53 research outputs found
Global Carbon Budget 2015
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 as well as consistency within and among components, alongside methodology and data limitations. CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and industry (E-FF) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change (E-LUC), 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 (G(ATM)) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The mean ocean CO2 sink (S-OCEAN) is based on observations from the 1990s, while the annual anomalies and trends are estimated with ocean models. The variability in S-OCEAN is evaluated with data products based on surveys of ocean CO2 measurements. The global residual terrestrial CO2 sink (S-LAND) 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 +/- 1 sigma, reflecting the current capacity to characterise the annual estimates of each component of the global carbon budget. For the last decade available (20052014), E-FF was 9.0 +/- 0.5 GtC yr(-1) E-LUC was 0.9 +/- 0.5 GtC yr(-1), GATM was 4.4 +/- 0.1 GtC yr(-1), S-OCEAN was 2.6 +/- 0.5 GtC yr(-1), and S LAND was 3.0 +/- 0.8 GtC yr(-1). For the year 2014 alone, E FF grew to 9.8 +/- 0.5 GtC yr(-1), 0.6% above 2013, continuing the growth trend in these emissions, albeit at a slower rate compared to the average growth of 2.2% yr(-1) that took place during 2005-2014. Also, for 2014, E-LUC was 1.1 +/- 0.5 GtC yr(-1), G(ATM) was 3.9 +/- 0.2 GtC yr(-1), S-OCEAN was 2.9 +/- 0.5 GtC yr(-1), and S-LAND was 4.1 +/- 0.9 GtC yr(-1). G(ATM) was lower in 2014 compared to the past decade (2005-2014), reflecting a larger S-LAND for that year. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 397.15 +/- 0.10 ppm averaged over 2014. For 2015, preliminary data indicate that the growth in E-FF will be near or slightly below zero, with a projection of 0.6 [ range of 1.6 to C 0.5] %, based on national emissions projections for China and the USA, and projections of gross domestic product corrected for recent changes in the carbon intensity of the global economy for the rest of the world. From this projection of E-FF and assumed constant E LUC for 2015, cumulative emissions of CO2 will reach about 555 +/- 55 GtC (2035 +/- 205 GtCO(2)) for 1870-2015, about 75% from E FF and 25% from E LUC. 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 Quere et al., 2015, 2014, 2013). All observations presented here can be downloaded from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (doi: 10.3334/CDIAC/GCP_2015)
Global Carbon Budget 2018
Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere â the âglobal carbon budgetâ â 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 ±1Ï. For the last decade available (2008â2017), EFF was 9.4±0.5âGtCâyrâ1, ELUC 1.5±0.7âGtCâyrâ1, GATM 4.7±0.02âGtCâyrâ1, SOCEAN 2.4±0.5âGtCâyrâ1, and SLAND 3.2±0.8âGtCâyrâ1, with a budget imbalance BIM of 0.5âGtCâyrâ1 indicating overestimated emissions and/or underestimated sinks. For the year 2017 alone, the growth in EFF was about 1.6â% and emissions increased to 9.9±0.5âGtCâyrâ1. Also for 2017, ELUC was 1.4±0.7âGtCâyrâ1, GATM was 4.6±0.2âGtCâyrâ1, SOCEAN was 2.5±0.5âGtCâyrâ1, and SLAND was 3.8±0.8âGtCâyrâ1, with a BIM of 0.3âGtC. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 405.0±0.1âppm averaged over 2017. For 2018, preliminary data for the first 6â9 months indicate a renewed growth in EFF of +2.7â% (range of 1.8â% to 3.7â%) 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 1959â2017, but discrepancies of up to 1âGtCâyrâ1 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 QuĂ©rĂ© et al., 2018, 2016, 2015a, b, 2014, 2013). All results presented here can be downloaded from https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2018
Global Carbon Budget 2018
Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere â the âglobal carbon budgetâ â 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 ±1Ï. For the last decade available (2008â2017), EFF was 9.4±0.5âGtCâyrâ1, ELUC 1.5±0.7âGtCâyrâ1, GATM 4.7±0.02âGtCâyrâ1, SOCEAN 2.4±0.5âGtCâyrâ1, and SLAND 3.2±0.8âGtCâyrâ1, with a budget imbalance BIM of 0.5âGtCâyrâ1 indicating overestimated emissions and/or underestimated sinks. For the year 2017 alone, the growth in EFF was about 1.6â% and emissions increased to 9.9±0.5âGtCâyrâ1. Also for 2017, ELUC was 1.4±0.7âGtCâyrâ1, GATM was 4.6±0.2âGtCâyrâ1, SOCEAN was 2.5±0.5âGtCâyrâ1, and SLAND was 3.8±0.8âGtCâyrâ1, with a BIM of 0.3âGtC. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 405.0±0.1âppm averaged over 2017. For 2018, preliminary data for the first 6â9 months indicate a renewed growth in EFF of +2.7â% (range of 1.8â% to 3.7â%) 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 1959â2017, but discrepancies of up to 1âGtCâyrâ1 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 QuĂ©rĂ© et al., 2018, 2016, 2015a, b, 2014, 2013). All results presented here can be downloaded from https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2018
- âŠ