Institution
Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research
Facility•Bergen, Norway•
About: Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research is a facility organization based out in Bergen, Norway. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Climate change & Sea ice. The organization has 537 authors who have published 1969 publications receiving 88668 citations.
Topics: Climate change, Sea ice, Holocene, Arctic, Climate model
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory1, Earth System Research Laboratory2, Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory3, Oregon State University4, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute5, University of East Anglia6, Pierre-and-Marie-Curie University7, Hokkaido University8, National Institute for Environmental Studies9, Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences10, University of Iceland11, Hobart Corporation12, Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research13, Fisheries and Oceans Canada14, University of Liège15
TL;DR: In this article, a global mean distribution for surface water pCO2 over the global oceans in non-El Nino conditions has been constructed with spatial resolution of 4° (latitude) × 5° (longitude) for a reference year 2000 based upon about 3 million measurements of surface water PCO2 obtained from 1970 to 2007.
Abstract: A climatological mean distribution for the surface water pCO2 over the global oceans in non-El Nino conditions has been constructed with spatial resolution of 4° (latitude) ×5° (longitude) for a reference year 2000 based upon about 3 million measurements of surface water pCO2 obtained from 1970 to 2007. The database used for this study is about 3 times larger than the 0.94 million used for our earlier paper [Takahashi et al., 2002. Global sea–air CO2 flux based on climatological surface ocean pCO2, and seasonal biological and temperature effects. Deep-Sea Res. II, 49, 1601–1622]. A time-trend analysis using deseasonalized surface water pCO2 data in portions of the North Atlantic, North and South Pacific and Southern Oceans (which cover about 27% of the global ocean areas) indicates that the surface water pCO2 over these oceanic areas has increased on average at a mean rate of 1.5 μatm y−1 with basin-specific rates varying between 1.2±0.5 and 2.1±0.4 μatm y−1. A global ocean database for a single reference year 2000 is assembled using this mean rate for correcting observations made in different years to the reference year. The observations made during El Nino periods in the equatorial Pacific and those made in coastal zones are excluded from the database.
Seasonal changes in the surface water pCO2 and the sea-air pCO2 difference over four climatic zones in the Atlantic, Pacific, Indian and Southern Oceans are presented. Over the Southern Ocean seasonal ice zone, the seasonality is complex. Although it cannot be thoroughly documented due to the limited extent of observations, seasonal changes in pCO2 are approximated by using the data for under-ice waters during austral winter and those for the marginal ice and ice-free zones.
The net air–sea CO2 flux is estimated using the sea–air pCO2 difference and the air–sea gas transfer rate that is parameterized as a function of (wind speed)2 with a scaling factor of 0.26. This is estimated by inverting the bomb 14C data using Ocean General Circulation models and the 1979–2005 NCEP-DOE AMIP-II Reanalysis (R-2) wind speed data. The equatorial Pacific (14°N–14°S) is the major source for atmospheric CO2, emitting about +0.48 Pg-C y−1, and the temperate oceans between 14° and 50° in the both hemispheres are the major sink zones with an uptake flux of −0.70 Pg-C y−1 for the northern and −1.05 Pg-C y−1 for the southern zone. The high-latitude North Atlantic, including the Nordic Seas and portion of the Arctic Sea, is the most intense CO2 sink area on the basis of per unit area, with a mean of −2.5 tons-C month−1 km−2. This is due to the combination of the low pCO2 in seawater and high gas exchange rates. In the ice-free zone of the Southern Ocean (50°–62°S), the mean annual flux is small (−0.06 Pg-C y−1) because of a cancellation of the summer uptake CO2 flux with the winter release of CO2 caused by deepwater upwelling. The annual mean for the contemporary net CO2 uptake flux over the global oceans is estimated to be −1.6±0.9 Pg-C y−1, which includes an undersampling correction to the direct estimate of −1.4±0.7 Pg-C y−1. Taking the pre-industrial steady-state ocean source of 0.4±0.2 Pg-C y−1 into account, the total ocean uptake flux including the anthropogenic CO2 is estimated to be −2.0±1.0 Pg-C y−1 in 2000.
1,653 citations
••
University of East Anglia1, University of Exeter2, Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research3, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich4, Max Planck Society5, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation6, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology7, Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory8, Cooperative Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Studies9, École Normale Supérieure10, Centre national de la recherche scientifique11, University of Maryland, College Park12, University of Virginia13, Flanders Marine Institute14, Oak Ridge National Laboratory15, Woods Hole Research Center16, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign17, Geophysical Institute, University of Bergen18, Met Office19, University of California, San Diego20, Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency21, Utrecht University22, University of Paris23, Oeschger Centre for Climate Change Research24, Tsinghua University25, National Center for Atmospheric Research26, Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research27, National Institute for Environmental Studies28, Cooperative Research Centre29, Hobart Corporation30, Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology31, University of Groningen32, Wageningen University and Research Centre33, Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research34, Goddard Space Flight Center35, Leibniz Institute for Baltic Sea Research36, Princeton University37, Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences38, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration39, Auburn University40, Food and Agriculture Organization41, VU University Amsterdam42
TL;DR: In this article, the authors describe data sets and methodology to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties, including emissions from land use and land-use change data and bookkeeping models.
