Determinants and predictability of global wildfire emissions

Biomass burning is one of the largest sources of atmospheric trace gases and aerosols globally. These emissions have a major impact on the radiative balance of the atmosphere and on air quality, and are thus of significant scientific and societal interest. Several datasets have been developed that quantify those emissions on a global grid and offered to the atmospheric modelling community. However, no study has yet attempted to systematically quantify the dependence of the inferred pyrogenic emissions on underlying assumptions and input data. Such a sensitivity study is needed for understanding how well we can currently model those emissions and what the factors are that contribute to uncertainties in those emission estimates. <br><br> Here, we combine various satellite-derived burned area products, a terrestrial ecosystem model to simulate fuel loads and the effect of fire on ecosystem dynamics, a model of fuel combustion, and various emission models that relate combusted biomass to the emission of various trace gases and aerosols. We carry out simulations with varying parameters for combustion completeness and fuel decomposition rates within published estimates, four different emissions models and three different global burned-area products. We find that variations in combustion completeness and simulated fuel loads have the largest impact on simulated global emissions for most species, except for some with highly uncertain emission factors. Variation in burned-area estimates also contribute considerably to emission uncertainties. We conclude that global models urgently need more field-based data for better parameterisation of combustion completeness and validation of simulated fuel loads, and that further validation and improvement of burned area information is necessary for accurately modelling global wildfire emissions. The results are important for chemical transport modelling studies, and for simulations of biomass burning impacts on the atmosphere under future climate change scenarios

Impact of human population density on fire frequency at the global scale

Human impact on wildfires, a major earth system component, remains poorly understood. While local studies have found more fires close to settlements and roads, assimilated charcoal records and analyses of regional fire patterns from remote-sensing observations point to a decline in fire frequency with increasing human population. Here, we present a global analysis using three multi-year satellite-based burned-area products combined with a parameter estimation and uncertainty analysis with a non-linear model. We show that at the global scale, the impact of increasing population density is mainly to reduce fire frequency. Only for areas with up to 0.1 people per km2, we find that fire frequency increases by 10 to 20% relative to its value at no population. The results are robust against choice of burned-area data set, and indicate that at only very few places on earth, fire frequency is limited by human ignitions. Applying the results to historical population estimates results in a moderate but accelerating decline of global burned area by around 14% since 1800, with most of the decline since 1950

Biophysics and vegetation cover change: A process-based evaluation framework for confronting land surface models with satellite observations

This is the final version. Available on open access from Copernicus Publications via the DOI in this recordLand use and land cover change (LULCC) alter the biophysical properties of the Earth's surface. The associated changes in vegetation cover can perturb the local surface energy balance, which in turn can affect the local climate. The sign and magnitude of this change in climate depends on the specific vegetation transition, its timing and its location, as well as on the background climate. Land surface models (LSMs) can be used to simulate such land-climate interactions and study their impact in past and future climates, but their capacity to model biophysical effects accurately across the globe remain unclear due to the complexity of the phenomena. Here we present a framework to evaluate the performance of such models with respect to a dedicated dataset derived from satellite remote sensing observations. Idealized simulations from four LSMs (JULES, ORCHIDEE, JSBACH and CLM) are combined with satellite observations to analyse the changes in radiative and turbulent fluxes caused by 15 specific vegetation cover transitions across geographic, seasonal and climatic gradients. The seasonal variation in net radiation associated with land cover change is the process that models capture best, whereas LSMs perform poorly when simulating spatial and climatic gradients of variation in latent, sensible and ground heat fluxes induced by land cover transitions. We expect that this analysis will help identify model limitations and prioritize efforts in model development as well as inform where consensus between model and observations is already met, ultimately helping to improve the robustness and consistency of model simulations to better inform land-based mitigation and adaptation policies.The study was funded by the FP7 LUC4C project (grant no. 603542

Air quality impacts of European wildfire emissions in a changing climate

Wildfires are not only a threat to human property and a vital element of many ecosystems, but also an important source of air pollution. In this study, we first review the available evidence for a past or possible future climate-driven increase in wildfire emissions in Europe. We then introduce an ensemble of model simulations with a coupled wildfire–dynamic-ecosystem model, which we combine with published spatial maps of both wildfire and anthropogenic emissions of several major air pollutants to arrive at air pollutant emission projections for several time slices during the 21st century. The results indicate moderate wildfire-driven emission increases until 2050, but there is a possibility of large increases until the last decades of this century at high levels of climate change. We identify southern and north-eastern Europe as potential areas where wildfires may surpass anthropogenic pollution sources during the summer months. Under a scenario of high levels of climate change (Representative Concentration Pathway, RCP, 8.5), emissions from wildfires in central and northern Portugal and possibly southern Italy and along the west coast of the Balkan peninsula are projected to reach levels that could affect annual mean particulate matter concentrations enough to be relevant for meeting WHO air quality targets

Consistent negative response of US crops to high temperatures in observations and crop models

