Search

Column mixing ratio of carbon dioxide (CO2) data alone do not provide enough information for source attribution. Carbon monoxide (CO) is a product of inefficient combustion often co-emitted with CO2. CO data can then provide a powerful constraint on fire emissions, supporting more accurate estimation of biospheric CO2 fluxes. In this framework and using the chemistry transport model TM5, a CO inversion using Measurements of Pollution in The Troposphere (MOPITT) v8 data is performed to estimate fire emissions which are then converted into CO2 fire emissions (called FIREMo) through the use of the emission ratio. These optimized CO2 fire emissions are used to rebalance the CO2 net ecosystem exchange (NEEMo) and respiration (RhMo) with the global CO2 growth rate. Subsequently, in a second step, these rebalanced fluxes are used as priors for a CO2 inversion to derive the NEE and ocean fluxes constrained either by the Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 (OCO-2) v9 or by in situ (IS) CO2 data. For comparison purpose, we also balanced the respiration using fire emissions from the Global Fire Emissions Database (GFED) version 3 (GFED3) and version 4.1s (GFED4.1s). We hence study the impact of CO fire emissions in our CO2 inversions at global, latitudinal, and regional scales over the period 2015–2018 and compare our results to the two other similar approaches using GFED3 (FIRE3) and GFED4.1s (FIRE4) fires, as well as with an inversion using both Carnegie–Ames–Stanford Approach (CASA)-GFED3 NEE and GFED3 fire priors (priorCMS). After comparison at the different scales, the inversions are evaluated against Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON) data. Comparison of the flux estimates shows that at the global scale posterior net flux estimates are more robust than the different prior flux estimates. However, at the regional scale, we can observe differences in fire emissions among the priors, resulting in differences among the NEE prior emissions. The derived NEE prior emissions are rebalanced in concert with the fires. Consequently, the differences observed in the NEE posterior emissions are a result of the balancing with fires and the constraints provided by CO2 observations. Tropical net flux estimates from in situ inversions are highly sensitive to the prior flux assumed, of which fires are a significant component. Slightly larger net CO2 sources are derived with posterior fire emissions using either FIRE4 or FIREMo in the OCO-2 inversion, in particular for most tropical regions during the 2015 El Niño year. Similarly, larger net CO2 sources are also derived with posterior fire emissions in the in situ data inversion for Tropical Asia. Evaluation with CO2 TCCON data shows lower biases with the three rebalanced priors than with the prior using CASA-GFED3. However, posteriors have average bias and scatter very close each other, making it difficult to conclude which simulation performs better than the other. We observe that the assimilated CO2 data have a strong influence on the global net fluxes among the different inversions. Inversions using OCO-2 (or IS) data have similar emissions, mostly as a result of the observational constraints and to a lesser extent because of the fire prior used. But results in the tropical regions suggest net flux sensitivity to the fire prior for both the IS and OCO-2 inversions. Further work is needed to improve prior fluxes in tropical regions where fires are a significant component. Finally, even if the inversions using the FIREMo prior did enhance the biases over some TCCON sites, it is not the case for the majority of TCCON sites. This study consequently pushes forward the development of a CO–CO2 joint inversion with multi-observations for a possible stronger constraint on posterior CO2 fire and biospheric emissions.

Accurate accounting of emissions and removals of CO2 is critical for the planning and verification of emission reduction targets in support of the Paris Agreement. Here, we present a pilot dataset of country-specific net carbon exchange (NCE; fossil plus terrestrial ecosystem fluxes) and terrestrial carbon stock changes aimed at informing countries' carbon budgets. These estimates are based on “top-down” NCE outputs from the v10 Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO-2) modeling intercomparison project (MIP), wherein an ensemble of inverse modeling groups conducted standardized experiments assimilating OCO-2 column-averaged dry-air mole fraction (XCO2) retrievals (ACOS v10), in situ CO2 measurements or combinations of these data. The v10 OCO-2 MIP NCE estimates are combined with “bottom-up” estimates of fossil fuel emissions and lateral carbon fluxes to estimate changes in terrestrial carbon stocks, which are impacted by anthropogenic and natural drivers. These flux and stock change estimates are reported annually (2015–2020) as both a global 1∘ × 1∘ gridded dataset and a country-level dataset and are available for download from the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites' (CEOS) website: https://doi.org/10.48588/npf6-sw92 (Byrne et al., 2022). Across the v10 OCO-2 MIP experiments, we obtain increases in the ensemble median terrestrial carbon stocks of 3.29–4.58 Pg CO2 yr−1 (0.90–1.25 Pg C yr−1). This is a result of broad increases in terrestrial carbon stocks across the northern extratropics, while the tropics generally have stock losses but with considerable regional variability and differences between v10 OCO-2 MIP experiments. We discuss the state of the science for tracking emissions and removals using top-down methods, including current limitations and future developments towards top-down monitoring and verification systems.

Column mixing ratio of carbon dioxide (CO2) data alone do not provide enough information for source attribution. Carbon monoxide (CO) is a product of inefficient combustion often used as a tracer of CO2. CO data can then provide a powerful constraint on fire emissions, supporting more accurate estimation of biospheric CO2 fluxes. In this framework and using the chemistry transport model TM5, a CO inversion using MOPITT v8 data is performed to estimate fire emissions which are then converted in CO2 fire emissions through the use of emission ratio. These CO2 fire emissions allow us, then, to estimate adjusted CO2 Net Ecosystem Exchange (NEE) and respiration which are then used as priors for CO2 inversions constrained either by the Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 (OCO-2) v9 or by in situ data. For comparison purpose, we also balanced the respiration using fire emissions from the Global Fire Database Emissions (GFED) version 3 (GFED3) and version 4.1s (GFED4.1s). We hence study the impact of CO fire emissions in our CO2 inversions at global, latitudinal and regional scales over the period 2015–2018 and compare our results to the two other similar approaches using GFED3 and GFED4.1s, as well as with an inversion using CASA-GFED3 fire and NEE priors. After comparison at the different scales, the inversions are evaluated against TCCON data. Results show that variations in posterior flux are much smaller across different prior mean fluxes when compared with the data assimilated. However, at global scale and for most of the regions, while the net fluxes remain robust, we can observe differences in fire emissions among the priors, resulting in large adjustments in the Net Ecosystem Exchange (NEE) to match the fires and observations. Tropical flux estimates from in situ inversions are highly sensitive to the prior flux assumed, of which fires are a significant component. Slightly larger CO2 net sources are observed when using GFED4.1s and MOPITT CO prior in CO2 OCO-2 inversions than compared with the other priors, particularly during the 2015 El Niño event for most Tropical regions. Larger CO2 net sources with MOPITT CO and GFED4.1s priors are also observed in Tropical Asia in CO2 in situ inversions than compared with the other priors during the 2015–2016 El Niño period and shows large net emissions than compared to OCO-2 inversions. Evaluation with TCCON suggests that the re-balanced posterior simulated give biases and accuracy very close each other where biases have decreased and variability matches better the validation data than with the CASA-GFED3. Further work is needed to improve prior fluxes in Tropical regions where fires are a significant component.