Articles | Volume 17, issue 23
https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-6115-2020
https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-6115-2020
Research article
 | 
08 Dec 2020
Research article |  | 08 Dec 2020

Spatially resolved evaluation of Earth system models with satellite column-averaged CO2

Bettina K. Gier, Michael Buchwitz, Maximilian Reuter, Peter M. Cox, Pierre Friedlingstein, and Veronika Eyring

Related authors

Representation of the terrestrial carbon cycle in CMIP6
Bettina K. Gier, Manuel Schlund, Pierre Friedlingstein, Chris D. Jones, Colin Jones, Sönke Zaehle, and Veronika Eyring
Biogeosciences, 21, 5321–5360, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5321-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5321-2024, 2024
Short summary
Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) v2.0 – diagnostics for extreme events, regional and impact evaluation, and analysis of Earth system models in CMIP
Katja Weigel, Lisa Bock, Bettina K. Gier, Axel Lauer, Mattia Righi, Manuel Schlund, Kemisola Adeniyi, Bouwe Andela, Enrico Arnone, Peter Berg, Louis-Philippe Caron, Irene Cionni, Susanna Corti, Niels Drost, Alasdair Hunter, Llorenç Lledó, Christian Wilhelm Mohr, Aytaç Paçal, Núria Pérez-Zanón, Valeriu Predoi, Marit Sandstad, Jana Sillmann, Andreas Sterl, Javier Vegas-Regidor, Jost von Hardenberg, and Veronika Eyring
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3159–3184, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3159-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3159-2021, 2021
Short summary
Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) v2.0 – diagnostics for emergent constraints and future projections from Earth system models in CMIP
Axel Lauer, Veronika Eyring, Omar Bellprat, Lisa Bock, Bettina K. Gier, Alasdair Hunter, Ruth Lorenz, Núria Pérez-Zanón, Mattia Righi, Manuel Schlund, Daniel Senftleben, Katja Weigel, and Sabrina Zechlau
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4205–4228, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4205-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4205-2020, 2020
Short summary
Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) v2.0 – an extended set of large-scale diagnostics for quasi-operational and comprehensive evaluation of Earth system models in CMIP
Veronika Eyring, Lisa Bock, Axel Lauer, Mattia Righi, Manuel Schlund, Bouwe Andela, Enrico Arnone, Omar Bellprat, Björn Brötz, Louis-Philippe Caron, Nuno Carvalhais, Irene Cionni, Nicola Cortesi, Bas Crezee, Edouard L. Davin, Paolo Davini, Kevin Debeire, Lee de Mora, Clara Deser, David Docquier, Paul Earnshaw, Carsten Ehbrecht, Bettina K. Gier, Nube Gonzalez-Reviriego, Paul Goodman, Stefan Hagemann, Steven Hardiman, Birgit Hassler, Alasdair Hunter, Christopher Kadow, Stephan Kindermann, Sujan Koirala, Nikolay Koldunov, Quentin Lejeune, Valerio Lembo, Tomas Lovato, Valerio Lucarini, François Massonnet, Benjamin Müller, Amarjiit Pandde, Núria Pérez-Zanón, Adam Phillips, Valeriu Predoi, Joellen Russell, Alistair Sellar, Federico Serva, Tobias Stacke, Ranjini Swaminathan, Verónica Torralba, Javier Vegas-Regidor, Jost von Hardenberg, Katja Weigel, and Klaus Zimmermann
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 3383–3438, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3383-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3383-2020, 2020
Short summary

Related subject area

Biogeochemistry: Greenhouse Gases
Modelling decadal trends and the impact of extreme events on carbon fluxes in a temperate deciduous forest using a terrestrial biosphere model
Tea Thum, Tuuli Miinalainen, Outi Seppälä, Holly Croft, Cheryl Rogers, Ralf Staebler, Silvia Caldararu, and Sönke Zaehle
Biogeosciences, 22, 1781–1807, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1781-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1781-2025, 2025
Short summary
Surface CO2 gradients challenge conventional CO2 emission quantification in lentic water bodies under calm conditions
Patrick Aurich, Uwe Spank, and Matthias Koschorreck
Biogeosciences, 22, 1697–1709, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1697-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1697-2025, 2025
Short summary
Spatiotemporal variability of CO2, N2O and CH4 fluxes from a semi-deciduous tropical forest soil in the Congo Basin
Roxanne Daelman, Marijn Bauters, Matti Barthel, Emmanuel Bulonza, Lodewijk Lefevre, José Mbifo, Johan Six, Klaus Butterbach-Bahl, Benjamin Wolf, Ralf Kiese, and Pascal Boeckx
Biogeosciences, 22, 1529–1542, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1529-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1529-2025, 2025
Short summary
Eddy-covariance fluxes of CO2, CH4 and N2O in a drained peatland forest after clear-cutting
Olli-Pekka Tikkasalo, Olli Peltola, Pavel Alekseychik, Juha Heikkinen, Samuli Launiainen, Aleksi Lehtonen, Qian Li, Eduardo Martínez-García, Mikko Peltoniemi, Petri Salovaara, Ville Tuominen, and Raisa Mäkipää
Biogeosciences, 22, 1277–1300, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1277-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1277-2025, 2025
Short summary
Eddy covariance evaluation of ecosystem fluxes at a temperate saltmarsh in Victoria, Australia, shows large CO2 uptake
Ruth Reef, Edoardo Daly, Tivanka Anandappa, Eboni-Jane Vienna-Hallam, Harriet Robertson, Matthew Peck, and Adrien Guyot
Biogeosciences, 22, 1149–1162, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1149-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1149-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Adachi, Y., Yukimoto, S., Deushi, M., Obata, A., Nakano, H., Tanaka, T. Y., Hosaka, M., Sakami, T., Yoshimura, H., Hirabara, M., Shindo, E., Tsujino, H., Mizuta, R., Yabu, S., Koshiro, T., Ose, T., and Kitoh, A.: Basic performance of a new earth system model of the Meteorological Research Institute (MRI-ESM1), Pap. Meteorol. Geophys., 64, 1–19, https://doi.org/10.2467/mripapers.64.1, 2013. 
Anav, A., Friedlingstein, P., Kidston, M., Bopp, L., Ciais, P., Cox, P., Jones, C., Jung, M., Myneni, R., and Zhu, Z.: Evaluating the Land and Ocean Components of the Global Carbon Cycle in the CMIP5 Earth System Models, J. Climate, 26, 6801–6843, https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli-D-12-00417.1, 2013. 
Arora, V. K., Scinocca, J. F., Boer, G. J., Christian, J. R., Denman, K. L., Flato, G. M., Kharin, V. V., Lee, W. G., and Merryfield, W. J.: Carbon emission limits required to satisfy future representative concentration pathways of greenhouse gases, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L05805, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010gl046270, 2011. 
Download
Short summary
Models from Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) phases 5 and 6 are compared to a satellite data product of column-averaged CO2 mole fractions (XCO2). The previously believed discrepancy of the negative trend in seasonal cycle amplitude in the satellite product, which is not seen in in situ data nor in the models, is attributed to a sampling characteristic. Furthermore, CMIP6 models are shown to have made progress in reproducing the observed XCO2 time series compared to CMIP5.
Share
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint