94 research outputs found

    A Brief Overview of the GLObal RIver Chemistry Database, GLORICH

    Get PDF
    AbstractOver the last decade the number of regional to global scale studies of river chemical fluxes and their steering factors increased rapidly, entailing a growing demand for appropriate databases to calculate mass budgets, to calibrate models, or to test hypotheses. We present a short overview of the recently established GLObal RIver CHemistry database GLORICH, which combines an assemblage of hydrochemical data from varying sources with catchment characteristics of the sampling locations. The information provided include e.g. catchment size, lithology, soil, climate, land cover, net primary production, population density and average slope gradient. The data base comprises 1.27 million samples distributed over 17,000 sampling locations

    Historical and future contributions of inland waters to the Congo Basin carbon balance

    Get PDF
    International audienceAs the second largest area of contiguous tropical rainforest and second largest river basin in the world, the Congo Basin has a significant role to play in the global carbon (C) cycle. For the present day, it has been shown that a significant proportion of global terrestrial net primary productivity (NPP) is transferred laterally to the land-ocean aquatic continuum (LOAC) as dissolved CO 2 , dissolved organic carbon (DOC), and particulate organic carbon (POC). Whilst the importance of LOAC fluxes in the Congo Basin has been demonstrated for the present day, it is not known to what extent these fluxes have been perturbed historically, how they are likely to change under future climate change and land use scenarios, and in turn what impact these changes might have on the overall C cycle of the basin. Here we apply the ORCHILEAK model to the Congo Basin and estimate that 4 % of terrestrial NPP (NPP = 5800 ± 166 Tg C yr −1) is currently exported from soils and vegetation to inland waters. Further, our results suggest that aquatic C fluxes may have undergone considerable perturbation since 1861 to the present day, with aquatic CO 2 evasion and C export to the coast increasing by 26 % (186±41 to 235 ± 54 Tg C yr −1) and 25 % (12 ± 3 to 15 ± 4 Tg C yr −1), respectively, largely because of rising atmospheric CO 2 concentrations. Moreover, under climate scenario RCP6.0 we predict that this perturbation could continue; over the full simulation period (1861-2099), we estimate that aquatic CO 2 evasion and C export to the coast could increase by 79 % and 67 %, respectively. Finally, we show that the proportion of terrestrial NPP lost to the LOAC could increase from approximately 3 % to 5 % from 1861-2099 as a result of increasing atmospheric CO 2 concentrations and climate change. However, our future projections of the Congo Basin C fluxes in particular need to be interpreted with some caution due to model limitations. We discuss these limitations, including the wider challenges associated with applying the current generation of land surface models which ignore nutrient dynamics to make future projections of the tropical C cycle, along with potential next steps

    RECCAP2 Future Component: Consistency and Potential for Regional Assessment to Constrain Global Projections

    Get PDF
    This is the final version. Available from Wiley via the DOI in this record. Data Availability Statement: All CMIP6 model output datasets analyzed during this study are available online at https://esgf-node.llnl.gov/search/cmip6/ and code required to reproduce figures is available at https://github.com/ChrisJones-MOHC/RECCAP2Future_2023 (ChrisJones-MOHC, 2023) and Zenodo at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8420250.Projections of future carbon sinks and stocks are important because they show how the world's ecosystems will respond to elevated CO2 and changes in climate. Moreover, they are crucial to inform policy decisions around emissions reductions to stay within the global warming levels identified by the Paris Agreement. However, Earth System Models from the 6th Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) show substantial spread in future projections—especially of the terrestrial carbon cycle, leading to a large uncertainty in our knowledge of any remaining carbon budget (RCB). Here we evaluate the global terrestrial carbon cycle projections on a region‐by‐region basis and compare the global models with regional assessments made by the REgional Carbon Cycle Assessment and Processes, Phase 2 activity. Results show that for each region, the CMIP6 multi‐model mean is generally consistent with the regional assessment, but substantial cross‐model spread exists. Nonetheless, all models perform well in some regions and no region is without some well performing models. This gives confidence that the CMIP6 models can be used to look at future changes in carbon stocks on a regional basis with appropriate model assessment and benchmarking. We find that most regions of the world remain cumulative net sources of CO2 between now and 2100 when considering the balance of fossil‐fuels and natural sinks, even under aggressive mitigation scenarios. This paper identifies strengths and weaknesses for each model in terms of its performance over a particular region including how process representation might impact those results and sets the agenda for applying stricter constraints at regional scales to reduce the uncertainty in global projections.European Union’s Horizon 2020European Union’s Horizon 2020European Union’s Horizon 2020Joint UK BEIS/Defra Met Office Hadley Centre Climate ProgrammeCarbonWatch-NZ Endeavour Research ProgrammeSão Paulo Research FoundationSão Paulo Research FoundationSão Paulo Research FoundationNational Science FoundationAndrew Carnegie Fellow ProgramCNPqKorea Ministry of EnvironmentNatural Environment Research Council (NERC)Natural Environment Research Council (NERC)National Environmental Science Progra

    The consolidated European synthesis of CO2emissions and removals for the European Union and United Kingdom : 1990-2018

