ALBERT

All Library Books, journals and Electronic Records Telegrafenberg

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: 2015-05-08
    Description: Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere 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 a 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, consistency within and among components, alongside methodology and data limitations. CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (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 forced by observed climate, CO2, and land-cover-change (some including nitrogen–carbon interactions). 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 (2004–2013), EFF was 8.9 ± 0.4 GtC yr−1, ELUC 0.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, GATM 4.3 ± 0.1 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN 2.6 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND 2.9 ± 0.8 GtC yr−1. For year 2013 alone, EFF grew to 9.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, 2.3% above 2012, continuing the growth trend in these emissions, ELUC was 0.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, GATM was 5.4 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN was 2.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 2.5 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1. GATM was high in 2013, reflecting a steady increase in EFF and smaller and opposite changes between SOCEAN and SLAND compared to the past decade (2004–2013). The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 395.31 ± 0.10 ppm averaged over 2013. We estimate that EFF will increase by 2.5% (1.3–3.5%) to 10.1 ± 0.6 GtC in 2014 (37.0 ± 2.2 GtCO2 yr−1), 65% above emissions in 1990, based on projections of world gross domestic product and recent changes in the carbon intensity of the global economy. From this projection of EFF and assumed constant ELUC for 2014, cumulative emissions of CO2 will reach about 545 ± 55 GtC (2000 ± 200 GtCO2) for 1870–2014, about 75% from EFF and 25% from ELUC. This paper documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new carbon budget compared with previous publications of this living data set (Le Quéré et al., 2013, 2014). All observations presented here can be downloaded from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (doi:10.3334/CDIAC/GCP_2014).
    Print ISSN: 1866-3508
    Electronic ISSN: 1866-3516
    Topics: Geosciences
    Published by Copernicus
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Publication Date: 2015-10-13
    Description: During the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) substantial efforts were carried out on the systematic assessment of the skill of Earth system models. One goal was to check how realistically representative marine biogeochemical tracer distributions could be reproduced by models. Mean-state assessments routinely compared model hindcasts to available modern biogeochemical observations. However, these assessments considered neither the extent of equilibrium in modeled biogeochemical reservoirs nor the sensitivity of model performance to initial conditions or to the spin-up protocols. Here, we explore how the large diversity in spin-up protocols used for marine biogeochemistry in CMIP5 Earth system models (ESM) contribute to model-to-model differences in the simulated fields. We take advantage of a 500 year spin-up simulation of IPSL-CM5A-LR to quantify the influence of the spin-up protocol on model ability to reproduce relevant data fields. Amplification of biases in selected biogeochemical fields (O2, NO3, Alk-DIC) is assessed as a function of spin-up duration. We demonstrate that a relationship between spin-up duration and assessment metrics emerges from our model results and is consistent when confronted against a larger ensemble of CMIP5 models. This shows that drift has implications on their performance assessment in addition to possibly aliasing estimates of climate change impact. Our study suggests that differences in spin-up protocols could explain a substantial part of model disparities, constituting a source of model-to-model uncertainty. This requires more attention in future model intercomparison exercices in order to provide realistic ESM results on marine biogeochemistry and carbon cycle feedbacks.
    Print ISSN: 1991-9611
    Electronic ISSN: 1991-962X
    Topics: Geosciences
    Published by Copernicus on behalf of European Geosciences Union.
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Publication Date: 2022-05-25
    Description: © The Author(s), 2014. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Biogeosciences 11 (2014): 6955-6967, doi:10.5194/bg-11-6955-2014.
    Description: This study aims to evaluate the potential for impacts of ocean acidification on North Atlantic deep-sea ecosystems in response to IPCC AR5 Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs). Deep-sea biota is likely highly vulnerable to changes in seawater chemistry and sensitive to moderate excursions in pH. Here we show, from seven fully coupled Earth system models, that for three out of four RCPs over 17% of the seafloor area below 500 m depth in the North Atlantic sector will experience pH reductions exceeding −0.2 units by 2100. Increased stratification in response to climate change partially alleviates the impact of ocean acidification on deep benthic environments. We report on major pH reductions over the deep North Atlantic seafloor (depth 〉500 m) and at important deep-sea features, such as seamounts and canyons. By 2100, and under the high CO2 scenario RCP8.5, pH reductions exceeding −0.2 (−0.3) units are projected in close to 23% (~15%) of North Atlantic deep-sea canyons and ~8% (3%) of seamounts – including seamounts proposed as sites of marine protected areas. The spatial pattern of impacts reflects the depth of the pH perturbation and does not scale linearly with atmospheric CO2 concentration. Impacts may cause negative changes of the same magnitude or exceeding the current target of 10% of preservation of marine biomes set by the convention on biological diversity, implying that ocean acidification may offset benefits from conservation/management strategies relying on the regulation of resource exploitation.
    Description: This work was supported through EU FP7 projects EPOCA (grant no. 211384) and CARBOCHANGE (grant no. 264879). D. O. B. Jones was funded by the UK Natural Environment Research Council as part of the Marine Environmental Mapping Programme (MAREMAP). S. C. Doney acknowledges support from the National Science Foundation (AGS-1048827). F. Joos acknowledges support from the Swiss National Science Foundation.
    Repository Name: Woods Hole Open Access Server
    Type: Article
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    facet.materialart.
    Unknown
    Copernicus Publications
    In:  EPIC3Earth System Science Data, Copernicus Publications, 7(1), pp. 47-85, ISSN: 1866-3516
    Publication Date: 2019-10-04
    Repository Name: EPIC Alfred Wegener Institut
    Type: Article , isiRev , info:eu-repo/semantics/article
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    Publication Date: 2022-05-26
    Description: © The Author(s), 2014. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Earth System Science Data 6 (2014): 235-263, doi:10.5194/essd-6-235-2014.
    Description: Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere 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 a 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, consistency within and among components, alongside methodology and data limitations. CO2 emissions from fossil-fuel combustion and cement production (EFF) are based on energy statistics, 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 for the first time in this budget 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 forced by observed climate, CO2 and land cover change (some including nitrogen–carbon interactions). 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 (2003–2012), EFF was 8.6 ± 0.4 GtC yr−1, ELUC 0.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, GATM 4.3 ± 0.1 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN 2.5 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND 2.8 ± 0.8 GtC yr−1. For year 2012 alone, EFF grew to 9.7 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, 2.2% above 2011, reflecting a continued growing trend in these emissions, GATM was 5.1 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN was 2.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and assuming an ELUC of 1.0 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 (based on the 2001–2010 average), SLAND was 2.7 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1. GATM was high in 2012 compared to the 2003–2012 average, almost entirely reflecting the high EFF. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 392.52 ± 0.10 ppm averaged over 2012. We estimate that EFF will increase by 2.1% (1.1–3.1%) to 9.9 ± 0.5 GtC in 2013, 61% above emissions in 1990, based on projections of world gross domestic product and recent changes in the carbon intensity of the economy. With this projection, cumulative emissions of CO2 will reach about 535 ± 55 GtC for 1870–2013, about 70% from EFF (390 ± 20 GtC) and 30% from ELUC (145 ± 50 GtC).
    Description: We thank the many researchers and funding agencies responsible for the collection and quality control of the data included in SOCAT, and the support of the International Ocean Carbon Coordination Project (IOCCP), the Surface Ocean Lower Atmosphere Study (SOLAS), and the Integrated Marine Biogeochemistry and Ecosystem Research program (IMBER). The UK Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) provided funding to C. Le Quéré, R. Moriarty and the GCP though their International Opportunities Fund specifically to support this publication (project NE/103002X/1). R. J. Andres and T. A. Boden were supported by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research (BER) programs under US Department of Energy contract DE-AC05- 00OR22725. G. P. Peters and R. M. Andrews were supported by the Norwegian Research Council (221355). A. Arneth, A. Omar, C. Le Quéré, J. Schwinger, P. Ciais, P. Friedlingstein, P. Regnier, J. Segschneider, S. Sitch and S. Zaehle were supported by the EU FP7 for funding through projects GEOCarbon (283080), COMBINE (226520), CARBOCHANGE (264879), EMBRACE (GA282672), and LUC4C (GA603542). A. Harper was supported by the NERC Joint Weather and Climate Research Programme. A. K. Jain was supported by the US National Science Foundation (NSF AGS 12-43071) the US Department of Energy, Office of Science and BER programs (DOE DE-SC0006706) and NASA LCLUC program (NASA NNX14AD94G). B. D. Stocker was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation. A. Wiltshire was supported by the Joint UK DECC/Defra Met Office Hadley Centre Climate Programme (GA01101). E. Kato was supported by the Environment Research and Technology Development Fund (S-10) of the Ministry of Environment of Japan. J. G. Canadell and M. R. Raupach were supported by the Australian Climate Change Science Program. J. I. House was supported by a Leverhulme Research Fellowship. S. C. Doney was supported by the US National Science Foundation (NSF AGS-1048827).
    Repository Name: Woods Hole Open Access Server
    Type: Article
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 6
    Publication Date: 2022-05-26
    Description: © The Author(s), 2015. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Earth System Science Data 7 (2015): 47-85, doi:10.5194/essd-7-47-2015.
