific year and highlight the need for further evaluation. We conclude the study by discussing sources of uncertainty for the dataset, future research avenues to improve it, as well as requirements to operationalize the production of the dataset, i.e. extend it and update it on an annual basis instead of every 5–7 years following CMIP cycles.

Aubry, Thomas J. [Univ. of Exeter, Devon (United K↗

Wildfire management decisions outweigh mechanical treatment as the keystone to forest landscape adaptation

Modern land management faces unprecedented uncertainty regarding future climates, novel disturbance regimes, and unanticipated ecological feedbacks. Mitigating this uncertainty requires a cohesive landscape management strategy that utilizes multiple methods to optimize benefits while hedging risks amidst uncertain futures. We used a process-based landscape simulation model (LANDIS-II) to forecast forest management, growth, climate effects, and future wildfire dynamics, and we distilled results using a decision support tool allowing us to examine tradeoffs between alternative management strategies. We developed plausible future management scenarios based on factorial combinations of restoration-oriented thinning prescriptions, prescribed fire, and wildland fire use. Results were assessed continuously for a 100-year simulation period, which provided a unique assessment of tradeoffs and benefits among seven primary topics representing social, ecological, and economic aspects of resilience. Projected climatic changes had a substantial impact on modeled wildfire activity. In the Wildfire Only scenario (no treatments, but including active wildfire and climate change), we observed an upwards inflection point in area burned around mid-century (2060) that had detrimental impacts on total landscape carbon storage. While simulated mechanical treatments (~ 3% area per year) reduced the incidence of high-severity fire, it did not eliminate this inflection completely. Scenarios involving wildland fire use resulted in greater reductions in high-severity fire and a more linear trend in cumulative area burned. Mechanical treatments were beneficial for subtopics under the economic topic given their positive financial return on investment, while wildland fire use scenarios were better for ecological subtopics, primarily due to a greater reduction in high-severity fire. Benefits among the social subtopics were mixed, reflecting the inevitability of tradeoffs in landscapes that we rely on for diverse and countervailing ecosystem services. This study provides evidence that optimal future scenarios will involve a mix of active and passive management strategies, allowing different management tactics to coexist within and among ownerships classes. Our results also emphasize the importance of wildfire management decisions as central to building more robust and resilient future landscapes.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Use of an Alternative Conceptual Model of Vadose Zone Heterogeneity to Evaluate Past Tank Leaks and Other Unplanned Releases within a Tank Farm at the Hanford Site - 20061

Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) requested that U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-Office of River Protection (ORP) consider an evaluation of effects of fine-grained thin sediment layers on transport with a separate alternative conceptual model in its evaluation of the potential impact of tank leaks and other unplanned releases within the tank farm at the Hanford Site. For this alternative model, Ecology recommended that the model be developed based on the general framework of fine-grained units identified by a stakeholder group in their interpretations of variability in moisture content data collected in the vicinity of Waste Management Area (WMA) C. In discussions with DOE-ORP, Ecology acknowledged that the underlying data and interpretations of the occurrence and lateral continuity of the fine-grained thin layers identified by a stakeholder group are uncertain. However, DOE-ORP agreed to Ecology's recommendation and has provided support for the requested evaluation that involved development of an alternative model based on the general framework of the unpublished report by the stakeholder. DOE-ORP considered this evaluation to be a hypothetical evaluation of vadose zone heterogeneities at WMA C. General observations from the range of simulation cases examined in the evaluation of the effects of hypothetical vadose zone heterogeneities at WMA C are as follows. - The movement of the center of mass of the simulated plumes was generally vertically downward below the source for all simulations, including those that incorporated the hypothetical fine-grained units. - All simulations that incorporated hypothetical heterogeneity produced additional plume spreading over what was produced in simulations using Equivalent Homogeneous Media (EHM) model(s)a. The spreading resulted in a broadening of the fringes of the plume, resulting in a wider region of low concentration, but lower peak concentrations associated with the center of mass of the plume. - Simulations that used the silty-sand hydraulic properties, suggested by Ecology for the hypothetical fine-grained units, generally produced similar spreading and slightly lower peak mass flux at the water table when compared to the EHM modeling results. a The EHM-based models used at WMA C do not explicitly include small-scale fine-grained heterogeneities used in the model advocated by Ecology. - Simulations that used the silty-sand hydraulic properties, suggested by Ecology for the hypothetical fine-grained units, generally produced less spreading and an earlier arrival of mass flux at the water table when compared to the use of another set of hydraulic properties from a silty-sand sample collected at a nearby disposal facility. - The EHM representation of the vadose zone generally produced higher peak mass flux and an earlier occurrence of peak fluxes at the water table compared to all analyses incorporating additional hypothetical heterogeneity. Results of this alternative model evaluation of past leaks provided some insight into the transport effects of vadose zone heterogeneities at WMA C that helped resolve Ecology's comments and issues related to the effects of vadose zone heterogeneities on past leaks and losses from the WMA C tank farms area. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

