Trends in the sources and sinks of carbon dioxide pdf

Combining the long-term average global LUC lux, 1. In the Amazon basin, climate conditions were not anomalous, suggesting that other factors caused the decrease in deforestation rates, which for the Brazilian Amazon rainforest was the continuation of a decreasing Year trend following high deforestation rates in — ref. The data in age deforestation emissions in Although LUC emissions all panels are the annual mean data.

The grey shading in a is the emissions Methods. First, the atmospheric CO2 concentration could be increasing on a timescale shorter than those regulating the rate 4 Land-use of uptake of carbon sinks.

Second, both the land and ocean CO2 change sinks are expected to decrease in eiciency at high ambient CO2 2 concentration because of the limits of CO2 fertilization on land 0 and the decrease in carbonate concentration, which bufers CO2 in the ocean Finally, sink proc- esses not considered in current models may be contributing to the c 2 observed changes Land sink Pg C yr—1 Combined evidence from atmosphere and ocean observations 0 constrains the mean uptake rates of land and ocean CO2 sinks to —2 2.

We estimated the year-to-year variability and trends in the land and —4 ocean CO2 sinks using a series of global models that represent the complex processes governing the carbon cycle in these two pools —6 Methods.

Year For , the models estimated that the uptake rates for land and ocean CO2 sinks were 4. Year he ocean models also attributed the low ocean CO2 sink in in part to a weaker Southern Ocean sink, in response to the con- e 4 Residual Pg C yr—1 tinuing increase in the southern annular mode24, During —, the fraction of the total CO2 emissions that was absorbed Figure 2 Components of the global CO2 budget. The shaded area is the uncertainty associated with each taken up by the oceans cannot be veriied from ocean observa- component.

See Methods for the sources of data and an explanation tions alone because of the lack of global data coverage However, of uncertainties.

The observed trends are calculated by itting a linear 0. Positive red values indicate regions where the partial pressure of tion. Average atmospheric CO2 in reached a concentration of CO2 in the ocean is increasing faster than atmospheric CO2. In the South Indian Ocean rates of deforestation in southeast Asia and in the Amazon16, as B , the trends were estimated for — ref.

However, major gaps Southern Ocean In contrast, increasing air—sea CO2 lux was observed in our capacity to quantify the efectiveness of climate mitigation the North Paciic Ocean If this see Supplementary Information. In all models tested, CO2 emissions estimates. We emissions suggests that the growth in uptake rate of CO2 sinks is not combined the land and ocean CO2 sinks estimated by the models keeping up with the increase in CO2 emissions If the 0.

However, these models do not yet include many processes hese simulations do not completely exclude a role for rapidly ris- and reservoirs that may be important, such as peat, buried carbon ing CO2 or high ambient CO2 concentration because the models are in permafrost soils, wild ires, ocean eddies and the response of subject to uncertainty, particularly due to their coarse resolution36 marine ecosystems to ocean acidiication.

An improved knowledge in the ocean and to errors in observed precipitation and radiation of regional trends would help to constrain the climate—carbon cycle on land. Our estimates of sources and sinks of CO2 were based on largely he current growth in global anthropogenic CO2 emissions is independent data and methods.

On the basis of the projected sinks were summed every year they did not necessarily add to zero, changes in GDP, it is likely that CO2 emissions in will revert to because of the errors in the various methods. CO2 emissions from fossil for instance during the late s, when ires in Indonesia were fuel and other industrial processes between and were based on United partly caused by land clearance taking advantage of the drought Nations Energy Statistics and cement data from the US Geological Survey 38, and were provided by the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center.

For and conditions Our ire-based LUC anomalies for were 0. Guan, D. Journey to world top emissions for were also used for and For and , per-capita emissions were based on our global CO2 emis- 8. Minx, J. Weber, C. Embodied environmental emissions in share of global emissions from non-Annex B countries.

US international trade, — Hertwich, E. We used ire trade-linked analysis. Canadell, J. Natl Acad. USA , — Raupach, M. Houghton, R. Revised estimates of the annual net lux of carbon to the an order of magnitude lower than deforestation emissions because of lower fuel atmosphere from changes in land use and land management — loads in pasture and cropland ecosystems45; in our analyses, we therefore included Tellus B 55, — Mouillot, F.

Change Biol. Interannual variability in global biomass burning correlated with the variability estimated by the book-keeping method when emissions from to We used an uncertainty of Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais. Climate regulation of ire emissions and deforestation statistics see Supplementary Information.

Press, We used the Denman, K. Manning, A. Global oceanic and land biotic carbon sinks from ref. Tellus B esses governing ecosystem carbon dynamics in biomass, litter and soil pools and 58, 95— McNeil, B. All models were forced by observed atmospheric CO2 concentration and a J. Anthropogenic CO2 uptake by the ocean based on the global combination of meteorological ields from the Climatic Research Unit observed chloroluorocarbon data set. Science , — Gruber, N. Oceanic sources, sinks, and transport of atmospheric CO2.

