Global Carbon Budget 2022
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)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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 data sets and methodologies 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 year 2021, EFOS increased by 5.1 % relative to 2020, withfossil emissions at 10.1 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 (9.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 when the cement carbonation sink is included), and ELUC was 1.1 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1, for a total anthropogenic CO2 emission(including the cement carbonation sink) of 10.9 ± 0.8 GtC yr−1(40.0 ± 2.9 GtCO2). Also, for 2021, GATM was 5.2 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1 (2.5 ± 0.1 ppm yr−1), SOCEAN was 2.9 ± 0.4 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 3.5 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1, with aBIM of −0.6 GtC yr−1 (i.e. the total estimated sources were too low orsinks were too high). The global atmospheric CO2 concentration averaged over2021 reached 414.71 ± 0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2022 suggest anincrease in EFOS relative to 2021 of +1.0 % (0.1 % to 1.9 %)globally and atmospheric CO2 concentration reaching 417.2 ppm, morethan 50 % above pre-industrial levels (around 278 ppm). Overall, the meanand trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistentlyestimated over the period 1959–2021, but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC yr−1 persist for the representation of annual to semi-decadalvariability in CO2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from multipleapproaches and observations shows (1) a persistent large uncertainty in theestimate of land-use change emissions, (2) a low agreement between thedifferent methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northernextratropics, and (3) a discrepancy between the different methods on thestrength of the ocean sink over the last decade. This living data updatedocuments changes in the methods and data sets used in this new globalcarbon budget and the progress in understanding of the global carbon cyclecompared with previous publications of this data set. The data presented inthis work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2022 (Friedlingstein et al., 2022b).
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
- Tula FoundationEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
- Funders
- Fondation BNP ParibasInstitut national des sciences de l'UniversNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationEuropean Centre for Medium-Range Weather ForecastsPrince Albert II of Monaco FoundationHelmholtz AssociationUniversität BremenFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekChinese Academy of SciencesBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftMinistry of the Environment, Government of JapanSight Research UKUniversity of East AngliaFlotte Océanographique FrançaiseHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeSvenska Forskningsrådet FormasTula FoundationNational Science FoundationUK Research and InnovationBureau of Indian AffairsRoyal SocietyEuropean Space AgencyChina Association for Science and TechnologyTsinghua Shenzhen International Graduate SchoolMarine InstituteInstitut Français de Recherche pour l'Exploitation de la MerU.S. Department of EnergyMeteorological Research Institute, Japan Meteorological AgencyNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaSorbonne UniversitéInstitut Polaire Français Paul Emile VictorInstitut de Recherche pour le DéveloppementNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNatural Environment Research CouncilNorges ForskningsrådU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyNational Center for Atmospheric ResearchSveriges Meteorologiska och Hydrologiska Institut
- Keywords
- BiosphereEnvironmental scienceCarbon cycleGreenhouse gasCarbon sinkClimate changeSink (geography)Global changeAtmospheric sciencesBiogeochemistryClimatologyGlobal warmingOceanographyEcosystemGeologyEcologyGeography
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes