Investigating carbon and nitrogen conservation in reported CMIP6 Earth system model data

Authors:
Open Access
Publisher website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Reliable, robust, and consistent data are essential foundations for analysis of carbon cycle feedbacks. Here, we consider the data from multiple Earth system models (ESMs) participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). We identify a mass conservation issue in the reported carbon and nitrogen data, with a few exceptions for specific models and reporting levels. The accumulated mass imbalance in the reported data can amount to hundreds of gigatons of carbon or nitrogen by the end of the simulated period, largely exceeding the total carbon–nitrogen pool size changes over the same period. Nitrogen mass imbalance is evident across all reported organic and inorganic pools, with mineral nitrogen exhibiting the most significant cumulative mass imbalance. Due to a lack of detail in the reported data, we cannot uniquely identify the cause of this imbalance. However, we postulate that the carbon mass imbalance primarily arises from missing fluxes in the reported data and inconsistencies between these data and the definitions provided by the C4MIP protocol (e.g., land-use and fire emissions), rather than from an underlying mass conservation issue in the models themselves. Our findings suggest that future CMIP reporting protocols should consider incorporating mass conservation into their data validation processes so that such issues are caught before users have to deal with them, rather than forcing all users to handle this issue in their own way. In addition, attention from model groups to the detailed diagnostic request and definitions, along with their own quality control, will also help to avoid such issues in future. Given that no additional CMIP6 data are currently being published and none are expected in the future, we recommend that data users that rely on a closed carbon–nitrogen cycle address potential flux imbalances by using the workarounds provided in this study.
All Related Versions
Funding Information
  • Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (National Environmental Science Program, Climate Systems Hub)
  • Horizon 2020 (101003536)
  • Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (Met Office Hadley Centre Climate Programme)
  • Natural Environment Research Council (NE/S007458/1)

This publication has 56 references indexed in Scilit: