Barbero
Leticia
Barbero
Leticia
No Thumbnail Available
Search Results
Now showing
1 - 7 of 7
-
ArticleCarbon cycling in the North American coastal ocean: a synthesis(European Geosciences Union, 2019-03-27) Fennel, Katja ; Alin, Simone R. ; Barbero, Leticia ; Evans, Wiley ; Bourgeois, Timothée ; Cooley, Sarah R. ; Dunne, John P. ; Feely, Richard A. ; Hernandez-Ayon, Jose Martin ; Hu, Xinping ; Lohrenz, Steven E. ; Muller-Karger, Frank E. ; Najjar, Raymond G. ; Robbins, Lisa ; Shadwick, Elizabeth H. ; Siedlecki, Samantha A. ; Steiner, Nadja ; Sutton, Adrienne J. ; Turk, Daniela ; Vlahos, Penny ; Wang, Zhaohui AleckA quantification of carbon fluxes in the coastal ocean and across its boundaries with the atmosphere, land, and the open ocean is important for assessing the current state and projecting future trends in ocean carbon uptake and coastal ocean acidification, but this is currently a missing component of global carbon budgeting. This synthesis reviews recent progress in characterizing these carbon fluxes for the North American coastal ocean. Several observing networks and high-resolution regional models are now available. Recent efforts have focused primarily on quantifying the net air–sea exchange of carbon dioxide (CO2). Some studies have estimated other key fluxes, such as the exchange of organic and inorganic carbon between shelves and the open ocean. Available estimates of air–sea CO2 flux, informed by more than a decade of observations, indicate that the North American Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) acts as a sink of 160±80 Tg C yr−1, although this flux is not well constrained. The Arctic and sub-Arctic, mid-latitude Atlantic, and mid-latitude Pacific portions of the EEZ account for 104, 62, and −3.7 Tg C yr−1, respectively, while making up 51 %, 25 %, and 24 % of the total area, respectively. Combining the net uptake of 160±80 Tg C yr−1 with an estimated carbon input from land of 106±30 Tg C yr−1 minus an estimated burial of 65±55 Tg C yr−1 and an estimated accumulation of dissolved carbon in EEZ waters of 50±25 Tg C yr−1 implies a carbon export of 151±105 Tg C yr−1 to the open ocean. The increasing concentration of inorganic carbon in coastal and open-ocean waters leads to ocean acidification. As a result, conditions favoring the dissolution of calcium carbonate occur regularly in subsurface coastal waters in the Arctic, which are naturally prone to low pH, and the North Pacific, where upwelling of deep, carbon-rich waters has intensified. Expanded monitoring and extension of existing model capabilities are required to provide more reliable coastal carbon budgets, projections of future states of the coastal ocean, and quantification of anthropogenic carbon contributions.
-
ArticleThe technological, scientific, and sociological revolution of global subsurface ocean observing(Oceanography Society, 2022-01-07) Roemmich, Dean ; Talley, Lynne D. ; Zilberman, Nathalie ; Osborne, Emily ; Johnson, Kenneth S. ; Barbero, Leticia ; Bittig, Henry C. ; Briggs, Nathan ; Fassbender, Andrea J. ; Johnson, Gregory C. ; King, Brian A. ; McDonagh, Elaine L. ; Purkey, Sarah G. ; Riser, Stephen C. ; Suga, Toshio ; Takeshita, Yuichiro ; Thierry, Virginie ; Wijffels, Susan E.The complementary partnership of the Global Ocean Ship-based Hydrographic Investigations Program (GO-SHIP; https://www.go-ship.org/) and the Argo Program (https://argo.ucsd.edu) has been instrumental in providing sustained subsurface observations of the global ocean for over two decades. Since the late twentieth century, new clues into the ocean’s role in Earth’s climate system have revealed a need for sustained global ocean observations (e.g., Gould et al., 2013; Schmitt, 2018) and stimulated revolutionary technology advances needed to address the societal mandate. Together, the international GO-SHIP and Argo Program responded to this need, providing insight into the mean state and variability of the physics, biology, and chemistry of the ocean that led to advancements in fundamental science and monitoring of the state of Earth's climate.
