the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Global Carbon Budget 2021
Pierre Friedlingstein
Matthew W. Jones
Michael O'Sullivan
Robbie M. Andrew
Dorothee C. E. Bakker
Judith Hauck
Corinne Le Quéré
Glen P. Peters
Wouter Peters
Julia Pongratz
Stephen Sitch
Josep G. Canadell
Philippe Ciais
Rob B. Jackson
Simone R. Alin
Peter Anthoni
Nicholas R. Bates
Meike Becker
Nicolas Bellouin
Laurent Bopp
Thi Tuyet Trang Chau
Frédéric Chevallier
Louise P. Chini
Margot Cronin
Kim I. Currie
Bertrand Decharme
Laique M. Djeutchouang
Xinyu Dou
Wiley Evans
Richard A. Feely
Liang Feng
Thomas Gasser
Dennis Gilfillan
Thanos Gkritzalis
Giacomo Grassi
Luke Gregor
Nicolas Gruber
Özgür Gürses
Ian Harris
Richard A. Houghton
George C. Hurtt
Yosuke Iida
Tatiana Ilyina
Ingrid T. Luijkx
Atul Jain
Steve D. Jones
Etsushi Kato
Daniel Kennedy
Kees Klein Goldewijk
Jürgen Knauer
Jan Ivar Korsbakken
Arne Körtzinger
Peter Landschützer
Siv K. Lauvset
Nathalie Lefèvre
Sebastian Lienert
Junjie Liu
Gregg Marland
Patrick C. McGuire
Joe R. Melton
David R. Munro
Julia E. M. S. Nabel
Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka
Yosuke Niwa
Tsuneo Ono
Denis Pierrot
Benjamin Poulter
Gregor Rehder
Laure Resplandy
Eddy Robertson
Christian Rödenbeck
Thais M. Rosan
Jörg Schwinger
Clemens Schwingshackl
Roland Séférian
Adrienne J. Sutton
Colm Sweeney
Toste Tanhua
Pieter P. Tans
Hanqin Tian
Bronte Tilbrook
Francesco Tubiello
Guido R. van der Werf
Nicolas Vuichard
Chisato Wada
Rik Wanninkhof
Andrew J. Watson
David Willis
Andrew J. Wiltshire
Wenping Yuan
Sönke Zaehle
Jiye Zeng
Download
- Final revised paper (published on 26 Apr 2022)
- Preprint (discussion started on 04 Nov 2021)
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on essd-2021-386', Anonymous Referee #1, 29 Nov 2021
Outstanding product! Excellent match for ESSD. Comments and musings in attrached file.
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Pierre Friedlingstein, 11 Mar 2022
-
CC1: 'Comments on Global Carbon Budget 2021 (essd-2021-386)', Robert Gieseke, 03 Jan 2022
Thanks to all authors and contributors for this valuable and important resource.
Thanks also for opening up the peer review discussion process to the community.Given this opportunity I have the following comments you might consider for the final version.
Page 6, lines 6-16:
This paragraph was a bit confusing to me trying to understand where numbers came from.
I probably wouldn't say that the remaining carbon budget has shrunk but rather only say that emissions from 2020 and 2021 used up 77 GtCO2 of the remaining carbon budget as assessed in IPCC AR6.
The 2021 cumulative CO2 emissions from 1850 - 2019 (2393 Gt CO2) are closer then the 2020 version (2411 Gt CO2) to the historic emissions shown in
Table SPM.2 (2390 ± 240 Gt CO2), so if a newer assessment (like this study) of historical emissions had an effect on the remaining carbon budget calculation, the 2021 version would actually be in better agreement with the IPCC AR6 assessment than before.
As noted by anonymous reviewer 1 in their comment for page 47, line 24 with regards to 'hard' targets of the Paris Agreement it might be clearer to simply state the remaining budget in relation to the temperature of 1.5 degrees.
The Excel sheet proposes a conversion factor for carbon to CO2 of 3.664.
The numbers shown here appear to use different factors, probably due to rounding?Page 12, line 21:
Is it planned to publish Andrew and Peters (2021) as a separate publication?
It is a very valuable resource containing interesting and important points.
The information could also be part of this peer reviewed publication, maybe as supplementary material.Page 24, line 21, line 27:
PRIMAP-hist 2.3.1 does not seem to include bunker emissions either, see
https://www.pik-potsdam.de/paris-reality-check/primap-hist/PRIMAP-hist_v2.3.1_data-description.pdf
"Emissions from international aviation and shipping are not included in the dataset."Page 53, lines 13-22:
The data availability section and the header information in the Excel files should probably be updated to include a reference to the data being released under a CC-BY 4.0 license.
The ICOS page and and file metadata include it but it would be clearer to write this in the manuscript and Excel files as well.Figures:
Some figures have very light gray text which is hard to read.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2021-386-CC1 - AC3: 'Reply on CC1', Pierre Friedlingstein, 11 Mar 2022
-
RC2: 'Comment on essd-2021-386', Hélène Peiro, 25 Feb 2022
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Pierre Friedlingstein, 11 Mar 2022
Peer review completion
- Article
(16098 KB) - Full-text XML