High temperatures are detrimental to crop yields and could lead to global warming-driven reductions in agricultural productivity. To assess future threats, the majority of studies used process-based crop models, but their ability to represent effects of high temperature has been questioned. Here we show that an ensemble of nine crop models reproduces the observed average temperature responses of US maize, soybean and wheat yields. Each day >30 °C diminishes maize and soybean yields by up to 6% under rainfed conditions. Declines observed in irrigated areas, or simulated assuming full irrigation, are weak. This supports the hypothesis that water stress induced by high temperatures causes the decline. For wheat a negative response to high temperature is neither observed nor simulated under historical conditions, since critical temperatures are rarely exceeded during the growing season. In the future, yields are modelled to decline for all three crops at temperatures >30 °C. Elevated CO 2 can only weakly reduce these yield losses, in contrast to irrigation

Uncertainties in global crop model frameworks: effects of cultivar distribution, crop management and soil handling on crop yield estimates

Global gridded crop models (GGCMs) combine field-scale agronomic models or sets of plant growth algorithms with gridded spatial input data to estimate spatially explicit crop yields 40 and agricultural externalities at the global scale. Differences in GGCM outputs arise from the use of different bio-physical models, setups, and input data. While algorithms have been in the focus of recent GGCM comparisons, this study investigates differences in maize and wheat yield estimates from five GGCMs based on the public domain field-scale model Environmental Policy Integrated Climate (EPIC) that participate in the AgMIP Global Gridded Crop Model 45 Intercomparison (GGCMI) project. Albeit using the same crop model, the GGCMs differ in model version, input data, management assumptions, parameterization, geographic distribution of cultivars, and selection of subroutines e.g. for the estimation of potential evapotranspiration or soil erosion. The analyses reveal long-term trends and inter-annual yield variability in the EPIC-based GGCMs to be highly sensitive to soil parameterization and crop management. Absolute yield levels as well depend not only on nutrient supply but 50 also on the parameterization and distribution of crop cultivars. All GGCMs show an intermediate performance in reproducing reported absolute yield levels or inter-annual dynamics. Our findings suggest that studies focusing on the evaluation of differences in bio-physical routines may require further harmonization of input data and management assumptions in order to eliminate background noise resulting from differences in model setups. For agricultural impact assessments, employing a GGCM ensemble with its widely varying assumptions 55 in setups appears the best solution for bracketing such uncertainties as long as comprehensive global datasets taking into account regional differences in crop management, cultivar distributions and coefficients for parameterizing agro-environmental processes are lacking. Finally, we recommend improvements in the documentation of setups and input data of GGCMs in order to allow for sound interpretability, comparability and reproducibility of published results

The Fire Modeling Intercomparison Project (FireMIP), phase 1: experimental and analytical protocols

The important role of fire in regulating vegetation community composition and contributions to emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols make it a critical component of dynamic global vegetation models and Earth system models. Over two decades of development, a wide variety of model structures and mechanisms have been designed and incorporated into global fire models, which have been linked to different vegetation models. However, there has not yet been a systematic examination of how these different strategies contribute to model performance. Here we describe the structure of the first phase of the Fire Model Intercomparison Project (FireMIP), which for the first time seeks to systematically compare a number of models. By combining a standardized set of input data and model experiments with a rigorous comparison of model outputs to each other and to observations, we will improve the understanding of what drives vegetation fire, how it can best be simulated, and what new or improved observational data could allow better constraints on model behavior. Here we introduce the fire models used in the first phase of FireMIP, the simulation protocols applied, and the benchmarking system used to evaluate the models

The status and challenge of global fire modelling

This is the discussion paper version of the article. The final published version was published in Biogeosciences Vol. 13 (1), pp. 3359-3375 and is in ORE at http://hdl.handle.net/10871/22886Biomass burning impacts vegetation dynamics, biogeochemical cycling, atmospheric chemistry, and climate, with sometimes deleterious socio-economic impacts. Under future climate projections it is often expected that the risk of wildfires will increase. Our ability to predict the magnitude and geographic pattern of future fire impacts rests on our ability to model fire regimes, either using well-founded empirical relationships or process-based models with good predictive skill. A large variety of models exist today and it is still unclear which type of model or degree of complexity is required to model fire adequately at regional to global scales. This is the central question underpinning the creation of the Fire Model Intercomparison Project - FireMIP, an international project to compare and evaluate existing global fire models against benchmark data sets for present-day and historical conditions. In this paper we summarise the current state-of-the-art in fire regime modelling and model evaluation, and outline what lessons may be learned from FireMIP.Stijn Hantson and Almut Arneth acknowledge support by the EU FP7 projects BACCHUS (grant agreement no. 603445) and LUC4C (grant agreement no. 603542). This work was supported, in part, by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), through the Helmholtz Association and its research programme ATMO, and the HGF Impulse and Networking fund. The MC-FIRE model development was supported by the global change research programmes of the Biological Resources Division of the US Geological Survey (CA 12681901,112-), the US Department of Energy (LWT6212306509), the US Forest Service (PNW96–5I0 9 -2-CA), and funds from the Joint Fire Science Program. I. Colin Prentice is supported by the AXA Research Fund under the Chair Programme in Biosphere and Climate Impacts, part of the Imperial College initiative Grand Challenges in Ecosystems and the Environment. Fang Li was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation (grant agreement no. 41475099 and no. 2010CB951801). Jed O. Kaplan was supported by the European Research Council (COEVOLVE 313797). Sam S. Rabin was funded by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship, as well as by the Carbon Mitigation Initiative. Allan Spessa acknowledges funding support provided by the Open University Research Investment Fellowship scheme. FireMIP is a non-funded community initiative and participation is open to all

