An assessment of

Anthropogenic Carbon dioxide

on the context of

Global Carbon Budget-2017

Presented by:
Group No.-03
 Outline

• Objective
• Terminology
• Methodology
• Results
• Discussion
• Acknowledgement
 Objective:
• Global carbon cycle is the interaction between its three reservoirs-
land , ocean & atmosphere.
• Assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions &
redistribution in its reservoirs.
• Description of data sets and methodology to quantify the emission
and sink characteristics of the global carbon budget within restricted
uncertainties for the period pre-industrial (1750) to 2016 & projects
for 2017.
 Five major components :Carbon budget

Fossil fuels and industry (EFF)

SOURCE
Land-use change (ELUC)

Rate of growth of
atmospheric CO2 (GATM)

SOCEAN
SINK

SLAND
 Terminology : Budget Imbalance
• The global emissions and their distribution among the atmosphere, ocean,
and land are in reality in balance.
• Imperfect spatial, temporal data coverage, errors in each estimate, ignoring
of smaller terms in budget estimate invites Budget Imbalance (BIM).
• -is a measure of the mismatch between the estimated emissions and the
estimated changes in the 3 reservoirs.
• Now, the full global carbon budget:

EFF+ELUC=GATM+SOCEAN+SLAND+BIM GATM is in ppm yr-1 & rest Gigatonnes yr-1 .

Budget data:

• Decadal mean in the five components of the

anthropogenic CO2 budget for different
periods.
• Uncertainties are reported as ±1σ.
• A positive imbalance means the emissions are
overestimated and/or the sinks are too small.
 Atmospheric concentration
The global CO2 concentration increased from ~277ppm in 1750 to 403ppm in 2016 (up 45%)
2016 was the first full year with concentration above 400ppm.

1ppm = 2.12 GtC conversion:(1Gtc=1015g)

 Molecular mass air, C & CO2 28.97, 12 & 44.

So, 12 g of C = 44 g of CO2; 1 g of C = 3.67 g of CO2.
 1 ppm=10-6
mass of atmosphere = 5.1 x 1021 g.
Nos. of mol of air=(5.1 x 1021/ 29) = 1.76 x 1020
1 ppm of CO2 in air = 1.76 x 1020 x 10-6 = 1.76 x 1014 mol of
CO2.
44 x 1.76 x 1014 g =7.73 Gt of CO2.
 3.67 Gt of CO2= 1Gt of C ;
So 7.73 Gt of CO2= 2.11 Gt of C .
Methods: Contributors 60 people | 57 organisations | 15 countries.

The community improvised with the following :

• The inclusion of data to year 2016 (inclusive) and a projection for the global
carbon budget for year 2017.
• Two Bookkeeping models : ELUC
• Dynamic global vegetation model(DGVMs) : SLAND
• Direct use of global ocean biogeochemistry models (GOBMs) to assess SOCEAN
with no normalization to observations.
• Introduction of the budget imbalance BIM, recognizing uncertainties in the
estimate of SOCEAN along with SLAND.

On the 5 1. Estimate emission/sinking , 2. Modeling , 3.Finding other

factors. parameters to reduce uncertainties, 4.future projections
Emission from fossil fuel
• Data sets: CDIAC(1751-2014), UNFCCC (1990–2015 for the 42 Annex-I countries), The
BP Statistical Review of World Energy (BP, 2017),US Geological Survey estimates of
cement production (USGS, 2017)
• Country mappings: reduction of 256 countries to 220 countries by reallocating
emissions to the currently defined territories, using mass-preserving aggregation or
disaggregation. E.g. Germany, USSR(1991;15) and Yugoslavia(1991-92).
• Global total: based on CDIAC, which is greater than the sum of emissions from all
countries.
• combustion of fuels used in international shipping and aviation (bunker fuels),
• Difference in import/export quantity,
• Inconsistent national data reporting etc.
• Emissions embodied in goods and services:
Consumption-based emission= Territorial−Exports+Imports.
Major flows from production to consumption

• carbon physically present

in fossil fuels, petroleum-
derived products,
harvested wood
products, crops, and
livestock products.
• Flows from location of
generation of emissions
to location of
consumption of goods
and services
• Source: Peters et al 2012
Carbon flows in harvested wood products, Crops etc.

