Abstract. Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions andtheir redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere– the “global carbon budget” – is important to better understand theglobal carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, andproject future climate change. Here we describe data sets and methodology toquantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and theiruncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFF) are based on energystatistics and cement production data, while emissions from land use change(ELUC), mainly deforestation, are based on land use and land use changedata and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is measureddirectly and its growth rate (GATM) is computed from the annual changesin concentration. The ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) and terrestrialCO2 sink (SLAND) are estimated with global process modelsconstrained by observations. The resulting carbon budget imbalance(BIM), the difference between the estimated total emissions and theestimated changes in the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere, is ameasure of imperfect data and understanding of the contemporary carboncycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the lastdecade available (2009–2018), EFF was 9.5±0.5 GtC yr−1,ELUC 1.5±0.7 GtC yr−1, GATM 4.9±0.02 GtC yr−1 (2.3±0.01 ppm yr−1), SOCEAN 2.5±0.6 GtC yr−1, and SLAND 3.2±0.6 GtC yr−1, with a budgetimbalance BIM of 0.4 GtC yr−1 indicating overestimated emissionsand/or underestimated sinks. For the year 2018 alone, the growth in EFF wasabout 2.1 % and fossil emissions increased to 10.0±0.5 GtC yr−1, reaching 10 GtC yr−1 for the first time in history,ELUC was 1.5±0.7 GtC yr−1, for total anthropogenicCO2 emissions of 11.5±0.9 GtC yr−1 (42.5±3.3 GtCO2). Also for 2018, GATM was 5.1±0.2 GtC yr−1 (2.4±0.1 ppm yr−1), SOCEAN was 2.6±0.6 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 3.5±0.7 GtC yr−1, with a BIM of 0.3 GtC. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 407.38±0.1 ppm averaged over 2018. For 2019, preliminary data for the first 6–10 months indicate a reduced growth in EFF of +0.6 % (range of−0.2 % to 1.5 %) based on national emissions projections for China, theUSA, the EU, and India and projections of gross domestic product correctedfor recent changes in the carbon intensity of the economy for the rest ofthe world. Overall, the mean and trend in the five components of the globalcarbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2018, butdiscrepancies of up to 1 GtC yr−1 persist for the representation ofsemi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. A detailed comparison amongindividual estimates and the introduction of a broad range of observationsshows (1) no consensus in the mean and trend in land use change emissionsover the last decade, (2) a persistent low agreement between the differentmethods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northernextra-tropics, and (3) an apparent underestimation of the CO2variability by ocean models outside the tropics. This living data updatedocuments changes in the methods and data sets used in this new globalcarbon budget and the progress in understanding of the global carbon cyclecompared with previous publications of this data set (Le Quéré etal., 2018a, b, 2016, 2015a, b, 2014, 2013). The data generated bythis work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/gcp-2019 (Friedlingsteinet al., 2019).
more »
« less
Diverging Northern Hemisphere Trends in Meteorological Versus Ecological Indicators of Spring Onset in CMIP6
Plant phenology regulates the carbon cycle and land‐atmosphere coupling. Currently, climate models often disagree with observations on the seasonal cycle of vegetation growth, partially due to how spring onset is measured and simulated. Here we use both thermal and leaf area index (LAI) based indicators to characterize spring onset in CMIP6 models. Although the historical timing varies considerably across models, most agree that spring has advanced in recent decades and will continue to arrive earlier with future warming. Across the Northern Hemisphere for the periods 1950–2014, 1981–2014, and 2015–2099 in the historical and SSP5‐8.5 simulations, thermal‐based indicators estimate spring advances of −0.7 ± 0.2, −1.4 ± 0.4, and −2.4 ± 0.7 days/decade, while LAI‐based indicators estimate −0.4 ± 0.3, −0.1 ± 0.3, and −1±1.1 days/decade. Thereby, LAI‐based indicators exhibit weaker trends toward earlier onset, leading to uncertainties from different indices being as large or larger than model uncertainty. Reconciling these discrepancies is critical for understanding future changes in spring onset.
