Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Land use change”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assessing Land Cover Change Dynamics in the Peruvian Amazon to Map Outbreak Risk and Inform Public Health Interventions for Zoonotic Disease Prevention

Dengue fever and leishmaniasis are two tropical diseases prevalent in Madre de Dios Region of Peru and have been associated with urbanization and road construction. Rapid land use changes such as mining, timber harvesting, and hydroelectric dam development lead to denser human presence in previously sparsely-populated areas which increases the proximity of human settlements to zoonotic disease vectors. In partnership with the Peruvian Ministries of Health (MINSA), the Environment (MINAM), and other in-country collaborators, a NASA DEVELOP team examined Land Use Land Cover (LULC) changes and reported dengue and leishmaniasis incidence in the Madre de Dios region. This sought to help MINSA and MINAM understand the spatial relationship between land use change and zoonotic disease incidence. We created a LULC classification script using Google Earth Engine (GEE) with Landsat 5 Thematic Mapper (TM) and Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager (OLI) imagery to classify land cover in 2010, 2015, and 2020 and evaluate changes over this time period. The team then compared the quantified results of the LULC assessment in conjunction with reported disease cases to evaluate disease incidence and key land cover changes across Madre de Dios’s 11 districts. Follow on work will use these products to develop more detailed outbreak risk maps. These products will allow MINSA, MINAM, and other partners to understand hotspots of land cover change in Peru and the relationship with outbreaks to inform public health decision makers and environmental policy.

Nataly Chacon-Buitrago↗
NASA NTRS1995

A remotely sensed index of deforestation/urbanization for use in climate models

The object of this research is to use indirect measurements, notably thermal infrared, to describe urbanization and deforestation with parameters that can be used to assess, as well as predict, the effects of land use changes on local microclimate. More specifically, we use a new approach for the treatment of remotely sensed data; this is referred to as the 'triangle' method. The name triangle is given because the envelope of data points, when plotted as a function of surface radiant temperature versus vegetation index or fractional vegetation cover, exhibits the shape of a triangle. From the information contained on these 'scatter plots', land use changes can be related to two intrinsic surface variables, the surface moisture availability (M(sub 0))(sup 1) and fractional vegetation cover. Recent work by Carlson et al. indicate that the triangle shape on the scatter plots may be scale similar, suggesting that these two parameters are subject to the same interpretation on differing scales. A second objective in this research is to determine if historical data for Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) (NOAA satellite; 1.1 km resolution at nadir) can be used to assess changes in regional land use over time. To this end, two target areas were chosen for the investigation of urbanization and two for deforestation. The former comprise tow areas in Pennsylvania, one a small but rapidly growing population center (State College) and the other a medium-sized urban area which continues to undergo development (Chester County). The two deforestation sites consist of rain forest areas in western and central Costa Rica and a region in the Brazilian Amazon.

Gillies, Robert R.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Synergy Between Land Use and Climate Change Increases Future Fire Risk in Amazon Forests

Tropical forests have been a permanent feature of the Amazon basin for at least 55 million years, yet climate change and land use threaten the forest's future over the next century. Understory forest fires, which are common under the current climate in frontier forests, may accelerate Amazon forest losses from climate-driven dieback and deforestation. Far from land use frontiers, scarce fire ignitions and high moisture levels preclude significant burning, yet projected climate and land use changes may increase fire activity in these remote regions. Here, we used a fire model specifically parameterized for Amazon understory fires to examine the interactions between anthropogenic activities and climate under current and projected conditions. In a scenario of low mitigation efforts with substantial land use expansion and climate change – Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 – projected understory fires increase in frequency and duration, burning 4–28 times more forest in 2080–2100 than during 1990–2010. In contrast, active climate mitigation and land use contraction in RCP4.5 constrain the projected increase in fire activity to 0.9–5.4 times contemporary burned area. Importantly, if climate mitigation is not successful, land use contraction alone is very effective under low to moderate climate change, but does little to reduce fire activity under the most severe climate projections. These results underscore the potential for a fire-driven transformation of Amazon forests if recent regional policies for forest conservation are not paired with global efforts to mitigate climate change.

