From the Helmholtz Association
Extreme weather, climate and the carbon cycle
Extreme weather and climate events like storms, heavy precipitation and droughts and heat waves prevent the uptake of 3 giga-tonnes of carbon by the global vegetation. A team of scientists under the lead of Markus Reichstein, Director of the Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry in Jena, Germany, investigated the effect of extremes on the carbon cycle from the terrestrial ecosystem perspective for the first time.
In the current issue of Nature (14th of August 2013), they use Earth observation methods and numerical models to show that especially extreme droughts lead to a strong reduction in the carbon sequestration of forests, grass- and croplands. This reduction in the regional and global carbon uptake has the potential to influence the global climate. Especially large scale events like the heat wave in western and southern Europe in the year 2003 provide the evidence that such extremes events have a much stronger and long lasting impact on the carbon cycle than expected so far.
One part of the question is the response of arable ecosystems: plants take up carbondioxide, soils are an important storage for the carbon produced by plants, which they release driven by increasing temperature. However, in the case of croplands we observe a complex interplay of these natural processes with the human management either increasing or reducing the impacts of an event. “In general the timing of an event in the course of the development of crops clearly influences the magnitude of the impact on the carbon cycle. Extreme temperature in spring can foster growth, prevent pollination, or have no effect at all, depending on when they appear in the cropping cycle and the type of crop” says Martin Wattenbach from the GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, who contributed to this part of the study. “Rice yields are reduced when temperatures rise above 37°C, but only in the short period of pollination in spring”
It is possible for farmers to mitigate extremes like droughts and heat waves by, for example, irrigation. However, they are limited by the amount of water available at the time of the event and their technical resources. Since information on spatial and temporal patterns of management practise such as irrigation and annual crop distribution during an extreme event are largely unknown, the demand for further research remains very high. In addition to this part of the carbon cycle playing a relevant role in climate, the long term supply with agricultural produce may also be affected.
Reichstein, M., Bahn, M., Ciais, P., Frank, D., Mahecha, M.D., Seneviratne, S. I., Zscheischler, J., Beer, C., Buchmann, N., Frank, D.C., Papale, D., Rammig, A., Smith, P., Thonicke, K., van der Velde, M., Vicca, S., Walz, A., and Wattenbach, M. (2013): “Climate extremes and the carbon cycle”, Nature. doi: 10.1038/nature12350, 14.08.2013
” the demand for further research remains very high. ”
Oh goody, the leeches have DEMANDS now.
Ferdinand;
Yes, it will be amusing, should I last so long, to read in a few decades how humanity greened and rescued the biosphere in spite of itself by emitting CO2 that it didn’t want to. Hyuk-hyuk, he said!
Not long ago I read a paper – report (very alarmist) from one of the employees of Dutch institute KNMI (sorry I can not quickly find the link) that yes, the number of extreme events in the World – global, has increased but … no drought.
Increased frequent of extreme precipitation.
… but if the increased number of droughts …
I remember only two papers:
Terrestrial Gross Carbon Dioxide Uptake: Global Distribution and Covariation with Climate, Beer et al. 2010. (http://www.sciencemag.org/content/329/5993/834.abstract):
“Most likely, the association of GPP and climate in process-oriented models can be improved by including negative feedback mechanisms (eg, adaptation) that might stabilize the systems.”
The ecological role of climate extremes: current understanding and future prospects, Smith, 2011. (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2011.01833.x/pdf):
“Finally, with a long-term field experiment where statistically extreme drought events were applied to constructed European grassland communities for five consecutive years, (Jentsch et al. 2011) show a lack of large effects for the majority of the 32 response parameters measured. For example, above- and below-ground productivity remained unchanged across all years of the study …”
I will not refuse myself the pleasure of cite:
“Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation” (www.ipcc-wg2.gov/SREX/images/uploads/SREX-SPMbrochure_FINAL.pdf), 2012.:
“There is medium confidence that some regions of the world have experienced more intense and longer droughts, in particular in southern Europe and West Africa, but in some regions droughts have become less frequent, less intense, or shorter, for example, in central North America and northwestern Australia.”
“Furthermore, there is low agreement in this evidence, and thus overall low confidence at the global scale regarding even the sign of these changes.”
They say ‘extreme droughts’ which sounds a bit obvious. Just look at the middle of the Sahara. Just this year we had papers showing how arid areas are becoming greener and arable land becoming more productive due to co2 fertilisation [HERE]. I also understand that more co2 in the atmosphere makes vegetation more drought resistant. It looks like this paper has been published to keep the funds flowing in the right direction in the face of contradictory observations.
As a footnote see one Hartmut Grassl, the a former “director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg until 2005” and “once director of the UN World Climate Program in Geneva from 1994 to 1999”. He can now be found on the Board of Trustees of the large re-insurer Munich Re. You can also find the other German alarmists at Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research — PIK in bed with the insurance industry. Munich Re has been fanning climate alarmism since the 1970s I believe.
