nacp site synthesis
DESCRIPTION
NACP Site Synthesis. 47 Flux Tower Sites. 30 Models. Do models match observations? If not, why?. Presentations. Tuesday Comparison of observed and modeled carbon and energy fluxes for agricultural sites under NACP site-level interim synthesis ( Lokupitiya et al .) - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
NACP Site Synthesis
30 Models47 Flux Tower SitesNum Model Num Model
1 Agro-IBIS 16 GTEC2 BEPS 17 ISAM3 Biome-BGC 18 ISOLSM4 Can-IBIS 19 LoTEC5 CLM-CASA' 20 LoTEC-DA6 CLM-CN 21 LPJ_wsl7 CN-CLASS 22 ORCHIDEE8 DAYCENT 23 ORCHIDEE-STICS9 DLEM 24 SiB310 DNDC 25 SiBCASA11 ecosys 26 SiBCrop12 ED2 27 SIPNET13 EDCM 28 SSiB214 EPIC 29 TECO15 GFDL LM3V 30 TRIPLEX-Flux
Do models match observations? If not, why?
Presentations• Tuesday
• Comparison of observed and modeled carbon and energy fluxes for agricultural sites under NACP site-level interim synthesis (Lokupitiya et al.)
• Using AmeriFlux Observations in the NACP Site-Level Interim Synthesis (Schaefer et al.)
• Comparing Simulated and Observed Gross Primary Productivity (Schaefer et al.)
• Sensitivity of modeled carbon pools and fluxes to biases in reanalysis meteorology forcing data (Ricciuto et al.)
• Wednesday• How much model complexity is necessary to accurately predict peatland
CO2 fluxes? (Sulman et al.)• Evaluation of Site and Continental Terrestrial Carbon Cycle Simulations
with North American Flux Tower Observations (Raczka and Davis)• Impact of data assimilation on terrestrial carbon cycle model performance
from site to regional scales (Ricciuto et al.)• Evaluating Terrestrial Biosphere Models: Comparing Simulated and
Observed Net Ecosystem Exchange (Schwalm et al.)• Results from the NACP Site-Level Interim Synthesis (Schaefer et al.)
• Thursday• A Modeling and Synthesis Thematic Data Center for the North American
Carbon Program (Cook et al.)
NACP Interim Synthesis: Regional and Continental Models and Observations
• Objective: a synthesis of results from a broad range of investigations: state of our understanding of the carbon balance of North America
• Approach: collecting “off the shelf” data from various regional / continental-scale results: inverse models, terrestrial biosphere (‘forward’) models, inventories and observations (including remotely-sensed data sets)
NACP Interim Synthesis: Regional and Continental Models and
Observations Presentations:
McGuire, 4:45p Thursday Post, 8:30a Friday Tian, 9:50 Friday
Posters: Huntzinger, F-124 MsTMIP, F-125 Raczka, F-130 Cook, H-176
NACP: “State of the Science in Assessing the North American Carbon Budget” I & II
C
CO2 CO2
CO2
CO2
CO2
CO2
C
Atmospheric Inversions
Inventories
Mid-Continent Intensive
Synthesis Lead: Synthesis Lead: Stephen M. OgleStephen M. OgleNatural Resources Ecology Laboratory, Natural Resources Ecology Laboratory,
Colorado State UniversityColorado State University
MCI Campaign RegionPre-Campaign Atmospheric
Measurement NetworkCampaign Atmospheric Measurement Network
Inventory
PostersH-184: MCI Inventory Overview, OgleF-129: Cropland Inventory Evaluation, OgleG-167: US Cropland Carbon Budget, WestH-172: Crop NPP, BandaruH-170: Assessing US Carbon Budget, Zhu
G-160: Verifying US Soil C Inventory, Spencer
Oral Presentation9:50AM, Thursday, Fossil Fuel Emissions Uncertainty, Gurney
Atmospheric Inversions
PostersE-119: Transport Model Comparison, AndrewsH-182: Network Design for High Resolution Inversions, Lauvaux
