An attempt to introduce atmospheric CO2 concentration data to estimate the gross primary production by the terrestrial biosphere and analyze its effects

2018 ◽  
Vol 84 ◽  
pp. 218-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhongyi Sun ◽  
Xiufeng Wang ◽  
Haruhiko Yamamoto ◽  
Hiroshi Tani ◽  
Guosheng Zhong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Production ◽  
Gross Primary Production ◽  
Co2 Concentration ◽  
Atmospheric Co2 ◽  
Concentration Data ◽  
Terrestrial Biosphere ◽  
Atmospheric Co2 Concentration

scholarly journals Improved estimate of global gross primary production for reproducing its long-term variation, 1982–2017

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 2725-2746
Author(s):  
Yi Zheng ◽  
Ruoque Shen ◽  
Yawen Wang ◽  
Xiangqian Li ◽  
Shuguang Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Production ◽  
Environmental Variables ◽  
Gross Primary Production ◽  
Co2 Concentration ◽  
Atmospheric Co2 ◽  
Interannual Variations ◽  
Light Use Efficiency ◽  
Long Term Changes ◽  
Use Efficiency

Abstract. Satellite-based models have been widely used to simulate vegetation gross primary production (GPP) at the site, regional, or global scales in recent years. However, accurately reproducing the interannual variations in GPP remains a major challenge, and the long-term changes in GPP remain highly uncertain. In this study, we generated a long-term global GPP dataset at 0.05∘ latitude by 0.05∘ longitude and 8 d interval by revising a light use efficiency model (i.e., EC-LUE model). In the revised EC-LUE model, we integrated the regulations of several major environmental variables: atmospheric CO2 concentration, radiation components, and atmospheric vapor pressure deficit (VPD). These environmental variables showed substantial long-term changes, which could greatly impact the global vegetation productivity. Eddy covariance (EC) measurements at 95 towers from the FLUXNET2015 dataset, covering nine major ecosystem types around the globe, were used to calibrate and validate the model. In general, the revised EC-LUE model could effectively reproduce the spatial, seasonal, and annual variations in the tower-estimated GPP at most sites. The revised EC-LUE model could explain 71 % of the spatial variations in annual GPP over 95 sites. At more than 95 % of the sites, the correlation coefficients (R2) of seasonal changes between tower-estimated and model-simulated GPP are larger than 0.5. Particularly, the revised EC-LUE model improved the model performance in reproducing the interannual variations in GPP, and the averaged R2 between annual mean tower-estimated and model-simulated GPP is 0.44 over all 55 sites with observations longer than 5 years, which is significantly higher than those of the original EC-LUE model (R2=0.36) and other LUE models (R2 ranged from 0.06 to 0.30 with an average value of 0.16). At the global scale, GPP derived from light use efficiency models, machine learning models, and process-based biophysical models shows substantial differences in magnitude and interannual variations. The revised EC-LUE model quantified the mean global GPP from 1982 to 2017 as 106.2±2.9 Pg C yr−1 with the trend 0.15 Pg C yr−1. Sensitivity analysis indicated that GPP simulated by the revised EC-LUE model was sensitive to atmospheric CO2 concentration, VPD, and radiation. Over the period of 1982–2017, the CO2 fertilization effect on the global GPP (0.22±0.07 Pg C yr−1) could be partly offset by increased VPD (-0.17±0.06 Pg C yr−1). The long-term changes in the environmental variables could be well reflected in global GPP. Overall, the revised EC-LUE model is able to provide a reliable long-term estimate of global GPP. The GPP dataset is available at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.8942336.v3 (Zheng et al., 2019).

scholarly journals Global Carbon Budget 2017

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corinne Le Quéré ◽  
Robbie M. Andrew ◽  
Pierre Friedlingstein ◽  
Stephen Sitch ◽  
Julia Pongratz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Cycle ◽  
Co2 Emissions ◽  
Carbon Budget ◽  
Co2 Concentration ◽  
Atmospheric Co2 ◽  
Data Sets ◽  
Terrestrial Biosphere ◽  
Global Carbon Budget ◽  
Atmospheric Co2 Concentration ◽  
Global Carbon

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 our 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 higher fossil emissions and smaller SLAND for that year consistent with El Niño conditions. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 402.8 ± 0.1 ppm averaged over 2016. For 2017, preliminary data 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 corrected for recent changes in the carbon intensity of the economy for the rest of the world. For 2017, initial data indicate an increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration of around 5.3 GtC (2.5 ppm), attributed to a combination of increasing emissions and receding El Niño conditions. 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; 2015a; 2014; 2013). All results presented here can be downloaded from https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2017.

