4.8 Article

Constraining China's land carbon sink from emerging satellite CO2 observations: Progress and challenges

期刊

GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY
卷 28, 期 23, 页码 6838-6846

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/gcb.16412

关键词

atmospheric inversion; China's land carbon sink; retrieval algorithm; satellite; XCO2

资金

  1. Second Tibetan Plateau Scientific Expedition and Research Program [2019QZKK0208]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [42001104, 42101090]
  3. NASA's Carbon Cycle Science Program [80HQTR21T0101]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article reviews satellite missions dedicated to CO2 monitoring and recent progress in using satellite CO2 measurements to estimate China's land carbon sink. The limitations and challenges of current space platforms, retrieval algorithms, and inverse modeling are summarized. The study highlights the large uncertainties in contemporary satellite-based estimates of China's land carbon sink and discusses opportunities for continuous improvements in better constraining it using space-based CO2 measurements.
Land carbon sink is a vital component for the achievement of China's ambitious carbon neutrality goal, but its magnitude is poorly known. Atmospheric observations and inverse models are valuable tools to constrain the China's land carbon sink. Space-based CO2 measurements from satellites form an emerging data stream for application of such atmospheric inversions. Here, we reviewed the satellite missions that is dedicated to the monitoring of CO2, and the recent progresses on the inversion of China's land carbon sink using satellite CO2 measurements. We summarized the limitations and challenges in current space platforms, retrieval algorithms, and the inverse modeling. It is shown that there are large uncertainties of contemporary satellite-based estimates of China's land carbon sink. We discussed future opportunities of continuous improvements in three aspects to better constrain China's land carbon sink with space-based CO2 measurements.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据