Le Page, Yannick↗
DOE OSTI2025

Spatially explicit terrestrial carbon densities for calibrating the carbon cycle in human-Earth system Models

Soil and vegetation carbon stocks play a critical role in human-Earth system models. These stocks (denominated as densities in MgC/ha) affect variables such as land use change emissions and also influence land use change pathways under climate forcing scenarios where terrestrial carbon is assigned a carbon price. Here we present reharmonized soil and vegetation carbon densities both at the 5-arcmin resolution grid cell level and also aggregated to 235 water sheds for 4 land use types (Cropland, Grazed land, Urban land and unmanaged vegetation) and 15 unmanaged land cover types. Moreover, we use the distribution of carbon within and across pixels to define statistical "states" of carbon, once again differentiated by land type. These statistical states are used to define a range of possible carbon values that can be used for defining initial conditions of soil and vegetation carbon in human-Earth system models. We implement these data in a state-of-the-art multi sector dynamics model, namely the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM), and show that these new data improve several land use responses, especially when terrestrial carbon is assigned a carbon price.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2020

Land management and climate change determine second‐generation bioenergy potential of the US Northern Great Plains

Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) has been proposed as a potential climate mitigation strategy raising concerns over trade‐offs with existing ecosystem services. We evaluate the feasibility of BECCS in the Upper Missouri River Basin (UMRB), a landscape with diverse land use, ownership, and bioenergy potential. We develop land‐use change scenarios and a switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) crop functional type to use in a land‐surface model to simulate second‐generation bioenergy production. By the end of this century, average annual switchgrass production over the UMRB ranges from 60 to 210 Tg dry mass/year and is dependent on the Representative Concentration Pathway for greenhouse gas emissions and on land‐use change assumptions. Under our simple phase‐in assumptions this results in a cumulative total production of 2,000–6,000 Tg C over the study period with the upper estimates only possible in the absence of climate change. Switchgrass yields decreased as average CO2 concentrations and temperatures increased, suggesting the effect of elevated atmospheric CO2 was small because of its C4 photosynthetic pathway. By the end of the 21st century, the potential energy stored annually in harvested switchgrass averaged between 1 and 4 EJ/year assuming perfect conversion efficiency, or an annual electrical generation capacity of 7,000–28,000 MW assuming current bioenergy efficiency rates. Trade‐offs between bioenergy and ecosystem services were identified, including cumulative direct losses of 1,000–2,600 Tg C stored in natural ecosystems from land‐use change by 2090. Total cumulative losses of ecosystem carbon stocks were higher than the potential ~300 Tg C in fossil fuel emissions from the single largest power plant in the region over the same time period, and equivalent to potential carbon removal from the atmosphere from using biofuels grown in the same region. Numerous trade‐offs from BECCS expansion in the UMRB must be balanced against the potential benefits of a carbon‐negative energy system.

climate change↗
NASA NTRS2019

Multimodel Analysis of Future Land Use and Climate Change Impacts on Ecosystem Functioning

Land use and climate changes both affect terrestrial ecosystems. Here, we used three combinations of Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and Representative Concentration Pathways (SSP1xRCP26, SSP3xRCP60, and SSP5xRCP85) as input to three dynamic global vegetation models to assess the impacts and associated uncertainty on several ecosystem functions: terrestrial carbon storage and fluxes, evapotranspiration, surface albedo, and runoff. We also performed sensitivity simulations in which we kept either land use or climate (including atmospheric CO2) constant from year 2015 on to calculate the isolated land use versus climate effects. By the 2080–2099 period, carbon storage increases by up to 87 ± 47 Gt (SSP1xRCP26) compared to present day, with large spatial variance across scenarios and models. Most of the carbon uptake is attributed to drivers beyond future land use and climate change, particularly the lagged effects of historic environmental changes. Future climate change typically increases carbon stocks in vegetation but not soils, while future land use change causes carbon losses, even for net agricultural abandonment (SSP1xRCP26). Evapotranspiration changes are highly variable across scenarios, and models do not agree on the magnitude or even sign of change of the individual effects. A calculated decrease in January and July surface albedo (up to −0.021 ± 0.007 and −0.004 ± 0.004 for SSP5xRCP85) and increase in runoff (+67 ± 6 mm/year) is largely driven by climate change. Overall, our results show that future land use and climate change will both have substantial impacts on ecosystem functioning. However, future changes can often not be fully explained by these two drivers and legacy effects have to be considered.

land use change↗
NASA NTRS1973

Urban and regional land use analysis: CARETS and Census Cities experiment package

The author has identified the following significant results. Areas of post 1970 and 1972 land use changes were identified solely from the Skylab imagery from comparisons with 1970 land use maps. Most land use changes identified involved transition from agriculture to single family residential land use. The second most prominent changes identified from the Skylab imagery were areas presently under construction. Post 1970 changes from Skylab were compared with the 1972 changes noted from the high altitude photographs. A good correlation existed between the change polygons mapped from Skylab and those mapped from the 1972 high altitude aerial photos. In addition, there were a number of instances where additional built-up land use not noted in the 1972 aerial photo as being developed were identified on the Skylab imagery. While these cases have not been documented by field observation, by correlating these areas with the appearance of similar land use areas whose identity has been determined, we can safely say that we have been able to map further occurrences of land use change beyond existing high altitude photo coverage from the Skylab imagery. It was concluded that Skylab data can be used to detect areas of land use change within an urban setting.