Gobblygook looking for a hand out, these people need to get a real job. Maybe tending pot plants in some ones productive office and researching their reaction to water, CO2 and the office temperature, you never know they might learn some thing.
Right at the beginning, they state “Extreme weather and climate events”, then state merely weather events “like storms, heavy precipitation and droughts and heat waves”.
Now a climate ‘event’ might be something like Yellowstone, Toba and Laki going kerblooey all at once, but calling a heat wave or a downpour a climate-anything is ridiculous. Still, gotta keep that junk-science funding handle turning…
“Since information on spatial and temporal patterns of management practise such as irrigation and annual crop distribution during an extreme event are largely unknown, the demand for further research remains very high.”
I translate: “largely unknown” = “Not a frigging clue”!
Haven’t read the latest musings from UK’s Wet Office, but there last projections of portentous BS puter modelling, went something like this……”some areas will have more rainfall, some area will have less rainfall, some areas will have more drought, some areas will have less drought, some areas will have higher temperatures, some areas will have lower temperatures”. It was embarrassing reading to be frank.
The vast majority of the carbon cycle takes place in bodies of water, like oceans, where droughts don’t really have much impact, if I recall.
So…increased atmospheric CO2=climate change=more extreme events=less CO2 uptake for vegetation=more CO2=more climate change…OMG, the feedback mechanism is more positive than we estimated!!!! (do I really need a sarc tag?)
Mike Bromley the Kurd says:
August 15, 2013 at 11:56 pm
What is a climate “event”? Wouldn’t that take some time to occur? How would you know when it started? A change in the…….weather? I stopped taking this latest Planck in the Platitudeform seriously at that very first assertion.
——————————————————————————–
We had a big thunderstorm with high wind and hail last Saturday. Does that count?
Biogeochemistry—impressive. Now they just need to add physics to the title. “physicalbiogeochemistry” or “biogeochemicalphysics” would make it sound much more impressive.
I’ve heard rumors that we had droughts and the like long before we had an Environment and Climate.
Since irrigation is a man-made process this study sounds like humans help reduce the impact of completely natural droughts. That won’t go over well with the anti-humanists.
Stop taking this paper so seriously. As I said earlier http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/15/vicious-carbon-cycles/#comment-1391721 this is a joke played by the researchers and everyone is falling for it including their funders and the journals. Scatter some hot-button warmist phrases through a report that states the blindingly obvious and get funded for it AND published.
Scamming the scammers brilliant.
Repeated use of the word “EXTREME!”… check
Use of the phrase “more than expected”… check
Vague, indefinite terms… check
Statement of the blatantly obvious… CHECK
Completely one-sided presentation of research… CHECK and DOUBLE CHECK
(Whereas, of course, optimal conditions experienced at non-extreme locations could easily enhance the uptake by 3 gigatonnes or more)
Hand out for more money… Triple Check, and Mate!
Yep, it’s “climate science” all right.
So how does this “paper” account for the increased annual variation in CO2 levels measured at Hawaii?
These Northern summer/winter cyclical changes indicate greater activity in the biosphere, not less, as this latest alarmist excretion would like us to believe.
@- Leo Morgan
“I’ve long wondered how much carbon is captured by bacteria, contributing to sediment at the bottom of lakes and oceans, and similarly how much is captured by fish excrement, fish corpse, dead seaweeds, phytoplankton and algae falling into sediment?”
These are the usual ways in which carbon on the active biological cycle is sequestered into the long term geological cycle. It has of course been the subject of extensive study, and the rate at which it happens is recorded rather neatly in any sediment core you take from lakes and oceans.
@- “Surely these capture methods will increase as carbon increases and the planet warms?
Does anyone have a link to an article that discusses these in terms accessible to an intelligent layman?”
Well unless you have a conspiracy theory which causes you to reject the most comprehensive compilation of scientific knowledge on this subject I would suggest starting with –
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch7s7-3-4.html
However if you find that assumes more intelligence than you think a layman can apply to the subject, or you arbitrarily reject it for non-scientific ideological reasons then try –
http://www1.whoi.edu/62987_ocean.pdf
Lady Life Grows (Esther Cook) says:
August 15, 2013 at 10:25 pm
Actually, I have concluded that there really is climate change going on, and it truly is dangerous. It is drought caused by human farming that bares (exposes) the soil. It is mitigated by animal herd management….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I agree and my farm, once a rented tobacco field and now pasture is an example. The farm used to have the richest soil in the county according to the Ag extension agent and the old soil survey. There was over two feet of loam now all washed into the sea and only the clay subsoil remained. The farm was barely able to support weeds when I purchased it.
