본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

기후 인자와 관련된 육상 탄소 순환 변동: 탄소추적시스템과 CMIP5 모델 결과 비교

Response of Terrestrial Carbon Cycle: Climate Variability in CarbonTracker and CMIP5 Earth System Models

김영미|조천호|부경온|이조한|변영화|선민아
한국기상학회 (Korean Meteorological Society)|2017.09|대기 (Atmosphere)|제27권 제3호|pp. 301-316|DOI 10.14191/Atmos.2017.27.3.301

2

조회

0

다운로드

1

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

CMIP5CarbonTrackerterrestrial carbon fluxclimate factor
주제분류대기과학

초록

This study analyzes the spatio-temporal variability of terrestrial carbon flux and the response of land carbon sink with climate factors to improve of understanding of the variability of land-atmosphere carbon exchanges accurately. The coupled carbon-climate models of CMIP5 (the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project) and CT (CarbonTracker) are used. The CMIP5 multi-model ensemble mean overestimated the NEP (Net Ecosystem Production) compares to CT and GCP (Global Carbon Project) estimates over the period 2001~2012. Variation of NEP in the CMIP5 ensemble mean is similar to CT, but a couple of models which have fire module without nitrogen cycle module strongly simulate carbon sink in the Africa, Southeast Asia, South America, and some areas of the United States. Result in comparison with climate factor, the NEP is highly affected by temperature and solar radiation in both of CT and CMIP5. Partial correlation between temperature and NEP indicates that the temperature is affecting NEP positively at higher than mid-latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere, but opposite correlation represents at other latitudes in CT and most CMIP5 models. The CMIP5 models except for few models show positive correlation with precipitation at 30oN~90oN, but higher percentage of negative correlation represented at 60oS~30oN compare to CT. For each season, the correlation between temperature (solar radiation) and NEP in the CMIP5 ensemble mean is similar to that of CT, but overestimated.

Abstract

This study analyzes the spatio-temporal variability of terrestrial carbon flux and the response of land carbon sink with climate factors to improve of understanding of the variability of land-atmosphere carbon exchanges accurately. The coupled carbon-climate models of CMIP5 (the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project) and CT (CarbonTracker) are used. The CMIP5 multi-model ensemble mean overestimated the NEP (Net Ecosystem Production) compares to CT and GCP (Global Carbon Project) estimates over the period 2001~2012. Variation of NEP in the CMIP5 ensemble mean is similar to CT, but a couple of models which have fire module without nitrogen cycle module strongly simulate carbon sink in the Africa, Southeast Asia, South America, and some areas of the United States. Result in comparison with climate factor, the NEP is highly affected by temperature and solar radiation in both of CT and CMIP5. Partial correlation between temperature and NEP indicates that the temperature is affecting NEP positively at higher than mid-latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere, but opposite correlation represents at other latitudes in CT and most CMIP5 models. The CMIP5 models except for few models show positive correlation with precipitation at 30oN~90oN, but higher percentage of negative correlation represented at 60oS~30oN compare to CT. For each season, the correlation between temperature (solar radiation) and NEP in the CMIP5 ensemble mean is similar to that of CT, but overestimated.

참고문헌 (61)

  1. A. Anav, "Evaluating the Land and Ocean Components of the Global Carbon Cycle in the CMIP5 Earth System Models", Journal of Climate, 26(18), pp.6801~6843 (2013), American Meteorological Society[DOI]
  2. V. K. Arora, "Carbon emission limits required to satisfy future representative concentration pathways of greenhouse gases", Geophysical Research Letters, 38(5), pp.L05805~ (2011), American Geophysical Union (AGU)[DOI]
  3. Vivek K. Arora, "Carbon–Concentration and Carbon–Climate Feedbacks in CMIP5 Earth System Models", Journal of Climate, 26(15), pp.5289~5314 (2013), American Meteorological Society[DOI]
  4. Baba, K., "Partial correlation and conditional correlation as measures of conditional independence", Australian New Zealand J. Stat., 46, pp.657~664 (2004)
  5. Sourish Basu, "The seasonal cycle amplitude of total column CO2: Factors behind the modelobservation mismatch", Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 116(D23), pp.D23306~ (2011), American Geophysical Union (AGU)[DOI]
  6. C. Beer, "Terrestrial Gross Carbon Dioxide Uptake: Global Distribution and Covariation with Climate", Science, 329(5993), pp.834~838 (2010), American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)[DOI]
  7. G. J. Boer, "Geographic Aspects of Temperature and Concentration Feedbacks in the Carbon Budget", Journal of Climate, 23(3), pp.775~784 (2010), American Meteorological Society[DOI]
  8. G. J. Boer, "Feedbacks in Emission-Driven and Concentration-Driven Global Carbon Budgets", Journal of Climate, 26(10), pp.3326~3341 (2013), American Meteorological Society[DOI]
  9. Terrestrial response of QUMPC ensemble, "Booth, B. B.", Hadley Centre Tech, 19~, pp.Hadley Centre Tech. Note 89 (2011)
  10. Brovkin, V., "Global biogeophysical interactions between forest and climate", Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, pp.L07405~ (2009)
  11. F. S. Chapin, "Role of Land-Surface Changes in Arctic Summer Warming", Science, 310(5748), pp.657~660 (2005), American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)[DOI]
  12. W. J. Collins, "Development and evaluation of an Earth-System model – HadGEM2", Geoscientific Model Development, 4(4), pp.1051~1075 (2011), Copernicus GmbH[DOI]
  13. Denman, K. L., "Couplings between changes in the climate system and biogeochemistry. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis", pp.589~662 (2007), Cambridge University Press
  14. J.-L. Dufresne, "Climate change projections using the IPSL-CM5 Earth System Model: from CMIP3 to CMIP5", Climate Dynamics, 40(9-10), pp.2123~2165 (2013), Springer Nature[DOI]
  15. John P. Dunne, "GFDL’s ESM2 Global Coupled Climate–Carbon Earth System Models. Part I: Physical Formulation and Baseline Simulation Characteristics", Journal of Climate, 25(19), pp.6646~6665 (2012), American Meteorological Society[DOI]
  16. John P. Dunne, "GFDL’s ESM2 Global Coupled Climate–Carbon Earth System Models. Part II: Carbon System Formulation and Baseline Simulation Characteristics", Journal of Climate, 26(7), pp.2247~2267 (2013), American Meteorological Society[DOI]
  17. Friedlingstein, P., "Climate-carbon cycle feedback analysis: Results from the C4MIP model intercomparison", J. Climate, 19, pp.3337~3353 (2006)
  18. N. P. Gillett, "Attribution of cyclogenesis region sea surface temperature change to anthropogenic influence", Geophysical Research Letters, 35(9), pp.L09707~ (2008), American Geophysical Union (AGU)[DOI]
  19. Nathan P. Gillett, "Constraining the ratio of global warming to cumulative CO2 emissions using CMIP5 simulations", Journal of Climate, 26(18), pp.6844~6858 (2013), American Meteorological Society[DOI]
  20. V. Huijnen, "The global chemistry transport model TM5: description and evaluation of the tropospheric chemistry version 3.0", Geoscientific Model Development, 3(2), pp.445~473 (2010), Copernicus GmbH[DOI]
  21. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to The Fifth Assessment Report of The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, "IPCC", Cambridge University Press, 1535~ (2013)
  22. Yiquan Jiang, "Impacts of global open-fire aerosols on direct radiative, cloud and surface-albedo effects simulated with CAM5", Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 16(23), pp.14805~14824 (2016), Copernicus GmbH[DOI]
  23. Jones, A., "Aerosol forcing, climate response and climate sensitivity in the Hadley Centre climate model", J. Geophys. Res., 112, pp.D20211~ (2007)
  24. C. D. Jones, "The HadGEM2-ES implementation of CMIP5 centennial simulations", Geoscientific Model Development, 4(3), pp.543~570 (2011), Copernicus GmbH[DOI]
  25. Kato, T., "Spatial variability and major controlling factors of CO2 sink strength in Asian terrestrial ecosystems: evidence from eddy covariance data", Glob. Change Biol., 14, pp.2333~2348 (2008)
  26. Krol, M., "The two-way nested global chemistry-transport zoom model TM5: Algorithm and applications", Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, pp.417~432 (2005)
  27. Susan Kulawik, "Consistent evaluation of ACOS-GOSAT, BESD-SCIAMACHY, CarbonTracker, and MACC through comparisons to TCCON", Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 9(2), pp.683~709 (2016), Copernicus GmbH[DOI]
  28. Jean-Sébastien Landry, "A global assessment of the carbon cycle and temperature responses to major changes in future fire regime", Climatic Change, 133(2), pp.179~192 (2015), Springer Nature[DOI]
  29. Landry, J. -S., "Carbon cycle and climate effects of forcing from fireemitted aerosols", Envion. Res. Lett., 12, pp.025002~ (2017)[DOI]
  30. Law, B. E., "Environmental controls over carbon dioxide and water vapor exchange of terrestrial vegetation", Agr. Forest Meteorol., 113, pp.97~120 (2002)
  31. C. Le Quéré, "Global Carbon Budget 2015", Earth System Science Data, 7(2), pp.349~396 (2015), Copernicus GmbH[DOI]
  32. Jia-Lin Lin, "Interdecadal variability of ENSO in 21 IPCC AR4 coupled GCMs", Geophysical Research Letters, 34(12), pp.L12702~ (2007), American Geophysical Union (AGU)[DOI]
  33. Matthew C. Long, "Twentieth-Century Oceanic Carbon Uptake and Storage in CESM1(BGC)*", Journal of Climate, 26(18), pp.6775~6800 (2013), American Meteorological Society[DOI]
  34. Natalie Mahowald, "Aerosol Impacts on Climate and Biogeochemistry", Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 36(1), pp.45~74 (2011), Annual Reviews[DOI]
  35. Maier-Reimer, E., "The HAMburg Ocean Carbon Cycle model HAMOCC 5.1 - Technical description, Release 1.1", Max-Planck Institute for Meteorology, 49~ (2005)
  36. Malhi, Y., "Carbon in the atmosphere and terrestrial biosphere in the 21st century", Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, 360, pp.2925~2945 (2002)
  37. Moorcroft, P. R., "How close are we to a predictive science of the biosphere?", Trends Ecol. Evol., 21, pp.400~407 (2006)
  38. Nasrin Nasrollahi, "How well do CMIP5 climate simulations replicate historical trends and patterns of meteorological droughts?", Water Resources Research, 51(4), pp.2847~2864 (2015), American Geophysical Union (AGU)[DOI]
  39. Jing Peng, "Sensitivity of Global and Regional Terrestrial Carbon Storage to the Direct CO2 Effect and Climate Change Based on the CMIP5 Model Intercomparison", PLoS ONE, 9(4), pp.e95282~ (2014), Public Library of Science (PLoS)[DOI]
  40. Jing Peng, "Impacts of CO2 concentration and climate change on the terrestrial carbon flux using six global climate–carbon coupled models", Ecological Modelling, 304, pp.69~83 (2015), Elsevier BV[DOI]
  41. W. Peters, "An ensemble data assimilation system to estimate CO2 surface fluxes from atmospheric trace gas observations", Journal of Geophysical Research, 110(D24) (2005), American Geophysical Union (AGU)[DOI]
  42. Peters, W., "An atmospheric perspective on North American carbon dioxide exchange: CarbonTracker", Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 104, pp.18925~18930 (2007)
  43. Piao, S., "Net carbon dioxide losses of northern ecosystems in response to autumn warming", Nature, 451, pp.49~52 (2008)
  44. Shilong Piao, "Evaluation of terrestrial carbon cycle models for their response to climate variability and to CO2 trends", Global Change Biology, 19(7), pp.2117~2132 (2013), Wiley[DOI]
  45. Potter, C., "Continental scale comparisons of terrestrial carbon sinks estimated from satellite data and ecosystem modeling", Global Planet. Change, 39, pp.201~213 (2003)
  46. Raddatz, T. J., "Will the tropical land biosphere dominate the climatecarbon cycle feedback during the twenty-first century?", Climate Dyn., 29, pp.565~574 (2007)
  47. Santer, B. D., "Identification of human induced changes in atmospheric moisture content", Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 104, pp.15248~15253 (2007)
  48. O. Schneising, "Terrestrial carbon sink observed from space: variation of growth rates and seasonal cycle amplitudes in response to interannual surface temperature variability", Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 14(1), pp.133~141 (2014), Copernicus GmbH[DOI]
  49. Pu Shao, "Terrestrial Carbon Cycle: Climate Relations in Eight CMIP5 Earth System Models", Journal of Climate, 26(22), pp.8744~8764 (2013), American Meteorological Society[DOI]
  50. Andrei P. Sokolov, "Consequences of Considering Carbon–Nitrogen Interactions on the Feedbacks between Climate and the Terrestrial Carbon Cycle", Journal of Climate, 21(15), pp.3776~3796 (2008), American Meteorological Society[DOI]
  51. Taylor, K. E., "An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design", Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 93, pp.485~498 (2012)[DOI]
  52. Peter E. Thornton, "Influence of carbon-nitrogen cycle coupling on land model response to CO2fertilization and climate variability", Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 21(4) (2007), American Geophysical Union (AGU)[DOI]
  53. S. Watanabe, "MIROC-ESM 2010: model description and basic results of CMIP5-20c3m experiments", Geoscientific Model Development, 4(4), pp.845~872 (2011), Copernicus GmbH[DOI]
  54. Tongwen Wu, "Global carbon budgets simulated by the Beijing Climate Center Climate System Model for the last century", Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 118(10), pp.4326~4347 (2013), American Geophysical Union (AGU)[DOI]
  55. Jianyang Xia, "Terrestrial carbon cycle affected by non-uniform climate warming", Nature Geoscience, 7(3), pp.173~180 (2014), Springer Nature[DOI]
  56. Sönke Zaehle, "Terrestrial nitrogen feedbacks may accelerate future climate change", Geophysical Research Letters, 37(1), pp.L01401~ (2010), American Geophysical Union (AGU)[DOI]
  57. S. Zaehle, "Carbon and nitrogen cycle dynamics in the O-CN land surface model: 2. Role of the nitrogen cycle in the historical terrestrial carbon balance", Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 24(1) (2010), American Geophysical Union (AGU)[DOI]
  58. N. Zeng, "Terrestrial mechanisms of interannual CO2 variability", Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 19(1) (2005), American Geophysical Union (AGU)[DOI]
  59. Zhao-Cheng Zeng, "Global land mapping of satellite-observed CO2 total columns using spatiotemporal geostatistics", International Journal of Digital Earth, 10(4), pp.426~456 (2017), Informa UK Limited[DOI]
  60. M. Zhao, "Drought-Induced Reduction in Global Terrestrial Net Primary Production from 2000 Through 2009", Science, 329(5994), pp.940~943 (2010), American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)[DOI]
  61. Kirsten Zickfeld, "Nonlinearity of Carbon Cycle Feedbacks", Journal of Climate, 24(16), pp.4255~4275 (2011), American Meteorological Society[DOI]

