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. 12, No. 4 ( 2020-12-11), p. 3269-3340
    Abstract: Abstract. Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere in a changing climate – 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 and synthesize data sets and methodology to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFOS) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from 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 (2010–2019), EFOS was 9.6 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 excluding the cement carbonation sink (9.4 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 when the cement carbonation sink is included), and ELUC was 1.6 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1. For the same decade, GATM was 5.1 ± 0.02 GtC yr−1 (2.4 ± 0.01 ppm yr−1), SOCEAN 2.5 ±  0.6 GtC yr−1, and SLAND 3.4 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1, with a budget imbalance BIM of −0.1 GtC yr−1 indicating a near balance between estimated sources and sinks over the last decade. For the year 2019 alone, the growth in EFOS was only about 0.1 % with fossil emissions increasing to 9.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 excluding the cement carbonation sink (9.7 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 when cement carbonation sink is included), and ELUC was 1.8 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1, for total anthropogenic CO2 emissions of 11.5 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1 (42.2 ± 3.3 GtCO2). Also for 2019, GATM was 5.4 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1 (2.5 ± 0.1 ppm yr−1), SOCEAN was 2.6 ± 0.6 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 3.1 ± 1.2 GtC yr−1, with a BIM of 0.3 GtC. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 409.85 ± 0.1 ppm averaged over 2019. Preliminary data for 2020, accounting for the COVID-19-induced changes in emissions, suggest a decrease in EFOS relative to 2019 of about −7 % (median estimate) based on individual estimates from four studies of −6 %, −7 %, −7 % (−3 % to −11 %), and −13 %. Overall, the mean and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2019, but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC yr−1 persist for the representation of semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from diverse approaches and observations shows (1) no consensus in the mean and trend in land-use change emissions over the last decade, (2) a persistent low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, and (3) an apparent discrepancy between the different methods for the ocean sink outside the tropics, particularly in the Southern Ocean. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understanding of the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this data set (Friedlingstein et al., 2019; Le Quéré et al., 2018b, a, 2016, 2015b, a, 2014, 2013). The data presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/gcp-2020 (Friedlingstein et al., 2020).
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1866-3516
    Language: English
    Publisher: Copernicus GmbH
    Publication Date: 2020
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2475469-9
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Global Biogeochemical Cycles, American Geophysical Union (AGU), Vol. 37, No. 11 ( 2023-11)
    Abstract: Ocean models and machine learning estimates agree on the mean Southern Ocean CO 2 sink, but the trend since 2000 differs by a factor of two REgional Carbon Cycle Assessment and Processes Project Phase 2 estimates a 50% smaller Southern Ocean CO 2 sink for the same region and timeframe as RECCAP1 Large model spread in summer and winter indicates that sustained efforts are required to understand driving processes in all seasons
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0886-6236 , 1944-9224
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Geophysical Union (AGU)
    Publication Date: 2023
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2021601-4
    SSG: 12
    SSG: 13
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    In: Global Biogeochemical Cycles, American Geophysical Union (AGU), Vol. 15, No. 1 ( 2001-03), p. 43-60
    Abstract: We have compared simulations of anthropogenic CO 2 in the four three‐dimensional ocean models that participated in the first phase of the Ocean Carbon‐Cycle Model Intercomparison Project (OCMIP), as a means to identify their major differences. Simulated global uptake agrees to within ±19%, giving a range of 1.85±0.35 Pg C yr −1 for the 1980–1989 average. Regionally, the Southern Ocean dominates the present‐day air‐sea flux of anthropogenic CO 2 in all models, with one third to one half of the global uptake occurring south of 30°S. The highest simulated total uptake in the Southern Ocean was 70% larger than the lowest. Comparison with recent data‐based estimates of anthropogenic CO 2 suggest that most of the models substantially overestimate storage in the Southern Ocean; elsewhere they generally underestimate storage by less than 20%. Globally, the OCMIP models appear to bracket the real ocean's present uptake, based on comparison of regional data‐based estimates of anthropogenic CO 2 and bomb 14 C. Column inventories of bomb 14 C have become more similar to those for anthropogenic CO 2 with the time that has elapsed between the Geochemical Ocean Sections Study (1970s) and World Ocean Circulation Experiment (1990s) global sampling campaigns. Our ability to evaluate simulated anthropogenic CO 2 would improve if systematic errors associated with the data‐based estimates could be provided regionally.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0886-6236 , 1944-9224
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Geophysical Union (AGU)
    Publication Date: 2001
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2021601-4
    SSG: 12
    SSG: 13
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    In: Global Biogeochemical Cycles, American Geophysical Union (AGU), Vol. 19, No. 1 ( 2005-03)
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0886-6236
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Geophysical Union (AGU)
    Publication Date: 2005
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2021601-4
    SSG: 12
    SSG: 13
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    In: Earth System Science Data, Copernicus GmbH, Vol. 14, No. 11 ( 2022-11-11), p. 4811-4900
    Abstract: Abstract. Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere in a changing climate is critical to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe and synthesize data sets and methodologies to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFOS) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from 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) is estimated with global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-based data products. The terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated with dynamic global vegetation models. 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 year 2021, EFOS increased by 5.1 % relative to 2020, with fossil emissions at 10.1 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 (9.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 when the cement carbonation sink is included), and ELUC was 1.1 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1, for a total anthropogenic CO2 emission (including the cement carbonation sink) of 10.9 ± 0.8 GtC yr−1 (40.0 ± 2.9 GtCO2). Also, for 2021, GATM was 5.2 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1 (2.5 ± 0.1 ppm yr−1), SOCEAN was 2.9  ± 0.4 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 3.5 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1, with a BIM of −0.6 GtC yr−1 (i.e. the total estimated sources were too low or sinks were too high). The global atmospheric CO2 concentration averaged over 2021 reached 414.71 ± 0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2022 suggest an increase in EFOS relative to 2021 of +1.0 % (0.1 % to 1.9 %) globally and atmospheric CO2 concentration reaching 417.2 ppm, more than 50 % above pre-industrial levels (around 278 ppm). Overall, the mean and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2021, but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC yr−1 persist for the representation of annual to semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from multiple approaches and observations shows (1) a persistent large uncertainty in the estimate of land-use change emissions, (2) a low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extratropics, and (3) a discrepancy between the different methods on the strength of the ocean sink over the last decade. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understanding of the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this data set. The data presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2022 (Friedlingstein et al., 2022b).
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1866-3516
    Language: English
    Publisher: Copernicus GmbH
    Publication Date: 2022
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2475469-9
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 6
    In: Earth System Science Data, Copernicus GmbH, Vol. 14, No. 4 ( 2022-04-26), p. 1917-2005
    Abstract: Abstract. Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere in a changing climate is critical to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe and synthesize datasets and methodology to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFOS) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from 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) is estimated with global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-based data products. The terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated with dynamic global vegetation models. 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 first time, an approach is shown to reconcile the difference in our ELUC estimate with the one from national greenhouse gas inventories, supporting the assessment of collective countries' climate progress. For the year 2020, EFOS declined by 5.4 % relative to 2019, with fossil 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 of 10.2 ± 0.8 GtC yr−1 (37.4 ± 2.9 GtCO2). Also, for 2020, 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 SLAND was 2.9 ± 1 GtC yr−1, with a BIM of −0.8 GtC yr−1. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration averaged over 2020 reached 412.45 ± 0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2021 suggest a rebound in EFOS relative to 2020 of +4.8 % (4.2 % to 5.4 %) globally. Overall, the mean and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2020, but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC yr−1 persist for the representation of annual to semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from multiple approaches and observations shows (1) a persistent large uncertainty in the estimate of land-use changes emissions, (2) a low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, and (3) a discrepancy between the different methods on the strength of the ocean sink over the last decade. This living data update documents changes in the methods and datasets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understanding of the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this dataset (Friedlingstein et al., 2020, 2019; Le Quéré et al., 2018b, a, 2016, 2015b, a, 2014, 2013). The data presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/gcp-2021 (Friedlingstein et al., 2021).