TRAILS Output Files

Overview This data repository contains ZIP files that store compressed versions of the output of running the WaterPaths utility planning and management tool in the DU Re-Evaluation mode (to download the tool, please see this GitHub repository). The tool was used to simulate the six-utility North Carolina Research Triangle problem. Details on the contents of each ZIP file can be seen below. Data details Temporal range: Weekly data for 2,344 weeks from 2015 to 2060 (45 years). Spatial range: Six water utilities in the North Carolina Research Triangle region (0: Chapel Hil/OWASA, 1: Durham, 2: Cary, 3: Raleigh, 4: Pittsboro, and 5: Chatham) File types: CSV and OUT Different solutions available The solution numbers correspond to the different pathway strategies (henceforth referred to as "solutions") discussed in paper's main and supporting text (abstract and link to the paper here). They are as follows: Sol92: The Durham-focused pathway strategy Sol132: The Raleigh-focused pathway strategy Sol140: The regionally-robust pathway strategy Objectives files These files can be accessed by unzipping solXX_objectives_pathways.zip that contains 1,000 Objectives_RDMXX_solsXX_to_XX.csv files. Each CSV file will consist of a row representing all the objective values for that specific solution, while every six columns represents the reliability, restriction frequency, infrastructure net present value ($ mil), peak financial cost, worst-case cost, and unit cost ($ per MG; in that order) for each of the six utilities. There will be 1,000 such files, denoting the performance of the six utilities across the 1,000 deeply uncertain states of the world (DU SOWs). Pathway files These files can be accessed by unzipping solXX_objectives_pathways.zip that contains 1,000 Pathways_sXX_RDMXX.out file. Each OUT corresponds to the set of infrastructure being triggered in a specific DU SOW, and each file will have the name file will consist of four tab-delimited columns that are described as follows: Realization: The realization in which an infrastructure options being triggered utility: The utility currently triggering infrastructure week: The week in which a specific infrastructure option is being triggered infra.: The infrastructure option being triggered If the OUT file contains only the header line, no infrastructure was triggered for that specific DU SOW. Policies files These files can be obtained by unzipping Policies.zip. Each of the 1,000 CSV files within the unzipped folder will contain weekly water use restriction policies for all 1,000 hydroclimatic realizations within a specific DU SOW. The column structure is as follows: 0rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 0 (values between 0 and 1) 1rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 1 (values between 0 and 1) 2rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 2 (values between 0 and 1) 3rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 3 (values between 0 and 1) 4rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 4 (values between 0 and 1) 5rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 5 (values between 0 and 1) 0transf: transfer volume for utility 0 (in MGD) 1transf: transfer volume for utility 1 (in MGD) 2transf: transfer volume for utility 2 (in MGD) 3transf: transfer volume for utility 3 (in MGD) 4transf: transfer volume for utility 4 (in MGD) 5transf: transfer volume for utility 5 (in MGD) Water Sources files These files can be obtained by unzipping WaterSources_subset.zip. Each of the 100 CSV files within the unzipped folder will contain weekly state variables at each water source for all 1,000 hydroclimatic realizations within a specific DU SOW. The column structure is as follows: Xvolume: available water volume from source X (in MGD) Xs_area: surface area of source X (in ACF) Xdemand: demand drawn from a water source from source X (in MGD) Xup_spill: upstream spillage from source X (in MGD) Xww_inflow: wastewater inflow from source X (in MGD) Xcatch_inflow: upstream catchment inflow to source X (in MGD) Xevap: evaporation multiplier for source X (values between 0 and 1) Xds_spill: downstream spillage from source X (in MGD) X_Y_alloc_cap: the allocated capacity from source X to utility Y (values between 0 and 1) X_Y_alloc_dem: the allocated demand from source X to utility Y (values between 0 and 1) Xtrmt_alloc_Y: the allocated treatment capacity from source X to utility Y (values between 0 and 1) Utilities files These files can be obtained by unzipping Utilities_subset.zip. Each of the 100 CSV files within the unzipped folder will contain weekly state variables at each utility for all 1,000 hydroclimatic realizations within a specific DU SOW. The column structure is as follows: Xst_vol: total available storage volume of utility X (in MG) Xcapacity: total storage capacity of utility X (in MG) Xnet_inf: : net inflow for all storage infrastructure for utility X (in MGD) Xst_rof: short term ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xst_stor_rof: short-term storage ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xst_trmt_rof: short-term treatment ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xlt_rof: long-term ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xlt_stor_rof: long-term storage ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xlt_trmt_rof: long-term treatment ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xrest_demand: restricted demand for utility X (in MGD) Xunrest_demand: unrestricted demand for utility X (in MGD) Xunfulf_demand: unfulfilled demand for utility X (in MGD) Xwastewater: wastewater return for utility X (in MGD) Xtreat_capacity: total treatment capacity for utility X (in MG) Xcont_fund: reserve (contingency) fund balance for utility X Xins_pout: insurance payout for utility X (% annual volumetric revenue) Xins_price: insurance price for utility X (% annual volumetric revenue) Xinfra_npv: infrastructure net present value for utility ($mil) Xst_vol: total available storage volume of utility X (in MG) Xdebt_serv: debt service for utility X (usually once per year if the infrastructure is triggered; % annual volumetric revenue) Xstor_vol: total stored volume (in MGD) Xobs_ann_dem: observed annual demand for utility X (in MGD) Xproj_dem: projected annual demand for utility X (in MGD) Xpv_debt_serv: present value of debt service payments for utility X (% annual volumetric revenue) Xgross_rev: gross revenue for utility X ($mil) Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program.

