Global Carbon Budget 2021

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

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.

Teacher spread

0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work

Validation status

score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

Abstract. Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions andtheir redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biospherein a changing climate is critical to better understand the global carboncycle, support the development of climate policies, and project futureclimate change. Here we describe and synthesize datasets and methodology toquantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and theiruncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFOS) are based on energystatistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change(ELUC), mainly deforestation, are based on land use and land-use changedata and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is measureddirectly, and its growth rate (GATM) is computed from the annualchanges in concentration. The ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) is estimatedwith global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-baseddata products. The terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated withdynamic global vegetation models. The resulting carbon budget imbalance(BIM), the difference between the estimated total emissions and theestimated changes in the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere, is ameasure of imperfect data and understanding of the contemporary carboncycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the firsttime, an approach is shown to reconcile the difference in our ELUCestimate with the one from national greenhouse gas inventories, supportingthe assessment of collective countries' climate progress. For the year 2020, EFOS declined by 5.4 % relative to 2019, withfossil emissions at 9.5 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 (9.3 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 when the cement carbonation sink is included), and ELUC was 0.9 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1, for a total anthropogenic CO2 emission of10.2 ± 0.8 GtC yr−1 (37.4 ± 2.9 GtCO2). Also, for2020, GATM was 5.0 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1 (2.4 ± 0.1 ppm yr−1), SOCEAN was 3.0 ± 0.4 GtC yr−1, and SLANDwas 2.9 ± 1 GtC yr−1, with a BIM of −0.8 GtC yr−1. Theglobal atmospheric CO2 concentration averaged over 2020 reached 412.45 ± 0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2021 suggest a rebound in EFOSrelative to 2020 of +4.8 % (4.2 % to 5.4 %) globally. Overall, the mean and trend in the components of the global carbon budgetare consistently estimated over the period 1959–2020, but discrepancies ofup to 1 GtC yr−1 persist for the representation of annual tosemi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates frommultiple approaches and observations shows (1) a persistent largeuncertainty in the estimate of land-use changes emissions, (2) a lowagreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the landCO2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, and (3) a discrepancy betweenthe different methods on the strength of the ocean sink over the lastdecade. This living data update documents changes in the methods and datasets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understandingof the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this dataset (Friedlingstein et al., 2020, 2019; LeQuéré et al., 2018b, a, 2016, 2015b, a, 2014, 2013). Thedata presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/gcp-2021 (Friedlingstein et al., 2021).

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.

The record

Venue

Earth system science data

Topic

Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics

Field

Environmental Science

Canadian institutions

Environment and Climate Change CanadaTula Foundation

Funders

NOAA ResearchHorizon 2020Hakai InstitutePrinceton Environmental Institute, Princeton UniversityOffice of ScienceNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationPrince Albert II of Monaco FoundationGrand Équipement National De Calcul IntensifHelmholtz AssociationUniversität BremenNatural Environment Research CouncilNorges ForskningsrådNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekGEOMAR Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung KielFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungMarine InstituteCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research OrganisationDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftMinistry of the Environment, Government of JapanNational Centre for Atmospheric ScienceSight Research UKDeutsches KlimarechenzentrumNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaU.S. Department of EnergyDepartment of Science and Innovation, South AfricaNational Cancer InstituteNuclear Safety and Security CommissionNational Institute of Water and Atmospheric ResearchNewton FundNational Research FoundationTula FoundationFondation BNP ParibasNational Computational InfrastructureOcean Acidification ProgramU.S. Department of CommerceEuropean Space AgencyPrinceton UniversityInstitut de Recherche pour le DéveloppementNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationRoyal SocietyNational Science Foundation

Keywords

Carbon fibersEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceAlgorithm

Has abstract in OpenAlex

yes

API

/api/v1/works/W4225004802