Alexander, R. H.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Choices in land representation materially affect modeled biofuel carbon intensity estimates

Estimates of biofuel carbon intensity are uncertain and depend on modeled land use change (LUC) emissions. While analysts have focused on economic and agronomic assumptions affecting the quantity of land converted, researchers have paid less attention to how models classify land into broad categories and designate some categories as ineligible for LUC. To explore the effect of these land representation attributes, we use three versions of a global human and Earth systems model, GCAM, and compute the “carbon intensity of land-use change” (CI-LUC) from increased U.S. corn ethanol production. We consider uncertainty in model parameters along with the choice of land representation and find the latter is one of the most influential parameters on estimated CI-LUC. A version of the model that protects 90% of non-commercial land reduced estimated CI-LUC by an average of 32% across Monte Carlo trials compared to our baseline model. Another version that mimics the GTAP-BIO-ADV land representation, which protects all non-commercial land, reduced CI-LUC by an average of 19%. The results of this experiment suggest that analyses of LUC that exclude non-commercial land categories or assume more land is protected than empirically justified underestimate biofuel induced LUC GHG emissions.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Global Carbon Budget 2024

Abstract. Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) 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 datasets and methodologies to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFOS) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC) are based on land-use and land-use change data and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly, and its growth rate (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The global net uptake of CO2 by the ocean (SOCEAN, called the ocean sink) is estimated with global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-based fCO2 products (fCO2 is the fugacity of CO2). The global net uptake of CO2 by the land (SLAND, called the land sink) is estimated with dynamic global vegetation models. Additional lines of evidence on land and ocean sinks are provided by atmospheric inversions, atmospheric oxygen measurements, and Earth system models. The sum of all sources and sinks results in the carbon budget imbalance (BIM), a measure of imperfect data and incomplete understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the year 2023, EFOS increased by 1.3 % relative to 2022, with fossil emissions at 10.1 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 (10.3 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 when the cement carbonation sink is not included), and ELUC was 1.0 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1, for a total anthropogenic CO2 emission (including the cement carbonation sink) of 11.1 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1 (40.6 ± 3.2 GtCO2 yr−1). Also, for 2023, GATM was 5.9 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1 (2.79 ± 0.1 ppm yr−1; ppm denotes parts per million), SOCEAN was 2.9 ± 0.4 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 2.3 ± 1.0 GtC yr−1, with a near-zero BIM (−0.02 GtC yr−1). The global atmospheric CO2 concentration averaged over 2023 reached 419.31 ± 0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2024 suggest an increase in EFOS relative to 2023 of +0.8 % (−0.2 % to 1.7 %) globally and an atmospheric CO2 concentration increase by 2.87 ppm, reaching 422.45 ppm, 52 % above the pre-industrial level (around 278 ppm in 1750). Overall, the mean of and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2023, with a near-zero overall budget imbalance, although discrepancies of up to around 1 GtC yr−1 persist for the representation of annual to semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from multiple approaches and observations shows the following: (1) a persistent large uncertainty in the estimate of land-use change emissions, (2) low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, and (3) a discrepancy between the different methods on the mean ocean sink. This living-data update documents changes in methods and datasets applied to this most recent global carbon budget as well as evolving community understanding of the global carbon cycle. The data presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2024 (Friedlingstein et al., 2024).