• In HWPs: Russia to E
Asia, EU, North
America
• In Crops most
extraction: East Asia,
North America
Growth rate emission & projection:
• Annual growth rate in emissions for adjacent years:
(EFF(t0+1)−EFF(t0))/EFF(t0)×100%
• The relative growth rate of EFF over time periods of greater than 1
year:

• Assessment of global fossil fuel emissions by combining individual

assessments of emissions for China, USA, India and rest of the world.
• GDP projections are the best tools to infer the emissions for rest of
the world region.
• - based on KAYA IDENTITY.( Here they used simplified model)
 Basic on KAYA IDENTITY
• The Kaya identity is an identity stating that the total emission level of the greenhouse gas carbon
dioxide can be expressed as the product of four factors: human population, GDP per capita, energy
intensity (per unit of GDP), and carbon intensity (emissions per unit of energy consumed).

• Relating factors that determine the level of human impact on climate.

• The Kaya identity is both simple and tricky, as it can be reduced to only two terms, but it is developed so
that the carbon emission calculation becomes easy, as per the available data, or generally in which format
the data is available.
• simplified Kaya identity, whereby EFF (GtCyr−1) is decomposed by the product of GDP (USDyr−1) and the
fossil fuel carbon intensity of the economy (IFF; GtCUSD−1) as follows:
EFF=GDP× IFF;

*Yoichi Kaya, Japanese energy economist.

Top emitters: fossil fuels and industry (per capita)

The ups-down reflecting

national circumstances.
1st one per capita.
2nd carbon intensity trend.
China has a decreasing trend
but still more than world
average.

Source: CDIAC; IEA 2016 GDP to 2014,

IMF 2017 growth rates to 2016; Le Quéré
et al 2017; Global Carbon Budget 2017
• primary energy
consumption and CO2
emissions from fossil fuel
use both increased.
• Steadiness on CO2 around
2011 onwards due to new
less carbon energy
resources.
• The global economy is
using less energy to
produce a unit of wealth,
partially because of the
higher relative growth of
low-carbon products and
services.
 Land-use change emissions ELUC
• The net CO2 flux from land use, land-use change, and forestry include CO2 fluxes from deforestation,
afforestation, logging and forest degradation (including harvest activity), shifting cultivation (cycle of cutting
forest for agriculture, then abandoning), regrowth of forests.
• MODELS: 2 BOOK KEEPING MODELS (Houghton and Nassikas -H&N , Bookkeeping of Land-Use Emissions-
BLUE)
• keeps track of the carbon stored in vegetation and soils before and after a land-use change(transitions
between various natural vegetation types, croplands, pastures).
• Not includes the ecosystem transient response to changes in climate, atmospheric CO2, and other
environmental factors, and the carbon densities are based on contemporary data reflecting stable
environmental conditions at that time.
• DGVMs are used to quantify the uncertainty in ELUC and to explore the consistency of our understanding.
• All DGVMs represent processes of vegetation growth and mortality, as well as decomposition of dead organic
matter associated with natural cycles, and include the vegetation and soil carbon response to increasing
atmospheric CO2 levels and to climate variability and change.
• 12 DGVM simulations are used some has N-C coupling cycles interactions etc. uses Food and Agriculture
Organization data.
Land-use change emissions
Ocean CO2 sink(Socean)
• Estimated by GOBMs with 90% confidence limit.(revised by IPCC)
• GOBMs(Global Ocean Biogeochemistry Models) represents physical,
chemical, biological processes that influence the surface ocean
concentration of CO2 and thus the air CO2 flux.
• CO2 sink of ocean are calculated using these techniques:
1.O2/N2 technique was used
2.method based on penetration timescale for CFCs.
• They do not include effect of anthropogenic changes in nutrient
supply that could lead to an increased ocean sink.
• Also do not include perturbations associated with changes with river organic
carbon.
Uncertainty in Socean Assessment