Artificial Intelligence↗

Global Methane Budget 2000–2020

Abstract. Understanding and quantifying the global methane (CH4) budget is important for assessing realistic pathways to mitigate climate change. CH4 is the second most important human-influenced greenhouse gas in terms of climate forcing after carbon dioxide (CO2), and both emissions and atmospheric concentrations of CH4 have continued to increase since 2007 after a temporary pause. The relative importance of CH4 emissions compared to those of CO2 for temperature change is related to its shorter atmospheric lifetime, stronger radiative effect, and acceleration in atmospheric growth rate over the past decade, the causes of which are still debated. Two major challenges in quantifying the factors responsible for the observed atmospheric growth rate arise from diverse, geographically overlapping CH4 sources and from the uncertain magnitude and temporal change in the destruction of CH4 by short-lived and highly variable hydroxyl radicals (OH). To address these challenges, we have established a consortium of multidisciplinary scientists under the umbrella of the Global Carbon Project to improve, synthesise, and update the global CH4 budget regularly and to stimulate new research on the methane cycle. Following Saunois et al. (2016, 2020), we present here the third version of the living review paper dedicated to the decadal CH4 budget, integrating results of top-down CH4 emission estimates (based on in situ and Greenhouse Gases Observing SATellite (GOSAT) atmospheric observations and an ensemble of atmospheric inverse-model results) and bottom-up estimates (based on process-based models for estimating land surface emissions and atmospheric chemistry, inventories of anthropogenic emissions, and data-driven extrapolations). We present a budget for the most recent 2010–2019 calendar decade (the latest period for which full data sets are available), for the previous decade of 2000–2009 and for the year 2020. The revision of the bottom-up budget in this 2025 edition benefits from important progress in estimating inland freshwater emissions, with better counting of emissions from lakes and ponds, reservoirs, and streams and rivers. This budget also reduces double counting across freshwater and wetland emissions and, for the first time, includes an estimate of the potential double counting that may exist (average of 23 Tg CH4 yr−1). Bottom-up approaches show that the combined wetland and inland freshwater emissions average 248 [159–369] Tg CH4 yr−1 for the 2010–2019 decade. Natural fluxes are perturbed by human activities through climate, eutrophication, and land use. In this budget, we also estimate, for the first time, this anthropogenic component contributing to wetland and inland freshwater emissions. Newly available gridded products also allowed us to derive an almost complete latitudinal and regional budget based on bottom-up approaches. For the 2010–2019 decade, global CH4 emissions are estimated by atmospheric inversions (top-down) to be 575 Tg CH4 yr−1 (range 553–586, corresponding to the minimum and maximum estimates of the model ensemble). Of this amount, 369 Tg CH4 yr−1 or ∼ 65 % is attributed to direct anthropogenic sources in the fossil, agriculture, and waste and anthropogenic biomass burning (range 350–391 Tg CH4 yr−1 or 63 %–68 %). For the 2000–2009 period, the atmospheric inversions give a slightly