The status and challenge of global fire modelling

This is the final version of the article. Available from European Geosciences Union / Copernicus Publications via the DOI in this record.The discussion paper version of this article was published in Biogeosciences Discussions on 25 January 2016 and is in ORE at http://hdl.handle.net/10871/34451Biomass burning impacts vegetation dynamics, biogeochemical cycling, atmospheric chemistry, and climate, with sometimes deleterious socio-economic impacts. Under future climate projections it is often expected that the risk of wildfires will increase. Our ability to predict the magnitude and geographic pattern of future fire impacts rests on our ability to model fire regimes, using either well-founded empirical relationships or process-based models with good predictive skill. While a large variety of models exist today, it is still unclear which type of model or degree of complexity is required to model fire adequately at regional to global scales. This is the central question underpinning the creation of the Fire Model Intercomparison Project (FireMIP), an international initiative to compare and evaluate existing global fire models against benchmark data sets for present-day and historical conditions. In this paper we review how fires have been represented in fire-enabled dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) and give an overview of the current state of the art in fire-regime modelling. We indicate which challenges still remain in global fire modelling and stress the need for a comprehensive model evaluation and outline what lessons may be learned from FireMIP.Stijn Hantson and Almut Arneth acknowledge support by the EU FP7 projects BACCHUS (grant agreement no. 603445) and LUC4C (grant agreement no. 603542). This work was supported, in part, by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), through the Helmholtz Association and its research programme ATMO, and the HGF Impulse and Networking fund. The MC-FIRE model development was supported by the global change research programmes of the Biological Resources Division of the US Geological Survey (CA 12681901,112-), the US Department of Energy (LWT-6212306509), the US Forest Service (PNW96–5I0 9 -2-CA), and funds from the Joint Fire Science Program. I. Colin Prentice is supported by the AXA Research Fund under the Chair Programme in Biosphere and Climate Impacts, part of the Imperial College initiative Grand Challenges in Ecosystems and the Environment. Fang Li was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation (grant agreement no. 41475099 and no. 2010CB951801). Jed O. Kaplan was supported by the European Research Council (COEVOLVE 313797). Sam S. Rabin was funded by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship, as well as by the Carbon Mitigation Initiative. Allan Spessa acknowledges funding support provided by the Open University Research Investment Fellowship scheme. FireMIP is a non-funded community initiative and participation is open to all. For more information, contact Stijn Hantson ([email protected])

Disentangling land model uncertainty via Matrix-based Ensemble Model Inter-comparison Platform (MEMIP)

Abstract Background Large uncertainty in modeling land carbon (C) uptake heavily impedes the accurate prediction of the global C budget. Identifying the uncertainty sources among models is crucial for model improvement yet has been difficult due to multiple feedbacks within Earth System Models (ESMs). Here we present a Matrix-based Ensemble Model Inter-comparison Platform (MEMIP) under a unified model traceability framework to evaluate multiple soil organic carbon (SOC) models. Using the MEMIP, we analyzed how the vertically resolved soil biogeochemistry structure influences SOC prediction in two soil organic matter (SOM) models. By comparing the model outputs from the C-only and CN modes, the SOC differences contributed by individual processes and N feedback between vegetation and soil were explicitly disentangled. Results Results showed that the multi-layer models with a vertically resolved structure predicted significantly higher SOC than the single layer models over the historical simulation (1900–2000). The SOC difference between the multi-layer models was remarkably higher than between the single-layer models. Traceability analysis indicated that over 80% of the SOC increase in the multi-layer models was contributed by the incorporation of depth-related processes, while SOC differences were similarly contributed by the processes and N feedback between models with the same soil depth representation. Conclusions The output suggested that feedback is a non-negligible contributor to the inter-model difference of SOC prediction, especially between models with similar process representation. Further analysis with TRENDY v7 and more extensive MEMIP outputs illustrated the potential important role of multi-layer structure to enlarge the current ensemble spread and the necessity of more detail model decomposition to fully disentangle inter-model differences. We stressed the importance of analyzing ensemble outputs from the fundamental model structures, and holding a holistic view in understanding the ensemble uncertainty. </jats:sec