GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

feed icon rss

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

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

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    Publication Date: 2020-02-06
    Description: The Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP) focuses on the physics and biogeochemistry of the ocean component of Earth system models participating in the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). OMIP aims to provide standard protocols and diagnostics for ocean models, while offering a forum to promote their common assessment and improvement. It also offers to compare solutions of the same ocean models when forced with reanalysis data (OMIP simulations) vs. when integrated within fully coupled Earth system models (CMIP6). Here we detail simulation protocols and diagnostics for OMIP's biogeochemical and inert chemical tracers. These passive-tracer simulations will be coupled to ocean circulation models, initialized with observational data or output from a model spin-up, and forced by repeating the 1948–2009 surface fluxes of heat, fresh water, and momentum. These so-called OMIP-BGC simulations include three inert chemical tracers (CFC-11, CFC-12, SF6) and biogeochemical tracers (e.g., dissolved inorganic carbon, carbon isotopes, alkalinity, nutrients, and oxygen). Modelers will use their preferred prognostic BGC model but should follow common guidelines for gas exchange and carbonate chemistry. Simulations include both natural and total carbon tracers. The required forced simulation (omip1) will be initialized with gridded observational climatologies. An optional forced simulation (omip1-spunup) will be initialized instead with BGC fields from a long model spin-up, preferably for 2000 years or more, and forced by repeating the same 62-year meteorological forcing. That optional run will also include abiotic tracers of total dissolved inorganic carbon and radiocarbon, CTabio and 14CTabio, to assess deep-ocean ventilation and distinguish the role of physics vs. biology. These simulations will be forced by observed atmospheric histories of the three inert gases and CO2 as well as carbon isotope ratios of CO2. OMIP-BGC simulation protocols are founded on those from previous phases of the Ocean Carbon-Cycle Model Intercomparison Project. They have been merged and updated to reflect improvements concerning gas exchange, carbonate chemistry, and new data for initial conditions and atmospheric gas histories. Code is provided to facilitate their implementation.
    Type: Article , PeerReviewed , info:eu-repo/semantics/article
    Format: text
    Format: text
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Publication Date: 2021-02-08
    Description: 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)
    Type: Article , PeerReviewed
    Format: text
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Publication Date: 2019-09-23
    Description: 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: Article , PeerReviewed
    Format: text
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    Publication Date: 2024-02-07
    Description: Marine diazotrophs convert dinitrogen (N-2) gas into bioavailable nitrogen (N), supporting life in the global ocean. In 2012, the first version of the global oceanic diazotroph database (version 1) was published. Here, we present an updated version of the database (version 2), significantly increasing the number of in situ diazotrophic measurements from 13 565 to 55 286. Data points for N-2 fixation rates, diazotrophic cell abundance, and nifH gene copy abundance have increased by 184 %, 86 %, and 809 %, respectively. Version 2 includes two new data sheets for the nifH gene copy abundance of non-cyanobacterial diazotrophs and cell-specific N2 fixation rates. The measurements of N-2 fixation rates approximately follow a log-normal distribution in both version 1 and version 2. However, version 2 considerably extends both the left and right tails of the distribution. Consequently, when estimating global oceanic N-2 fixation rates using the geometric means of different ocean basins, version 1 and version 2 yield similar rates (43-57 versus 45-63 TgNyr (-1); ranges based on one geometric standard error). In contrast, when using arithmetic means, version 2 suggests a significantly higher rate of 223 +/- 30 TgNyr (-1) (mean +/- standard error; same hereafter) compared to version 1 (74 +/- 7 TgNyr (-1)). Specifically, substantial rate increases are estimated for the South Pacific Ocean (88 +/- 23 versus 20 +/- 2 TgNyr 1), primarily driven by measurements in the southwestern subtropics, and for the North Atlantic Ocean (40 +/- 9 versus 10 +/- 2 TgNyr (-1)). Moreover, version 2 estimates the N-2 fixation rate in the Indian Ocean to be 35 +/- 14 TgNyr (-1), which could not be estimated using version 1 due to limited data availability. Furthermore, a comparison of N-2 fixation rates obtained through different measurement methods at the same months, locations, and depths reveals that the conventional N-15(2) bubble method yields lower rates in 69% cases compared to the new N-15(2) dissolution method. This updated version of the database can facilitate future studies in marine ecology and biogeochemistry. The database is stored at the Figshare repository (https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.21677687; Shao et al., 2022).
    Type: Article , PeerReviewed
    Format: text
    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...