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1866-3516
    Language: English
    Publisher: Copernicus GmbH
    Publication Date: 2022
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2475469-9
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 7
    In: Limnology and Oceanography, Wiley, Vol. 60, No. 3 ( 2015-05), p. 1020-1038
    Abstract: We characterize the realized ecological niches of 133 phytoplankton taxa in the open ocean based on observations from the MAREDAT initiative and a statistical species distribution model (MaxEnt). The models find that the physical conditions (mixed layer depth, temperature, light) govern large‐scale patterns in phytoplankton biogeography over nutrient availability. Strongest differences in the realized niche centers were found between diatoms and coccolithophores. Diatoms (87 species) occur in habitats with significantly lower temperatures, light intensity and salinity, with deeper mixed layers, and with higher nitrate and silicate concentrations than coccolithophores (40 species). However, we could not statistically separate the realized niches of coccolithophores from those of diazotrophs (two genera) and picophytoplankton (two genera). Phaeocystis (two species) niches only clearly differed from diatom niches for temperature. While the realized niches of diatoms cover the majority of niche space, the niches of picophytoplankton and coccolithophores spread across an intermediate fraction and diazotroph and colonial Phaeocystis niches only occur within a relatively confined range of environmental conditions in the open ocean. Our estimates of the realized niches roughly match the predictions of Reynolds' C‐S‐R model for the global ocean, namely that taxa classified as nutrient stress tolerant have niches at lower nutrient and higher irradiance conditions than light stress tolerant taxa. Yet, there is considerable within‐class variability in niche centers, and many taxa occupy broad niches, suggesting that more complex approaches may be necessary to capture all aspects of phytoplankton ecology.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0024-3590 , 1939-5590
    URL: Issue
    Language: English
    Publisher: Wiley
    Publication Date: 2015
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2033191-5
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 412737-7
    SSG: 12
    SSG: 14
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 8
    In: Frontiers in Marine Science, Frontiers Media SA, Vol. 7 ( 2020-10-27)
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2296-7745
    Language: Unknown
    Publisher: Frontiers Media SA
    Publication Date: 2020
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2757748-X
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 9
    In: Global Biogeochemical Cycles, American Geophysical Union (AGU)
    Abstract: The RECCAP2 global ocean analysis provides an authoritative multi‐model and observation‐based assessment of global ocean CO 2 uptake pCO 2 ‐based products yield a mean sea‐air CO 2 flux from 1985‐2018 of ‐1.6±0.2 PgC yr ‐1 with a trend of ‐0.61 PgC yr ‐1 decade ‐1 since 2001 Ocean anthropogenic CO 2 uptake averages ‐2.1‐2.4 PgC yr ‐1 from 1985‐2018, with a trend of ‐0.34‐0.41 PgC yr ‐1 decade ‐1 since 2001
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0886-6236 , 1944-9224
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Geophysical Union (AGU)
    Publication Date: 2023
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2021601-4
    SSG: 12
    SSG: 13
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 10
    In: Earth System Science Data, Copernicus GmbH, Vol. 11, No. 4 ( 2019-12-04), p. 1783-1838
    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 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 (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 budget imbalance BIM of 0.4 GtC yr−1 indicating overestimated emissions and/or underestimated sinks. For the year 2018 alone, the growth in EFF was about 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 anthropogenic CO2 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, the USA, 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. Overall, the mean and trend in the five components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2018, 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 shows (1) no consensus in the mean and trend in land use change emissions over the last decade, (2) a persistent low agreement between 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 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 of the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this data set (Le Quéré et al., 2018a, b, 2016, 2015a, b, 2014, 2013). The data generated by this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/gcp-2019 (Friedlingstein et al., 2019).
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1866-3516
    Language: English
    Publisher: Copernicus GmbH
    Publication Date: 2019
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2475469-9
    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...