Uncertainties in soil and terrestrial carbon response to 20th century human CO 2 emissions J.-F....
-
Upload
virginia-lester -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of Uncertainties in soil and terrestrial carbon response to 20th century human CO 2 emissions J.-F....
Uncertainties in soil and terrestrial carbon response to 20th century human CO2 emissions
J.-F. Exbrayat1, Q. Zhang2, A. J. Pitman3, G. Abramowitz1 and Y.-P. Wang4
1 Climate Change Research Centre, UNSW Sydney2 College of Global Change and Earth System, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China3 ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science, UNSW, Sydney4 Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research, CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research
CoE CSS Annual Workshop, Hobart 26/09/2012
Global carbon cycle
Source: IPCC AR4 (image downloaded from http://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/anthropogenic-carbon-cycle)
Terrestrial Carbon Budget in a nutshell
Homeostatic pre-industrial conditions: carbon uptake = release (GPP ~ Rh)
GPP enhanced by anthropogenic increase in atmospheric CO2 (fertilisation)
Release (Rh) favoured by increasing temperatures
Up to now, the gain in GPP is higher than the gain in Rh= net uptake
From Wania et al. [2012 GMD]
• Limitations in nutrient availability slow down the carbon cycle
• Rh response to soil temperature and soil moisture
Sources of uncertainty
From Zhang et al. [2011 GRL]
From Exbrayat et al. [2012 under review]
• Biogeochemical model within CABLE
• Coupled to CSIRO Mk3L GCM (3.2 lat x 5.6 lon) [Phipps et al., 2011 GMD]
• Several nutrient modes with corresponding limitations on C cycle: C-only, CN, CNP
CASA-CNP model
From Wang et al. [2010 BG]
Rh parameterisation in soil biogeochemical models
Experiments
27 model versions: each combination of a moisture response function, a temperature response function and a nutrient mode
Spin-up all model versions with pre-industrial atmospheric CO2 (284.7 ppmv)
Transient runs of increasing atmospheric CO2 from 1850 to 2005
Prescribed SSTs from CSIRO Mk3.6 driven by CMIP5 historical emission data [Rotstayn et al., 2012 ACP]
Simulated 20th century NEA
Emission data from Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center [Boden et al., 2010]
Comparison with independent estimates
Regional impact
Regions in CDIAC data [Boden et al., 2010]
Regional offset
Conclusion
Introducing NP limitations reduces the NEA but also narrows the uncertainty introduced by different parameterisations of Rh
NP limited models are well in agreement with independent estimates when considering different time windows of the period 1959-2005
NP limitations reduce or even cancel the capability of regions to offset their emissions
Way forward
What are the policy / trade scheme relevant implications of the regional results?
Will the land surface remain a net sink?
What is the effect of a more detailed N cycle (with separation of different inorganic N species) within CASA-CNP?
Thank you for your attentionQuestions?