Abstract: . 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 ( EFF ) are based on energy statistics and cement
production data, while emissions from land use and 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 )
and terrestrial CO2 sink ( SLAND ) are estimated with
global process models constrained by observations. 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 last decade available (2008–2017), EFF was
9.4±0.5 GtC yr −1 , ELUC 1.5±0.7 GtC yr −1 , GATM 4.7±0.02 GtC yr −1 ,
SOCEAN 2.4±0.5 GtC yr −1 , and SLAND 3.2±0.8 GtC yr −1 , with a budget imbalance BIM of
0.5 GtC yr −1 indicating overestimated emissions and/or underestimated
sinks. For the year 2017 alone, the growth in EFF was about 1.6 %
and emissions increased to 9.9±0.5 GtC yr −1 . Also for 2017,
ELUC was 1.4±0.7 GtC yr −1 , GATM was 4.6±0.2 GtC yr −1 , SOCEAN was 2.5±0.5 GtC yr −1 , and SLAND was 3.8±0.8 GtC yr −1 ,
with a BIM of 0.3 GtC. The global atmospheric
CO2 concentration reached 405.0±0.1 ppm averaged over 2017.
For 2018, preliminary data for the first 6–9 months indicate a renewed
growth in EFF of + 2.7 % (range of 1.8 % to 3.7 %) based
on national emission projections for China, the US, 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. The analysis
presented here shows that the mean and trend in the five components of the
global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period of 1959–2017,
but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC yr −1 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 show (1) no consensus in the mean and trend in land-use change
emissions, (2) a persistent low agreement among 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, originating 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 the global carbon cycle compared with
previous publications of this data set (Le Quere et al., 2018, 2016,
2015a, b, 2014, 2013). All results presented here can be downloaded from
https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2018 .
1,458 citations
••
Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research1, Stockholm University2, Saint Petersburg State University3, Russian Academy of Sciences4, University of Cambridge5, Geological Museum6, Gas Technology Institute7, Lund University8, University of Copenhagen9, Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research10, University of Iceland11, University of New Hampshire12, Geological Survey of Sweden13, University of Oulu14, Aarhus University15, Ohio State University16, Geological Survey of Finland17, University of Bristol18, Leibniz Association19
TL;DR: In this paper, the maximum limits of the Eurasian ice sheets during four glaciations have been reconstructed: (1) the Late Saalian (>140 ka), (2) the Early Weichselian (100-80 ka),(3) the Middle Weichsellian (60-50 ka), and (4) the late Weichselsian (25-15 ka) based on satellite data and aerial photographs combined with geological field investigations in Russia and Siberia, and with marine seismic and sediment core data.
1,426 citations
••
University of East Anglia1, University of Oslo2, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation3, University of Exeter4, Oak Ridge National Laboratory5, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration6, Woods Hole Research Center7, University of California, San Diego8, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology9, Cooperative Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Studies10, Centre national de la recherche scientifique11, University of Maryland, College Park12, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research13, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution14, Flanders Marine Institute15, Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research16, Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency17, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign18, Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences19, Max Planck Society20, University of Paris21, Hobart Corporation22, Oeschger Centre for Climate Change Research23, University of Bern24, National Center for Atmospheric Research25, University of Miami26, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research27, University of Colorado Boulder28, National Institute for Environmental Studies29, Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean30, Geophysical Institute, University of Bergen31, Montana State University32, Goddard Space Flight Center33, University of New Hampshire34, Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research35, Imperial College London36, Lamont–Doherty Earth Observatory37, Auburn University38, Wageningen University and Research Centre39, VU University Amsterdam40, Met Office41
TL;DR: In this article, the authors quantify all major components of the global carbon budget, including their uncertainties, based on the combination of a range of data, algorithms, statistics, and model estimates and their interpretation by a broad scientific community.
