Global Carbon Budget 2020
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere in a changing climate – 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 and synthesize data sets and methodology to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO 2 emissions ( E FOS ) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change ( E LUC ), mainly deforestation, are based on land use and land-use change data and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO 2 concentration is measured directly and its growth rate ( G ATM ) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The ocean CO 2 sink ( S OCEAN ) and terrestrial CO 2 sink ( S LAND ) are estimated with global process models constrained by observations. The resulting carbon budget imbalance ( B IM ), 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 ±1 σ . For the last decade available (2010–2019), E FOS was 9.6 ± 0.5 GtC yr −1 excluding the cement carbonation sink (9.4 ± 0.5 GtC yr −1 when the cement carbonation sink is included), and E LUC was 1.6 ± 0.7 GtC yr −1 . For the same decade, G ATM was 5.1 ± 0.02 GtC yr −1 (2.4 ± 0.01 ppm yr −1 ), S OCEAN 2.5 ± 0.6 GtC yr −1 , and S LAND 3.4 ± 0.9 GtC yr −1 , with a budget imbalance B IM of −0.1 GtC yr −1 indicating a near balance between estimated sources and sinks over the last decade. For the year 2019 alone, the growth in E FOS was only about 0.1 % with fossil emissions increasing to 9.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr −1 excluding the cement carbonation sink (9.7 ± 0.5 GtC yr −1 when cement carbonation sink is included), and E LUC was 1.8 ± 0.7 GtC yr −1 , for total anthropogenic CO 2 emissions of 11.5 ± 0.9 GtC yr −1 (42.2 ± 3.3 GtCO 2 ). Also for 2019, G ATM was 5.4 ± 0.2 GtC yr −1 (2.5 ± 0.1 ppm yr −1 ), S OCEAN was 2.6 ± 0.6 GtC yr −1 , and S LAND was 3.1 ± 1.2 GtC yr −1 , with a B IM of 0.3 GtC. The global atmospheric CO 2 concentration reached 409.85 ± 0.1 ppm averaged over 2019. Preliminary data for 2020, accounting for the COVID-19-induced changes in emissions, suggest a decrease in E FOS relative to 2019 of about −7 % (median estimate) based on individual estimates from four studies of −6 %, −7 %, −7 % (−3 % to −11 %), and −13 %. Overall, the mean and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2019, but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC yr −1 persist for the representation of semi-decadal variability in CO 2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from diverse approaches and observations shows (1) no consensus in the mean and trend in land-use change emissions over the last decade, (2) a persistent low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO 2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, and (3) an apparent discrepancy between the different methods for the ocean sink outside the tropics, particularly in the Southern Ocean. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understanding of the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this data set (Friedlingstein et al., 2019; Le Quéré et al., 2018b, a, 2016, 2015b, a, 2014, 2013). The data presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/gcp-2020 (Friedlingstein et al., 2020).
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,109 | 0,073 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».