관련 논문AI추천

기후변동성에 따른 육상 탄소 순환의 반응김영미, 변영화, 부경온, 선민아, 이조한, 조천호한국기상학회 · 대기2017 · 제27권 제2호RCP 시나리오에 따른 미래 전지구 육상탄소순환 변화 전망이철, 부경온, 설경희, 성현민, 이조한, 조천호, 허태경, 홍진규한국기상학회 · 대기2014 · 제24권 제3호앙상블 칼만 필터 기반 탄소추적시스템의 아시아 지역 탄소 순환 진단에의 적용김진웅, 김현미, 조천호한국기상학회 · 대기2012 · 제22권 제4호Quantifying Climate Regulation of Terrestrial Ecosystems Using a Land-Atmosphere Interaction Model Over East Asia for the Last Half Century장인영, 정헌모, 홍승범국립생태원 · 국립생태원회보2020 · 제1권 제1호기후변화에 따른 식생과 토양에 의한 탄소변화량 공간적 분석박찬, 오영출, 이동근한국농촌계획학회 · 농촌계획2010 · 제16권 제4호기후변화에 따른 수도권 산림의 순일차생산량과 토양탄소저장량의 시공간적 변화 추정권선순, 이상돈, 최선희한국환경영향평가학회 · 환경영향평가2012 · 제21권 제5호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (7건)

고해상도 장기예측시스템의 주별 앙상블 예측자료 성능 평가원덕진, 함현준, 이예숙pp. 261-2762016년 한반도 장마 강수 특성 분석권민호, 함유근, 김현경, 임소영, 서경환, 김진용, 예상욱, 이현수pp. 277-290제주도 고산지역 자외선복사의 월변화 특성과 원인 고찰김영아, 최우갑pp. 291-300해양혼합층 모델 적용을 통한 고해상도 지역예측모델 성능개선에 대한 연구지준범, 민재식, 박정균, 장민pp. 317-329서울지역의 고해상도 수치표고모델기반 태양 에너지 산출장민, 민재식, 김부요, 조일성, 지준범, 이규태pp. 331-344
원문 보기