    Get PDF
    Acknowledgements FAOSTAT statistics are produced and disseminated with the support of its member countries to the FAO regular budget. Philippe Ciais acknowledges the support of the European Research Council Synergy project SyG-2013-610028 IMBALANCE-P and from the ANR CLAND Convergence Institute. We acknowledge the work of the entire EDGAR group (Marilena Muntean, Diego Guizzardi, Edwin Schaaf and Jos Olivier). We acknowledge Stephen Sitch and the authors of the DGVMs TRENDY v7 ensemble models for providing us with the data. Financial support This research has been supported by the H2020 European Research Council (grant no. 776810).Peer reviewedPublisher PD

    The consolidated European synthesis of CH4 and N2O emissions for the European Union and United Kingdom : 1990-2017

    Get PDF
    Reliable quantification of the sources and sinks of greenhouse gases, together with trends and uncertainties, is essential to monitoring the progress in mitigating anthropogenic emissions under the Paris Agreement. This study provides a consolidated synthesis of CH4 and N2O emissions with consistently derived state-of-the-art bottom-up (BU) and top-down (TD) data sources for the European Union and UK (EU27 C UK). We integrate recent emission inventory data, ecosystem process-based model results and inverse modeling estimates over the period 1990-2017. BU and TD products are compared with European national greenhouse gas inventories (NGHGIs) reported to the UN climate convention UNFCCC secretariat in 2019. For uncertainties, we used for NGHGIs the standard deviation obtained by varying parameters of inventory calculations, reported by the member states (MSs) following the recommendations of the IPCC Guidelines. For atmospheric inversion models (TD) or other inventory datasets (BU), we defined uncertainties from the spread between different model estimates or model-specific uncertainties when reported. In comparing NGHGIs with other approaches, a key source of bias is the activities included, e.g., anthropogenic versus anthropogenic plus natural fluxes. In inversions, the separation between anthropogenic and natural emissions is sensitive to the geospatial prior distribution of emissions. Over the 2011-2015 period, which is the common denominator of data availability between all sources, the anthropogenic BU approaches are directly comparable, reporting mean emissions of 20.8 TgCH(4) yr (-1) (EDGAR v5.0) and 19.0 TgCH(4) yr(-1) (GAINS), consistent with the NGHGI estimates of 18.9 +/- 1.7 TgCH(4) yr(-1). The estimates of TD total inversions give higher emission estimates, as they also include natural emissions. Over the same period regional TD inversions with higher-resolution atmospheric transport models give a mean emission of 28.8 TgCH(4) yr(-1). Coarser-resolution global TD inversions are consistent with regional TD inversions, for global inversions with GOSAT satellite data (23.3 TgCH(4) yr(-1)) and surface network (24.4 TgCH(4) yr (-1)). The magnitude of natural peatland emissions from the JSBACH-HIMMELI model, natural rivers and lakes emissions, and geological sources together account for the gap between NGHGIs and inversions and account for 5.2 TgCH(4) yr(-1). For N2O emissions, over the 2011-2015 period, both BU approaches (EDGAR v5.0 and GAINS) give a mean value of anthropogenic emissions of 0.8 and 0.9 TgN(2)Oyr(-1), respectively, agreeing with the NGHGI data (0.9 0.6 TgN(2)Oyr(-1)). Over the same period, the average of the three total TD global and regional inversions was 1.3 +/- 0.4 and 1.3 +/- 0.1 TgN(2)Oyr(-1), respectively. The TD and BU comparison method defined in this study can be operationalized for future yearly updates for the calculation of CH4 and N2O budgets both at the EU CUK scale and at the national scale.Peer reviewe

    The consolidated European synthesis of CO2 emissions and removals for the European Union and United Kingdom:1990-2020

