Search for: All records

Abstract. In the current era of rapid climate change, accuratecharacterization of climate-relevant gas dynamics – namely production,consumption, and net emissions – is required for all biomes, especially thoseecosystems most susceptible to the impact of change. Marine environmentsinclude regions that act as net sources or sinks for numerous climate-activetrace gases including methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O). Thetemporal and spatial distributions of CH4 and N2O are controlledby the interaction of complex biogeochemical and physical processes. Toevaluate and quantify how these mechanisms affect marine CH4 andN2O cycling requires a combination of traditional scientificdisciplines including oceanography, microbiology, and numerical modeling.Fundamental to these efforts is ensuring that the datasets produced byindependent scientists are comparable and interoperable. Equally critical istransparent communication within the research community about the technicalimprovements required to increase our collective understanding of marineCH4 and N2O. A workshop sponsored by Ocean Carbon and Biogeochemistry (OCB)was organized to enhance dialogue and collaborations pertaining tomarine CH4 and N2O. Here, we summarize the outcomes from theworkshop to describe the challenges and opportunities for near-futureCH4 and N2O research in the marine environment. 

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). 

This dataset consists of the Surface Ocean CO2 Atlas Version 2022 (SOCATv2022) data product files. The ocean absorbs one quarter of the global CO2 emissions from human activity. The community-led Surface Ocean CO2 Atlas (www.socat.info) is key for the quantification of ocean CO2 uptake and its variation, now and in the future. SOCAT version 2022 has quality-controlled in situ surface ocean fCO2 (fugacity of CO2) measurements on ships, moorings, autonomous and drifting surface platforms for the global oceans and coastal seas from 1957 to 2021. The main synthesis and gridded products contain 33.7 million fCO2 values with an estimated accuracy of better than 5 μatm. A further 6.4 million fCO2 sensor data with an estimated accuracy of 5 to 10 μatm are separately available. During quality control, marine scientists assign a flag to each data set, as well as WOCE flags of 2 (good), 3 (questionable) or 4 (bad) to individual fCO2 values. Data sets are assigned flags of A and B for an estimated accuracy of better than 2 μatm, flags of C and D for an accuracy of better than 5 μatm and a flag of E for an accuracy of better than 10 μatm. Bakker et al. (2016) describe the quality control criteria used in SOCAT versions 3 to 2022. Quality control comments for individual data sets can be accessed via the SOCAT Data Set Viewer (www.socat.info). All data sets, where data quality has been deemed acceptable, have been made public. The main SOCAT synthesis files and the gridded products contain all data sets with an estimated accuracy of better than 5 µatm (data set flags of A to D) and fCO2 values with a WOCE flag of 2. Access to data sets with an estimated accuracy of 5 to 10 (flag of E) and fCO2 values with flags of 3 and 4 is via additional data products and the Data Set Viewer (Table 8 in Bakker et al., 2016). SOCAT publishes a global gridded product with a 1° longitude by 1° latitude resolution. A second product with a higher resolution of 0.25° longitude by 0.25° latitude is available for the coastal seas. The gridded products contain all data sets with an estimated accuracy of better than 5 µatm (data set flags of A to D) and fCO2 values with a WOCE flag of 2. Gridded products are available monthly, per year and per decade. Two powerful, interactive, online viewers, the Data Set Viewer and the Gridded Data Viewer (www.socat.info), enable investigation of the SOCAT synthesis and gridded data products. SOCAT data products can be downloaded. Matlab code is available for reading these files. Ocean Data View also provides access to the SOCAT data products (www.socat.info). SOCAT data products are discoverable, accessible and citable. The SOCAT Data Use Statement (www.socat.info) asks users to generously acknowledge the contribution of SOCAT scientists by invitation to co-authorship, especially for data providers in regional studies, and/or reference to relevant scientific articles. The SOCAT website (www.socat.info) provides a single access point for online viewers, downloadable data sets, the Data Use Statement, a list of contributors and an overview of scientific publications on and using SOCAT. Automation of data upload and initial data checks allows annual releases of SOCAT from version 4 onwards. SOCAT is used for quantification of ocean CO2 uptake and ocean acidification and for evaluation of climate models and sensor data. SOCAT products inform the annual Global Carbon Budget since 2013. The annual SOCAT releases by the SOCAT scientific community are a Voluntary Commitment for United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 14.3 (Reduce Ocean Acidification) (#OceanAction20464). More broadly the SOCAT releases contribute to UN SDG 13 (Climate Action) and SDG 14 (Life Below Water), and to the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development. Hundreds of peer-reviewed scientific publications and high-impact reports cite SOCAT. The SOCAT community-led synthesis product is a key step in the value chain based on in situ inorganic carbon measurements of the oceans, which provides policy makers with critical information on ocean CO2 uptake in climate negotiations. The need for accurate knowledge of global ocean CO2 uptake and its (future) variation makes sustained funding of in situ surface ocean CO2 observations imperative. 