Oral Presentation4PM, Thursday – Overview of Inversions, Schuh4:15PM, Wednesday – Impact of expanding network on atmospheric inversions, Mueller
Reconciling Inventory & Inversion
Inversion
Inventory
Inversion
Inventory
Oral Presentation4:45PM, Wednesday – Comparing, Attributing and Reconciling Inversion and Inventory Estimates, Cooley
ULTIMATE GOAL: To quantify the short and long-term impacts of disturbance and climate change on the terrestrial carbon budget of North America
WORKING GROUP 3: MODELING OF THE IMPACTS OF DISTURBANCE
OBJECTIVE 1: Provide reliable information on the spatial and
temporal extent of forest disturbances and the severity of these disturbances
WORKING GROUP 1: QUANTIFYING FOREST
DISTURBANCES
OBJECTIVE 2: Quantify the impacts of disturbance on processes controlling carbon cycling in forests
WORKING GROUP 2: IMPACTS OF FOREST DISTURBANCE
OBJECTIVE 3: Quantify the impacts of other disturbances and longer-term climate change on the terrestrial carbon budget of
North America
WORKING GROUP 4: WOODY ENCROACHMENT AND HNL SOILS
Disturbance Synthesis Presentations
• Tues 11 am - What have we learned from forest tower flux data following disturbance? – Amiro et al.
• Wed 11 am posters#W-221: Carbon emissions from North American wildland fires: a review of
methods and comparison of results from five case studies – French et al.#E-102: Recent Rates of Forest Harvest and Conversion in North America - Jeff
Masek et al.#D-94: Observations and assessment of forest carbon recovery following
disturbance in North America - Goetz et al.• Wed 4 pm - The impacts of biotic disturbances on carbon budgets of North
American forests – Hicke et al.• Wed 4:15 pm - Vulnerability of high latitude soil carbon in North America
to disturbance – Grosse et al.• Wed. 5 p.m. - Impacts of Disturbance on the North American Carbon
Budget - a Synthesis - Kasischke et al.
Coastal Carbon Interim Synthesis Activity• Five regional preliminary budgets
• East Coast and Gulf of Maine – Wei-jun Cai• Gulf of Mexico – Paula Coble• Great Lakes – Galen McKinley• Arctic – Jeremy Mathis• West Coast – Simone Alin
• Initiated at July 2008 OCB Meeting
• Presentations given in special sessions at the 2009 and 2010 OCB Meeting.
• Science meeting held in 2010 before AGU.
• In 2011, work will continue with smaller meetings for each region.
• Science meeting associated with the 2012 OCB meeting.
Fluxes of InterestInterfacial fluxes:
• Inputs from land of DOC, POC, and DIC• Air-sea: Exchange of CO2, rainwater DOC• Sedimentary fluxes: POC deposition, DOC & DIC exchange, benthic
productivity, groundwater, hydrocarbon seeps• Shelf-break exchange: DIC, DOC, POC
Internal fluxes:• Primary production• Respiration• Net community production
Poster Session III – Wed.11 AM - 12 PM (Side Meeting 5:15 – 6:15, Conti)
C-64: Lake Superior's influence on regional carbon budgets (McKinley et al.) C-65: Coastal Carbon Fluxes along the U.S. Eastern Continental Shelf Derived from a Coupled Biogeochemical-Circulation Model (Friedrichs et al.)D-74: Carbon System Dynamics in the Large River-Dominated Northern Gulf of Mexico Coastal Margin (Lohrenz et al.)
NACP non-CO2 GHG Synthesis Project
• OVERVIEW
• Goal: synthesis of data and models to define the spatial/temporal distributions and sources of
CH4, CO2 and N2O over N. America.
1.Archive data for concentrations, and a priori source fields.
