The growth rate of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations since industrialization is characterized by large interannual variability, mostly resulting from variability in CO2 uptake by terrestrial ecosystems (typically termed carbon sink). However, the contributions of regional ecosystems to that variability are not well known. Using an ensemble of ecosystem and land-surface models and an empirical observation-based product of global gross primary production, we show that the mean sink, trend, and interannual variability in CO2 uptake by terrestrial ecosystems are dominated by distinct biogeographic regions. Whereas the mean sink is dominated by highly productive lands (mainly tropical forests), the trend and interannual variability of the sink are dominated by semi-arid ecosystems whose carbon balance is strongly associated with circulation-driven variations in both precipitation and temperature.

Abstract. The global methane (CH 4 ) budget is becoming an increasingly important component for managing realistic pathways to mitigate climate change. This relevance, due to a shorter atmospheric lifetime and a stronger warming potential than carbon dioxide, is challenged by the still unexplained changes of atmospheric CH 4 over the past decade. Emissions and concentrations of CH 4 are continuing to increase, making CH 4 the second most important human-induced greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide. Two major difficulties in reducing uncertainties come from the large variety of diffusive CH 4 sources that overlap geographically, and from the destruction of CH 4 by the very short-lived hydroxyl radical (OH). To address these difficulties, we have established a consortium of multi-disciplinary scientists under the umbrella of the Global Carbon Project to synthesize and stimulate research on the methane cycle, and producing regular (∼ biennial) updates of the global methane budget. This consortium includes atmospheric physicists and chemists, biogeochemists of surface and marine emissions, and socio-economists who study anthropogenic emissions. Following Kirschke et al. (2013), we propose here the first version of a living review paper that integrates results of top-down studies (exploiting atmospheric observations within an atmospheric inverse-modelling framework) and bottom-up models, inventories and data-driven approaches (including process-based models for estimating land surface emissions and atmospheric chemistry, and inventories for anthropogenic emissions, data-driven extrapolations). . Top-down inversions consistently infer lower emissions in China (∼ 58 Tg CH 4 yr −1 , range 51-72, −14 %) and higher emissions in Africa (86 Tg CH 4 yr −1 , range 73-108, +19 %) than bottom-up values used as prior estimates. Overall, uncertainties for anthropogenic emissions appear smaller than those from natural sources, and the uncertainties on source categories appear larger for top-down inversions than for bottom-up inventories and models.The most important source of uncertainty on the methane budget is attributable to emissions from wetland and other inland waters. We show that the wetland extent could contribute 30-40 % on the estimated range for wetland emissions. Other priorities for improving the methane budget include the following: (i) the development of process-based models for inland-water emissions, (ii) the intensification of methane observations at local scale (flux measurements) to constrain bottom-up land surface models, and at regional scale (surface networks and satellites) to constrain top-down inversions, (iii) improvements in the estimation of atmospheric loss by OH, and (iv) improvements of the transport models integrated in top-down inversions.

Future climate change and increasing atmospheric CO 2 are expected to cause major changes in vegetation structure and function over large fractions of the global land surface. Seven global vegetation models are used to analyze possible responses to future climate simulated by a range of general circulation models run under all four representative concentration pathway scenarios of changing concentrations of greenhouse gases. All 110 simulations predict an increase in global vegetation carbon to 2100, but with substantial variation between vegetation models. For example, at 4°C of global land surface warming (510-758 ppm of CO 2 ), vegetation carbon increases by 52-477 Pg C (224 Pg C mean), mainly due to CO 2 fertilization of photosynthesis. Simulations agree on large regional increases across much of the boreal forest, western Amazonia, central Africa, western China, and southeast Asia, with reductions across southwestern North America, central South America, southern Mediterranean areas, southwestern Africa, and southwestern Australia. Four vegetation models display discontinuities across 4°C of warming, indicating global thresholds in the balance of positive and negative influences on productivity and biomass. In contrast to previous global vegetation model studies, we emphasize the importance of uncertainties in projected changes in carbon residence times. We find, when all seven models are considered for one representative concentration pathway × general circulation model combination, such uncertainties explain 30% more variation in modeled vegetation carbon change than responses of net primary productivity alone, increasing to 151% for non-HYBRID4 models. A change in research priorities away from production and toward structural dynamics and demographic processes is recommended.errestrial vegetation is central to many components of the coupled Earth system, in particular the global carbon cycle, biophysical land-atmosphere exchanges, atmospheric chemistry, and the diversity of life with the numerous ecosystem services this engenders. However, vegetation is very sensitive to climate and levels of atmospheric CO 2 , the primary substrate for plant growth. Therefore, it is imperative that we are capable of anticipating the potential responses of global terrestrial vegetation to future changes in climate and atmospheric chemistry. However, a comprehensive, consistent analysis of impacts, taking into account uncertainty in both climate models and impacts models, has so far been lacking. The recent availability of representative concentration pathway (RCP)-driven climate model simulations, with bias-corrected outputs produced within the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISI-MIP) (1), allows such an analysis.Vegetation biomass, productivity, and the competitive abilities of different plant types are all influenced by climate and atmospheric CO 2 . Higher temperatures will increase growing season lengths, metabolic rates, and rates of nitrogen mineralization at high latitudes and altitudes, there...

Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere – the "global carbon budget" – is important to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe data sets and methodology to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and industry (EFF) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, respectively, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC), mainly deforestation, are based on land-cover change data and bookkeeping models. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly and its rate of growth (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) and terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) are estimated with global process models constrained by observations. The resulting carbon budget imbalance (BIM), the difference between the estimated total emissions and the estimated changes in the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere, is a measure of our imperfect data and understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the last decade available (2007–2016), EFF was 9.4 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, ELUC 1.3 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1, GATM 4.7 ± 0.1 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN 2.4 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND 3.0 ± 0.8 GtC yr−1, with a budget imbalance BIM of 0.6 GtC yr−1 indicating overestimated emissions and/or underestimated sinks. For year 2016 alone, the growth in EFF was approximately zero and emissions remained at 9.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1. Also for 2016, ELUC was 1.3 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1, GATM was 6.1 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN was 2.6 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 and SLAND was 2.7 ± 1.0 GtC yr−1, with a small BIM of −0.3 GtC. GATM continued to be higher in 2016 compared to the past decade (2007–2016), reflecting in part the higher fossil emissions and smaller SLAND for that year consistent with El Niño conditions. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 402.8 ± 0.1 ppm averaged over 2016. For 2017, preliminary data indicate a renewed growth in EFF of +2.0 % (range of 0.8 % to 3.0 %) based on national emissions projections for China, USA, and India, and projections of Gross Domestic Product corrected for recent changes in the carbon intensity of the economy for the rest of the world. For 2017, initial data indicate an increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration of around 5.3 GtC (2.5 ppm), attributed to a combination of increasing emissions and receding El Niño conditions. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new global carbon budget compared with previous publications of this data set

Great advances have been made in the last decade in quantifying and understanding the spatiotemporal patterns of terrestrial gross primary production (GPP) with ground, atmospheric, and space observations. However, although global GPP estimates exist, each data set relies upon assumptions and none of the available data are based only on measurements. Consequently, there is no consensus on the global total GPP and large uncertainties exist in its benchmarking. The objective of this review is to assess how the different available data sets predict the spatiotemporal patterns of GPP, identify the differences among data sets, and highlight the main advantages/disadvantages of each data set. We compare GPP estimates for the historical period (1990-2009) from two observation-based data sets (Model Tree Ensemble and Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) to coupled carbon-climate models and terrestrial carbon cycle models from the Fifth Climate Model Intercomparison Project and TRENDY projects and to a new hybrid data set (CARBONES). Results show a large range in the mean global GPP estimates. The different data sets broadly agree on GPP seasonal cycle in terms of phasing, while there is still discrepancy on the amplitude. For interannual variability (IAV) and trends, there is a clear separation between the observation-based data that show little IAV and trend, while the process-based models have large GPP variability and significant trends. These results suggest that there is an urgent need to improve observation-based data sets and develop carbon cycle modeling with processes that are currently treated either very simplistically to correctly estimate present GPP and better quantify the future uptake of carbon dioxide by the world's vegetation.