English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This study uses two climate models and six scenarios of prescribedmethane emissions to compare modelled and observed atmospheric methanebetween 1994 and 2007, for Cape Grim, Australia (40.7° S,144.7° E). The model simulations follow the TransCom-CH<sub>4</sub>protocol and use the Australian Community Climate and Earth SystemSimulator (ACCESS) and the CSIRO Conformal-Cubic Atmospheric Model(CCAM). Radon is also simulated and used to reduce the impact oftransport differences between the models and observations.Comparisons are made for air samples that have traversed theAustralian continent. All six emission scenarios give modelledconcentrations that are broadly consistent with those observed.  Thereare three notable mismatches, however. Firstly, scenarios thatincorporate interannually varying biomass burning emissions produceanomalously high methane concentrations at Cape Grim at times of largefire events in southeastern Australia, most likely due to the firemethane emissions being unrealistically input into the lowest modellevel.  Secondly, scenarios with wetland methane emissions in theaustral winter overestimate methane concentrations at Cape Grim duringwintertime while scenarios without winter wetland emissions performbetter. Finally, all scenarios fail to represent a~methane source inaustral spring implied by the observations. It is possible that thetiming of wetland emissions in the scenarios is incorrect with recentsatellite measurements suggesting an austral spring (September–October–November),rather than winter, maximum for wetland emissions

Simulations of atmospheric methane for Cape Grim, Tasmania, to constrain southeastern Australian methane emissions