lower total emission than for 2010–2019, by 32 Tg CH4 yr−1 (range 9–40). The 2020 emission rate is the highest of the period and reaches 608 Tg CH4 yr−1 (range 581–627), which is 12 % higher than the average emissions in the 2000s. Since 2012, global direct anthropogenic CH4 emission trends have been tracking scenarios that assume no or minimal climate mitigation policies proposed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (shared socio-economic pathways SSP5 and SSP3). Bottom-up methods suggest 16 % (94 Tg CH4 yr−1) larger global emissions (669 Tg CH4 yr−1, range 512–849) than top-down inversion methods for the 2010–2019 period. The discrepancy between the bottom-up and the top-down budgets has been greatly reduced compared to the previous differences (167 and 156 Tg CH4 yr−1 in Saunois et al. (2016, 2020) respectively), and for the first time uncertainties in bottom-up and top-down budgets overlap. Although differences have been reduced between inversions and bottom-up, the most important source of uncertainty in the global CH4 budget is still attributable to natural emissions, especially those from wetlands and inland freshwaters. The tropospheric loss of methane, as the main contributor to methane lifetime, has been estimated at 563 [510–663] Tg CH4 yr−1 based on chemistry–climate models. These values are slightly larger than for 2000–2009 due to the impact of the rise in atmospheric methane and remaining large uncertainty (∼ 25 %). The total sink of CH4 is estimated at 633 [507–796] Tg CH4 yr−1 by the bottom-up approaches and at 554 [550–567] Tg CH4 yr−1 by top-down approaches. However, most of the top-down models use the same OH distribution, which introduces less uncertainty to the global budget than is likely justified. For 2010–2019, agriculture and waste contributed an estimated 228 [213–242] Tg CH4 yr−1 in the top-down budget and 211 [195–231] Tg CH4 yr−1 in the bottom-up budget. Fossil fuel emissions contributed 115 [100–124] Tg CH4 yr−1 in the top-down budget and 120 [117–125] Tg CH4 yr−1 in the bottom-up budget. Biomass and biofuel burning contributed 27 [26–27] Tg CH4 yr−1 in the top-down budget and 28 [21–39] Tg CH4 yr−1 in the bottom-up budget. We identify five major priorities for improving the CH4 budget: (i) producing a global, high-resolution map of water-saturated soils and inundated areas emitting CH4 based on a robust classification of different types of emitting ecosystems; (ii) further development of process-based models for inland-water emissions; (iii) intensification of CH4 observations at local (e.g. FLUXNET-CH4 measurements, urban-scale monitoring, satellite imagery with pointing capabilities) to regional scales (surface networks and global remote sensing measurements from satellites) to constrain both bottom-up models and atmospheric inversions; (iv) improvements of transport models and the representation of photochemical sinks in top-down inversions; and (v) integration of 3D variational inversion systems using isotopic and/or co-emitted species such as ethane as well as information in the bottom-up inventories on anthropogenic super-emitters detected by remote sensing (mainly oil and gas sector but also coal, agriculture, and landfills) to improve source partitioning. The data presented here can be downloaded from https://doi.org/10.18160/GKQ9-2RHT (Martinez et al., 2024).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