Engineering topics

Laurent Bopp

Publications and source records attributed to Laurent Bopp.

4 records

NASA NTRS2024

Aera-Mip: Emission Pathways, Remaining Budgets, and Carbon Cycle Dynamics Compatible With 1.5 and 2 °C Global Warming Stabilization

While international climate policies now focus on limiting global warming to well below 2 °C or pursuing a 1.5 °C level of global warming, the climate modelling community has not provided an experimental design in which all Earth system models (ESMs) converge and stabilize at the same prescribed global warming levels. This gap hampers accurate estimations based on comprehensive ESMs of the carbon emission pathways and budgets needed to meet such agreed warming levels and of the associated climate impacts under temperature stabilization. Here, we apply the Adaptive Emission Reduction Approach (AERA) with ESMs to provide such simulations in which all models converge at 1.5 and 2.0 °C warming levels by adjusting their emissions over time. These emission-driven simulations provide a wide range of emission pathways and resulting atmospheric CO 2 projections for a given warming level, uncovering uncertainty ranges that were previously missing in the traditional Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) scenarios with prescribed greenhouse gas concentration pathways. Meeting the 1.5 °C warming level requires a 40 % (full model range: 7 % to 76 %) reduction in multi-model mean CO 2 -forcing-equivalent (CO 2 -fe) emissions from 2025 to 2030, a 98 % (57 % to 127 %) reduction from 2025 to 2050, and a stabilization at 1.0 (−1.7 to 2.9) PgC yr−1 from 2100 onward after the 1.5 °C global warming level is reached. Meeting the 2.0 °C warming level requires a 47 % (8 % to 92 %) reduction in multi-model mean CO 2 -fe emissions until 2050 and a stabilization at 1.7 (−1.5 to 2.7) PgC yr−1 from 2100 onward. The on-average positive emissions under stabilized global temperatures are the result of a decreasing transient climate response to cumulative CO 2 -fe emissions over time under stabilized global warming. This evolution is consistent with a slightly negative zero emissions commitment – initially assumed to be zero – and leads to an increase in the post-2025 CO 2 -fe emission budget by a factor of 2.2 (−0.8 to 6.9) by 2150 for the 1.5 °C warming level and a factor of 1.4 (0.9 to 2.4) for the 2.0 °C warming level compared to its first estimate in 2025. The median CO 2 -only carbon budget by 2150, relative to 2020, is 800 GtCO 2 for the 1.5 °C warming level and 2250 GtCO 2 for the 2.0 °C warming level. These median values exceed the median IPCC AR6 estimates by 60 % for the 1.5 °C warming level and 67 % for 2.0 °C. Some of the differences may be explained by the choice of the mitigation scenario for non-CO 2 radiative agents. Our simulations highlight shifts in carbon uptake dynamics under stabilized temperature, such as a cessation of the carbon sinks in the North Atlantic and in tropical forests. On the other hand, the Southern Ocean remains a carbon sink centuries after temperatures stabilize. Overall, this new type of warming-level-based emission-driven simulation offers a more coherent assessment across climate models and opens up a wide range of possibilities for studying both the carbon cycle and climate impacts, such as extreme events, under climate stabilization.

Adaptive Emission Reduction Approach↗

NASA NTRS2022

Global Carbon Budget 2022

Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere in a changing climate is critical to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe and synthesize data sets and methodologies to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO 2 emissions (E FOS ) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change (E LUC ), mainly deforestation, are based on land use and land-use change data and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO 2 concentration is measured directly, and its growth rate (G ATM ) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The ocean CO 2 sink (S OCEAN ) is estimated with global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-based data products. The terrestrial CO 2 sink (S LAND ) is estimated with dynamic global vegetation models. The resulting carbon budget imbalance (B IM ), the difference between the estimated total emissions and the estimated changes in the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere, is a measure of imperfect data and understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the year 2021, E FOS increased by 5.1 % relative to 2020, with fossil emissions at 10.1 ± 0.5 GtC yr −1 (9.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr −1 when the cement carbonation sink is included), and E LUC was 1.1 ± 0.7 GtC yr −1 , for a total anthropogenic CO 2 emission (including the cement carbonation sink) of 10.9 ± 0.8 GtC yr −1 (40.0 ± 2.9 GtCO 2 ). Also, for 2021, G ATM was 5.2 ± 0.2 GtC yr −1 (2.5 ± 0.1 ppm yr −1 ), S OCEAN was 2.9 ± 0.4 GtC yr −1 , and S LAND was 3.5 ± 0.9 GtC yr −1 , with a B IM of −0.6 GtC yr −1 (i.e. the total estimated sources were too low or sinks were too high). The global atmospheric CO 2 concentration averaged over 2021 reached 414.71 ± 0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2022 suggest an increase in E FOS relative to 2021 of +1.0 % (0.1 % to 1.9 %) globally and atmospheric CO 2 concentration reaching 417.2 ppm, more than 50 % above pre-industrial levels (around 278 ppm). Overall, the mean and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2021, but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC yr −1 persist for the representation of annual to semi-decadal variability in CO 2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from multiple approaches and observations shows (1) a persistent large uncertainty in the estimate of land-use change emissions, (2) a low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO 2 flux in the northern extratropics, and (3) a discrepancy between the different methods on the strength of the ocean sink over the last decade. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understanding of the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this data set. The data presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2022 (Friedlingstein et al., 2022b).