    Get PDF
    Quantification of land surface-atmosphere fluxes of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their trends and uncertainties is essential for monitoring progress of the EU27+UK bloc as it strives to meet ambitious targets determined by both international agreements and internal regulation. This study provides a consolidated synthesis of fossil sources (CO2 fossil) and natural (including formally managed ecosystems) sources and sinks over land (CO2 land) using bottom-up (BU) and top-down (TD) approaches for the European Union and United Kingdom (EU27+UK), updating earlier syntheses (Petrescu et al., 2020, 2021). Given the wide scope of the work and the variety of approaches involved, this study aims to answer essential questions identified in the previous syntheses and understand the differences between datasets, particularly for poorly characterized fluxes from managed and unmanaged ecosystems. The work integrates updated emission inventory data, process-based model results, data-driven categorical model results, and inverse modeling estimates, extending the previous period 1990-2018 to the year 2020 to the extent possible. BU and TD products are compared with the European national greenhouse gas inventory (NGHGI) reported by parties including the year 2019 under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The uncertainties of the EU27+UK NGHGI were evaluated using the standard deviation reported by the EU member states following the guidelines of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and harmonized by gap-filling procedures. Variation in estimates produced with other methods, such as atmospheric inversion models (TD) or spatially disaggregated inventory datasets (BU), originate from within-model uncertainty related to parameterization as well as structural differences between models. By comparing the NGHGI with other approaches, key sources of differences between estimates arise primarily in activities. System boundaries and emission categories create differences in CO2 fossil datasets, while different land use definitions for reporting emissions from land use, land use change, and forestry (LULUCF) activities result in differences for CO2 land. The latter has important consequences for atmospheric inversions, leading to inversions reporting stronger sinks in vegetation and soils than are reported by the NGHGI. For CO2 fossil emissions, after harmonizing estimates based on common activities and selecting the most recent year available for all datasets, the UNFCCC NGHGI for the EU27+UK accounts for 926g±g13gTggCgyr-1, while eight other BU sources report a mean value of 948 [937,961]gTggCgyr-1 (25th, 75th percentiles). The sole top-down inversion of fossil emissions currently available accounts for 875gTggC in this same year, a value outside the uncertainty of both the NGHGI and bottom-up ensemble estimates and for which uncertainty estimates are not currently available. For the net CO2 land fluxes, during the most recent 5-year period including the NGHGI estimates, the NGHGI accounted for -91g±g32gTggCgyr-1, while six other BU approaches reported a mean sink of -62 [-117,-49]gTggCgyr-1, and a 15-member ensemble of dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) reported -69 [-152,-5]gTggCgyr-1. The 5-year mean of three TD regional ensembles combined with one non-ensemble inversion of -73gTggCgyr-1 has a slightly smaller spread (0th-100th percentiles of [-135,+45]gTggCgyr-1), and it was calculated after removing net land-atmosphere CO2 fluxes caused by lateral transport of carbon (crop trade, wood trade, river transport, and net uptake from inland water bodies), resulting in increased agreement with the NGHGI and bottom-up approaches. Results at the category level (Forest Land, Cropland, Grassland) generally show good agreement between the NGHGI and category-specific models, but results for DGVMs are mixed. Overall, for both CO2 fossil and net CO2 land fluxes, we find that current independent approaches are consistent with the NGHGI at the scale of the EU27+UK. We conclude that CO2 emissions from fossil sources have decreased over the past 30 years in the EU27+UK, while land fluxes are relatively stable: positive or negative trends larger (smaller) than 0.07 (-0.61)gTggCgyr-2 can be ruled out for the NGHGI. In addition, a gap on the order of 1000gTggCgyr-1 between CO2 fossil emissions and net CO2 uptake by the land exists regardless of the type of approach (NGHGI, TD, BU), falling well outside all available estimates of uncertainties. However, uncertainties in top-down approaches to estimate CO2 fossil emissions remain uncharacterized and are likely substantial, in addition to known uncertainties in top-down estimates of the land fluxes. The data used to plot the figures are available at 10.5281/zenodo.8148461 (McGrath et al., 2023).</p

    The consolidated European synthesis of CH4 and N2O emissions for the European Union and United Kingdom : 1990-2019

    Get PDF
    Funding Information: We thank Aurélie Paquirissamy, Géraud Moulas and the ARTTIC team for the great managerial support offered during the project. FAOSTAT statistics are produced and disseminated with the support of its member countries to the FAO regular budget. Annual, gap-filled and harmonized NGHGI uncertainty estimates for the EU and its member states were provided by the EU GHG inventory team (European Environment Agency and its European Topic Centre on Climate change mitigation). Most top-down inverse simulations referred to in this paper rely for the derivation of optimized flux fields on observational data provided by surface stations that are part of networks like ICOS (datasets: 10.18160/P7E9-EKEA , Integrated Non-CO Observing System, 2018a, and 10.18160/B3Q6-JKA0 , Integrated Non-CO Observing System, 2018b), AGAGE, NOAA (Obspack Globalview CH: 10.25925/20221001 , Schuldt et al., 2017), CSIRO and/or WMO GAW. We thank all station PIs and their organizations for providing these valuable datasets. We acknowledge the work of other members of the EDGAR group (Edwin Schaaf, Jos Olivier) and the outstanding scientific contribution to the VERIFY project of Peter Bergamaschi. Timo Vesala thanks ICOS-Finland, University of Helsinki. The TM5-CAMS inversions are available from https://atmosphere.copernicus.eu (last access: June 2022); Arjo Segers acknowledges support from the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service, implemented by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts on behalf of the European Commission (grant no. CAMS2_55). This research has been supported by the European Commission, Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (VERIFY, grant no. 776810). Ronny Lauerwald received support from the CLand Convergence Institute. Prabir Patra received support from the Environment Research and Technology Development Fund (grant no. JPMEERF20182002) of the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency of Japan. Pierre Regnier received financial support from the H2020 project ESM2025 – Earth System Models for the Future (grant no. 101003536). David Basviken received support from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (METLAKE, grant no. 725546). Greet Janssens-Maenhout received support from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (CoCO, grant no. 958927). Tuula Aalto received support from the Finnish Academy (grants nos. 351311 and 345531). Sönke Zhaele received support from the ERC consolidator grant QUINCY (grant no. 647204).Peer reviewedPublisher PD
    corecore