Abstract: . 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 all major components of the global carbon budget, including their uncertainties, based on the combination of a range of data, algorithms, statistics, and model estimates and their interpretation by a broad scientific community. We discuss changes compared to previous estimates and consistency within and among components, alongside methodology and data limitations. CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and industry (EFF) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, respectively, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC), mainly deforestation, are based on combined evidence from land-cover change data, fire activity associated with deforestation, and models. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly and its rate of growth (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The mean ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) is based on observations from the 1990s, while the annual anomalies and trends are estimated with ocean models. The variability in SOCEAN is evaluated with data products based on surveys of ocean CO2 measurements. The global residual terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated by the difference of the other terms of the global carbon budget and compared to results of independent dynamic global vegetation models. We compare the mean land and ocean fluxes and their variability to estimates from three atmospheric inverse methods for three broad latitude bands. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ, reflecting the current capacity to characterise the annual estimates of each component of the global carbon budget. For the last decade available (2006–2015), EFF was 9.3 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, ELUC 1.0 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, GATM 4.5 ± 0.1 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN 2.6 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND 3.1 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1. For year 2015 alone, the growth in EFF was approximately zero and emissions remained at 9.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, showing a slowdown in growth of these emissions compared to the average growth of 1.8 % yr−1 that took place during 2006–2015. Also, for 2015, ELUC was 1.3 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, GATM was 6.3 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN was 3.0 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 1.9 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1. GATM was higher in 2015 compared to the past decade (2006–2015), reflecting a smaller SLAND for that year. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 399.4 ± 0.1 ppm averaged over 2015. For 2016, preliminary data indicate the continuation of low growth in EFF with +0.2 % (range of −1.0 to +1.8 %) based on national emissions projections for China and USA, and projections of gross domestic product corrected for recent changes in the carbon intensity of the economy for the rest of the world. In spite of the low growth of EFF in 2016, the growth rate in atmospheric CO2 concentration is expected to be relatively high because of the persistence of the smaller residual terrestrial sink (SLAND) in response to El Nino conditions of 2015–2016. From this projection of EFF and assumed constant ELUC for 2016, cumulative emissions of CO2 will reach 565 ± 55 GtC (2075 ± 205 GtCO2) for 1870–2016, about 75 % from EFF and 25 % from ELUC. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new carbon budget compared with previous publications of this data set (Le Quere et al., 2015b, a, 2014, 2013). All observations presented here can be downloaded from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center ( doi:10.3334/CDIAC/GCP_2016 ).
1,224 citations
••
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors used the most recent simulations performed in the framework of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 5 to assess how these stressors may evolve over the course of the 21st century.
Abstract: Ocean ecosystems are increasingly stressed by human-induced changes of their physical, chemical and biological environment. Among these changes, warming, acidification, deoxygenation and changes in primary productivity by marine phytoplankton can be considered as four of the major stressors of open ocean ecosystems. Due to rising atmospheric CO 2 in the coming decades, these changes will be amplified. Here, we use the most recent simulations performed in the framework of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 5 to assess how these stressors may evolve over the course of the 21st century. The 10 Earth system models used here project similar trends in ocean warming, acidification, deoxygenation and reduced primary productivity for each of the IPCC's representative concentration pathways (RCPs) over the 21st century. For the "business-as-usual" scenario RCP8.5, the model-mean changes in the 2090s (compared to the 1990s) for sea surface temperature, sea surface pH, global O 2 content and integrated primary productivity amount to p2.73 (±0.72) °C, −0.33 (±0.003) pH unit, −3.45 (±0.44)% and −8.6 (±7.9)%, respectively. For the high mitigation scenario RCP2.6, corresponding changes are +0.71 (±0.45) °C, −0.07 (±0.001) pH unit, −1.81 (±0.31)% and −2.0 (±4.1)%, respectively, illustrating the effectiveness of extreme mitigation strategies. Although these stressors operate globally, they display distinct regional patterns and thus do not change coincidentally. Large decreases in O 2 and in pH are simulated in global ocean intermediate and mode waters, whereas large reductions in primary production are simulated in the tropics and in the North Atlantic. Although temperature and pH projections are robust across models, the same does not hold for projections of subsurface O 2 concentrations in the tropics and global and regional changes in net primary productivity. These high uncertainties in projections of primary productivity and subsurface oxygen prompt us to continue inter-model comparisons to understand these model differences, while calling for caution when using the CMIP5 models to force regional impact models.
1,147 citations
Authors
Showing all 602 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Raymond S. Bradley | 83 | 296 | 34822 |
Harry John Betteley Birks | 81 | 213 | 20204 |
Jan Mangerud | 67 | 187 | 15015 |
David B. Stephenson | 67 | 220 | 20552 |
David S. Battisti | 62 | 184 | 18851 |
Eystein Jansen | 61 | 140 | 11801 |
Jens Hesselbjerg Christensen | 57 | 163 | 17349 |
Hans Petter Sejrup | 54 | 152 | 9432 |
Noel Keenlyside | 54 | 176 | 11671 |
Hilary H. Birks | 54 | 125 | 8382 |
Atle Nesje | 53 | 155 | 8633 |
Haflidi Haflidason | 52 | 157 | 22240 |
H. John B. Birks | 50 | 143 | 10416 |
Richard Sanders | 46 | 120 | 6130 |
Frank Nilsen | 46 | 185 | 7906 |