Abstract. Understanding and quantifying the global methane (CH₄) budget is important for assessing realistic pathways to mitigate climate change. Atmospheric emissions and concentrations of CH₄ continue to increase, making CH₄ the second most important human-influenced greenhouse gas in terms of climate forcing, after carbon dioxide (CO₂). The relative importance of CH₄ compared to CO₂ depends on its shorter atmospheric lifetime, stronger warming potential, and variations in atmospheric growth rate over the past decade, the causes of which are still debated. Two major challenges in reducing uncertainties in the atmospheric growth rate arise from the variety of geographically overlapping CH₄ sources and from the destruction of CH₄ by short-lived hydroxyl radicals (OH). To address these challenges, we have established a consortium of multidisciplinary scientists under the umbrella of the Global Carbon Project to synthesize and stimulate new research aimed at improving and regularly updating the global methane budget. Following Saunois et al. (2016), we present here the second version of the living review paper dedicated to the decadal methane budget, integrating results of top-down studies (atmospheric observations within an atmospheric inverse-modelling framework) and bottom-up estimates (including process-based models for estimating land surface emissions and atmospheric chemistry, inventories of anthropogenic emissions, and data-driven extrapolations).

For the 2008–2017 decade, global methane emissions are estimated by atmospheric inversions (a top-down approach) to be 576 Tg CH₄ yr⁻¹ (range 550–594, corresponding to the minimum and maximum estimates of the model ensemble). Of this total, 359 Tg CH₄ yr⁻¹ or ∼ 60 % is attributed to anthropogenic sources, that is emissions caused by direct human activity (i.e. anthropogenic emissions; range 336–376 Tg CH₄ yr⁻¹ or 50 %–65 %). The mean annual total emission for the new decade (2008–2017) is 29 Tg CH₄ yr⁻¹ larger than our estimate for the previous decade (2000–2009), and 24 Tg CH₄ yr⁻¹ larger than the one reported in the previous budget for 2003–2012 (Saunois et al., 2016). Since 2012, global CH₄ emissions have been tracking the warmest scenarios assessed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Bottom-up methods suggest almost 30 % larger global emissions (737 Tg CH₄ yr⁻¹, range 594–881) than top-down inversion methods. Indeed, bottom-up estimates for natural sources such as natural wetlands, other inland water systems, and geological sources are higher than top-down estimates. The atmospheric constraints on the top-down budget suggest that at least some of these bottom-up emissions are overestimated. The latitudinal distribution of atmospheric observation-based emissions indicates a predominance of tropical emissions (∼ 65 % of the global budget, < 30^∘ N) compared to mid-latitudes (∼ 30 %, 30–60^∘ N) and high northern latitudes (∼ 4 %, 60–90^∘ N). The most important source of uncertainty in the methane budget is attributable to natural emissions, especially those from wetlands and other inland waters.

Some of our global source estimates are smaller than those in previously published budgets (Saunois et al., 2016; Kirschke et al., 2013). In particular wetland emissions are about 35 Tg CH₄ yr⁻¹ lower due to improved partition wetlands and other inland waters. Emissions from geological sources and wild animals are also found to be smaller by 7 Tg CH₄ yr⁻¹ by 8 Tg CH₄ yr⁻¹, respectively. However, the overall discrepancy between bottom-up and top-down estimates has been reduced by only 5 % compared to Saunois et al. (2016), due to a higher estimate of emissions from inland waters, highlighting the need for more detailed research on emissions factors. Priorities for improving the methane budget include (i) a global, high-resolution map of water-saturated soils and inundated areas emitting methane based on a robust classification of different types of emitting habitats; (ii) further development of process-based models for inland-water emissions; (iii) intensification of methane observations at local scales (e.g., FLUXNET-CH₄ measurements) and urban-scale monitoring to constrain bottom-up land surface models, and at regional scales (surface networks and satellites) to constrain atmospheric inversions; (iv) improvements of transport models and the representation of photochemical sinks in top-down inversions; and (v) development of a 3D variational inversion system using isotopic and/or co-emitted species such as ethane to improve source partitioning.

The data presented here can be downloaded from https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-CH4-2019 (Saunois et al., 2020) and from the Global Carbon Project.

Abstract. Understanding the interannual variability of surface mass balance (SMB) and surface melting in Antarctica is key to quantify the signal-to-noise ratio in climate trends, identify opportunities for multi-year climate predictions and assess the ability of climate models to respond to climate variability. Here we simulate summer SMB and surface melting from 1979 to 2017 using the Regional Atmosphere Model (MAR) at 10 km resolution over the drainage basins of the Amundsen Sea glaciers in West Antarctica. Our simulations reproduce the mean present-day climate in terms of near-surface temperature (mean overestimation of 0.10 ^∘C), near-surface wind speed (mean underestimation of 0.42 m s⁻¹), and SMB (relative bias <20 % over Thwaites glacier). The simulated interannual variability of SMB and melting is also close to observation-based estimates.

For all the Amundsen glacial drainage basins, the interannual variability of summer SMB and surface melting is driven by two distinct mechanisms: high summer SMB tends to occur when the Amundsen Sea Low (ASL) is shifted southward and westward, while high summer melt rates tend to occur when ASL is shallower (i.e. anticyclonic anomaly). Both mechanisms create a northerly flow anomaly that increases moisture convergence and cloud cover over the Amundsen Sea and therefore favors snowfall and downward longwave radiation over the ice sheet. The part of interannual summer SMB variance explained by the ASL longitudinal migrations increases westward and reaches 40 % for Getz. Interannual variation in the ASL relative central pressure is the largest driver of melt rate variability, with 11 % to 21 % of explained variance (increasing westward). While high summer SMB and melt rates are both favored by positive phases of El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO), the Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) only explains 5 % to 16 % of SMB or melt rate interannual variance in our simulations, with moderate statistical significance. However, the part explained by SOI in the previous austral winter is greater, suggesting that at least a part of the ENSO–SMB and ENSO–melt relationships in summer is inherited from the previous austral winter. Possible mechanisms involve sea ice advection from the Ross Sea and intrusions of circumpolar deep water combined with melt-induced ocean overturning circulation in ice shelf cavities. Finally, we do not find any correlation with the Southern Annular Mode (SAM) in summer.