Description: Author Posting. © The Oceanography Society, 2015. This article is posted here by permission of The Oceanography Society for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Oceanography 28, no. 2 (2015): 92-107, doi:10.5670/oceanog.2015.34.

Description: Coastal ocean ecosystems have always served human populations—they provide food security, livelihoods, coastal protection, and defense. Ocean acidification is a global threat to these ecosystem services, particularly when other local and regional stressors combine with it to jeopardize coastal health. Monitoring efforts call for a coordinated global approach toward sustained, integrated coastal ocean health observing networks to address the region-specific mix of factors while also adhering to global ocean acidification observing network principles to facilitate comparison among regions for increased utility and understanding. Here, we generalize guidelines for scoping and designing regional coastal ocean acidification observing networks and provide examples of existing efforts. While challenging in the early stages of coordinating the design and prioritizing the implementation of these observing networks, it is essential to actively engage all of the relevant stakeholder groups from the outset, including private industries, public agencies, regulatory bodies, decision makers, and the general public. The long-term sustainability of these critical observing networks will rely on leveraging of resources and the strength of partnerships across the consortium of stakeholders and those implementing coastal ocean health observing networks

Description: National Science Foundation, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Description: © The Author(s), 2022. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Jiang, L.-Q., Pierrot, D., Wanninkhof, R., Feely, R. A., Tilbrook, B., Alin, S., Barbero, L., Byrne, R. H., Carter, B. R., Dickson, A. G., Gattuso, J.-P., Greeley, D., Hoppema, M., Humphreys, M. P., Karstensen, J., Lange, N., Lauvset, S. K., Lewis, E. R., Olsen, A., Pérez, F. F., Sabine, C., Sharp, J. D., Tanhua, T., Trull, T. W., Velo, A., Allegra, A. J., Barker, P., Burger, E., Cai, W-J., Chen, C-T. A., Cross, J., Garcia, H., Hernandez-Ayon J. M., Hu, X., Kozyr, A., Langdon, C., Lee., K, Salisbury, J., Wang, Z. A., & Xue, L. Best practice data standards for discrete chemical oceanographic observations. Frontiers in Marine Science, 8, (2022): 705638, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.705638.

Description: Effective data management plays a key role in oceanographic research as cruise-based data, collected from different laboratories and expeditions, are commonly compiled to investigate regional to global oceanographic processes. Here we describe new and updated best practice data standards for discrete chemical oceanographic observations, specifically those dealing with column header abbreviations, quality control flags, missing value indicators, and standardized calculation of certain properties. These data standards have been developed with the goals of improving the current practices of the scientific community and promoting their international usage. These guidelines are intended to standardize data files for data sharing and submission into permanent archives. They will facilitate future quality control and synthesis efforts and lead to better data interpretation. In turn, this will promote research in ocean biogeochemistry, such as studies of carbon cycling and ocean acidification, on regional to global scales. These best practice standards are not mandatory. Agencies, institutes, universities, or research vessels can continue using different data standards if it is important for them to maintain historical consistency. However, it is hoped that they will be adopted as widely as possible to facilitate consistency and to achieve the goals stated above.

Description: Funding for L-QJ and AK was from NOAA Ocean Acidification Program (OAP, Project ID: 21047) and NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) through NOAA grant NA19NES4320002 [Cooperative Institute for Satellite Earth System Studies (CISESS)] at the University of Maryland/ESSIC. BT was in part supported by the Australia’s Integrated Marine Observing System (IMOS), enabled through the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS). AD was supported in part by the United States National Science Foundation. AV and FP were supported by BOCATS2 Project (PID2019-104279GB-C21/AEI/10.13039/501100011033) funded by the Spanish Research Agency and contributing to WATER:iOS CSIC interdisciplinary thematic platform. MH was partly funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program under grant agreement N°821001 (SO-CHIC).