Pierre Friedlingstein↗

NASA NTRS2020

Tracking Improvement in Simulated Marine Biogeochemistry Between CMIP5 and CMIP6

Purpose of Review The changes or updates in ocean biogeochemistry component have been mapped between CMIP5 and CMIP6 model versions, and an assessment made of how far these have led to improvements in the simulated mean state of marine biogeochemical models within the current generation of Earth system models (ESMs). Recent Findings The representation of marine biogeochemistry has progressed within the current generation of Earth system models. However, it remains difficult to identify which model updates are responsible for a given improvement. In addition, the full potential of marine biogeochemistry in terms of Earth system interactions and climate feedback remains poorly examined in the current generation of Earth system models. Summary Increasing availability of ocean biogeochemical data, as well as an improved understanding of the underlying processes, allows advances in the marine biogeochemical components of the current generation of ESMs. The present study scrutinizes the extent to which marine biogeochemistry components of ESMs have progressed between the 5th and the 6th phases of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP).

Marine Biogeochemistry↗

NASA NTRS2019

Global Carbon Budget 2019

Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere – the “global carbon budget” – is important to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe data sets and methodology to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (E(FF)) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land use change (E(LUC)), mainly deforestation, are based on land use and land use change data and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly and its growth rate (G(ATM)) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The ocean CO2 sink (S(OCEAN)) and terrestrial CO2 sink (S(LAND)) are estimated with global process models constrained by observations. The resulting carbon budget imbalance (B(IM)), the difference between the estimated total emissions and the estimated changes in the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere, is a measure of imperfect data and understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the last decade available (2009–2018), E(FF) was 9.5±0.5 GtC/yr, E(LUC) 1.5±0.7 GtC/yr, G(ATM) 4.9±0.02 GtC/yr (2.3±0.01 ppm/yr), S(OCEAN) 2.5±0.6 GtC/yr, and S(LAND) 3.2±0.6 GtC/yr, with a budget imbalance B(IM) of 0.4 GtC/yr indicating overestimated emissions and/or underestimated sinks. For the year 2018 alone, the growth in E(FF) was about 2.1 % and fossil emissions increased to 10.0±0.5 GtC/yr, reaching 10 GtC/yr for the first time in history, E(LUC) was 1.5±0.7 GtC/yr, for total anthropogenic CO2 emissions of 11.5±0.9 GtC/yr (42.5±3.3 GtCO2). Also for 2018, G(ATM) was 5.1±0.2 GtC/yr (2.4±0.1 ppm/yr), S(OCEAN) was 2.6±0.6 GtC/yr, and S(LAND) was 3.5±0.7 GtC/yr, with a B(IM) of 0.3 GtC. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 407.38±0.1 ppm averaged over 2018. For 2019, preliminary data for the first 6–10 months indicate a reduced growth in E(FF) of +0.6 % (range of −0.2 % to 1.5 %) based on national emissions projections for China, the USA, the EU, and India and projections of gross domestic product corrected for recent changes in the carbon intensity of the economy for the rest of the world. Overall, the mean and trend in the five components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2018, but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC/yr persist for the representation of semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. A detailed comparison among individual estimates and the introduction of a broad range of observations shows (1) no consensus in the mean and trend in land use change emissions over the last decade, (2) a persistent low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, and (3) an apparent underestimation of the CO2 variability by ocean models outside the tropics. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understanding of the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this data set (Le Quéré et al., 2018a, b, 2016, 2015a, b, 2014, 2013).

global carbon budget 2019↗