    Description: Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere 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 a 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, consistency within and among components, alongside methodology and data limitations. CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (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 forced by observed climate, CO2, and land-cover-change (some including nitrogen–carbon interactions). 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 (2004–2013), EFF was 8.9 ± 0.4 GtC yr−1, ELUC 0.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, GATM 4.3 ± 0.1 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN 2.6 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND 2.9 ± 0.8 GtC yr−1. For year 2013 alone, EFF grew to 9.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, 2.3% above 2012, continuing the growth trend in these emissions, ELUC was 0.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, GATM was 5.4 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN was 2.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 2.5 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1. GATM was high in 2013, reflecting a steady increase in EFF and smaller and opposite changes between SOCEAN and SLAND compared to the past decade (2004–2013). The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 395.31 ± 0.10 ppm averaged over 2013. We estimate that EFF will increase by 2.5% (1.3–3.5%) to 10.1 ± 0.6 GtC in 2014 (37.0 ± 2.2 GtCO2 yr−1), 65% above emissions in 1990, based on projections of world gross domestic product and recent changes in the carbon intensity of the global economy. From this projection of EFF and assumed constant ELUC for 2014, cumulative emissions of CO2 will reach about 545 ± 55 GtC (2000 ± 200 GtCO2) for 1870–2014, about 75% from EFF and 25% from ELUC. This paper documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new carbon budget compared with previous publications of this living data set (Le Quéré et al., 2013, 2014). All observations presented here can be downloaded from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (doi:10.3334/CDIAC/GCP_2014).
    Description: NERC provided funding to C. Le Quéré, R. Moriarty, and the GCP though their International Opportunities Fund specifically to support this publication (NE/103002X/1), and to U. Schuster through UKOARP (NE/H017046/1). G. P. Peters and R. M. Andrews were supported by the Norwegian Research Council (236296). T. A. Boden was supported by US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research (BER) programmes under US Department of Energy contract DEAC05- 00OR22725. Y. Bozec was supported by Region Bretagne, CG29, and INSU (LEFE/MERMEX) for CARBORHONE cruises. J. G. Canadell and M. R. Raupach were supported by the Australian Climate Change Science Programme. M. Hoppema received ICOSD funding through the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) to the AWI (01 LK 1224I). J. I. House was supported by a Leverhulme Early Career Fellowship. A. K. Jain was supported by the US National Science Foundation (NSF AGS 12-43071) the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, and BER programmes (DOE DE-SC0006706) and the NASA LCLUC programme (NASA NNX14AD94G). E. Kato was supported by the Environment Research and Technology Development Fund (S-10) of the Ministry of Environment of Japan. C. Koven was supported by the Director, Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research, of the US Department of Energy under contract no. DE-AC02-05CH11231 as part of their Regional and Global Climate Modeling Program. I. D. Lima was supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF AGS-1048827). N. Metzl was supported by Institut National des Sciences de l’Univers (INSU) and Institut Paul Emile Victor (IPEV) for OISO cruises. A. Olsen was supported by the Centre for Climate Dynamics at the Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research. J. E. Salisbury was supported by grants from NOAA/NASA. T. Steinhoff was supported by ICOS-D (BMBF FK 01LK1101C). B. D. Stocker was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation and FP7 funding through project EMBRACE (282672). A. J. Sutton was supported by NOAA. T. Takahashi was supported by grants from NOAA and the Comer Education and Science Foundation. B. Tilbrook was supported by the Australian Department of the Environment and the Integrated Marine Observing System. A.Wiltshire was supported by the Joint UK DECC/Defra Met Office Hadley Centre Climate Programme (GA01101). P. Ciais,W. Peters, C. Le Quére, P. Regnier, and U. Schuster were supported by the EU FP7 through project GEOCarbon (283080). A. Arneth, P. Ciais, S. Sitch, and A. Wiltshire were supported by COMBINE (226520). V. Kitidis, M. Hoppema, N. Metzl, C. Le Quéré, U. Schuster, J. Schwiger, J. Segschneider, and T. Steinhoff were supported by the EU FP7 through project CARBOCHANGE (264879). A. Arnet, P. Friedlingstein, B. Poulter, and S. Sitch were supported by the EU FP7 through projects LUC4C (GA603542). P. Friedlingstein was also supported by EMBRACE (GA282672). F. Chevallier and G. R. van der Werf were supported by the EU FP7 through project MACC-II (283576).
    Repository Name: Woods Hole Open Access Server
    Type: Article
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...