-
ArticleGlobal carbon budget 2017(Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union, 2018-03-12) Le Quere, Corinne ; Andrew, Robbie M. ; Friedlingstein, Pierre ; Sitch, Stephen ; Pongratz, Julia ; Manning, Andrew C. ; Korsbakken, Jan Ivar ; Peters, Glen P. ; Canadell, Josep G. ; Jackson, Robert B. ; Boden, Thomas A. ; Tans, Pieter P. ; Andrews, Oliver D. ; Arora, Vivek K. ; Bakker, Dorothee ; Barbero, Leticia ; Becker, Meike ; Betts, Richard A. ; Bopp, Laurent ; Chevallier, Frédéric ; Chini, Louise Parsons ; Ciais, Philippe ; Cosca, Catherine E. ; Cross, Jessica N. ; Currie, Kim I. ; Gasser, Thomas ; Harris, Ian ; Hauck, Judith ; Haverd, Vanessa ; Houghton, Richard A. ; Hunt, Christopher W. ; Hurtt, George ; Ilyina, Tatiana ; Jain, Atul K. ; Kato, Etsushi ; Kautz, Markus ; Keeling, Ralph F. ; Klein Goldewijk, Kees ; Körtzinger, Arne ; Landschützer, Peter ; Lefèvre, Nathalie ; Lenton, Andrew ; Lienert, Sebastian ; Lima, Ivan D. ; Lombardozzi, Danica ; Metzl, Nicolas ; Millero, Frank J. ; Monteiro, Pedro M. S. ; Munro, David R. ; Nabel, Julia E. M. S. ; Nakaoka, Shin-ichiro ; Nojiri, Yukihiro ; Padin, X. Antonio ; Peregon, Anna ; Pfeil, Benjamin ; Pierrot, Denis ; Poulter, Benjamin ; Rehder, Gregor ; Reimer, Janet ; Rödenbeck, Christian ; Schwinger, Jorg ; Séférian, Roland ; Skjelvan, Ingunn ; Stocker, Benjamin D. ; Tian, Hanqin ; Tilbrook, Bronte ; Tubiello, Francesco N. ; van der Laan-Luijkx, Ingrid T. ; van der Werf, Guido R. ; van Heuven, Steven ; Viovy, Nicolas ; Vuichard, Nicolas ; Walker, Anthony P. ; Watson, Andrew J. ; Wiltshire, Andrew J. ; Zaehle, Sonke ; Zhu, DanAccurate 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 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 high fossil emissions and the small SLAND consistent with El Niño conditions. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 402.8 ± 0.1 ppm averaged over 2016. For 2017, preliminary data for the first 6–9 months 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 (GDP) corrected for recent changes in the carbon intensity of the economy for the rest of the world. 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 (Le Quéré et al., 2016, 2015b, a, 2014, 2013). All results presented here can be downloaded from https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2017 (GCP, 2017).