Friedlingstein, Pierre (ORCID:0000000333094739)↗
DOE OSTI2020

Dynamics and drivers of land use and land cover changes in Bangladesh

Abstract Bangladesh has undergone dramatic land use and land cover changes (LULCC) in recent years, but no quantitative analysis of LULCC drivers at the national scale exists so far. Here, we quantified the drivers of major LULCC in combination with biophysical and socioeconomic observations at the sub-district level. We used Landsat satellite data to interpret LULCC from 2000 to 2010 and employed a Global Surface Water Dataset to account for the influences of water seasonality. The results suggest that major LULCC in Bangladesh occur between agricultural land and waterbodies and between forest and shrubland. Exclusion of seasonal waterbodies can improve the accuracy of our LULCC results and driver analysis. Although the gross gain and loss of agricultural land are large on the local scale, the net change (gross gain minus gross loss) at a country scale is almost negligible. Climate dynamics and extreme events and changes in urban and rural households were driving the changes from forest to shrubland in the southeast region. The conversion from agricultural land to standing waterbodies in the southwest region was mainly driven by urban household dynamics, population growth, distance to cities and major roads, and precipitation dynamics. This study, which is the first effort accounting for water seasonality and quantifying biophysical and socioeconomic drivers of LULCC at the national scale, provides a perspective on overall LULCC and underlying drivers over a decadal time scale and national spatial scale and can serve as a scientific basis for developing land policies in Bangladesh.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2019

Multimodel Analysis of Future Land Use and Climate Change Impacts on Ecosystem Functioning

Land use and climate changes both affect terrestrial ecosystems. Here, we used three combinations of Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and Representative Concentration Pathways (SSP1xRCP26, SSP3xRCP60, and SSP5xRCP85) as input to three dynamic global vegetation models to assess the impacts and associated uncertainty on several ecosystem functions: terrestrial carbon storage and fluxes, evapotranspiration, surface albedo, and runoff. We also performed sensitivity simulations in which we kept either land use or climate (including atmospheric CO2) constant from year 2015 on to calculate the isolated land use versus climate effects. By the 2080–2099 period, carbon storage increases by up to 87 ± 47 Gt (SSP1xRCP26) compared to present day, with large spatial variance across scenarios and models. Most of the carbon uptake is attributed to drivers beyond future land use and climate change, particularly the lagged effects of historic environmental changes. Future climate change typically increases carbon stocks in vegetation but not soils, while future land use change causes carbon losses, even for net agricultural abandonment (SSP1xRCP26). Evapotranspiration changes are highly variable across scenarios, and models do not agree on the magnitude or even sign of change of the individual effects. A calculated decrease in January and July surface albedo (up to −0.021 ± 0.007 and −0.004 ± 0.004 for SSP5xRCP85) and increase in runoff (+67 ± 6 mm/year) is largely driven by climate change. Overall, our results show that future land use and climate change will both have substantial impacts on ecosystem functioning. However, future changes can often not be fully explained by these two drivers and legacy effects have to be considered.

Krause, A.↗
NASA NTRS1975

CARETS: A prototype regional environmental information system. Volume 5: Interpretation, compilation and field verification procedures in the CARETS project

The production of the CARETS map data base involved the development of a series of procedures for interpreting, compiling, and verifying data obtained from remote sensor sources. Level II land use mapping from high-altitude aircraft photography at a scale of 1:100,000 required production of a photomosaic mapping base for each of the 48, 50 x 50 km sheets, and the interpretation and coding of land use polygons on drafting film overlays. CARETS researchers also produced a series of 1970 to 1972 land use change overlays, using the 1970 land use maps and 1972 high-altitude aircraft photography. To enhance the value of the land use sheets, researchers compiled series of overlays showing i cultural features, county boundaries and census tracts, surface geology, and drainage basins. In producing Level I land use maps from Landsat imagery, at a scale I of 1:250,000, interpreters overlaid drafting film directly on Landsat color composite transparencies and interpreted on the film. They found that such interpretation involves pattern and spectral signature recognition. In studies using Landsat imagery, interpreters identified numerous areas of change but also identified extensive areas of "false change," where Landsat spectral signatures but not land use had changed.

Field verification procedures↗
NASA NTRS2024

Platte River Water Resources: Assessing Urban Flood Vulnerability to Select Restoration Sites for Urban Woods and Prairies in the Great Plains

In the Platte River Basin, wetlands provide ecosystem services such as flood mitigation and wildlife habitat. However, increasing urban development in the area has impacted natural floodplain processes, leading to a decline in wildlife habitat and an elevated flood risk for nearby communities. To address this issue, Audubon Great Plains’ Urban Woods and Prairies (UWP) Initiative focuses on restoring vital habitats within urban areas to protect bird species and reduce flood hazards. Our project used remotely sensed data, including Landsat 8 Operational Land Imagery (OLI), Sentinel-2 Multispectral Instrument (MSI), and Sentinel-1 Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR), to assess land use and land cover from 2013 to 2023, as well as flood extent. Broad-scale analysis of the LULC showed some changes in land use patterns across the Central Platte River Basin, with the most notable being a decrease in Agricultural land coverage and an increase in Vegetation and Grassland coverage. Land use changes varied across 13 focal cities across the entire basin. In particular, developed land in Grand Island, NE, nearly tripled from 2019 to 2023, making it a good possible candidate for restoration efforts. We overlaid a flood extent map with the LULC classifications in Grand Island to identify possible restoration sites under UWP. This data will inform Audubon Great Plains in identifying potential restoration sites in key cities.

