Difference between revisions of "CO2 simulation"

From Geos-chem
Jump to: navigation, search
(CO<span><sub>2</sub> simulation user groups)
(CO<span><sub>2</sub> simulation user groups)
Line 48: Line 48:
| CO<span><sub>2</sub> modeling and source sink estimation using satellite and in situ data
| CO<span><sub>2</sub> modeling and source sink estimation using satellite and in situ data
|[http://wennberg-wiki.caltech.edu/ Wennberg group (Caltech)]
|[http://wennberg-wiki.caltech.edu/ Caltech]
|[mailto:janina@caltech.edu Janina Messerschmidt]
|[mailto:janina@caltech.edu Janina Messerschmidt]
| CO<span><sub>2</sub> source/sink estimation using ground-based FTS data
| CO<span><sub>2</sub> source/sink estimation using ground-based FTS data

Revision as of 20:19, 26 September 2011

This page contains information about the carbon dioxide (CO2) simulation in GEOS-Chem.


The original GEOS-Chem CO2 simulation was developed by Parv Suntharalingam (Suntharalingam et al., 2003; 2004), now at the University of East Anglia. A major update to the CO2 simulation has been developed by Ray Nassar (now at Environment Canada) and Dylan B.A. Jones of the University of Toronto (Nassar et al., 2010). This update was delivered to the GEOS-Chem software development team at Harvard on 2010 April 1.

The update retains the original six CO2 fluxes: fossil fuel, ocean exchange, biomass burning, biofuel burning, balanced terrestrial exchange (CASA) and net annual terrestrial exchange. New inventories are available as options for some of these fluxes and other new fluxes have been added such as CO2 emissions from international shipping and aviation. There is also now an optional feature to include CO2 production from the oxidation of CO, CH4 and NMVOCs. This chemical source concept was first highlighted by Enting and Mansbridge (1991). Although a few attempts have been made by other groups in the past, this implementation will make GEOS-Chem the only 3-D global model in current use to account for the chemical production of CO2. The GEOS-Chem implementation uses an approach similar to that described in Suntharalingam et al. (2005), with some updated year-specific numbers and some other modifications described in Nassar et al. (2010).

The full GEOS-Chem CO2 update was applied to and tested with v8-02-01 (along with some patches). It is now publicly available in GEOS-Chem release v8-03-02 and later versions, along with an update to the GEOS-Chem online manual. The references below are cited in the updated code's comments and online manual, and include the new CO2 simulation description paper Nassar et al. (2010).

In Feb 2010, the CDIAC fossil fuel emissions inventory was updated. Files containing annual and monthly emissions of CO2 are now available for the years 1979-2009.

Authors and collaborators

CO2 simulation user groups

User Group Personnel Projects
University of Toronto Dylan Jones Model updates and application to inverse modeling
Korea Environment Institute (KEI)] Changsub Shim
University of Colorado Boulder Daven Henze CO2 adjoint
IAP,CAS Zhu J,Chen Inverse modeling of CO2 using satellite
Tsinghua University Yuxuan Wang ; Mingwei Li
Environment Canada Ray Nassar CO2 modeling and source sink estimation using satellite and in situ data
Caltech Janina Messerschmidt CO2 source/sink estimation using ground-based FTS data
Add yours here!


The updated CO2 simulation will be incorporated into GEOS-Chem v8-03-02. In Nassar et al. (2010) model comparisons are made with GLOBALVEIW-CO2 (http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/globalview/co2/co2_intro.html) and CONTRAIL (Comprehensive Observation Network for TRace gases by AIrLiner) measurements. In other work, the CO2 simulation has also been compared with aircraft observations from the HIAPER Pole-to-Pole Observations (HIPPO) campaigns of 2009 (Wofsy et al., 2010).

