GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    In: Earth System Science Data, Copernicus GmbH, Vol. 8, No. 2 ( 2016-11-14), p. 605-649
    Abstract: 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 all major components of the global carbon budget, including their uncertainties, based on the combination of a range of data, algorithms, statistics, and model estimates and their interpretation by a broad scientific community. We discuss changes compared to previous estimates and consistency within and among components, alongside methodology and data limitations. 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 combined evidence from land-cover change data, fire activity associated with deforestation, and models. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly and its rate of growth (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The mean ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) is based on observations from the 1990s, while the annual anomalies and trends are estimated with ocean models. The variability in SOCEAN is evaluated with data products based on surveys of ocean CO2 measurements. The global residual terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated by the difference of the other terms of the global carbon budget and compared to results of independent dynamic global vegetation models. We compare the mean land and ocean fluxes and their variability to estimates from three atmospheric inverse methods for three broad latitude bands. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ, reflecting the current capacity to characterise the annual estimates of each component of the global carbon budget. For the last decade available (2006–2015), EFF was 9.3 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, ELUC 1.0 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, GATM 4.5 ± 0.1 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN 2.6 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND 3.1 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1. For year 2015 alone, the growth in EFF was approximately zero and emissions remained at 9.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, showing a slowdown in growth of these emissions compared to the average growth of 1.8 % yr−1 that took place during 2006–2015. Also, for 2015, ELUC was 1.3 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, GATM was 6.3 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN was 3.0 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 1.9 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1. GATM was higher in 2015 compared to the past decade (2006–2015), reflecting a smaller SLAND for that year. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 399.4 ± 0.1 ppm averaged over 2015. For 2016, preliminary data indicate the continuation of low growth in EFF with +0.2 % (range of −1.0 to +1.8 %) based on national emissions projections for China and USA, and projections of gross domestic product corrected for recent changes in the carbon intensity of the economy for the rest of the world. In spite of the low growth of EFF in 2016, the growth rate in atmospheric CO2 concentration is expected to be relatively high because of the persistence of the smaller residual terrestrial sink (SLAND) in response to El Niño conditions of 2015–2016. From this projection of EFF and assumed constant ELUC for 2016, cumulative emissions of CO2 will reach 565 ± 55 GtC (2075 ± 205 GtCO2) for 1870–2016, about 75 % from EFF and 25 % from ELUC. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new carbon budget compared with previous publications of this data set (Le Quéré et al., 2015b, a, 2014, 2013). All observations presented here can be downloaded from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (doi:10.3334/CDIAC/GCP_2016).
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1866-3516
    Language: English
    Publisher: Copernicus GmbH
    Publication Date: 2016
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2475469-9
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Earth System Science Data, Copernicus GmbH, Vol. 10, No. 4 ( 2018-12-05), p. 2141-2194
    Abstract: 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. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFF) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land use and land-use change (ELUC), mainly deforestation, are based on land use and land-use change data and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly and its growth rate (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 (2008–2017), EFF was 9.4±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 of 0.5 GtC yr−1 indicating overestimated emissions and/or underestimated sinks. 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 atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 405.0±0.1 ppm averaged over 2017. For 2018, preliminary data for the first 6–9 months indicate a renewed growth in EFF of +2.7 % (range of 1.8 % to 3.7 %) based on national emission projections for China, the US, the EU, 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. The analysis presented here shows that the mean and trend in the five components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period of 1959–2017, but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC yr−1 persist for the representation of semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. A detailed comparison among individual estimates and the introduction of a broad range of observations show (1) no consensus in the mean and trend in land-use change emissions, (2) a persistent low agreement among the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, and (3) an apparent underestimation of the CO2 variability by ocean models, originating outside the tropics. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understanding the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this data set (Le Quéré et al., 2018, 2016, 2015a, b, 2014, 2013). All results presented here can be downloaded from https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2018.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1866-3516
    Language: English
    Publisher: Copernicus GmbH
    Publication Date: 2018
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2475469-9
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    In: Earth System Science Data, Copernicus GmbH, Vol. 10, No. 1 ( 2018-03-12), p. 405-448
    Abstract: 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).
