A comprehensive estimate of recent carbon sinks in China using both top-down and bottom-up approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atmospheric inversions use measurements of atmospheric CO2 gradients to constrain regional surface fluxes. Current inversions indicate a net terrestrial CO2 sink in China between 0.16 and 0.35 PgC/yr. The uncertainty of these estimates is as large as the mean because the atmospheric network historically contained only one high altitude station in China. Here, we revisit the calculation of the terrestrial CO2 flux in China, excluding emissions from fossil fuel burning and cement production, by using two inversions with three new CO2 monitoring stations in China as well as aircraft observations over Asia. We estimate a net terrestrial CO2 uptake of 0.39-0.51 PgC/yr with a mean of 0.45 PgC/yr in 2006-2009. After considering the lateral transport of carbon in air and water and international trade, the annual mean carbon sink is adjusted to 0.35 PgC/yr. To evaluate this top-down estimate, we constructed an independent bottom-up estimate based on ecosystem data, and giving a net land sink of 0.33 PgC/yr. This demonstrates closure between the top-down and bottom-up estimates. Both top-down and bottom-up estimates give a higher carbon sink than previous estimates made for the 1980s and 1990s, suggesting a trend towards increased uptake by land ecosystems in China.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".