Sentences with phrase «vegetation carbon increases»

The spatial extent of the areas experiencing decreased vegetation carbon increases monotonically with warming above +3 °C, as does the intermodel agreement on these reductions.

For example, at 4 °C of global land surface warming (510 — 758 ppm of CO2), vegetation carbon increases by 52 — 477 Pg C (224 Pg C mean), mainly due to CO2 fertilization of photosynthesis.

Not exact matches

The simulations suggested that the indirect effects of increased CO2 on net primary productivity (how much carbon dioxide vegetation takes in during photosynthesis minus how much carbon dioxide the plants release during respiration) are large and variable, ranging from less than 10 per cent to more than 100 per cent of the size of direct effects.

The researchers believe the greening is a response to higher atmospheric carbon dioxide inducing decreases in plant stomatal conductance — the measure of the rate of passage of carbon dioxide entering, or water vapor exiting, through the stomata of a leaf — and increases in soil water, thus enhancing vegetation growth.

«If ozone continues to increase, vegetation will take up less and less of our carbon dioxide emissions, which will leave more CO2 in the atmosphere, adding to global warming,» Sitch says.

She has already found a large increase in soil carbon two years after a single application of compost, probably due to enhanced vegetation growth.

an emerging body of science indicates that rapidly increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide may be boosting the onrushing waves of woody vegetation.

Desertification also contributes to climate change, with land degradation and related loss of vegetation resulting in increased emissions and reduced carbon sink.

For instance, the sensitivity only including the fast feedbacks (e.g. ignoring land ice and vegetation), or the sensitivity of a particular class of climate model (e.g. the «Charney sensitivity»), or the sensitivity of the whole system except the carbon cycle (the Earth System Sensitivity), or the transient sensitivity tied to a specific date or period of time (i.e. the Transient Climate Response (TCR) to 1 % increasing CO2 after 70 years).

Worldwide, vegetation carbon storage and leaf cover are increasing in response to rising CO2.

Complete restoration of deforested areas is unrealistic, yet 100 GtC carbon drawdown is conceivable because: (1) the human - enhanced atmospheric CO2 level increases carbon uptake by some vegetation and soils, (2) improved agricultural practices can convert agriculture from a CO2 ource into a CO2 sink [174], (3) biomass - burning power plants with CO2 capture and storage can contribute to CO2 drawdown.

Besides food production, another benefit of increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is the lush vegetation that results.

Decaying vegetation increases the levels of ammonia and carbon dioxide; nobody wants that!

The resulting increased / decreased ice is amplified by «various feedbacks, including ice - albedo, dust, vegetation and, of course, the carbon cycle which amplify the direct effects of the orbital changes.»

Yet, as Ashley Ballantyne's work shows, current vegetation levels are still soaking up about have the carbon emissions, even as emission rates have increased.

This is due to vegetation growth in the Northern Hemisphere sucking down carbon faster than the average 2.06 increase in C in the atmosphere.

Considering the carbon - cycle feedback, some models (e.g. Cox et al.) estimate large positive vegetation feedback (increased soil respiration, lower photosynthesis due to increased vegetation stress, increased fire frequency...) and some of the most extreme scenarios predict the CO2 concentration to be up to 980 ppm.

The study, which appears in November's issue of Energy Policy, determined that while increases in temperature and carbon dioxide levels may actually benefit vegetation in the short run, rising ozone levels would more than offset those gains by harming crops.

As Arctic and sub-Arctic regions warm more than the global average, the increase in temperature could lead to more regular fire damage to vegetation and soils and carbon release.

More generally, increased vegetation cover lowers albedo, meaning that more of the sun's light is absorbed which in turn warms the climate locally (another positive feedback), as well as increasing evapotranspiration and carbon uptake.

According to a new study in PNAS, in some regions more than a quarter of the warming from increased carbon dioxide is due to its direct impact on vegetation.

Wårlind, D., Smith, B., Hickler, T., and Arneth, A.: Nitrogen feedbacks increase future terrestrial ecosystem carbon uptake in an individual - based dynamic vegetation model, Biogeosciences, 11, 6131 - 6146, doi: 10.5194 / bg -11-6131-2014, 2014 link

This caused a rapid increase in vegetation in 2011, which the team thought might have a significant effect on carbon uptake.

The sink swallowed up roughly 0.77 gigaton of carbon per year, persisting despite a significant increase in biomass burning emissions that occurred during the dry season of 2011, fueled by the rapid growth of vegetation that year.

These facts help explain why, in spite of the Earth's air temperature increasing to a level that the IPCC claims is unprecedented in the the past millennium or more, a recent study by Randall et al. (2013) found that the 14 % extra carbon dioxide fertilization caused by human emissions between 1982 and 2010 caused an average worldwide increase in vegetation foliage by 11 % after adjusting the data for precipitation effects.

