A global Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation System (CCDAS) to infer atmosphere- biosphere CO 2 exchanges and their uncertainties Marko Scholze 1, Peter Rayner.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Dynamical Prediction of the Terrestrial Ecosystem and the Global Carbon Cycle: a 25-year Hindcast Experiment Jin-Ho Yoon Dept. Atmospheric and Oceanic.
Advertisements

The global Carbon Cycle - The Terrestrial Biosphere Dr. Peter Köhler Monday, , 11:15 – 13:00 Room: S 3032.
Improving Understanding of Global and Regional Carbon Dioxide Flux Variability through Assimilation of in Situ and Remote Sensing Data in a Geostatistical.
Tropical vs. extratropical terrestrial CO 2 uptake and implications for carbon-climate feedbacks Outline: How we track the fate of anthropogenic CO 2 Historic.
Niall P. Hanan 1, Christopher A. Williams 1, Joseph Berry 2, Robert Scholes 3 A. Scott Denning 1, Jason Neff 4, and Jeffrey Privette 5 1. Colorado State.
Estimating biophysical parameters from CO 2 flask and flux observations Kevin Schaefer 1, P. Tans 1, A. S. Denning 2, J. Collatz 3, L. Prihodko 2, I. Baker.
FACTORS GOVERNING THE SEASONAL VARIABILITY OF ATMOSPHERIC CARBONYL SULFIDE Parv Suntharalingam Harvard/Univ. of East Anglia A.J. Kettle, S. Montzka, D.
Estimation of daily CO 2 fluxes over Europe by inversion of atmospheric continuous data C. Carouge and P. Peylin ; P. Bousquet ; P. Ciais ; P. Rayner Laboratoire.
Prabir K. Patra Acknowledgments: S. Maksyutov, K. Gurney and TransCom-3 modellers TransCom Meeting, Paris; June 2005 Sensitivity CO2 sources and.
Interannual variability in CO2 fluxes derived from 64-region inversion of atmospheric CO2 data Prabir K. Patra*, Shamil Maksyutov*, Misa Ishizawa*, Takakiyo.
TransCom 3 Level 2 Base Case Inter-annual CO 2 Flux Inversion Results Current Status David Baker, Rachel Law, Kevin Gurney, Peter Rayner, TransCom3 L2.
Compatibility of surface and aircraft station networks for inferring carbon fluxes TransCom Meeting, 2005 Nir Krakauer California Institute of Technology.
Prabir K. Patra, Shamil Maksyutov, A. Ito and TransCom-3 modellers Jena; 13 May 2003 An evaluation of an ecosystem model for studying CO2 seasonal cycle.
Carbon Cycle Basics Ranga Myneni Boston University 1/12 Egon Schiele ( ) Autumn Sun 1.
Evaluating the Impact of the Atmospheric “ Chemical Pump ” on CO 2 Inverse Analyses P. Suntharalingam GEOS-CHEM Meeting, April 4-6, 2005 Acknowledgements.
NOCES meeting Plymouth, 2005 June Top-down v.s. bottom-up estimates of air-sea CO 2 fluxes : No winner so far … P. Bousquet, A. Idelkadi, C. Carouge,
QUESTIONS 1.How do elements in the lithosphere get transferred to the atmosphere? 2.Imagine an early Earth with a weak Sun and frozen ocean (“snowball.
Evaluating the Role of the CO 2 Source from CO Oxidation P. Suntharalingam Harvard University TRANSCOM Meeting, Tsukuba June 14-18, 2004 Collaborators.
Assimilating observed seasonal cycles of CO2 to CASA model parameters
Application of Geostatistical Inverse Modeling for Data-driven Atmospheric Trace Gas Flux Estimation Anna M. Michalak UCAR VSP Visiting Scientist NOAA.
S. Maksyutov, P.K. Patra and M. Ishizawa Jena; 13 May 2003 TDI experiment with NIES model and interannually varying NCEP winds.
Inversion of continuous data over Europe : a pseudo-data analysis. C. Carouge and P. Peylin ; P. Bousquet ; P. Ciais ; P. Rayner Laboratoire des Sciences.
Cyclo-stationary inversions of  13 C and CO 2 John Miller, Scott Denning, Wouter Peters, Neil Suits, Kevin Gurney, Jim White & T3 Modelers.
Global Carbon Cycle Feedbacks: From pattern to process Dave Schimel NEON inc.
A global Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation System (CCDAS) and its link to CAMELS Marko Scholze 1, Peter Rayner 2, Wolfgang Knorr 3, Thomas Kaminski 4, Ralf.
Optimising ORCHIDEE simulations at tropical sites Hans Verbeeck LSM/FLUXNET meeting June 2008, Edinburgh LSCE, Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de.
Paul R. Moorcroft David Medvigy, Stephen Wofsy, J. William Munger, M. Dietze Harvard University Developing a predictive science of the biosphere.
Applications of Bayesian sensitivity and uncertainty analysis to the statistical analysis of computer simulators for carbon dynamics Marc Kennedy Clive.
The seasonal and interannual variability in atmospheric CO 2 is simulated using best available estimates of surface carbon fluxes and the MATCH atmospheric.
Page 1© Crown copyright WP4 Development of a System for Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation Richard Betts.
Results from the Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation System (CCDAS) 3 FastOpt 4 2 Marko Scholze 1, Peter Rayner 2, Wolfgang Knorr 1 Heinrich Widmann 3, Thomas.
Carbon, soil moisture and fAPAR assimilation Wolfgang Knorr Max-Planck Institute of Biogeochemistry Jena, Germany 1 Acknowledgments: Nadine Gobron 2, Marko.
Translation to the New TCO Panel Beverly Law Prof. Global Change Forest Science Science Chair, AmeriFlux Network Oregon State University.
