RECCAP2 Future Component: Consistency and Potential for Regional Assessment to Constrain Global Projections

Author:

Jones Chris D.1ORCID,Ziehn Tilo2ORCID,Anand Jatin3,Bastos Ana4ORCID,Burke Eleanor1ORCID,Canadell Josep G.5ORCID,Cardoso Manoel6ORCID,Ernst Yolandi7,Jain Atul K.3ORCID,Jeong Sujong8ORCID,Keller Elizabeth D.910ORCID,Kondo Masayuki11ORCID,Lauerwald Ronny12ORCID,Lin Tzu‐Shun313ORCID,Murray‐Tortarolo Guillermo14ORCID,Nabuurs Gert‐Jan15,O’Sullivan Mike16,Poulter Ben17ORCID,Qin Xiaoyu1819,von Randow Celso6ORCID,Sanches Marcos6,Schepaschenko Dmitry20ORCID,Shvidenko Anatoly20,Smallman T. Luke2122ORCID,Tian Hanqin23ORCID,Villalobos Yohanna5ORCID,Wang Xuhui24ORCID,Yun Jeongmin25ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Met Office Hadley Centre Exeter UK

2. CSIRO Environment Aspendale VIC Australia

3. Department of Atmospheric Sciences University of Illinois Urbana IL USA

4. Department Biogeochemical Integratio Max‐Planck‐Institut für Biogeochemie Jena Germany

5. Global Carbon Project CSIRO Environment Canberra ACT Australia

6. National Institute for Space Research São José dos Campos Brazil

7. Global Change Institute University of the Witwatersrand Johannesburg South Africa

8. Department of Environmental Planning Graduate School of Environmental Studies Seoul National University Seoul Republic of Korea

9. GNS Science Lower Hutt New Zealand

10. Victoria University of Wellington Wellington New Zealand

11. Institute for Space‐Earth Environmental Research Nagoya University Nagoya Japan

12. INRAE/AgroParisTech‐UMR Ecosys Université Paris‐Saclay Palaiseau France

13. National Center for Atmospheric Research Boulder CO USA

14. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ecosistemas y Sustentabilidad Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Morelia México

15. Wageningen Environmental Research Wageningen The Netherlands

16. Faculty of Environment, Science and Economy University of Exeter Exeter UK

17. Biospheric Sciences Lab NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt MD USA

18. State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology Research Center for Eco‐Environmental Sciences Chinese Academy of Sciences Beijing China

19. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences Beijing China

20. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Laxenburg Austria

21. School of GeoSciences University of Edinburgh Edinburgh UK

22. National Centre for Earth Observations University of Edinburgh Edinburgh UK

23. Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences Schiller Institute for Integrated Science and Society Boston College Chestnut Hill MA USA

24. College of Urban and Environmental Sciences Institute of Carbon Neutrality Sino‐French Institute of Earth System Sciences Peking University Beijing China

25. Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Pasadena CA USA

Abstract

AbstractProjections of future carbon sinks and stocks are important because they show how the world's ecosystems will respond to elevated CO2 and changes in climate. Moreover, they are crucial to inform policy decisions around emissions reductions to stay within the global warming levels identified by the Paris Agreement. However, Earth System Models from the 6th Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) show substantial spread in future projections—especially of the terrestrial carbon cycle, leading to a large uncertainty in our knowledge of any remaining carbon budget (RCB). Here we evaluate the global terrestrial carbon cycle projections on a region‐by‐region basis and compare the global models with regional assessments made by the REgional Carbon Cycle Assessment and Processes, Phase 2 activity. Results show that for each region, the CMIP6 multi‐model mean is generally consistent with the regional assessment, but substantial cross‐model spread exists. Nonetheless, all models perform well in some regions and no region is without some well performing models. This gives confidence that the CMIP6 models can be used to look at future changes in carbon stocks on a regional basis with appropriate model assessment and benchmarking. We find that most regions of the world remain cumulative net sources of CO2 between now and 2100 when considering the balance of fossil‐fuels and natural sinks, even under aggressive mitigation scenarios. This paper identifies strengths and weaknesses for each model in terms of its performance over a particular region including how process representation might impact those results and sets the agenda for applying stricter constraints at regional scales to reduce the uncertainty in global projections.

Funder

Horizon 2020 Framework Programme

Publisher

American Geophysical Union (AGU)

Subject

General Earth and Planetary Sciences

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3