Search for: All records

Abstract Climate change is rapidly altering composition, structure, and functioning of the boreal biome, across North America often broadly categorized into ecoregions. The resulting complex changes in different ecoregions present a challenge for efforts to accurately simulate carbon dioxide (CO₂) and energy exchanges between boreal forests and the atmosphere with terrestrial ecosystem models (TEMs). Eddy covariance measurements provide valuable information for evaluating the performance of TEMs and guiding their development. Here, we compiled a boreal forest model benchmarking dataset for North America by harmonizing eddy covariance and supporting measurements from eight black spruce (Picea mariana)-dominated, mature forest stands. The eight forest stands, located in six boreal ecoregions of North America, differ in stand characteristics, disturbance history, climate, permafrost conditions and soil properties. By compiling various data streams, the benchmarking dataset comprises data to parameterize, force, and evaluate TEMs. Specifically, it includes half-hourly, gap-filled meteorological forcing data, ancillary data essential for model parameterization, and half-hourly, gap-filled or partitioned component flux data on CO₂(net ecosystem production, gross primary production [GPP], and ecosystem respiration [ER]) and energy (latent [LE] and sensible heat [H]) and their daily aggregates screened based on half-hourly gap-filling quality criteria. We present a case study with the Canadian Land Surface Scheme Including Biogeochemical Cycles (CLASSIC) to: (1) demonstrate the utility of our dataset to benchmark TEMs and (2) provide guidance for model development and refinement. Model skill was evaluated using several statistical metrics and further examined through the flux responses to their environmental controls. Our results suggest that CLASSIC tended to overestimate GPP and ER among all stands. Model performance regarding the energy fluxes (i.e., LE and H) varied greatly among the stands and exhibited a moderate correlation with latitude. We identified strong relationships between simulated fluxes and their environmental controls except for H, thus highlighting current strengths and limitations of CLASSIC. 

Abstract The determinants of fire-driven changes in soil organic carbon (SOC) across broad environmental gradients remains unclear, especially in global drylands. Here we combined datasets and field sampling of fire-manipulation experiments to evaluate where and why fire changes SOC and compared our statistical model to simulations from ecosystem models. Drier ecosystems experienced larger relative changes in SOC than humid ecosystems—in some cases exceeding losses from plant biomass pools—primarily explained by high fire-driven declines in tree biomass inputs in dry ecosystems. Many ecosystem models underestimated the SOC changes in drier ecosystems. Upscaling our statistical model predicted that soils in savannah–grassland regions may have gained 0.64 PgC due to net-declines in burned area over the past approximately two decades. Consequently, ongoing declines in fire frequencies have probably created an extensive carbon sink in the soils of global drylands that may have been underestimated by ecosystem models. 

Abstract Process‐based land surface models are important tools for estimating global wetland methane (CH₄) emissions and projecting their behavior across space and time. So far there are no performance assessments of model responses to drivers at multiple time scales. In this study, we apply wavelet analysis to identify the dominant time scales contributing to model uncertainty in the frequency domain. We evaluate seven wetland models at 23 eddy covariance tower sites. Our study first characterizes site‐level patterns of freshwater wetland CH₄fluxes (FCH₄) at different time scales. A Monte Carlo approach was developed to incorporate flux observation error to avoid misidentification of the time scales that dominate model error. Our results suggest that (a) significant model‐observation disagreements are mainly at multi‐day time scales (<15 days); (b) most of the models can capture the CH₄variability at monthly and seasonal time scales (>32 days) for the boreal and Arctic tundra wetland sites but have significant bias in variability at seasonal time scales for temperate and tropical/subtropical sites; (c) model errors exhibit increasing power spectrum as time scale increases, indicating that biases at time scales <5 days could contribute to persistent systematic biases on longer time scales; and (d) differences in error pattern are related to model structure (e.g., proxy of CH₄production). Our evaluation suggests the need to accurately replicate FCH₄variability, especially at short time scales, in future wetland CH₄model developments. 

Abstract. Peatlands store large amounts of soil carbon and freshwater, constituting an important component of the global carbon and hydrologic cycles. Accurate information on the global extent and distribution of peatlands is presently lacking but is needed by Earth system models (ESMs) to simulate the effects of climate change on the global carbon and hydrologic balance. Here, we present Peat-ML, a spatially continuous global map of peatland fractional coverage generated using machine learning (ML) techniques suitable for use as a prescribed geophysical field in an ESM. Inputs to our statistical model follow drivers of peatland formation and include spatially distributed climate, geomorphological and soil data, and remotely sensed vegetation indices. Available maps of peatland fractional coverage for 14 relatively extensive regions were used along with mapped ecoregions of non-peatland areas to train the statistical model. In addition to qualitative comparisons to other maps in the literature, we estimated model error in two ways. The first estimate used the training data in a blocked leave-one-out cross-validation strategy designed to minimize the influence of spatial autocorrelation. That approach yielded an average r2 of 0.73 with a root-mean-square error and mean bias error of 9.11 % and −0.36 %, respectively. Our second error estimate was generated by comparing Peat-ML against a high-quality, extensively ground-truthed map generated by Ducks Unlimited Canada for the Canadian Boreal Plains region. This comparison suggests our map to be of comparable quality to mapping products generated through more traditional approaches, at least for boreal peatlands. 

Abstract. Understanding and quantifying the global methane (CH4) budget is important for assessing realistic pathways to mitigate climate change. Emissions and atmospheric concentrations of CH4 continue to increase, maintaining CH4 as 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 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 reducing uncertainties in the factors explaining the well-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 multi-disciplinary 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 gas 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 datasets are available), for the previous decade of 2000–2009 and for the year 2020. The revision of the bottom-up budget in this edition benefits from important progress in estimating inland freshwater emissions, with better accounting of emissions from lakes and ponds, reservoirs, and streams and rivers. This budget also reduces double accounting across freshwater and wetland emissions and, for the first time, includes an estimate of the potential double accounting that still exists (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 % are 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). 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 uncertainty in bottom-up and top-down budgets overlap. The latitudinal distribution from atmospheric inversion-based emissions indicates a predominance of tropical and southern hemisphere emissions (~65 % of the global budget, <30° N) compared to mid (30° N–60° N, ~30 % of emissions) and high-northern latitudes (60° N–90° N, ~4 % of global emissions). This latitudinal distribution is similar in the bottom-up budget though the bottom-up budget estimates slightly larger contributions for the mid and high-northern latitudes, and slightly smaller contributions from the tropics and southern hemisphere than the inversions. 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. 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). 

Abstract Wetlands are responsible for 20%–31% of global methane (CH₄) emissions and account for a large source of uncertainty in the global CH₄budget. Data‐driven upscaling of CH₄fluxes from eddy covariance measurements can provide new and independent bottom‐up estimates of wetland CH₄emissions. Here, we develop a six‐predictor random forest upscaling model (UpCH4), trained on 119 site‐years of eddy covariance CH₄flux data from 43 freshwater wetland sites in the FLUXNET‐CH4 Community Product. Network patterns in site‐level annual means and mean seasonal cycles of CH₄fluxes were reproduced accurately in tundra, boreal, and temperate regions (Nash‐Sutcliffe Efficiency ∼0.52–0.63 and 0.53). UpCH4 estimated annual global wetland CH₄emissions of 146 ± 43 TgCH₄ y⁻¹for 2001–2018 which agrees closely with current bottom‐up land surface models (102–181 TgCH₄ y⁻¹) and overlaps with top‐down atmospheric inversion models (155–200 TgCH₄ y⁻¹). However, UpCH4 diverged from both types of models in the spatial pattern and seasonal dynamics of tropical wetland emissions. We conclude that upscaling of eddy covariance CH₄fluxes has the potential to produce realistic extra‐tropical wetland CH₄emissions estimates which will improve with more flux data. To reduce uncertainty in upscaled estimates, researchers could prioritize new wetland flux sites along humid‐to‐arid tropical climate gradients, from major rainforest basins (Congo, Amazon, and SE Asia), into monsoon (Bangladesh and India) and savannah regions (African Sahel) and be paired with improved knowledge of wetland extent seasonal dynamics in these regions. The monthly wetland methane products gridded at 0.25° from UpCH4 are available via ORNL DAAC (https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/2253). 