-
ArticleGlobal Carbon Budget 2016(Copernicus Publications, 2016-11-14) Le Quere, Corinne ; Andrew, Robbie M. ; Canadell, Josep G. ; Sitch, Stephen ; Korsbakken, Jan Ivar ; Peters, Glen P. ; Manning, Andrew C. ; Boden, Thomas A. ; Tans, Pieter P. ; Houghton, Richard A. ; Keeling, Ralph F. ; Alin, Simone R. ; Andrews, Oliver D. ; Anthoni, Peter ; Barbero, Leticia ; Bopp, Laurent ; Chevallier, Frédéric ; Chini, Louise Parsons ; Ciais, Philippe ; Currie, Kim I. ; Delire, Christine ; Doney, Scott C. ; Friedlingstein, Pierre ; Gkritzalis, Thanos ; Harris, Ian ; Hauck, Judith ; Haverd, Vanessa ; Hoppema, Mario ; Klein Goldewijk, Kees ; Jain, Atul K. ; Kato, Etsushi ; Körtzinger, Arne ; Landschützer, Peter ; Lefèvre, Nathalie ; Lenton, Andrew ; Lienert, Sebastian ; Lombardozzi, Danica ; Melton, Joe R. ; Metzl, Nicolas ; Millero, Frank J. ; Monteiro, Pedro M. S. ; Munro, David R. ; Nabel, Julia E. M. S. ; Nakaoka, Shin-ichiro ; O'Brien, Kevin ; Olsen, Are ; Omar, Abdirahman M. ; Ono, Tsuneo ; Pierrot, Denis ; Poulter, Benjamin ; Rödenbeck, Christian ; Salisbury, Joseph E. ; Schuster, Ute ; Schwinger, Jorg ; Séférian, Roland ; Skjelvan, Ingunn ; Stocker, Benjamin D. ; Sutton, Adrienne J. ; Takahashi, Taro ; Tian, Hanqin ; Tilbrook, Bronte ; van der Laan-Luijkx, Ingrid ; van der Werf, Guido R. ; Viovy, Nicolas ; Walker, Anthony P. ; Wiltshire, Andrew J. ; Zaehle, SonkeAccurate 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 all major components of the global carbon budget, including their uncertainties, based on the combination of a range of data, algorithms, statistics, and model estimates and their interpretation by a broad scientific community. We discuss changes compared to previous estimates and consistency within and among components, alongside methodology and data limitations. 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 combined evidence from land-cover change data, fire activity associated with deforestation, and models. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly and its rate of growth (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The mean ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) is based on observations from the 1990s, while the annual anomalies and trends are estimated with ocean models. The variability in SOCEAN is evaluated with data products based on surveys of ocean CO2 measurements. The global residual terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated by the difference of the other terms of the global carbon budget and compared to results of independent dynamic global vegetation models. We compare the mean land and ocean fluxes and their variability to estimates from three atmospheric inverse methods for three broad latitude bands. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ, reflecting the current capacity to characterise the annual estimates of each component of the global carbon budget. For the last decade available (2006–2015), EFF was 9.3 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, ELUC 1.0 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, GATM 4.5 ± 0.1 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN 2.6 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND 3.1 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1. For year 2015 alone, the growth in EFF was approximately zero and emissions remained at 9.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, showing a slowdown in growth of these emissions compared to the average growth of 1.8 % yr−1 that took place during 2006–2015. Also, for 2015, ELUC was 1.3 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, GATM was 6.3 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN was 3.0 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 1.9 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1. GATM was higher in 2015 compared to the past decade (2006–2015), reflecting a smaller SLAND for that year. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 399.4 ± 0.1 ppm averaged over 2015. For 2016, preliminary data indicate the continuation of low growth in EFF with +0.2 % (range of −1.0 to +1.8 %) based on national emissions projections for China and USA, and projections of gross domestic product corrected for recent changes in the carbon intensity of the economy for the rest of the world. In spite of the low growth of EFF in 2016, the growth rate in atmospheric CO2 concentration is expected to be relatively high because of the persistence of the smaller residual terrestrial sink (SLAND) in response to El Niño conditions of 2015–2016. From this projection of EFF and assumed constant ELUC for 2016, cumulative emissions of CO2 will reach 565 ± 55 GtC (2075 ± 205 GtCO2) for 1870–2016, about 75 % from EFF and 25 % from ELUC. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new carbon budget compared with previous publications of this data set (Le Quéré et al., 2015b, a, 2014, 2013). All observations presented here can be downloaded from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (doi:10.3334/CDIAC/GCP_2016).
-
ArticleBest practice data standards for discrete chemical oceanographic observations(Frontiers Media, 2022-01-21) Jiang, Li-Qing ; Pierrot, Denis ; Wanninkhof, Rik ; Feely, Richard A. ; Tilbrook, Bronte ; Alin, Simone R. ; Barbero, Leticia ; Byrne, Robert H. ; Carter, Brendan ; Dickson, Andrew G. ; Gattuso, Jean-Pierre ; Greeley, Dana ; Hoppema, Mario ; Humphreys, Matthew P. ; Karstensen, Johannes ; Lange, Nico ; Lauvset, Siv K. ; Lewis, Ernie R. ; Olsen, Are ; Perez, Fiz F. ; Sabine, Christopher ; Sharp, Jonathan D. ; Tanhua, Toste ; Trull, Thomas W. ; Velo, Anton ; Allegra, Andrew J. ; Barker, Paul M. ; Burger, Eugene ; Cai, Wei-Jun ; Chen, Chen-Tung A. ; Cross, Jessica N. ; Garcia, Hernan E. ; Hernandez-Ayon, Jose Martin ; Hu, Xinping ; Kozyr, Alex ; Langdon, Chris ; Lee, Kitack ; Salisbury, Joseph E. ; Wang, Zhaohui Aleck ; Xue, LiangEffective data management plays a key role in oceanographic research as cruise-based data, collected from different laboratories and expeditions, are commonly compiled to investigate regional to global oceanographic processes. Here we describe new and updated best practice data standards for discrete chemical oceanographic observations, specifically those dealing with column header abbreviations, quality control flags, missing value indicators, and standardized calculation of certain properties. These data standards have been developed with the goals of improving the current practices of the scientific community and promoting their international usage. These guidelines are intended to standardize data files for data sharing and submission into permanent archives. They will facilitate future quality control and synthesis efforts and lead to better data interpretation. In turn, this will promote research in ocean biogeochemistry, such as studies of carbon cycling and ocean acidification, on regional to global scales. These best practice standards are not mandatory. Agencies, institutes, universities, or research vessels can continue using different data standards if it is important for them to maintain historical consistency. However, it is hoped that they will be adopted as widely as possible to facilitate consistency and to achieve the goals stated above.
-
ArticleGlobal Carbon Budget 2015(Copernicus Publications, 2015-12-07) Le Quere, Corinne ; Moriarty, Roisin ; Andrew, Robbie M. ; Canadell, Josep G. ; Sitch, Stephen ; Korsbakken, Jan Ivar ; Friedlingstein, Pierre ; Peters, Glen P. ; Andres, Robert J. ; Boden, Thomas A. ; Houghton, Richard A. ; House, Jo I. ; Keeling, Ralph F. ; Tans, Pieter P. ; Arneth, Almut ; Bakker, Dorothee C. E. ; Barbero, Leticia ; Bopp, Laurent ; Chang, J. ; Chevallier, Frédéric ; Chini, Louise Parsons ; Ciais, Philippe ; Fader, Marianela ; Feely, Richard A. ; Gkritzalis, Thanos ; Harris, Ian ; Hauck, Judith ; Ilyina, Tatiana ; Jain, Atul K. ; Kato, Etsushi ; Kitidis, Vassilis ; Klein Goldewijk, Kees ; Koven, Charles ; Landschutzer, Peter ; Lauvset, Siv K. ; Lefevre, N. ; Lenton, Andrew ; Lima, Ivan D. ; Metzl, Nicolas ; Millero, Frank J. ; Munro, David R. ; Murata, Akihiko ; Nabel, Julia E. M. S. ; Nakaoka, Shin-ichiro ; Nojiri, Yukihiro ; O'Brien, Kevin ; Olsen, Are ; Ono, Tsuneo ; Perez, Fiz F. ; Pfeil, Benjamin ; Pierrot, Denis ; Poulter, Benjamin ; Rehder, Gregor ; Rodenbeck, C. ; Saito, Shu ; Schuster, Ute ; Schwinger, Jorg ; Seferian, Roland ; Steinhoff, Tobias ; Stocker, Benjamin D. ; Sutton, Adrienne J. ; Takahashi, Taro ; Tilbrook, Bronte ; van der Laan-Luijkx, I. T. ; van der Werf, Guido R. ; van Heuven, Steven ; Vandemark, Douglas ; Viovy, Nicolas ; Wiltshire, Andrew J. ; Zaehle, Sonke ; Zeng, NingAccurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere 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 a methodology to quantify all major components of the global carbon budget, including their uncertainties, based on the combination of a range of data, algorithms, statistics, and model estimates and their interpretation by a broad scientific community. We discuss changes compared to previous estimates as well as consistency within and among components, alongside methodology and data limitations. CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and industry (EFF) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC), mainly deforestation, are based on combined evidence from land-cover-change data, fire activity associated with deforestation, and models. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly and its rate of growth (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The mean ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) is based on observations from the 1990s, while the annual anomalies and trends are estimated with ocean models. The variability in SOCEAN is evaluated with data products based on surveys of ocean CO2 measurements. The global residual terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated by the difference of the other terms of the global carbon budget and compared to results of independent dynamic global vegetation models forced by observed climate, CO2, and land-cover change (some including nitrogen–carbon interactions). We compare the mean land and ocean fluxes and their variability to estimates from three atmospheric inverse methods for three broad latitude bands. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ, reflecting the current capacity to characterise the annual estimates of each component of the global carbon budget. For the last decade available (2005–2014), EFF was 9.0 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, ELUC was 0.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, GATM was 4.4 ± 0.1 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN was 2.6 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 3.0 ± 0.8 GtC yr−1. For the year 2014 alone, EFF grew to 9.8 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, 0.6 % above 2013, continuing the growth trend in these emissions, albeit at a slower rate compared to the average growth of 2.2 % yr−1 that took place during 2005–2014. Also, for 2014, ELUC was 1.1 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, GATM was 3.9 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN was 2.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 4.1 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1. GATM was lower in 2014 compared to the past decade (2005–2014), reflecting a larger SLAND for that year. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 397.15 ± 0.10 ppm averaged over 2014. For 2015, preliminary data indicate that the growth in EFF will be near or slightly below zero, with a projection of −0.6 [range of −1.6 to +0.5] %, based on national emissions projections for China and the USA, and projections of gross domestic product corrected for recent changes in the carbon intensity of the global economy for the rest of the world. From this projection of EFF and assumed constant ELUC for 2015, cumulative emissions of CO2 will reach about 555 ± 55 GtC (2035 ± 205 GtCO2) for 1870–2015, about 75 % from EFF and 25 % from ELUC. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new carbon budget compared with previous publications of this data set (Le Quéré et al., 2015, 2014, 2013). All observations presented here can be downloaded from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (doi:10.3334/CDIAC/GCP_2015).
-
ArticleUncertainty sources for measurable ocean carbonate chemistry variables(Association for the Sciences of Limnology and Oceanography (ASLO), 2023-12-14) Carter, Brendan R. ; Sharp, Jonathan D. ; Dickson, Andrew G. ; Alvarez, Marta ; Fong, Michael B. ; Garcia-Ibanez, Maribel I. ; Woosley, Ryan J. ; Takeshita, Yuichiro ; Barbero, Leticia ; Byrne, Robert H. ; Cai, Wei-Jun ; Chierici, Melissa ; Clegg, Simon L. ; Easley, Regina A. ; Fassbender, Andrea J. ; Fleger, Kalla L. ; Li, Xinyu ; Martin-Mayor, Macarena ; Schockman, Katelyn M. ; Wang, Zhaohui AleckThe ocean carbonate system is critical to monitor because it plays a major role in regulating Earth's climate and marine ecosystems. It is monitored using a variety of measurements, and it is commonly understood that all components of seawater carbonate chemistry can be calculated when at least two carbonate system variables are measured. However, several recent studies have highlighted systematic discrepancies between calculated and directly measured carbonate chemistry variables and these discrepancies have large implications for efforts to measure and quantify the changing ocean carbon cycle. Given this, the Ocean Carbonate System Intercomparison Forum (OCSIF) was formed as a working group through the Ocean Carbon and Biogeochemistry program to coordinate and recommend research to quantify and/or reduce uncertainties and disagreements in measurable seawater carbonate system measurements and calculations, identify unknown or overlooked sources of these uncertainties, and provide recommendations for making progress on community efforts despite these uncertainties. With this paper we aim to (1) summarize recent progress toward quantifying and reducing carbonate system uncertainties; (2) advocate for research to further reduce and better quantify carbonate system measurement uncertainties; (3) present a small amount of new data, metadata, and analysis related to uncertainties in carbonate system measurements; and (4) restate and explain the rationales behind several OCSIF recommendations. We focus on open ocean carbonate chemistry, and caution that the considerations we discuss become further complicated in coastal, estuarine, and sedimentary environments.