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1866-3516
    Language: English
    Publisher: Copernicus GmbH
    Publication Date: 2018
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2475469-9
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    In: Geoscientific Model Development, Copernicus GmbH, Vol. 12, No. 9 ( 2019-09-23), p. 4133-4164
    Abstract: Abstract. Vegetation plays an important role in regulating global carbon cycles and is a key component of the Earth system models (ESMs) that aim to project Earth's future climate. In the last decade, the vegetation component within ESMs has witnessed great progress from simple “big-leaf” approaches to demographically structured approaches, which have a better representation of plant size, canopy structure, and disturbances. These demographically structured vegetation models typically have a large number of input parameters, and sensitivity analysis is needed to quantify the impact of each parameter on the model outputs for a better understanding of model behavior. In this study, we conducted a comprehensive sensitivity analysis to diagnose the Community Land Model coupled to the Functionally Assembled Terrestrial Simulator, or CLM4.5(FATES). Specifically, we quantified the first- and second-order sensitivities of the model parameters to outputs that represent simulated growth and mortality as well as carbon fluxes and stocks for a tropical site with an extent of 1×1∘. While the photosynthetic capacity parameter (Vc,max25) is found to be important for simulated carbon stocks and fluxes, we also show the importance of carbon storage and allometry parameters, which determine survival and growth strategies within the model. The parameter sensitivity changes with different sizes of trees and climate conditions. The results of this study highlight the importance of understanding the dynamics of the next generation of demographically enabled vegetation models within ESMs to improve model parameterization and structure for better model fidelity.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1991-9603
    Language: English
    Publisher: Copernicus GmbH
    Publication Date: 2019
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2456725-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    In: Archives of Virology, Springer Science and Business Media LLC, Vol. 162, No. 8 ( 2017-8), p. 2493-2504
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0304-8608 , 1432-8798
    Language: English
    Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
    Publication Date: 2017
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1458460-8
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 7491-3
    SSG: 12
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 6
    In: Geoscientific Model Development, Copernicus GmbH, Vol. 11, No. 8 ( 2018-08-10), p. 3159-3185
    Abstract: Abstract. Computer models are ubiquitous tools used to represent systems across many scientific and engineering domains. For any given system, many computer models exist, each built on different assumptions and demonstrating variability in the ways in which these systems can be represented. This variability is known as epistemic uncertainty, i.e. uncertainty in our knowledge of how these systems operate. Two primary sources of epistemic uncertainty are (1) uncertain parameter values and (2) uncertain mathematical representations of the processes that comprise the system. Many formal methods exist to analyse parameter-based epistemic uncertainty, while process-representation-based epistemic uncertainty is often analysed post hoc, incompletely, informally, or is ignored. In this model description paper we present the multi-assumption architecture and testbed (MAAT v1.0) designed to formally and completely analyse process-representation-based epistemic uncertainty. MAAT is a modular modelling code that can simply and efficiently vary model structure (process representation), allowing for the generation and running of large model ensembles that vary in process representation, parameters, parameter values, and environmental conditions during a single execution of the code. MAAT v1.0 approaches epistemic uncertainty through sensitivity analysis, assigning variability in model output to processes (process representation and parameters) or to individual parameters. In this model description paper we describe MAAT and, by using a simple groundwater model example, verify that the sensitivity analysis algorithms have been correctly implemented. The main system model currently coded in MAAT is a unified, leaf-scale enzyme kinetic model of C3 photosynthesis. In the Appendix we describe the photosynthesis model and the unification of multiple representations of photosynthetic processes. The numerical solution to leaf-scale photosynthesis is verified and examples of process variability in temperature response functions are provided. For rapid application to new systems, the MAAT algorithms for efficient variation of model structure and sensitivity analysis are agnostic of the specific system model employed. Therefore MAAT provides a tool for the development of novel or toy models in many domains, i.e. not only photosynthesis, facilitating rapid informal and formal comparison of alternative modelling approaches.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1991-9603
    Language: English
    Publisher: Copernicus GmbH
    Publication Date: 2018
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2456725-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 7
    In: Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences, American Geophysical Union (AGU), Vol. 122, No. 5 ( 2017-05), p. 1078-1097
    Abstract: Wavelet analysis and mechanistic modeling were applied to Sphagnum GPP calculated from NEE measured in situ at the Marcell Forest, Minnesota, USA Peak GPP was delayed relative to peak photosynthetically active radiation An interaction of the water table with Sphagnum photosynthesizing tissue area was the likely cause of delayed peak GPP
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2169-8953 , 2169-8961
    URL: Issue
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Geophysical Union (AGU)
    Publication Date: 2017
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2209360-6
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2220777-6
    SSG: 16,13
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 8
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    American Chemical Society (ACS) ; 2017
    In:  Macromolecules Vol. 50, No. 16 ( 2017-08-22), p. 6174-6183
    In: Macromolecules, American Chemical Society (ACS), Vol. 50, No. 16 ( 2017-08-22), p. 6174-6183
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0024-9297 , 1520-5835
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Chemical Society (ACS)
    Publication Date: 2017
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1491942-4
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 3436-8
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 9
    In: Nature, Springer Science and Business Media LLC, Vol. 535, No. 7613 ( 2016-7), p. 580-580
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0028-0836 , 1476-4687
    RVK:
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
    Publication Date: 2016
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 120714-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1413423-8
    SSG: 11
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 10
    In: New Phytologist, Wiley, Vol. 205, No. 1 ( 2015-01), p. 59-78
    Abstract: There is wide breadth of root function within ecosystems that should be considered when modeling the terrestrial biosphere. Root structure and function are closely associated with control of plant water and nutrient uptake from the soil, plant carbon (C) assimilation, partitioning and release to the soils, and control of biogeochemical cycles through interactions within the rhizosphere. Root function is extremely dynamic and dependent on internal plant signals, root traits and morphology, and the physical, chemical and biotic soil environment. While plant roots have significant structural and functional plasticity to changing environmental conditions, their dynamics are noticeably absent from the land component of process‐based Earth system models used to simulate global biogeochemical cycling. Their dynamic representation in large‐scale models should improve model veracity. Here, we describe current root inclusion in models across scales, ranging from mechanistic processes of single roots to parameterized root processes operating at the landscape scale. With this foundation we discuss how existing and future root functional knowledge, new data compilation efforts, and novel modeling platforms can be leveraged to enhance root functionality in large‐scale terrestrial biosphere models by improving parameterization within models, and introducing new components such as dynamic root distribution and root functional traits linked to resource extraction. Contents Summary 59 I. Introduction 59 II. Current representation of root function in models 62 III. Recommendations for leveraging root knowledge into models 69 IV. Conclusions 73 Acknowledgements 73 References 73
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0028-646X , 1469-8137
    URL: Issue
    Language: English
    Publisher: Wiley
    Publication Date: 2015
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 208885-X
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1472194-6
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...