Regional Inversion of continuous atmospheric CO 2 measurements A first attempt ! P., P., P., P., and P. Philippe Peylin, Peter Rayner, Philippe Bousquet,
A Global Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation System (CCDAS) to Infer Atmosphere- Biosphere CO2 Exchanges and Their Uncertainties Marko Scholze1, Peter Rayner2,
1 CAMELS Carbon Assimilation and Modelling of the European Land Surface an EU Framework V Project (Part of the CarboEurope Cluster) CAMELS.
CO 2 - Net Ecosystem Exchange and the Global Carbon Exchange Question Soil respiration chamber at College Woods near Durham New Hampshire. (Complex Systems.
State-of-the-Art of the Simulation of Net Primary Production of Tropical Forest Ecosystems Marcos Heil Costa, Edson Luis Nunes, Monica C. A. Senna, Hewlley.
CO 2 and O 2 Concentration Measurements Britton Stephens, NCAR/ATD Peter Bakwin, NOAA/CMDL Global carbon cycle Regional scale CO 2 measurements Potential.
Integration of biosphere and atmosphere observations Yingping Wang 1, Gabriel Abramowitz 1, Rachel Law 1, Bernard Pak 1, Cathy Trudinger 1, Ian Enting.
Research Vignette: The TransCom3 Time-Dependent Global CO 2 Flux Inversion … and More David F. Baker NCAR 12 July 2007 David F. Baker NCAR 12 July 2007.
Development of an EnKF to estimate CO 2 fluxes from realistic distributions of X CO2 Liang Feng, Paul Palmer
Non-Linear Parameter Optimisation of a Terrestrial Biosphere Model Using Atmospheric CO 2 Observation - CCDAS Marko Scholze 1, Peter Rayner 2, Wolfgang.
Inferring terrestrial CO 2 fluxes from a global-scale Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation System (CCDAS) Marko Scholze 1, Peter Rayner 2, Wolfgang Knorr 1,
Quantitative network design for biosphere model process parameters E. Koffi 1, P. Rayner 1, T. Kaminski 2, M. Scholze 3, M. Voßbeck 2, and R. Giering 2.
CAMELS CCDAS A Bayesian approach and Metropolis Monte Carlo method to estimate parameters and uncertainties in ecosystem models from eddy-covariance data.
FastOpt Quantitative Design of Observational Networks M. Scholze, R. Giering, T. Kaminski, E. Koffi P. Rayner, and M. Voßbeck Future GHG observation WS,
Biases in land surface models Yingping Wang CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research.
Goal: to understand carbon dynamics in montane forest regions by developing new methods for estimating carbon exchange at local to regional scales. Activities:
CarboEurope: The Big Research Lines Annette Freibauer Ivan Janssens.
Data assimilation in Marko Scholze. Strictly speaking, there are so far no DA activities in QUEST, but CCDAS (as part of core team activities) CPDAS and.
FastOpt CAMELS A prototype Global Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation System (CCDAS) Wolfgang Knorr 1, Marko Scholze 2, Peter Rayner 3,Thomas Kaminski 4, Ralf.
Inverse Modeling of Surface Carbon Fluxes Please read Peters et al (2007) and Explore the CarbonTracker website.
Geogg124: Data assimilation P. Lewis. What is Data Assimilation? Optimal merging of models and data Models Expression of current understanding about process.
Earth Observation Data and Carbon Cycle Modelling Marko Scholze QUEST, Department of Earth Sciences University of Bristol GAIM/AIMES Task Force Meeting,
Whats new with MODIS NPP and GPP MODIS/VIIRS Science Team Meeting May 20, 2015 Steven W. Running Numerical Terradynamic Simulation Group College of Forestry.
FastOpt A prototype Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation System (CCDAS) Inferring interannual variations of vegetation- atmosphere CO 2 fluxes Marko Scholze.
PKU-LSCE winter shool, 14 October 2014 Global methane budget : The period Philippe Bousquet 1, Robin Locatelli 1, Shushi Peng 1, and Marielle.
Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation with a Variational Approach (“4-D Var”) David Baker CGD/TSS with Scott Doney, Dave Schimel, Britt Stephens, and Roger Dargaville.
Figure 10. Improvement in landscape resolution that the new 250-meter MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) measurement of gross primary.
The Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation System (CCDAS)
CO2 sources and sinks in China as seen from the global atmosphere
Effects of drought and fire on interannual variability in CO2 as derived using atmospheric-CO2 inversion Prabir K. Patra Acknowledgements to: M. Ishizawa,
Ecosystem Demography model version 2 (ED2)
Directions of Inquiry Given a fixed atmospheric CO2 concentration assimilation scheme, what is the optimal network expansion? Given the wide array of available.
Hartmut Bösch and Sarah Dance
The global carbon cycle for the 1990s, showing the main annual fluxes in GtC yr–1: pre-industrial ‘natural’ fluxes in black and ‘anthropogenic’ fluxes.
The global carbon cycle for the 1990s, showing the main annual fluxes in GtC yr–1: pre-industrial ‘natural’ fluxes in black and ‘anthropogenic’ fluxes.
CO2 and O2 Concentration Measurements
Presentation transcript:

