Global Groundwater Carbon Mass Flux and the Myth of Atmospheric Weathering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Our recent steady‐state mass‐balance modeling suggests that most global carbonic‐acid weathering of silicate rocks occurs in the vadose zone of aquifer systems not on the surface by atmospheric CO 2 . That is, the weathering solute flux is nearly equal to the total global continental riverine carbon flux, signifying little atmospheric weathering by carbonic acid. This finding challenges previous carbon models that utilize silicate weathering as a control of atmospheric CO 2 levels. A robust analysis utilizing global estimates of groundwater carbon concentration generated by a geospatial machine learning algorithm was coupled with recharge flux in a geographic information system environment to yield a total global groundwater carbon flux of between 0.87 and 0.96 Pg C/year to the surface environment. On discharging to the surface, the carbon is speciated between 0.01 and 0.11 Pg C/year as CaCO 3 ; 0.35 and 0.38 Pg C/year as CO 2 gas; and 0.49 and 0.51 Pg C/year as dissolved HCO 3 − . This total weathering carbon flux was calculated for direct ocean discharge (0.030 Pg C/year); endorheic basins (0.046 Pg C/year); cold‐wet exorheic basins (0.058 Pg C/year); warm‐dry exorheic basins (0.072 Pg C/year); cold‐dry exorheic basins (0.115 Pg C/year); and warm‐wet exorheic basins (0.448 Pg C/year).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".