4.7 Article

Constraining global air-sea gas exchange for CO2 with recent bomb 14C measurements

Journal

GLOBAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL CYCLES
Volume 21, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2006GB002784

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

[1] The (CO2)-C-14 released into the stratosphere during bomb testing in the early 1960s provides a global constraint on air-sea gas exchange of soluble atmospheric gases like CO2. Using the most complete database of dissolved inorganic radiocarbon, (DIC)-C-14, available to date and a suite of ocean general circulation models in an inverse mode we recalculate the ocean inventory of bomb-produced (DIC)-C-14 in the global ocean and confirm that there is a 25% decrease from previous estimates using older DI14C data sets. Additionally, we find a 33% lower globally averaged gas transfer velocity for CO2 compared to previous estimates (Wanninkhof, 1992) using the NCEP/NCAR Reanalysis 1 1954-2000 where the global mean winds are 6.9 m s(-1). Unlike some earlier ocean radiocarbon studies, the implied gas transfer velocity finally closes the gap between small-scale deliberate tracer studies and global-scale estimates. Additionally, the total inventory of bomb-produced radiocarbon in the ocean is now in agreement with global budgets based on radiocarbon measurements made in the stratosphere and troposphere. Using the implied relationship between wind speed and gas transfer velocity k(s) = 0.27 [u(10)(2)] (Sc/660)(-0.5) and standard partial pressure difference climatology of CO2 we obtain an net air-sea flux estimate of 1.3 +/- 0.5 PgCyr(-1) for 1995. After accounting for the carbon transferred from rivers to the deep ocean, our estimate of oceanic uptake (1.8 +/- 0.5 PgCyr(-1)) compares well with estimates based on ocean inventories, ocean transport inversions using ocean concentration data, and model simulations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available