• For uncertainty assessment standard deviations are calculated for

GOBM and mean flux.
• The standard deviation includes a component of trend and decadal
variability in addition to inter annual variability, and their relative
influence differs across estimates. The estimates generally produce a
higher ocean CO2 sink during strong El Niño events.
Terrestrial CO2 sink

• The terrestrial land sink (SLAND) is thought to be due to the combined

effects of fertilization by rising atmospheric CO2 and N2 deposition on
plant growth, as well as the effects of climate change such as the
lengthening of the growing season in northern temperate and boreal
areas.
• SLAND does not include gross land sinks directly resulting from land use
and land-use change (e.g. regrowth of vegetation) as these are part of
the net land-use flux (ELUC), although system boundaries make it
difficult to exactly attribute CO2 fluxes on land between SLAND and
ELUC.
Atmospheric perspective
• Atmospheric inversion method:
estimates of the surface-atmosphere CO2 exchange based on atmospheric
measurements, with a focus on its temporal variations. The fluxes have been
calculated using an ‘atmospheric transport inversion’.
• The worldwide network of atmospheric measurements can be used with
atmospheric inversion methods to constrain the location of the combined
total surface CO2 fluxes from all sources, including fossil and land-use
change emissions and land and ocean CO2 Fluxes
Sources of CO2 emissions:
fossil fuels and industry, land-use
change
Sinks : Oceans, land and
atmosphere
Global Carbon Budget as Function of
time:
Emissions from fossil fuel and
industry is continuously increasing at
rapid rate but from land use is nearly
constant.

The total emissions were partitioned

among the atmosphere (45 %), ocean
(23 %), and land (32 %).

Methods of Estimates
GATM- Observations
SOCEAN, SLAND- Model ensembles
 Fate of anthropogenic CO2 emissions (2008–2017)

Sources = Sinks
17.3 GtCO2/yr
34.4 GtCO2/yr
87% 44%
29%
11.6 GtCO2/yr
13%
5.3 GtCO2/yr 22%
8.9 GtCO2/yr
Budget Imbalance: 5%
(the difference between estimated sources & sinks) 1.9 GtCO2/yr
 Decadal CO2 emissions

 EFF has increased in every decade but there is no trend in ELUC.This is in agreement with DGVM
ensemble of models.
 GATM, SOCEAN and SLAND all have increased
EFF is increasing (5% uncertainty) with falls
at certain places because of geopolitical and
economic reasons like US oil crisis, US
savings and loan crisis, Dissolution of soviet
union, Asian financial crisis, and global
financial crisis.

The atmospheric concentration growth rate

has shown a steady increase
The high growth in 1987, 1998, & 2015–16
reflect a strong El Niño, which weakens the
land sink

Sinks have continued to grow with

emissions, but the climate change will affect
the carbon cycle processes in a way that will
exacerbate the increase of CO2 in
atmosphere.
 Budget imbalance= EFF + ELUC-(GATM +
SOCEAN + SLAND).

 BI reflects the limits of our

understanding of carbon cycle.

 Budget imbalance shows no trend

 Ideally BI should be zero, but error

arises either due to overestimation of
emissions or underestimation of sinks.
 Remaining carbon budget imbalance
Large and unexplained variability in the global carbon balance caused by uncertainty and understanding
hinder independent verification of reported CO2 emissions

positive values mean

overestimated
emissions and/or
underestimated sinks

The budget imbalance is the carbon left after adding independent estimates for total emissions, minus the atmospheric
growth rate and estimates for the land and ocean carbon sinks using models constrained by observations
Source: Le Quéré et al 2018; Global Carbon Budget 2018
 Emissions can be extrapolated or
projected using BP energy statistics or
GDP projections.

 The top four emitters in 2017 covered 58%

of global emissions
China (27%), United States (15%), EU28
(10%), India (7%)

 Countries have a broad range of per capita

emissions reflecting their national
circumstances
 Terrestrial sink

 The land sink was 11.6 +/-3 Gt CO2 during 2008-

2017 and 13.9 +/- 3 GtCO2 / yr in 2017.