Jennifer Mathis↗
DOE OSTI2024

Storage and persistence of organic carbon in the upper three meters of soil under arable and native prairie land use

Aims: Land use change from native grasslands to arable lands globally impacts soil ecosystem functions, including the storage of soil organic carbon (SOC). Understanding the factors affecting SOC changes in topsoil and subsoil due to land use is crucial for effective mitigation strategies. We determined SOC storage and persistence as affected by land use change from native prairies to arable lands. Methods: Here we examined SOC stocks, soil δ 13 C and Δ 14 C signatures, microbial communities (bacteria and fungi), and soil mineral characteristics under native prairies and long-term arable lands (i.e., > 40 years) down to 3 m in the U.S. Midwest. Results: Native prairie soils had higher SOC stocks in the A horizon and 0–50 cm depth increment than arable soils. For both land use types, the δ 13 C and Δ 14 C values significantly decreased with depth, with the latter pointing towards highly stabilized SOC, especially in the B- and C-horizons. Analysis of the microbial communities indicated that the diversity of bacteria and fungi decreased with increasing soil depth. The content of oxalate soluble Al appeared to be the single most important predictor of SOC across horizons and land use types. Conclusion: Our data suggest that most SOC gains and losses and transformation and translocation processes seem to be restricted to the uppermost 50 cm. Increasing SOC retention in the A and B horizons within the 0–50 cm depth would enhance organic material serving as substrate and nutrients for microbes and plants (A horizon) and facilitate long-term SOC storage in the subsoil (B horizon).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
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↗
DOE OSTI2022

Global Carbon Budget 2022

Abstract. Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) 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 CO2 emissions (EFOS) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC), 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 (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) is estimated with global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-based data products. The terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated with dynamic global vegetation models. The resulting carbon budget imbalance (BIM), 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, EFOS 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 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 a BIM of −0.6 GtC yr−1 (i.e. the total estimated sources were too low or sinks were too high). The global atmospheric CO2 concentration averaged over 2021 reached 414.71 ± 0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2022 suggest an increase in EFOS relative to 2021 of +1.0 % (0.1 % to 1.9 %) globally and atmospheric CO2 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 CO2 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 CO2 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).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Global Carbon Budget 2021

Abstract. Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) 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 datasets and methodology to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFOS) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC), 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 (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) is estimated with global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-based data products. The terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated with dynamic global vegetation models. The resulting carbon budget imbalance (BIM), 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 first time, an approach is shown to reconcile the difference in our ELUC estimate with the one from national greenhouse gas inventories, supporting the assessment of collective countries' climate progress. For the year 2020, EFOS declined by 5.4 % relative to 2019, with fossil emissions at 9.5 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 (9.3 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 when the cement carbonation sink is included), and ELUC was 0.9 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1, for a total anthropogenic CO2 emission of 10.2 ± 0.8 GtC yr−1 (37.4 ± 2.9 GtCO2). Also, for 2020, GATM was 5.0 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1 (2.4 ± 0.1 ppm yr−1), SOCEAN was 3.0 ± 0.4 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 2.9 ± 1 GtC yr−1, with a BIM of −0.8 GtC yr−1. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration averaged over 2020 reached 412.45 ± 0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2021 suggest a rebound in EFOS relative to 2020 of +4.8 % (4.2 % to 5.4 %) globally. Overall, the mean and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2020, but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC yr−1 persist for the representation of annual to semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from multiple approaches and observations shows (1) a persistent large uncertainty in the estimate of land-use changes emissions, (2) a low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, 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 datasets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understanding of the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this dataset (Friedlingstein et al., 2020, 2019; Le Quéré et al., 2018b, a, 2016, 2015b, a, 2014, 2013). The data presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/gcp-2021 (Friedlingstein et al., 2021).

Friedlingstein, Pierre (ORCID:0000000333094739)↗
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↗