Description: The Global Ocean Data Analysis Project (GLODAP) is a synthesis effort providing regular compilations of surface-to-bottom ocean biogeochemical bottle data, with an emphasis on seawater inorganic carbon chemistry and related variables determined through chemical analysis of seawater samples. GLODAPv2.2022 is an update of the previous version, GLODAPv2.2021 (Lauvset et al., 2021). The major changes are as follows: data from 96 new cruises were added, data coverage was extended until 2021, and for the first time we performed secondary quality control on all sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) data. In addition, a number of changes were made to data included in GLODAPv2.2021. These changes affect specifically the SF6 data, which are now subjected to secondary quality control, and carbon data measured onboard the RV Knorr in the Indian Ocean in 1994–1995 which are now adjusted using CRM measurements made at the time. GLODAPv2.2022 includes measurements from almost 1.4 million water samples from the global oceans collected on 1085 cruises. The data for the now 13 GLODAP core variables (salinity, oxygen, nitrate, silicate, phosphate, dissolved inorganic carbon, total alkalinity, pH, CFC-11, CFC-12, CFC-113, CCl4, and SF6) have undergone extensive quality control with a focus on systematic evaluation of bias. The data are available in two formats: (i) as submitted by the data originator but converted to World Ocean Circulation Experiment (WOCE) exchange format and (ii) as a merged data product with adjustments applied to minimize bias. For the present annual update, adjustments for the 96 new cruises were derived by comparing those data with the data from the 989 quality controlled cruises in the GLODAPv2.2021 data product using crossover analysis. SF6 data from all cruises were evaluated by comparison with CFC-12 data measured on the same cruises. For nutrients and ocean carbon dioxide (CO2) chemistry comparisons to estimates based on empirical algorithms provided additional context for adjustment decisions. The adjustments that we applied are intended to remove potential biases from errors related to measurement, calibration, and data handling practices without removing known or likely time trends or variations in the variables evaluated. The compiled and adjusted data product is believed to be consistent to better than 0.005 in salinity, 1 % in oxygen, 2 % in nitrate, 2 % in silicate, 2 % in phosphate, 4 μmol kg-1 in dissolved inorganic carbon, 4 μmol kg-1 in total alkalinity, 0.01–0.02 in pH (depending on region), and 5 % in the halogenated transient tracers. The other variables included in the compilation, such as isotopic tracers and discrete CO2 fugacity (fCO2), were not subjected to bias comparison or adjustments.

Description: Workshop held August 19-21, 2014, Woods Hole, MA

Description: Relative to their surface area, continental margins represent some of the largest carbon fluxes in the global ocean, but sparse and sporadic sampling in space and time makes these systems difficult to characterize and quantify. Recognizing the importance of continental margins to the overall North American carbon budget, terrestrial and marine carbon cycle scientists have been collaborating on a series of synthesis, carbon budgeting, and modeling exercises for coastal regions of North America, which include the Gulf of Mexico, the Laurentian Great Lakes (LGL), and the coastal waters of the Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic Oceans. The Coastal CARbon Synthesis (CCARS) workshops and research activities have been conducted over the past several years as a partner activity between the Ocean Carbon and Biogeochemistry (OCB) Program and the North American Carbon Program (NACP) to synthesize existing data and improve quantitative assessments of the North American carbon budget.

Description: The authors of this science plan wish to acknowledge the generous support of NASA (NNX10AU78G) and NSF (OCE-1107285) for all of the CCARS activities, including a kickoff meeting (December 2010), a series of regional workshops (Atlantic coast, Gulf of Mexico, Pacific coast), and the final community workshop (August 2014).

Description: Author Posting. © American Meteorological Society, 2021. This article is posted here by permission of American Meteorological Society for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 102(8), (2021): S143–S198, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-21-0083.1.

