Global Carbon Budget 2015

Le Quéré, C.; Moriarty, R.; Andrew, R. M.; Canadell, J. G.; Sitch, S.; Korsbakken, J. I.; Friedlingstein, P.; Peters, G. P.; Andres, R. J.; Boden, T. A.; Houghton, R. A.; House, J. I.; Keeling, R. F.; Tans, P.; Arneth, A.; Bakker, D. C. E.; Barbero, L.; Bopp, L.; Chang, J.; Chevallier, F.; Chini, L. P.; Ciais, P.; Fader, M.; Feely, R. A.; Gkritzalis, T.; Harris, I.; Hauck, J.; Ilyina, T.; Jain, A. K.; Kato, E.; Kitidis, V.; Klein Goldewijk, K.; Koven, C.; Landschützer, P.; Lauvset, S. K.; Lefèvre, N.; Lenton, A.; Lima, I. D.; Metzl, N.; Millero, F.; Munro, D. R.; Murata, A.; Nabel, J. E. M. S.; Nakaoka, S.; Nojiri, Y.; O'Brien, K.; Olsen, A.; Ono, T.; Pérez, F. F.; Pfeil, B.; Pierrot, D.; Poulter, B.; Rehder, G.; Rödenbeck, C.; Saito, S.; Schuster, U.; Schwinger, J.; Séférian, R.; Steinhoff, T.; Stocker, B. D.; Sutton, A. J.; Takahashi, T.; Tilbrook, B.; van der Laan-Luijkx, I. T.; van der Werf, G. R.; van Heuven, S.; Vandemark, D.; Viovy, N.; Wiltshire, A.; Zaehle, S.; Zeng, N.

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-7-349-2015

Articles | Volume 7, issue 2

Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 7, 349–396, 2015

https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-7-349-2015

© Author(s) 2015. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 7, 349–396, 2015

https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-7-349-2015

© Author(s) 2015. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Articles | Volume 7, issue 2

Review article 07 Dec 2015

Review article | 07 Dec 2015

Global Carbon Budget 2015

C. Le Quéré et al.

Download

Final revised paper (published on 07 Dec 2015)
Preprint (discussion started on 02 Nov 2015)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

AR by Corinne Le Quere on behalf of the Authors (04 Nov 2015) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (04 Nov 2015) by David Carlson

RR by Albertus J. (Han) Dolman (04 Nov 2015)

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (10 Nov 2015)

RR by Martin Heimann (11 Nov 2015)

ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (12 Nov 2015) by David Carlson

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (Editor review) (20 Nov 2015) by David Carlson

AR by Corinne Le Quere on behalf of the Authors (25 Nov 2015) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (26 Nov 2015) by David Carlson

Overall, the authors have provided skilful and helpful answers, responses or changes to meet reviewers concerns.

Small concern remains about whether inclusion of the 2015 predicted emissions adds value to this data. The authors make a persuasive case that the historical and statistically reliable data enable such a projection, that such a projection adds potential interest and relevance to a larger audience, and that these projections have served a useful prior purpose within the annual budgets and across the sequence of budgets. This editor accepts the authors' reasons.

The as-published paper will require a tested and working doi pointing to the data on the CDIAC site.

Either in final up-load or during type setting and proofing, a small series of typos need correction:

- p9 L2: “minising”

-p9 L20: "totals will be to be slightly"

- p21 L7: Remove “boundary conditions”? The example given (whether fire management is included or not) is not a boundary condition but a question of definition.

- p22 L18: Replace “some of” by “a fraction of“

- p32, 37 and caption to Figure 8 (and perhaps elsewhere): There is a sign error in the formulae? E_LUC, S_LAND and S_OCEAN are all positive (equation 1). Hence what is meant here is S_LAND - E_LUC, or on p37 L6 and in caption to Figure 8: S_LAND + S_OCEAN - E_LUC.

- Table 1: Ballantyne et al. 2012 actually use 2.124 for the conversion of ppm to GtC. The calculations were done with this factor and are just reported here with
rounded numbers? However the GtCO2 to GtC conversion factor is not rounded… Perhaps better to state here the unrounded ppm to GtC factor.

- Excel spreadsheet: Would help the user of the spreadsheet if the meaning of the red numbers in the carbon budget spreadsheet were explicitly mentioned in the description.

- p49 L16: "in press. in press."

Hide

AR by Corinne Le Quere on behalf of the Authors (27 Nov 2015) Author's response Manuscript

Short summary

Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere is important to understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. We describe data sets and a methodology to quantify all major components of the global carbon budget, including their uncertainties, based on a range of data and models and their interpretation by a broad scientific community.