Some of these plants are consumed for food, fiber, and timber while others are replenishing or increasing carbon in soils and vegetation.

Peter Cox is the originator / author of the Triffid dynamic global vegetation model which was used to predict dieback of the Amazonian rain forest by 2050 and as a consequence a strong positive climate - carbon cycle feedback (i.e., an acceleration of global warming) with a resultant increase in global mean surface temperature by 8 deg.

In addition, it has been reported that Amazonian rain forests are increasing their vegetation by about 900 pounds of carbon per acre per year (113), or approximately 2 tons of biomass per acre per year.»

As temperatures continue to rise around the globe, more vegetation will spring up in the frigid region, potentially pulling even more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere due to increased plant productivity.

If we stopped letting cattle graze on federal land and allowed the vegetation there to naturally regrow, we'd save on emissions from lowered beef production and increase the capacity of the land to serve as a carbon sink.

We find, when all seven models are considered for one representative concentration pathway × general circulation model combination, such uncertainties explain 30 % more variation in modeled vegetation carbon change than responses of net primary productivity alone, increasing to 151 % for non-HYBRID4 models.

But if vegetation wilts, and soils turn to dust over large areas of already parched land, then the carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere will increase even more.

Most land supports increased vegetation carbon, with simulations agreeing on this increase in many locations.

They include the physical, chemical and biological processes that control the oceanic storage of carbon, and are calibrated against geochemical and isotopic constraints on how ocean carbon storage has changed over the decades and carbon storage in terrestrial vegetation and soils, and how it responds to increasing CO2, temperature, rainfall and other factors.

Agreement nevertheless emerges on increases in future global vegetation carbon, with large regional increases across much of the boreal forest, western Amazonia, central Africa, western China, and southeastern Asia.

Future global vegetation carbon change calculated by seven global vegetation models using climate outputs and associated increasing CO2 from five GCMs run with four RCPs, expressed as the change from the 1971 — 1999 mean relative to change in global mean land temperature.

Although increased vegetation would sequester additional carbon, this would be more - than - offset by the loss of the albedo effect, whereby sunlight bounces off white (snow and ice covered) parts of the Earth.

Previous modeling studies have also consistently predicted increased global vegetation carbon under future scenarios of climate and CO2, but with considerable variation in absolute values (2 — 4).

Vegetation carbon -LRB--RRB- was predicted to increase by an average of 270 Pg C from preindustrial levels across the models by 2100, but saturating NPP and increasing heterotrophic respiration led to a reduction in NEP after 2050.

Policies which include improving carbon storage by increasing vegetation and biodiversity, along with reduction in carbon emissions, will help to balance global atmospheric carbon.

As a result, the new model found that the increase in carbon uptake by more vegetation will be overshadowed by a much larger amount of carbon released into the atmosphere.

The carbon loss occurred first through the removal of the original vegetation, which stored much carbon in its leaves, stems and trunks; then through the oxidation of carbon in newly exposed soils; and finally through increased soil erosion, which carried away much of the organic - rich sediment during flooding.

Impacts ranged from a strong increase to a severe loss of vegetation carbon (cv), depending on differences in climate projections, as well as the physiological response to rising [CO2].

Complete restoration of deforested areas is unrealistic, yet 100 GtC carbon drawdown is conceivable because: (1) the human - enhanced atmospheric CO2 level increases carbon uptake by some vegetation and soils, (2) improved agricultural practices can convert agriculture from a CO2 ource into a CO2 sink [174], (3) biomass - burning power plants with CO2 capture and storage can contribute to CO2 drawdown.

This in turn increases the biomass in vegetation and soils and so fosters a carbon sink on land.

... Maybe some one should have a look at the disappearing vegetation as a cause for the increasing carbon...

Double CO2 climate scenarios increase wildfire events by 40 - 50 % in California (Fried et al., 2004), and double fire risk in Cape Fynbos (Midgley et al., 2005), favouring re-sprouting plants in Fynbos (Bond and Midgley, 2003), fire - tolerant shrub dominance in the Mediterranean Basin (Mouillot et al., 2002), and vegetation structural change in California (needle - leaved to broad - leaved trees, trees to grasses) and reducing productivity and carbon sequestration (Lenihan et al., 2003).

«Replacing the native vegetation by sown pastures or crops might increase the meat yield and reduce the carbon footprint but generates negative impacts on the use of nutrients, pesticide contamination, soil erosion and use of fossil fuels,» said Modernel.

For negative lags, the increased fire leads to reduction in the vegetation carbon.

Including a match with other observations like the mass balance, the 13C / 12C and 14C / 12C trends, the oxygen balance, the increase of carbon species in the ocean surface and vegetation, etc...