Description: This chapter details 2020 global patterns in select observed oceanic physical, chemical, and biological variables relative to long-term climatologies, their differences between 2020 and 2019, and puts 2020 observations in the context of the historical record. In this overview we address a few of the highlights, first in haiku, then paragraph form: La Niña arrives, shifts winds, rain, heat, salt, carbon: Pacific—beyond. Global ocean conditions in 2020 reflected a transition from an El Niño in 2018–19 to a La Niña in late 2020. Pacific trade winds strengthened in 2020 relative to 2019, driving anomalously westward Pacific equatorial surface currents. Sea surface temperatures (SSTs), upper ocean heat content, and sea surface height all fell in the eastern tropical Pacific and rose in the western tropical Pacific. Efflux of carbon dioxide from ocean to atmosphere was larger than average across much of the equatorial Pacific, and both chlorophyll-a and phytoplankton carbon concentrations were elevated across the tropical Pacific. Less rain fell and more water evaporated in the western equatorial Pacific, consonant with increased sea surface salinity (SSS) there. SSS may also have increased as a result of anomalously westward surface currents advecting salty water from the east. El Niño–Southern Oscillation conditions have global ramifications that reverberate throughout the report.

Description: Argo data used in the chapter were collected and made freely available by the International Argo Program and the national programs that contribute to it. (https://argo.ucsd.edu, https://www.ocean-ops. org). The Argo Program is part of the Global Ocean Observing System. Many authors of the chapter are supported by NOAA Research, the NOAA Global Ocean Monitoring and Observing Program, or the NOAA Ocean Acidification Program. • L. Cheng is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (42076202) and Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (XDB42040402. • R. E. Killick is supported by the Met Office Hadley Centre Climate Programme funded by BEIS and Defra. PMEL contribution numbers 5214, 5215, 5216, 5217, and 5247.

Description: © The Author(s), 2016. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Earth System Science Data 8 (2016): 605-649, doi:10.5194/essd-8-605-2016.

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).

Description: Australia, Integrated Marine Observing System and Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems CRC BT; European Commission (EC) Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service, European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) FC; EC H2020 (AtlantOS; grant no. 633211) NL, AO; EC H2020 (CRESCENDO; grant no. 641816) CD, RS, OA, PF; EC H2020 European Research Council (ERC) (QUINCY; grant no. 647204). SZ; EC H2020 ERC Synergy grant (IMBALANCE-P; grant no. ERC-2013-SyG-610028) PC; France, BNP Paribas Foundation grant to support the Global Carbon Atlas PC; French Institut National des Sciences de l’Univers (INSU) and Institut Paul Emile Victor (IPEV) for OISO cruises NM; French Institut de recherche pour le développement (IRD) NL; German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (grant no. 01LK1224I ICOS-D) MH; German Research Foundation’s Emmy Noether Programme (grant no. PO1751/1-1) JN; German Max Planck Society CR, SZ; Germany, Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) AK; Germany, Helmholtz Postdoc Programme (Initiative and Networking Fund of the Helmholtz Association) JH; Japan Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) OT; Japan Ministry of Environment SN; Japan Ministry of Environment (grant no. ERTDF S-10) EK; NASA LCLUC programme (grant no. NASA NNX14AD94G) AJ; New Zealand National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) Core Funding KC; Norway Research Council (grant no. 229752) AMO; Norway Research Council (grant no. 569980) GPP, RMA, JIK; Norway Research Council (project EVA; grant no. 229771) JS; Norwegian Environment Agency (grant no. 16078007) IS; Research Fund – Flanders (FWO; formerly Hercules Foundation) TG; South Africa Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) PMSM; UK Natural Environment Research Council (RAGANRAoCC; grant no. NE/K002473/1) US; UK Newton Fund through the Met Office Climate Science for Service Partnership Brazil (CSSP Brazil) AJW; US Department of Agriculture, National Institute of Food and Agriculture (grant no. 2015-67003- 23485) DL; US Department of Energy (grant no. DE-FC03-97ER62402/A010) DL; US Department of Energy, Biological and Environmental Research Program, Office of Science (grant no. DE-AC05-00OR22725) APW; US Department of Commerce, NOAA’s Climate Observation Division of the Climate Program Office SRA, AJS; US Department of Energy, Office of Science and BER programme (grant no. DOE DE-SC0016323) AJ; US National Science Foundation (grant no. AGS-1048827) SD; US National Science Foundation (grant no. AOAS-1543457) DRM; US National Science Foundation (grant no. AOAS-1341647) DRM; US NOAA’s Climate Observation Division of the Climate Program Office (grant no. N8R1SE3P00); US NOAA’s Ocean Acidification Program (grant no. N8R3CEAP00) DP, LB; US National Science Foundation (grant no. NSF AGS 12-43071)