Cycles 23, GB Feely, R. Decadal variability of the air-sea CO2 luxes in the equatorial the physical, chemical and biological processes governing the marine carbon Paciic Ocean. Saturation of the Southern Ocean CO2 sink due to recent atmosphere. All models were forced by meteorological ields from the US National climate change. Centers for Environmental Prediction reanalysis product Lenton, A.

Stratospheric ozone depletion reduces ocean carbon CO2 sinks were estimated from the mean of all models. We corrected the model uptake and enhances ocean acidiication. Gurney, K. Towards robust regional estimates of CO2 sources and variability and trends in the land and ocean CO2 sinks only.

Nature given time period combined the uncertainty for — ref. CO2 lux history period see Supplementary Information. Sitch, S. Evaluation of the terrestrial carbon cycle, future plant geography in the airborne fraction was reduced by removing the part of the variability and climate-carbon cycle feedbacks using ive dynamic global vegetation associated with the ENSO and volcanic-activity indices. Mercado, L. Impact of changes in difuse radiation on the global land properties similar to those of the airborne fraction.

Nature , — Peylin, P. Multiple constraints on regional CO2 lux variations over land and oceans. Cycles 19, GB Takahashi, T. Climatological mean and decadal changes in surface ocean 1.

Conway, T. Evidence of interannual variability of the carbon cycle pCO2, and net sea-air CO2 lux over the global oceans. Deep-Sea Res. Schuster, U. Trends in North Atlantic sea surface pCO2 from to Global and regional drivers of accelerating CO2 emissions. II 56, — Interannual 3. A fast method for updating global fossil fuel carbon dioxide emissions. Marland, G. Uncertainties in accounting for CO2 from fossil fuels. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Giglio, L. Estimates of fire emissions from an active deforestation region in the southern Amazon based on satellite data and biogeochemical modelling.

Biogeosciences 6 , — DeFries, R. Carbon emissions from tropical deforestation and regrowth based on satellite observations for the s and s. USA 99 , — Kalnay, E. Thomas, H. Cycles 22 , GB Aumont, O. Globalizing results from ocean in situ iron fertilization studies. Cycles 20 , GB Galbraith, E. Regional impacts of iron-light colimitation in a global biogeochemical model. Download references. The annual update and analyses of the global carbon budget are a collaborative effort of the Global Carbon Project, a joint project of the Earth System Science Partnership, contributed to by an international consortium of scientists.

We thank C. Mouchet, R. Keeling and N. Gruber for comments on this manuscript, and C. Enright and E. Buitenhuis for modelling support. Colin Prentice. You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar. Friedlingstein conceived and designed the global CO 2 budget.

Foster, P. Friedlingstein, C. Friedlingstein and C. All authors co-wrote the paper. Raupach 3 , Josep G. Conway 6 , Scott C. Doney 7 , Richard A. Houghton 11 , Joanna I. House 9 , Chris Huntingford 12 , Peter E. Levy 13 , Mark R. Ometto 17 , Glen P. Peters 18 , I. Colin Prentice 9 , James T. Randerson 19 , Steven W.

Running 20 , Jorge L. Ian Woodward Reprints and Permissions. Trends in the sources and sinks of carbon dioxide. Nature Geosci 2, — Download citation. Published : 17 November Issue Date : December Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:. Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative.

Advanced search. Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily. Skip to main content Thank you for visiting nature. Abstract Efforts to control climate change require the stabilization of atmospheric CO 2 concentrations. Access through your institution. Buy or subscribe. This is a preview of subscription content. Change institution. Buy article Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

Figure 1: Fossil fuel CO 2 and per-capita emissions since Figure 2: Components of the global CO 2 budget. Figure 3: Trends in the observed partial pressure of CO 2 for ocean minus air, for — References 1 Conway, T. Google Scholar 2 Raupach, M.

Google Scholar 3 Nakicenovic, N. Google Scholar 4 Peters, G. Google Scholar 5 Peters, G. Google Scholar 7 Guan, D. Google Scholar 8 Minx, J. Google Scholar 9 Weber, C. Google Scholar 10 Hertwich, E. Google Scholar 11 Canadell, J. Google Scholar 12 Raupach, M. Google Scholar 13 Houghton, R. Google Scholar 14 Mouillot, F. Google Scholar 15 van der Werf, G. Google Scholar 20 Manning, A.

Google Scholar 21 McNeil, B. Google Scholar 22 Gruber, N. Google Scholar 23 Feely, R. Google Scholar 25 Lenton, A. Google Scholar 26 Gurney, K. Google Scholar 28 Sitch, S. Google Scholar 29 Mercado, L. Google Scholar 30 Peylin, P. Google Scholar 31 Takahashi, T.

Google Scholar 32 Schuster, U. Google Scholar 34 Metzl, N. Google Scholar 35 Takahashi, T. Google Scholar 37 Friedlingstein, P. Google Scholar 38 Van Oss, H. Google Scholar 41 Van Oss, H. Google Scholar 42 Marland, G. Google Scholar 45 van der Werf, G. Google Scholar 46 DeFries, R. Google Scholar 47 Kalnay, E.