Modelling CO <sub>2</sub> weather – why horizontal resolution matters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Climate change mitigation efforts require information on the current greenhouse gas atmospheric concentrations and their sources and sinks. Carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is the most abundant anthropogenic greenhouse gas. Its variability in the atmosphere is modulated by the synergy between weather and CO 2 surface fluxes, often referred to as CO 2 weather. It is interpreted with the help of global or regional numerical transport models, with horizontal resolutions ranging from a few hundreds of kilometres to a few kilometres. Changes in the model horizontal resolution affect not only atmospheric transport but also the representation of topography and surface CO 2 fluxes. This paper assesses the impact of horizontal resolution on the simulated atmospheric CO 2 variability with a numerical weather prediction model. The simulations are performed using the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (CAMS) CO 2 forecasting system at different resolutions from 9 to 80 km and are evaluated using in situ atmospheric surface measurements and atmospheric column-mean observations of CO 2 , as well as radiosonde and SYNOP observations of the winds. The results indicate that both diurnal and day-to-day variability of atmospheric CO 2 are generally better represented at high resolution, as shown by a reduction in the errors in simulated wind and CO 2 . Mountain stations display the largest improvements at high resolution as they directly benefit from the more realistic orography. In addition, the CO 2 spatial gradients are generally improved with increasing resolution for both stations near the surface and those observing the total column, as the overall inter-station error is also reduced in magnitude. However, close to emission hotspots, the high resolution can also lead to a deterioration of the simulation skill, highlighting uncertainties in the high-resolution fluxes that are more diffuse at lower resolutions. We conclude that increasing horizontal resolution matters for modelling CO 2 weather because it has the potential to bring together improvements in the surface representation of both winds and CO 2 fluxes, as well as an expected reduction in numerical errors of transport. Modelling applications like atmospheric inversion systems to estimate surface fluxes will only be able to benefit fully from upgrades in horizontal resolution if the topography, winds and prior flux distribution are also upgraded accordingly. It is clear from the results that an additional increase in resolution might reduce errors even further. However, the horizontal resolution sensitivity tests indicate that the change in the CO 2 and wind modelling error with resolution is not linear, making it difficult to quantify the improvement beyond the tested resolutions. Finally, we show that the high-resolution simulations are useful for the assessment of the small-scale variability of CO 2 which cannot be represented in coarser-resolution models. These representativeness errors need to be considered when assimilating in situ data and high-resolution satellite data such as Greenhouse gases Observing Satellite (GOSAT), Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2), the Chinese Carbon Dioxide Observation Satellite Mission (TanSat) and future missions such as the Geostationary Carbon Observatory (GeoCarb) and the Sentinel satellite constellation for CO 2 . For these reasons, the high-resolution CO 2 simulations provided by the CAMS in real time can be useful to estimate such small-scale variability in real time, as well as providing boundary conditions for regional modelling studies and supporting field experiments.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".