2.Determine regional/continental sources
Participants (partial list)
• Steve Wofsy (chair)
• Arlyn E. Andrews
• Colm Sweeney
• Doug Worthy
• Hanqin Tian
• Anna Michalak
• Dale Hurst
• Adam Hirsch
• Bill Munger1515
Graduate students &c
• Archana Dayalu
• Scot Miller
• Leland Werden
Undergraduates:
• Talya Havice
• Max Brondfield
Others:
• MAST DC &c
DATABASE
MAST-DC website (ORNL)—public• AGAGE (2000-2008); continuous CFCs, HFCs,
HCFCs, CH4, N2O, SF6... **
• CSIRO Gaslab (2000-2001); flask data for CH4, CO2, CO and H2
• COBRA (2003 & 2004); C & F data: CO2, CO, CH4, N2O, CFCs, CH3CCl3, CCl4, SF6, O3.
• WMO/Environment Canada(2000-2008); C & F data for CH4, CO, CO2. (SF6, N2O,H2)
• INTEX A&B (2004&2006); C&F data for numerous gases and aerosols
• Irvine Latitude Network (2000-2004); F data methane, NMHCs, alkyl nitrates, and chlorinated carbon compounds.
• NOAA (2000-early 2009); C & F data for halocarbons, trace gases, CFCs , N2O, CH4, CO2, H2, 13C and 18O isotopes
• SCRIPPS (2000-2001); Flask data for CO2
• Tyler UCI (2000-2001); Flask data for CO, CH4, and their isotopes.
Additional data sets—password protected
DLEM (2000-2008); simulated daily flux values for N20 and CH4 across North America
NOAA Aircraft (2000-2008); PFP data from vertical profiles at NOAA tower sites, measuring CH4, N2O, CO, SF6, and CO2. (internal only) **
TCCON (2004-2009); continuous data for CO2 only. O2, CH4, N2O, CO, H2O, and HDO data awaiting calibrations. (on password protected site)
NOAA Tall Towers Data Sets (~2000-2009); Programmable Flask Packages (PFP) data, (awaiting final level QC.) **
Data sets expected to become available:
ARCTAS (2008); CA Central Valley; CLASSIC (2007)
WMO Environment Canada Flights (2003-2005)
NACP MCI; START-08; TexAQS
Comprehensive; uniform, accessible format.
http://nacp.ornl.gov/int_synth_greenhouse.shtml
Related Posters and Talks at NACP • Local signals of CO2, CH4 and N2O in the San Francisco and Sacramento regions of
California. –
• Modeling greenhouse gas balance induced by nitrogen addition in terrestrial ecosystems of the United States
• The GHG Balance of Terrestrial Ecosystems in North America in the early 2010s: Magnitude and Attribution
• Novel approaches to estimating regional CH4 fluxes from a very tall tower
• Comparison of Global Inundated Wetland Products Generated Through Multiple Resolution Microwave Remote Sensing Data Sets
• Methane emission from natural wetlands in northern mid-high latitude since 1980s
• Spectroscopic analysis and assessment of the critical role of geologic greenhouse gases from fossil fuel fugitive methane emissions towards global warming
• Biomass Burning Emissions of Methane - Source Sensitivity to Algorithm Assumptions
• Episodic CH4 emissions from a temperate fen
• Comparison of a priori-based and geostatistical inverse methods for estimating methane emissions from Central California
1717
Summary of model results:
Time series from WLEF (US Midwest) and Fraserdale (Hudson Bay Lowlands), COBRA aircraft data: using a high resolution Lagrangian Particle Dispersion Model ("STILT")
•N2O – Bayesian and geostatistical inverse analysis both give excellent simulations of observed time series. Results confirm the prevalence of agricultural sources, define the season cycle. Emissions larger than most bottom-up.
•CH4 – Confirm excellent simulation of time series at tall towers, and demonstrate the importance of regional wetlands and surprisingly strong industrial emissions.
• Annual budgets and error estimates determined for CH4 and N2O in the US.