Description: © The Author(s), 2019. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in WHOI Fennel, K., Alin, S., Barbero, L., Evans, W., Bourgeois, T., Cooley, S., Dunne, J., Feely, R. A., Martin Hernandez-Ayon, J., Hu, X., Lohrenz, S., Muller-Karger, F., Najjar, R., Robbins, L., Shadwick, E., Siedlecki, S., Steiner, N., Sutton, A., Turk, D., Vlahos, P., & Wang, Z. A. Carbon cycling in the north american coastal ocean: A synthesis. Biogeosciences, 16(6), (2019):1281-1304, doi:10.5194/bg-16-1281-2019.

Description: A quantification of carbon fluxes in the coastal ocean and across its boundaries with the atmosphere, land, and the open ocean is important for assessing the current state and projecting future trends in ocean carbon uptake and coastal ocean acidification, but this is currently a missing component of global carbon budgeting. This synthesis reviews recent progress in characterizing these carbon fluxes for the North American coastal ocean. Several observing networks and high-resolution regional models are now available. Recent efforts have focused primarily on quantifying the net air–sea exchange of carbon dioxide (CO2). Some studies have estimated other key fluxes, such as the exchange of organic and inorganic carbon between shelves and the open ocean. Available estimates of air–sea CO2 flux, informed by more than a decade of observations, indicate that the North American Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) acts as a sink of 160±80 Tg C yr−1, although this flux is not well constrained. The Arctic and sub-Arctic, mid-latitude Atlantic, and mid-latitude Pacific portions of the EEZ account for 104, 62, and −3.7 Tg C yr−1, respectively, while making up 51 %, 25 %, and 24 % of the total area, respectively. Combining the net uptake of 160±80 Tg C yr−1 with an estimated carbon input from land of 106±30 Tg C yr−1 minus an estimated burial of 65±55 Tg C yr−1 and an estimated accumulation of dissolved carbon in EEZ waters of 50±25 Tg C yr−1 implies a carbon export of 151±105 Tg C yr−1 to the open ocean. The increasing concentration of inorganic carbon in coastal and open-ocean waters leads to ocean acidification. As a result, conditions favoring the dissolution of calcium carbonate occur regularly in subsurface coastal waters in the Arctic, which are naturally prone to low pH, and the North Pacific, where upwelling of deep, carbon-rich waters has intensified. Expanded monitoring and extension of existing model capabilities are required to provide more reliable coastal carbon budgets, projections of future states of the coastal ocean, and quantification of anthropogenic carbon contributions.

Description: This paper builds on synthesis activities carried out for the second State of the Carbon Cycle Report (SOCCR2). We would like to thank Gyami Shrestha, Nancy Cavallero, Melanie Mayes, Holly Haun, Marjy Friedrichs, Laura Lorenzoni, and Erica Ombres for the guidance and input. We are grateful to Nicolas Gruber and Christophe Rabouille for their constructive and helpful reviews of the paper. It is a contribution to the Marine Biodiversity Observation Network (MBON), the Integrated Marine Biosphere Research (IMBeR) project, the International Ocean Carbon Coordination Project (IOCCP), and the Cooperative Institute of the University of Miami and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (CIMAS) under cooperative agreement NA10OAR4320143. Katja Fennel was funded by the NSERC Discovery program. Steven Lohrenz was funded by NASA grant NNX14AO73G. Ray Najjar was funded by NASA grant NNX14AM37G. Frank Muller-Karger was funded through NASA grant NNX14AP62A. This is Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory contribution number 4837 and Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory contribution number 8284. Simone Alin and Richard A. Feely also thank Libby Jewett and Dwight Gledhill of the NOAA Ocean Acidification Program for their support.