more » « less- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10409628
- Publisher / Repository:
- DOI PREFIX: 10.1029
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Geophysical Research Letters
- Volume:
- 50
- Issue:
- 8
- ISSN:
- 0094-8276
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
more » « less
Abstract The springtime transition to regional‐scale onset of photosynthesis and net ecosystem carbon uptake in boreal and tundra ecosystems are linked to the soil freeze–thaw state. We present evidence from diagnostic and inversion models constrained by satellite fluorescence and airborne
CO 2from 2012 to 2014 indicating the timing and magnitude of spring carbon uptake in Alaska correlates with landscape thaw and ecoregion. Landscape thaw in boreal forests typically occurs in late April (DOY 111 ± 7) with a 29 ± 6 day lag until photosynthetic onset. North Slope tundra thaws 3 weeks later (DOY 133 ± 5) but experiences only a 20 ± 5 day lag until photosynthetic onset. These time lag differences reflect efficient cold season adaptation in tundra shrub and the longer dehardening period for boreal evergreens. Despite the short transition from thaw to photosynthetic onset in tundra, synchrony of tundra respiration with snow melt and landscape thaw delays the transition from net carbon loss (at photosynthetic onset) to net uptake by 13 ± 7 days, thus reducing the tundra net carbon uptake period. Two globalCO 2inversions using aCASA ‐GFED model prior estimate earlier northern high latitude net carbon uptake compared to our regional inversion, which we attribute to (i) early photosynthetic‐onset model prior bias, (ii) inverse method (scaling factor + optimization window), and (iii) sparsity of available AlaskanCO 2observations. Another global inversion with zero prior estimates the same timing for net carbon uptake as the regional model but smaller seasonal amplitude. The analysis of Alaskan eddy covariance observations confirms regional scale findings for tundra, but indicates that photosynthesis and net carbon uptake occur up to 1 month earlier in evergreens than captured by models orCO 2inversions, with better correlation to above‐freezing air temperature than date of primary thaw. Further collection and analysis of boreal evergreen species over multiple years and at additional subarctic flux towers are critically needed. -
Abstract. Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide(CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere,ocean, and terrestrial biosphere – the “global carbon budget” – isimportant to better understand the global carbon cycle, support thedevelopment of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here wedescribe data sets and methodology to quantify the five major components ofthe global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO2emissions (EFF) are based on energy statistics and cementproduction data, while emissions from land use and land-use change (ELUC),mainly deforestation, are based on land use and land-use change data andbookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is measureddirectly and its growth rate (GATM) is computed from the annualchanges in concentration. The ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN)and terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) are estimated withglobal process models constrained by observations. The resulting carbonbudget imbalance (BIM), the difference between the estimatedtotal emissions and the estimated changes in the atmosphere, ocean, andterrestrial biosphere, is a measure of imperfect data and understanding ofthe contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the last decade available (2008–2017), EFF was9.4±0.5 GtC yr−1, ELUC 1.5±0.7 GtC yr−1, GATM 4.7±0.02 GtC yr−1,SOCEAN 2.4±0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND 3.2±0.8 GtC yr−1, with a budget imbalance BIM of0.5 GtC yr−1 indicating overestimated emissions and/or underestimatedsinks. For the year 2017 alone, the growth in EFF was about 1.6 %and emissions increased to 9.9±0.5 GtC yr−1. Also for 2017,ELUC was 1.4±0.7 GtC yr−1, GATM was 4.6±0.2 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN was 2.5±0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 3.8±0.8 GtC yr−1,with a BIM of 0.3 GtC. The global atmosphericCO2 concentration reached 405.0±0.1 ppm averaged over 2017.For 2018, preliminary data for the first 6–9 months indicate a renewedgrowth in EFF of +2.7 % (range of 1.8 % to 3.7 %) basedon national emission projections for China, the US, the EU, and India andprojections of gross domestic product corrected for recent changes in thecarbon intensity of the economy for the