Good soil conservation practices are well known but they cost quite a bit of money so they are not used on rented fields or on corporate owned farms that are only bought and sold for the purpose of making a profit. Betting the farm: As world population expands, the demand for arable land should soar. At least that’s what George Soros, Lord Rothschild, and other investors believe.
Farm families who have owned their farms for generations are much more likely to look at their land as a generational investment to be carefully taken care of.
I would have thought carbonation of rain water while in the air would have increased the removal of carbon D from the atmosphere.
Leo Morgan, you are already more of a scientist, and less of a layman, than Izen is. You are able to ask questions.
dp says: @ur momisugly August 15, 2013 at 11:57 pm
I’m pretty sure I read on this site recently that abundance of CO2 has led to the reversal of desertification around the world….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes, more CO2 means C3 plants do not have to have the stomata open as wide or as long and therefore they do not suffer as much water loss. A principle response of C3 plants to increasing concentrations of atmospheric CO2 (CO2) is to reduce transpirational water loss by decreasing stomatal conductance (gs) and simultaneously increase assimilation rates. Via this adaptation, vegetation has the ability to alter hydrology and climate.
CO2 increase also does the same for C4 plants. This is a very interesting study/survey of the literature on C4 Plants Adaptation to High Levels of CO2 and to Drought Environments It also touches on C3 plants. It makes a number of good observations although it is from the point of view:
“..Increase in global average temperatures would further result in drastic shifts in the annual precipitation with a 20% reduction per year, and about 20% loss in soil moisture (Schiermeier, 2008). Regarding plants, higher atmospheric CO2 levels tend to reduce stomatal conductance and transpiration, thereby lowering latent heat loss and causing higher leaf temperatures (Bernacchi et al., 2007). Thus, in the future, plants will likely experience increases in acute heat and drought stress, which can impact ecosystem productivity (Cias et al., 2005) and biodiversity (Thomas et al., 2004)….”
I guess these botanists never ever heard of evaporation rate and its correlation to temperature.
The above was written from the point same point of view as the paper under discussion and the authors try real hard to show ‘Global Warming’ will injure plants and thus the insertion of the drought resistance/water conservation from elevated CO2 “…means lower average transpiration and higher leaf temperatures in C4 plants, which may increase heat related damage…”
Another interesting tidbit:
Studies have revealed that about 10 percent of the moisture found in the atmosphere is released by plants through transpiration. The remaining 90 percent is mainly supplied by evaporation from oceans, seas, and other bodies of water (lakes, rivers, streams).
WJohn says:
August 15, 2013 at 10:41 pm
From: Institute for Climate Disruption Research
To: WJohn
Re: Grant request
Sir,
Your request for funding to travel and count people who water their plants is denied. The very notion of doing field work, collecting data, is counter to the principles of this department. Collection of field data just isn’t done!
However, should you wish this department to reconsider your research request, please submit a draft Abstract and Conclusion of your proposed paper, in compliance with the Institute’s Research Mandates, Section 2, paragraph 3. The Institute takes it’s responsibilities very seriously, as subparagraph 3b states “The Institute shall review the Abstract and Conclusions of any proposed research prior the start of such research.” As you know, the Institute cannot allow any research to be done which might even hint at a suggestion that global warming, climate change or climate disruption has any other cause other than anthropomorphic. Why this would be counter to the teachings of High Priest Gore and Chief Acolyte Mann.
Your options for research are limited to 1) literature review, in the mode of Cook, et al (the Department really believes that this is the future of all research, so much easier to get the results desired), or 2) employment of a suitable model*, in which all inputs variables, feedbacks and outputs can be tightly controlled (ref. Research Mandates, Section 4, paragraph 4, subparagraphs 2-6).
Compliance Officer
Dept of Climate Disruption Research
* Should you chose to employ a model, and insist on fieldwork as part of this research, the Compliance Office shall assign, in accordance with Research Guidelines Section 4, paragraph 4, subparagraph 8, a Compliance Officer to accompany said model to the field, to ensure the correct data is sent back to you at the Institute, as researchers are not permitted to do field work.
artw says:
August 16, 2013 at 6:54 am
Forgot the /sarc tag
Well, at its best, this paper is just another pathetic data extrapolation leading to dire consequences for mankind causing me irritable climate syndrome.
Bob says: @ur momisugly August 16, 2013 at 4:16 am
What is a climate “event”?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
A glacial an interglacial, an ice age, a Bond event, a Dansgaard–Oeschger event, a Heinrich event…
Everything the warmists talk of is just weather.
CodeTech says: @ur momisugly August 16, 2013 at 5:18 am
Repeated use of the word “EXTREME!”… check….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ROTFLMAO, I wonder if the Warmist Journals and ‘Pal reviewers’ use the same check list.