Differences between trends in atmospheric CO2 and the reported trends in anthropogenic CO2 emissions

Averaged annual accumulation of CO 2 in the atmosphere, dC a /dt, has been slowing from peak growth in 2002/2003 associated with anomalous climate-induced emissions at high northern latitudes. This slowing is widespread but determined with greatest certainty in the largest well-mixed portion of the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Tellus. Series B, Chemical and physical meteorology Chemical and physical meteorology, 2010-11, Vol.62 (5), p.316-328
Hauptverfasser: Francey, R.J., Trudinger, C.M., Schoot, Van Der, Krummel, P.B., Steele, L.P., Langenfelds, R.L.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Averaged annual accumulation of CO 2 in the atmosphere, dC a /dt, has been slowing from peak growth in 2002/2003 associated with anomalous climate-induced emissions at high northern latitudes. This slowing is widespread but determined with greatest certainty in the largest well-mixed portion of the global troposphere (30◦S-90◦S). We rely on atmospheric mixing for global integration and selection of atmospheric data for spatial representativeness. Prior to 2002/2003, after empirical adjustment for perturbations associated with ENSO and volcanic activity (EV), dC a /dt increases are well represented by linear regression, using direct monitoring records from 1990 or 1965, also from preindustrial times using archived air. In contrast,modelled atmospheric trends due to reported emissions dC E /dt (assuming historically consistent oceanic and terrestrial uptake mechanisms), agree with dC a /dt or dC a /dt-EV up until 1990, are near-stable through the 1990s and increase by 29% between 2000 and 2008. Using atmospheric constraints based on trends in both dCa/dt-EV and interhemispheric gradient, the differences between trends in dCE/dt and atmospheric CO 2 growth are most simply explained as an artefact of underestimating 1994-2003 emissions by around 6%. This is achieved with a near constant post-1965 airborne fraction; otherwise unusually complicated sink changes are required for the period.
ISSN:0280-6509
1600-0889
DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00472.x