A global Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation System (CCDAS) to infer atmosphere- biosphere CO 2 exchanges and their uncertainties Marko Scholze 1, Peter Rayner 2, Wolfgang Knorr 1, Thomas Kaminski 3, Ralf Giering 3 & Heinrich Widmann 1 TransCom Tsukuba, 2004 FastOpt 12 3

Overview CCDAS set-up Calculation and propagation of uncertainties Data fit Global results New developments Conclusions and outlook

Combined ‘top-down’/’bottom-up’ Method CCDAS – Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation System CO 2 station concentration Biosphere Model: BETHY Atmospheric Transport Model: TM2 Misfit to observations Model parameterFluxes Misfit 1 Forward Modeling: Parameters –> Misfit Inverse Modeling: Parameter optimization

CCDAS set-up 2-stage-assimilation: 1.AVHRR data (Knorr, 2000) 2.Atm. CO 2 data Background fluxes: 1.Fossil emissions (Marland et al., 2001 und Andres et al., 1996) 2.Ocean CO 2 (Takahashi et al., 1999 und Le Quéré et al., 2000) 3.Land-use (Houghton et al., 1990) Transport Model TM2 (Heimann, 1995)

Station network 41 stations from Globalview (2001), no gap-filling, monthly values Annual uncertainty values from Globalview (2001).

Terminology GPPGross primary productivity (photosynthesis) NPPNet primary productivity (plant growth) NEPNet ecosystem productivity (undisturbed C storage) NBPNet biome productivity (C storage)

BETHY (Biosphere Energy-Transfer-Hydrology Scheme) GPP: C3 photosynthesis – Farquhar et al. (1980) C4 photosynthesis – Collatz et al. (1992) stomata – Knorr (1997) Plant respiration: maintenance resp. = f(N leaf, T) – Farquhar, Ryan (1991) growth resp. ~ NPP – Ryan (1991) Soil respiration: fast/slow pool resp., temperature (Q 10 formulation) and soil moisture dependent Carbon balance: average NPP =  average soil resp. (at each grid point)  <1: source  >1: sink  t=1h  t=1day  lat,  lon = 2 deg

Calibration Step Flow of information in CCDAS. Oval boxes represent the various quantities. Rectangular boxes denote mappings between these fields.

