Sensitivity of biomass burning emissions estimates to land surface information

• Published in: Biogeosciences 2022-04, Vol.19 (7), p.2059-2078
• Main Authors: Saito, Makoto, Shiraishi, Tomohiro, Hirata, Ryuichi, Niwa, Yosuke, Saito, Kazuyuki, Steinbacher, Martin, Worthy, Doug, Matsunaga, Tsuneo
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aerosols; Biomass; Biomass burning; Burning; Carbon cycle; Carbon cycle (Biogeochemistry); Carbon dioxide; Carbon monoxide; Carbon monoxide emissions; Datasets; Distribution; Emissions; Environmental aspects; Estimates; Fires; Gases; Greenhouse gases; Ground-based observation; Land cover; Regions; Remote sensing; Satellite observation; Sensitivity; Simulation; Spatial variability; Spatial variations; Tracer gas; Tracer transport; Tracers; Tracers (Chemistry)
• ISSN: 1726-4189; 1726-4170; 1726-4189
• DOI: 10.5194/bg-19-2059-2022

Emissions from biomass burning (BB) are a key source of atmospheric tracer gases that affect the atmospheric carbon cycle. We developed four sets of global BB emissions estimates (named GlcGlob, GlcGeoc, McdGlob, and McdGeoc) using a bottom-up approach and by combining the remote sensing products related to fire distribution with two aboveground biomass (AGB) and two land cover classification (LCC) distributions. The sensitivity of the estimates of BB emissions to the AGB and LCC data was evaluated using the carbon monoxide (CO) emissions associated with each BB estimate. Using the AGB and/or LCC data led to substantially different spatial estimates of CO emissions, with a large (factor of approximately 3) spread of estimates for the mean annual CO emissions: 526±53, 219±35, 624±57, and 293±44 Tg CO yr−1 for GlcGlob, GlcGeoc, McdGlob, and McdGeoc, respectively, and 415±47 Tg CO yr−1 for their ensemble average (EsmAve). We simulated atmospheric CO variability at an approximately 2.5∘ grid using an atmospheric tracer transport model and the BB emissions estimates and compared it with ground-based and satellite observations. At ground-based observation sites during fire seasons, the impact of intermittent fire events was poorly defined in our simulations due to the coarse resolution, which obscured temporal and spatial variability in the simulated atmospheric CO concentration. However, when compared at the regional and global scales, the distribution of atmospheric CO concentrations in the simulations shows substantial differences among the estimates of BB emissions. These results indicate that the estimates of BB emissions are highly sensitive to the AGB and LCC data.