CSIRO High-precision Measurement of Atmospheric CO2 Concentration in Australia. Part 1: Initial Motivation, Techniques and Aircraft Sampling

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graeme I. Pearman ◽  
John R. Garratt ◽  
Paul J. Fraser
Keyword(s):  
High Precision ◽  
Precision Measurement ◽  
Measurement Techniques ◽  
Ice Cores ◽  
Co2 Concentration ◽  
Atmospheric Co2 ◽  
High Precision Measurement ◽  
Concentration Data ◽  
Atmospheric Co2 Concentration ◽  
The Impact

The potential for carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere to influence global surface temperatures was first recognized in the mid-nineteenth century. Even so, high-precision measurements of atmospheric CO2 concentration were not commenced until the International Geophysical Year (1957–8), following concerns of the climatic impact of increased use of fossil fuels and the concomitant release of CO2 into the atmosphere. In Australia, an early (1960s–70s) interest in the high-precision measurement of CO2 concentration was stimulated by a study of the photosynthesis and respiration of awheat crop. This study conducted in north-easternVictoria during 19717–2 led two young CSIRO scientists, J. R. Garratt and G. I. Pearman, encouraged by their Chief, C. H. B. Priestley, to extend micro-environment CO2 studies to larger-scale measurements of CO2 concentration in the background atmosphere. The significant extension of the observation programme required refined measurement techniques to improve both the precision and absolute comparability with observations made by laboratories overseas. Joined in 1974 by P. J. Fraser, they identified the impact of pressure broadening on calibration techniques used in the non-dispersive infrared absorption method of CO2 concentration measurement. This, in turn, led to improved inter-comparability of CO2 concentration data collected around the globe. Acomprehensive aircraft-based air sampling programmewas established in the early 1970s, leading to increased understanding of the time and space variability of CO2 concentration throughout the depth of the troposphere and lower stratosphere in the mid-latitudes of the Southern Hemisphere. In turn this led to: (i) the establishment of a permanent ground-based observatory at Cape Grim, north-western Tasmania; (ii) the development of carbon cycle models; and (iii) measurements of 12CO2, 13CO2 and 14CO2 relative abundances in current and past atmospheres, the last from air samples trapped in ice cores (described in Part 2, the companion paper). The accumulated data from these studies, together with those collected by international colleagues, form the basis of our understanding of the changes of CO2 concentration over thousands of years. In addition, the data have contributed to our understanding of the mechanisms of past and present biogeochemical cycling of CO2 that provides the predictive basis for future changes in CO2 concentration.

scholarly journals Global Carbon Budget 2017

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 405-448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corinne Le Quéré ◽  
Robbie M. Andrew ◽  
Pierre Friedlingstein ◽  
Stephen Sitch ◽  
Julia Pongratz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Cycle ◽  
Co2 Emissions ◽  
Carbon Budget ◽  
Co2 Concentration ◽  
Atmospheric Co2 ◽  
Data Sets ◽  
Terrestrial Biosphere ◽  
Global Carbon Budget ◽  
Atmospheric Co2 Concentration ◽  
Global Carbon

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).

scholarly journals Response of simulated burned area to historical changes in environmental and anthropogenic factors: a comparison of seven fire models

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (19) ◽  
pp. 3883-3910 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lina Teckentrup ◽  
Sandy P. Harrison ◽  
Stijn Hantson ◽  
Angelika Heil ◽  
Joe R. Melton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
Co2 Concentration ◽  
Fire Regimes ◽  
Atmospheric Co2 ◽  
Anthropogenic Factors ◽  
Burned Area ◽  
Earth System ◽  
Atmospheric Co2 Concentration ◽  
Fire Models ◽  
The Impact

Abstract. Understanding how fire regimes change over time is of major importance for understanding their future impact on the Earth system, including society. Large differences in simulated burned area between fire models show that there is substantial uncertainty associated with modelling global change impacts on fire regimes. We draw here on sensitivity simulations made by seven global dynamic vegetation models participating in the Fire Model Intercomparison Project (FireMIP) to understand how differences in models translate into differences in fire regime projections. The sensitivity experiments isolate the impact of the individual drivers on simulated burned area, which are prescribed in the simulations. Specifically these drivers are atmospheric CO2 concentration, population density, land-use change, lightning and climate. The seven models capture spatial patterns in burned area. However, they show considerable differences in the burned area trends since 1921. We analyse the trajectories of differences between the sensitivity and reference simulation to improve our understanding of what drives the global trends in burned area. Where it is possible, we link the inter-model differences to model assumptions. Overall, these analyses reveal that the largest uncertainties in simulating global historical burned area are related to the representation of anthropogenic ignitions and suppression and effects of land use on vegetation and fire. In line with previous studies this highlights the need to improve our understanding and model representation of the relationship between human activities and fire to improve our abilities to model fire within Earth system model applications. Only two models show a strong response to atmospheric CO2 concentration. The effects of changes in atmospheric CO2 concentration on fire are complex and quantitative information of how fuel loads and how flammability changes due to this factor is missing. The response to lightning on global scale is low. The response of burned area to climate is spatially heterogeneous and has a strong inter-annual variation. Climate is therefore likely more important than the other factors for short-term variations and extremes in burned area. This study provides a basis to understand the uncertainties in global fire modelling. Both improvements in process understanding and observational constraints reduce uncertainties in modelling burned area trends.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document