Prognostic Step Oval boxes represent the various quantities. Rectangular boxes denote mappings between these fields.

Methodology Minimize cost function such as (Bayesian form): where - is a model mapping parameters to observable quantities - is a set of observations - error covariance matrix  need of (adjoint of the model)

Calculation of uncertainties Error covariance of parameters = inverse Hessian Covariance (uncertainties) of prognostic quantities Adjoint, Hessian, and Jacobian code generated automatically from model code by TAF

Figure from Tarantola, 1987 Gradient Method 1 st derivative (gradient) of J (p) to model parameters p: yields direction of steepest descent. cost function J (p) Model parameter space (p) 2 nd derivative (Hessian) of J (p): yields curvature of J. Approximates covariance of parameters.

Data fit

Seasonal cycle Barrow Niwot Ridge observed seasonal cycle optimised modeled seasonal cycle

Global Growth Rate Calculated as: observed growth rate optimised modeled growth rate Atmospheric CO 2 growth rate

Parameters I 3 PFT specific parameters (J max, J max /V max and  ) 18 global parameters 57 parameters in all plus 1 initial value (offset) ParamInitialPredictedPrior unc. (%)Unc. Reduction (%) fautleaf c-cost Q 10 (slow)  (fast)  (TrEv)  (TrDec)  (TmpDec)  (EvCn)  (DecCn)  (C4Gr)  (Crop)

Parameters II Relative Error Reduction

Some values of global fluxes (prior) GPP Growth resp. Maint. resp. NPP Fast soil resp. Slow soil resp. NEP Value Gt C/yr

Carbon Balance latitude N *from Valentini et al. (2000) and others Euroflux (1-26) and other eddy covariance sites* net carbon flux gC / (m 2 year)

Uncertainty in net flux Uncertainty in net carbon flux gC / (m 2 year)

Uncertainty in prior net flux Uncertainty in net carbon flux from prior values gC / (m 2 year)

NEP anomalies: global and tropical global flux anomalies tropical (20S to 20N) flux anomalies

IAV and processes Major El Niño events Major La Niña event Post Pinatubo period

Interannual Variability I Normalized CO 2 flux and ENSO Lag correlation (low-pass filtered) ENSO and terr. biosph. CO 2 : Correlations seems strong with a maximum at ~4 months lag, for both El Niño and La Niña states.

Interannual Variabiliy II Lagged correlation on grid-cell basis at 99% significance correlation coefficient

Low-resolution CCDAS A fully functional low resolution version of CCDAS, BETHY runs on the TM2 grid (appr. 10° x 7.8°) 506 vegetation points compared to 8776 (high-res.) About a factor of 20 faster than high-res. Version -> ideal for developing, testing and debugging On a global scale results are comparable (can be used for pre- optimising)

Including the ocean A 1 GtC/month pulse lasting for three months is used as a basis function for the optimisation Oceans are divided into the 11 TransCom-3 regions That means: 11 regions * 12 months * 21 yr / 3 months = 924 additional parameters Test case:  all 924 parameters have a prior of 0. (assuming that our background ocean flux is correct)  each pulse has an uncertainty of 0.1 GtC/month giving an annual uncertainty of ~2 GtC for the total ocean flux

Including the ocean Seasonality at MLO Global land flux Observations Low-res incl. ocean basis functions Low resolution model High resolution standard model

Conclusions CCDAS with 58 parameters can fit 20 years of CO 2 concentration data; ~15 directions can be resolved Terr. biosphere response to climate fluctuations dominated by El Nino. A tool to test model with uncertain parameters and to deliver a posterior uncertainties on parameters and prognostics. With the ability of including ocean basis functions in the optimisation procedure CCDAS comprises a ‘normal’ atmospheric inversion.

Future Explore more parameter configurations. Include missing processes (e.g. fire). Upgrade transport model and extend data. Include more data constraints (eddy fluxes, isotopes, high frequency data, satellites) -> scaling issue. Projections of prognostics and uncertainties into future. Extend approach to a prognostic ocean carbon cycle model.

Visit: