An Intraseasonal Variability in CO₂ Over the Arctic Induced by the Madden‐Julian Oscillation

Abstract

Variability of atmospheric CO2 must be well understood for us to better characterize the anthropogenic CO2 release from the surface. A previous study revealed the influence of the Madden‐Julian Oscillation (MJO) to tropical midtropospheric CO2 via convection. In this work, the observations by NASA's Atmospheric Infrared Sounder are used to further examine the MJO impact on the CO2 concentration over the Arctic. A composite analysis shows that the CO2 north of 60°N varies with a peak‐to‐peak amplitude of 1.2 ± 0.2 ppm over the MJO cycle. An empirical correlation analysis is applied to examine possible effects of retrieval bias and dynamics on the MJO‐related CO2 anomalies. It is shown that the spatial pattern of the MJO‐related Arctic CO2 anomalies closely resembles that of the isentropic potential vorticity anomalies at 475 K.

Evaluation of Original and Water Stress-Incorporated Modified Weather Research and Forecasting Vegetation Photosynthesis and Respiration Model in Simulating CO2 Flux and Concentration Variability over the Tibetan Plateau

“…The daily driving force of surface CO 2 concentrations usually comprises background values, biospheric CO 2 , ocean absorption, and anthropogenic emissions. Anthropogenic emissions and biosphere absorption are often responsible for anomalies [68][69][70][71][72]. Starting from day 199, the eastern TP exhibited lower CO 2 concentrations compared with the relatively high concentrations in the central and western regions (Figure 11).…”

Global Patterns of Carbon Dioxide Variability from Satellite Observations

“…Intraseasonal variability, such as the Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO), can modulate mid-troposphere CO 2 concentrations in the tropics and polar region (Li et al 2010, Li 2018. MJO is an important intraseasonal feature with a period of about 30-90 days (Madden & Julian 1971).…”

“…MJO can also modulate CO 2 concentrations in the high latitudes. Li (2018) explored AIRS mid-tropospheric CO 2 over the Arctic region. MJO was separated into four different phases (phase 8 + 1, phase 2 + 3, phase 4 + 5, and phase 6 + 7).…”

Inter‐Annual Variability in Atmospheric Transport Complicates Estimation of US Methane Emissions Trends

“…The results suggest that atmospheric transport may have a large imprint on IAV in atmospheric methane observations. Indeed, many existing studies emphasize the salient role of transport in determining the atmospheric distribution of GHGs and of numerous other air pollutants—from hourly to annual time scales and site‐level to global spatial scales (e.g., Barnes et al., 2016; Denning et al., 1999; Keppel‐Aleks et al., 2011; Li, 2018; Li et al., 2010; Liu et al., 2015; Lu et al., 2019; Pal et al., 2020; Samaddar et al., 2021; Sweeney et al., 2015; Torres et al., 2019). In the current manuscript, we compare how emissions versus atmospheric transport likely impact AME—for both in situ and satellite observations across the US.…”