Abstract. Global fire-vegetation models are widely used to assessimpacts of environmental change on fire regimes and the carbon cycle and toinfer relationships between climate, land use and fire. However,differences in model structure and parameterizations, in both the vegetationand fire components of these models, could influence overall modelperformance, and to date there has been limited evaluation of how welldifferent models represent various aspects of fire regimes. The Fire ModelIntercomparison Project (FireMIP) is coordinating the evaluation ofstate-of-the-art global fire models, in order to improve projections of firecharacteristics and fire impacts on ecosystems and human societies in thecontext of global environmental change. Here we perform a systematicevaluation of historical simulations made by nine FireMIP models to quantifytheir ability to reproduce a range of fire and vegetation benchmarks. TheFireMIP models simulate a wide range in global annual total burnt area(39–536 Mha) and global annual fire carbon emission (0.91–4.75 Pg C yr−1) for modern conditions (2002–2012), but most of the range in burntarea is within observational uncertainty (345–468 Mha). Benchmarking scoresindicate that seven out of nine FireMIP models are able to represent thespatial pattern in burnt area. The models also reproduce the seasonality inburnt area reasonably well but struggle to simulate fire season length andare largely unable to represent interannual variations in burnt area.However, models that represent cropland fires see improved simulation offire seasonality in the Northern Hemisphere. The three FireMIP models whichexplicitly simulate individual fires are able to reproduce the spatialpattern in number of fires, but fire sizes are too small in key regions, andthis results in an underestimation of burnt area. The correct representationof spatial and seasonal patterns in vegetation appears to correlate with abetter representation of burnt area. The two older fire models included inthe FireMIP ensemble (LPJ–GUESS–GlobFIRM, MC2) clearly perform less wellglobally than other models, but it is difficult to distinguish between theremaining ensemble members; some of these models are better at representingcertain aspects of the fire regime; none clearly outperforms all othermodels across the full range of variables assessed. 

Abstract. Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions andtheir redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biospherein a changing climate is critical to better understand the global carboncycle, support the development of climate policies, and project futureclimate change. Here we describe and synthesize datasets and methodology toquantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and theiruncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFOS) 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 annualchanges in concentration. The ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) is estimatedwith global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-baseddata products. The terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated withdynamic global vegetation models. 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 firsttime, an approach is shown to reconcile the difference in our ELUCestimate with the one from national greenhouse gas inventories, supportingthe assessment of collective countries' climate progress. For the year 2020, EFOS declined by 5.4 % relative to 2019, withfossil emissions at 9.5 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 (9.3 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 when the cement carbonation sink is included), and ELUC was 0.9 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1, for a total anthropogenic CO2 emission of10.2 ± 0.8 GtC yr−1 (37.4 ± 2.9 GtCO2). Also, for2020, GATM was 5.0 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1 (2.4 ± 0.1 ppm yr−1), SOCEAN was 3.0 ± 0.4 GtC yr−1, and SLANDwas 2.9 ± 1 GtC yr−1, with a BIM of −0.8 GtC yr−1. Theglobal atmospheric CO2 concentration averaged over 2020 reached 412.45 ± 0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2021 suggest a rebound in EFOSrelative to 2020 of +4.8 % (4.2 % to 5.4 %) globally. Overall, the mean and trend in the components of the global carbon budgetare consistently estimated over the period 1959–2020, but discrepancies ofup to 1 GtC yr−1 persist for the representation of annual tosemi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates frommultiple approaches and observations shows (1) a persistent largeuncertainty in the estimate of land-use changes emissions, (2) a lowagreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the landCO2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, and (3) a discrepancy betweenthe different methods on the strength of the ocean sink over the lastdecade. This living data update documents changes in the methods and datasets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understandingof the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this dataset (Friedlingstein et al., 2020, 2019; LeQuéré et al., 2018b, a, 2016, 2015b, a, 2014, 2013). Thedata presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/gcp-2021 (Friedlingstein et al., 2021).