 Total fluxes on land (including land use change)

are constrained by atmospheric inversions.
The ocean carbon sink continues to
increase 8.9 +/-2 GtCO2 /yr for 2008-
2017 and 9.2 +/- 2 GtCO2/yr in 2017.
 Total land and ocean fluxes

Total land and ocean fluxes show more interannual variability in the tropics

Source: Le Quéré et al 2018

 Discussions
● Each year with global carbon budget ,corrections are made to
update previous years data components
● This year a major methodological change was introduced in
assessing both Sink OCEAN and Sink LAND directly using multiple
process models constrained by observations and by keeping track
of the budget imbalance separately.
● The mismatch between the total emissions and the total sinks
illustrates the need to explicitly identify imbalances separately
rather than assigning residuals to the land sink as was done in the
past
 The cumulative contributions to the global carbon budget from 1870

● The budget imbalance is the carbon left

after adding independent estimates for
total emissions, minus the atmospheric
growth rate and estimates for the land and
ocean carbon sinks using models
constrained by observations

● The sinks have continued to grow with

increasing emissions, but climate change
will affect carbon cycle processes in a way
that will exacerbate the increase of CO2 in
the atmosphere

● The budget imbalance reflects the limits of

our understanding of the carbon cycle and
represents the gap in our current
understanding of sources & sinks
● The budget imbalance reaches as much as ±2 GtC yr−1 in individual years and ±0.6
GtC yr−1 in individual decades .Such large budget imbalances limits our ability to
verify reported emissions and limits our confidence in the underlying processes
regulating the carbon cycle feedbacks with climate change

● Understanding the causes of the discrepancies and further analysis of regional

carbon budgets would provide additional information to quantify and improve our
estimates, as has been shown by the project REgional Carbon Cycle Assessment and
Processes RECCAP

● To improve the global carbon budget components, a list of the major known
uncertainties for each component is provided, in which those uncertainties are
defined that have demonstrated an effect of at least 0.3 GtC yr−1
 Sources of uncertainty :

● Multiple sources of uncertainties for Land use change includes

1) the land-cover and land-use change statistics,
2) Representation of management processes and methodologies

● Largest sources of Uncertainty for EFF are

1)the quality of the energy statistics and of the emissions factors

● Other sources of uncertainties can be for example cement emissions that could add up to significant
contributions but are unlikely to be the main sources of the budget imbalance. These sources also needs to
be taken care of

● There is also a possibility that yet unknown processes are not taken into account. For this Better
understanding the source of the carbon imbalance and how to resolve it is critical to progress further in the
understanding of the contemporary carbon budget.

● There are many other uncertainties affecting the annual estimates, some of which could be improved with
better data
 Annual fossil CO2 emissions in india .

● North America and Europe have contributed the most cumulative emissions, but Asia is growing fast
● India’s fossil fuel emissions are growing strongly along with rapid growth in economic activity.
● Although India is rapidly deploying solar & wind power, coal continues to grow very strongly.
● Clean energy sources are
beginning to replace fossil fuels, as
their costs become more
competitive.

● The IPCC Special Report on “Global

Warming of 1.5°C” presented new
scenarios:- 1.5°C scenarios require
halving emissions by ~2030, net-
zero by ~2050, and negative
thereafter.

● Renewable energy is growing, but

this growth has so far been too
low to offset the growth in fossil
energy consumption
 Conclusion

Annual carbon budget serves two purposes:

1. To serve growing demand for up-to-date information on the state of the anthropogenic perturbation of
the climate system and its causes. Ex. scientists, policy makers, businesses, journalists, and the society
increasingly engaged in adapting to and mitigating human-driven climate change.
2. over the last decade we have seen unprecedented changes in the human and biophysical environments
(e.g. changes in the growth of fossil fuel emissions, ocean temperatures and strength of the sink), which
calls for frequent assessments of the state of the planet and a better understanding of the future
evolution of the carbon cycle

Comment : Both the ocean and the land surface presently remove a large fraction of anthropogenic
emissions. Any significant change in the function of carbon sinks is of great importance to climate
policymaking, as they affect the excess CO2 remaining in the atmosphere and therefore the compatible
emissions for any climate stabilisation target. Thus we need more frequent, robust, and transparent data
sets and methods that can be scrutinised and replicated which would raise the capacity for the models to
become more accurate at future projections.
Thanks