rest of the world. The analysispresented here shows that the mean and trend in the five components of theglobal carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period of 1959–2017,but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC yr−1 persist for the representationof semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. A detailed comparisonamong individual estimates and the introduction of a broad range ofobservations show (1) no consensus in the mean and trend in land-use changeemissions, (2) a persistent low agreement among the different methods onthe magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extra-tropics,and (3) an apparent underestimation of the CO2 variability by oceanmodels, originating outside the tropics. This living data update documentschanges in the methods and data sets used in this new global carbon budgetand the progress in understanding the global carbon cycle compared withprevious publications of this data set (Le Quéré et al., 2018, 2016,2015a, b, 2014, 2013). All results presented here can be downloaded fromhttps://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2018.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract We present the discovery of the Type II supernova SN 2023ixf in M101 and follow-up photometric and spectroscopic observations, respectively, in the first month and week of its evolution. Our discovery was made within a day of estimated first light, and the following light curve is characterized by a rapid rise (≈5 days) to a luminous peak (
M V ≈ − 18.2 mag) and plateau (M V ≈ − 17.6 mag) extending to 30 days with a fast decline rate of ≈0.03 mag day−1. During the rising phase,U −V color shows blueward evolution, followed by redward evolution in the plateau phase. Prominent flash features of hydrogen, helium, carbon, and nitrogen dominate the spectra up to ≈5 days after first light, with a transition to a higher ionization state in the first ≈2 days. Both theU −V color and flash ionization states suggest a rise in the temperature, indicative of a delayed shock breakout inside dense circumstellar material (CSM). From the timescales of CSM interaction, we estimate its compact radial extent of ∼(3–7) × 1014cm. We then construct numerical light-curve models based on both continuous and eruptive mass-loss scenarios shortly before explosion. For the continuous mass-loss scenario, we infer a range of mass-loss history with 0.1–1.0M ⊙yr−1in the final 2−1 yr before explosion, with a potentially decreasing mass loss of 0.01–0.1M ⊙yr−1in ∼0.7–0.4 yr toward the explosion. For the eruptive mass-loss scenario, we favor eruptions releasing 0.3–1M ⊙of the envelope at about a year before explosion, which result in CSM with mass and extent similar to the continuous scenario. We discuss the implications of the available multiwavelength constraints obtained thus far on the progenitor candidate and SN 2023ixf to our variable CSM models. -
more » « less
Abstract Large-scale changes in the state of the land surface affect the circulation of the atmosphere and the structure and function of ecosystems alike. As global temperatures increase and regional climates change, the timing of key plant phenophase changes are likely to shift as well. Here we evaluate a suite of phenometrics designed to facilitate an “apples to apples” comparison between remote sensing products and climate model output. Specifically, we derive day-of-year (DOY) thresholds of leaf area index (LAI) from both remote sensing and the Community Land Model (CLM) over the Northern Hemisphere. This systematic approach to comparing phenologically relevant variables reveals appreciable differences in both LAI seasonal cycle and spring onset timing between model simulated phenology and satellite records. For example, phenological spring onset in the model occurs on average 30 days later than observed, especially for evergreen plant functional types. The disagreement in phenology can result in a mean bias of approximately 5% of the total estimated Northern Hemisphere NPP. Further, while the more recent version of CLM (v5.0) exhibits seasonal mean LAI values that are in closer agreement with satellite data than its predecessor (CLM4.5), LAI seasonal cycles in CLM5.0 exhibit poorer agreement. Therefore, despite broad improvements for a range of states and fluxes from CLM4.5 to CLM5.0, degradation of plant phenology occurs in CLM5.0. Therefore, any coupling between the land surface and the atmosphere that depends on vegetation state might not be fully captured by the existing generation of the model. We also discuss several avenues for improving the fidelity between observations and model simulations.
