1. Stephen M. Ogle, Dan Cooley, Tristram West, Andrew Schuh, Ken Davis, F. Jay Breidt, Arlyn Andrews, Linda Heath, Kevin Gurney, and Scott Denning Resolving CO 2 Flux Estimates from Atmospheric Inversions and Inventories in the Mid-Continent Region: An Overview

2. Main Goal of MCI Synthesis Compare and reconcile to the extent possible CO 2 fluxes from inventories and atmospheric inversions C CO 2 C Atmospheric Inversions Inventories

3. MCI Campaign Region

4. Major Tasks (DROP?) Compile Inversion data and Inventory for MCI region – Organize contributions and intercomparisons Compare Inversions with Inventory – Comparisons with sources in inventory and other land surface characteristics Reconcile Inversion and Inventory Results – Produce best estimate given the two lines of evidence about CO2 flux for MCI – Investigate sensitivity of inversions to tower density and a priori inversion framework Mechanisms – Interpretation of underlying mechanisms driving fluxes

5. Current components of the “bottom-up” inventory estimate of carbon fluxes 1) Cropland NPP 2) Harvested carbon 3) Livestock feed/emissions 4) human food/emissions 5) Carbon exported out of the MCI 6) soil carbon stock changes 7) forest carbon stock changes. 8) fossil fuels

6. Inventory Examples: Cattle Feed/Respiration ConAgra feedlot in Greely, CO (U.S.) Capacity for about 100,000 cattle Emissions over pens greater than 1000 μmol/m 2 /sec !!! (Baum et al. 2008)

7. Inventory Examples: Crop Production Maize Production 2007 Soybean Production 2007 United States

8. + = ?

9. Consumption of Livestock Feed, 2004 (Mg C per county) NPP + Livestock, 2004 (Mg C per county) NPP in 2004 (Mg C per county) Summing it up…. West et. al. (in submission)

10. Initial Comparisons of Inversions to Inventory (MCI Annual NEE, pre-2005) Data from North American Carbon Program Interim Synthesis, A. Jacobsen PgC/year

11. Results courtesy of C. Rödenbeck JENA Inversion JENA Inversion Large scale global inversion (4°x 5°) Large scale global inversion (4°x 5°) Uses hourly and flask (weekly) data Uses hourly and flask (weekly) data Prior constraints via Prior constraints via `statistical flux model’ setting spatial/temporal `statistical flux model’ setting spatial/temporal correlations and weighting correlations and weighting CarbonTracker Inversion CarbonTracker Inversion Nested global inversion (22 global regions subset by 19 Olson ecosystem types) Nested global inversion (22 global regions subset by 19 Olson ecosystem types) Uses hourly and flask (weekly) data Uses hourly and flask (weekly) data EnKF solving for ‘ecoregion’ bias for a priori CASA fluxes EnKF solving for ‘ecoregion’ bias for a priori CASA fluxes Results courtesy of A. Jacobsen/W. Peters MCI Annual NEE Estimates (2000-2004) (g/m 2 /sec)

12. North America Annual NEE Estimate from 2004 (g/m 2 /yr) Schuh et al. 2009 (in review) CROPS?

13. Carbon Tracker residuals: LEF (afternoon average) CT - Measured (ppm CO2) WLEF POOR AGREEMENT (CT TOO HIGH) Most trajectories have some southerly influence. CT overestimates CO2 compared to obs; probably not enough uptake over corn Courtesy of A. Andrews

14. No crops in underlying prior models Incredible mid-day drawdown of up to 60 umol/m2/s2. Phenology-based crop model has been incorporated into biosphere model (SiB3) dramatically improving flux estimates over crops. Lokupitiya et al. 2009

18. 31-day running mean Strong coherent seasonal cycle across stations West Branch (wbi) and Centerville (ce) differ significantly from 2007 to 2008 Large variance in seasonal drawdown, despite being separated by, at most, 550 km Mauna Loa wbi aircraft Ring 2 Observations

19. Lagrangian Footprints for Descent/Ascents Martins et. al. (2009)

20. Aircraft Observations Lagrangian aircraft sampling mitigated errors due to advection and entrainment Results showed averaged daily NEE of approximately - 10 μmol/m2/sec over path Martins et. al. (2009) 370ppm………..384ppm 0……… 2000 meters CO2 Profiles for Descent/Ascents

21. Where are we now with inversions and inventory estimates? Inventory has been compiled up to 2005 and is currently being compiled for 2007 (and 2008) Atmospheric transport has been run and will likely be rerun once more before AGU 2009. LPDM footprints are currently being created and tested. Initial comparisons have been made with forward coupled biosphere- atmosphere model to observations

22. Initial comparisons of forward model (SiBRAMS) to observations CO 2 (ppm)

23. Simulation of CO2, April – July 2007 (0 meters to 5000 meters above terrain )

24. Thanks! Stephen Ogle, Scott Denning, Kathy Corbin, Erandi Lokupitiya, Dan Cooley, Jay Breidt, Keith Paustian Colorado State University Ken Davis, Natasha Miles, Liza Diaz, Thomas Lauvaux Penn State University Linda Heath United States Forest Service Tris West, Bob Cook Oak Ridge National Laboratory Pieter Tans, Arlyn Andrews, Gabrielle Petron, Colm Sweeney Andy Jacobsen ESRL/NOAA Douglas Martins, Paul Shepson, Kevin Gurney Purdue Univerisity Shashi Verma University of Nebraska Shuguang Liu U.S.G.S EROS Data Center Tim Griffis University of Minnesota Margaret Torn Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory Cesar Izaurralde Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Maosheng Zhao (MODIS fPAR/LAI) NTGS University of Montana Participants