Restart Files


Some single-tracer restart files are available:

CO2 restart file for GEOS4 (30 levels) on date 2000-01-01
CO2 restart file for GEOS5 (47 levels) on date 2004-01-01

These two restart file have uniform CO2 values of 367.2 ppm for 2000-01-01 and 375.0 ppm for 2004-01-01, which are reasonable estimates of the global mean, but not realistic in the global distribution. Spinning up for one year will result in a realistic distribution in terms of both the global mean value and gross features (latitudinal gradient and seasonal/diurnal cycle) but accurate work will require adjusting or calibrating the restart file with actual measurements for the start of your run. The method of calibration using the sparse in situ measurements and/or satellite observations can be an active area of research on its own, so determining the approach to this is left to the user.


You can use the Git version control software to download GEOS-Chem run directories containing the above-mentioned restart files and other relevant input files (e.g. input.geos).

To download the GEOS-4 (30 levels) run directory, use this command:

git clone git://git.as.harvard.edu/bmy/GEOS-Chem-rundirs/2x2.5/geos4/CO2_run

To download the GEOS-5 (47 levels) run directory, use this command:

git clone git://git.as.harvard.edu/bmy/GEOS-Chem-rundirs/2x2.5/geos5/CO2_run


  1. Andres, R. J., G. Marland, I. Fung, and E. Matthews, A 1°x1° distribution of carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel consumption and cement manufacture, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 10, 419–429, 1996.
  2. Andres, R. J., Gregg, J. S., Losey, L., Marland, G., and Boden, T. A.: Monthly, global emissions of carbon dioxide from fossil fuel consumption, Tellus B, 63B, 2011.
  3. Baker, D. F., et al., TransCom 3 inversion intercomparison: Impact of transport model errors on the interannual variability of regional CO2 fluxes, 1988-2003, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 20, GB1002, doi:10.1029/2004GB002439, 2006.
  4. Boden, T.A., G. Marland, and R.J. Andres, Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn., U.S.A. doi 10.3334/CDIAC/00001, 2009.
  5. Corbett & Koehler, Updated emissions from ocean shipping, J. Geophys. Res., 108, D20, 4650, 2003.
  6. Corbett, J. J., and H. W. Koehler, Considering alternative input parameters in an activity-based ship fuel consumption and emissions model: Reply to comment by Øyvind Endresen et al. on Updated emissions from ocean shipping, J. Geophys. Res., 109, 2004.
  7. Duncan, B. N., R. V. Martin, A. C. Staudt, R. Yevich, and J. A. Logan, Interannual and seasonal variability of biomass burning emissions constrained by satellite observations, J. Geophys. Res., 108(D2), 4100, doi:10.1029/2002JD002378, 2003.
  8. Endresen, O, et al., A historical reconstruction of ships fuel consumption and emissions, J. Geophys. Res, 112, D12301, 2007.
  9. Enting, I. G. and Mansbridge, J. V.: Latitudinal distribution of sources and sinks of CO2: results of and inversion study, Tellus B, 43, 156–170, 1991.
  10. Kim, B. Y., et al., System for assessing Aviation's Global Emissions (SAGE) Version 1.5 global Aviation Emissions Inventories for 2000-2004, 2005.
  11. Kim, B. Y., et al., System for assessing Aviation’s Global Emissions (SAGE), Part 1: Model description and inventory results, Transportation Research, Part D 12, 325–346, 2007.
  12. Le Quere, C. et al., Trends in the sources and sinks of carbon dioxide, Nature Geoscience, doi:10.1038/ngeo689, 2009.
  13. Nassar, R., D. B. A. Jones, P. Suntharalingam, J. M. Chen, R. J. Andres, K. J. Wecht, R. M. Yantosca, S. S. Kualwik, K. W. Bowman, J. R. Worden, T. Machida, H. Matsueda, Modeling global atmospheric CO2 with improved emission inventories and CO2 production from the oxidation of other carbon species, Geoscientific Model Development, 3, 689-716, 2010.