Abstract. Large-scale climatic forcing is impactingoceanic biogeochemical cycles and is expected to influence the water-columndistribution of trace gases, including methane and nitrous oxide. Our abilityas a scientific community to evaluate changes in the water-column inventoriesof methane and nitrous oxide depends largely on our capacity to obtain robustand accurate concentration measurements that can be validated acrossdifferent laboratory groups. This study represents the first formalinternational intercomparison of oceanic methane and nitrous oxidemeasurements whereby participating laboratories received batches of seawatersamples from the subtropical Pacific Ocean and the Baltic Sea. Additionally,compressed gas standards from the same calibration scale were distributed tothe majority of participating laboratories to improve the analytical accuracyof the gas measurements. The computations used by each laboratory to derivethe dissolved gas concentrations were also evaluated for inconsistencies(e.g., pressure and temperature corrections, solubility constants). Theresults from the intercomparison and intercalibration provided invaluableinsights into methane and nitrous oxide measurements. It was observed thatanalyses of seawater samples with the lowest concentrations of methane andnitrous oxide had the lowest precisions. In comparison, while the analyticalprecision for samples with the highest concentrations of trace gases wasbetter, the variability between the different laboratories was higher:36% for methane and 27% for nitrous oxide. In addition, thecomparison of different batches of seawater samples with methane and nitrousoxide concentrations that ranged over an order of magnitude revealed theramifications of different calibration procedures for each trace gas.Finally, this study builds upon the intercomparison results to developrecommendations for improving oceanic methane and nitrous oxide measurements,with the aim of precluding future analytical discrepancies betweenlaboratories.

 

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). 

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. 

Abstract. Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere – the global carbon budget – is important to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe data sets and methodology to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and industry (EFF) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, respectively, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC), mainly deforestation, are based on land-cover change data and bookkeeping models. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly and its rate of growth (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) and terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) are estimated with global process models constrained by observations. The resulting carbon budget imbalance (BIM), the difference between the estimated total emissions and the estimated changes in the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere, is a measure of imperfect data and understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the last decade available (2007–2016), EFF was 9.4 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, ELUC 1.3 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1, GATM 4.7 ± 0.1 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN 2.4 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND 3.0 ± 0.8 GtC yr−1, with a budget imbalance BIM of 0.6 GtC yr−1 indicating overestimated emissions and/or underestimated sinks. For year 2016 alone, the growth in EFF was approximately zero and emissions remained at 9.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1. Also for 2016, ELUC was 1.3 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1, GATM was 6.1 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN was 2.6 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 2.7 ± 1.0 GtC yr−1, with a small BIM of −0.3 GtC. GATM continued to be higher in 2016 compared to the past decade (2007–2016), reflecting in part the high fossil emissions and the small SLAND consistent with El Niño conditions. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 402.8 ± 0.1 ppm averaged over 2016. For 2017, preliminary data for the first 6–9 months indicate a renewed growth in EFF of +2.0 % (range of 0.8 to 3.0 %) based on national emissions projections for China, USA, and India, and projections of gross domestic product (GDP) corrected for recent changes in the carbon intensity of the economy for the rest of the world. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new global carbon budget compared with previous publications of this data set (Le Quéré et al., 2016, 2015b, a, 2014, 2013). All results presented here can be downloaded from https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2017 (GCP, 2017).