  14. Olsen, S. C., and J. T. Randerson, Differences between surface and column atmospheric CO2 and implications for carbon cycle research, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D02301, doi:10.1029/2003JD003968, 2004.
  15. Potter, C. S., J. T. Randerson, C. B. Field, P. A. Matson, P. M. Vitousek, H. A. Mooney, and S. A. Klooster, Terrestrial ecosystem production: A process model based on global satellite and surface data, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 7, 811–841, 1993.
  16. Sausen, R. and U. Schumann, Estimates of the Climate Response to Aircraft CO2 and NOx Emissions Scenarios, Climate Change, 44: 27-58, 2000.
  17. Suntharalingam, P., C. M. Spivakovsky, J. A. Logan, and M. B. McElroy, Estimating the distribution of terrestrial CO2 sources and sinks from atmospheric measurements: Sensitivity to configuration of the observation network, J. Geophys. Res., 108(D15), 4452, doi:10.1029/2002JD002207, 2003.
  18. Suntharalingam, P., D. J. Jacob, P. I. Palmer, J. A. Logan, R. M. Yantosca, Y. Xiao, M. J. Evans, D. G. Streets, S. L. Vay, and G. W. Sachse, Improved quantification of Chinese carbon fluxes using CO2/CO correlations in Asian outflow, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D18S18, doi:10.1029/2003JD004362, 2004.
  19. Suntharalingam, P., J. T. Randerson, N. Krakauer, J. A. Logan, and D. J. Jacob, Influence of reduced carbon emissions and oxidation on the distribution of atmospheric CO2: Implications for inversion analyses, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 19, GB4003, doi:10.1029/2005GB002466, 2005.
  20. Takahashi, T., R. A. Feely, R. Weiss, R. H. Wanninkhof, D. W. Chipman, S. C. Sutherland, T. T. Takahashi, Global air-sea flux of CO2: an estimate based on measurements of sea-air pCO2 difference, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 94, 8292–8299, 1997.
  21. Takahashi, T., et al., Climatological mean and decadal change in surface ocean pCO2, and net sea–air CO2 flux over the global oceans, Deep-Sea Res. II, doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2008.12.009, 2009.
  22. Wang, C., J.J. Corbett, J. Firestone, Modeling Energy Use and Emissions from North American Shipping: Application of the Ship Traffic, Energy, and Environment Model, Environ. Sci. Technol., 41, 3226-3232, 2008.
  23. Wilkersen, J.T. et al., Analysis of emission data from global commercial Aviation: 2004 and 2006, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Disc., 10, 2945-2983, 2010.
  24. Wofsy, S.C., et al., HIAPER Pole-to-Pole Observations (HIPPO): Fine grained, global scale measurements of climatically important atmospheric gases and aerosols, Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 369, 2073-2086, 2011.
  25. Yevich, R., and J. A. Logan, An assessment of biofuel use and burning of agricultural waste in the developing world, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 17(4), 1095, doi:10.1029/2002GB001952, 2003. PDF

Known issues

Monthly CDIAC CO2 emissions

Although GEOS-Chem v8-03-02 will be released with the functionality to run with monthly fossil fuel CO2 emissions from CDIAC (R.J. Andres), the inventory files most likely will not be released until a later date, when the submitted paper Andres et al. (2010) is at a sufficient stage. Until then, annually-averaged fossil fuel CO2 emissions must be selected in the input.geos file.

--Bob Y. 12:26, 29 March 2010 (EDT)

--Ray Nassar 9:48, 25 June 2010 (EDT)

Update: 25 Feb 2010: Updated annual and monthly fossil fuel CO2 emissions from CDIAC (version 2010 by R. Andres) are now available for use in GEOS-Chem v8-03-02 and higher versions. These data are located in the data directories:



The 1° x 1° data will be available by special request. Please contact the GEOS-Chem Support Team.

For more information, please see the following README files:

  1. 2° x 2.5° global data: GEOS_2x2.5/CO2_201003/fossilfuel_andres/README
  2. 4° x 5° global data: GEOS_2x2.5/CO2_201003/fossilfuel_andres/README

--Bob Y. 11:48, 25 February 2011 (EST)