Quantifying memory and persistence in the atmosphere–land and ocean carbon system

Jonas, Matthias; Bun, Rostyslav; Ryzha, Iryna; Żebrowski, Piotr

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-439-2022

Articles | Volume 13, issue 1

https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-439-2022

© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-439-2022

© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 13, issue 1

Research article

|

10 Mar 2022

Research article |

| 10 Mar 2022

Quantifying memory and persistence in the atmosphere–land and ocean carbon system

Matthias Jonas, Rostyslav Bun, Iryna Ryzha, and Piotr Żebrowski

Download

Final revised paper (published on 10 Mar 2022)
Supplement to the final revised paper
Preprint (discussion started on 01 Jul 2021)
Supplement to the preprint

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

RC1:
'Comment on esd-2021-27', Victor Brovkin, 08 Sep 2021

The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-27/esd-2021-27-RC1-supplement.pdf

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-2021-27-RC1
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Matthias JONAS, 28 Sep 2021
  
  Detailed response attached.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-2021-27-AC1
RC2:
'Comment on esd-2021-27', Anonymous Referee #2, 21 Sep 2021

In this work, the authors studied the memory and persistence in the atmosphere-land/ocean carbon system. They introduced three parameters, the delay time, memory, and persistence to characterize the system, and found that since 1850, the atmosphere-land/ocean system has been trapped progressively in terms of persistence. This is a very interesting topic, which I also believe to be very important for better understanding the global warming. However, I am afraid that the current version of the manuscript still requires a major revision. Particularly, the readability needs to be improved.

1) One of my main concerns is about the stress-strain model. Why is this model useful in understanding the memory/persistence in the system? More detailed discussions and arguments are needed.

2) The “Abstract” should be improved. Now it is quite similar to the first three paragraphs of the “Motivation”.

3) A more detailed overview of the previous progresses on climate persistence may be helpful. In the current version, the authors only mentioned the previous studies very briefly, as shown on page 7 (lines 24-25), page 8 (lines 1-4). However, what are the limitations of the previous studies? I would suggest the authors to make a more detailed introduction.

4) The definitions of “delay time”, “memory”, and “persistence” should be clearly given in the main text. What is the differences between “memory” and “persistence”?

5) Regarding the “Data and Conversion Factors” section, I would suggest the authors to add more information (about the data used in this study) here. It is not convenient for the readers to search for the data information in the supplementary information. At least, some basic information should be provided in the main text.

6) When estimating the compression modulus K, why is the atmosphere assumed to be represented by a Hooke element in the MB? What is a Hooke element?

7) The current manuscript is very technical. For me, I would like to see more explanations of the results from the perspective of climate sciences.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-2021-27-RC2
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Matthias JONAS, 28 Sep 2021
  
  Detailed response attached.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-2021-27-AC2

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (04 Oct 2021) by Zhenghui Xie

AR by Matthias JONAS on behalf of the Authors (06 Dec 2021) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (15 Dec 2021) by Zhenghui Xie

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (27 Jan 2022) by Zhenghui Xie

AR by Matthias JONAS on behalf of the Authors (31 Jan 2022) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (04 Feb 2022) by Zhenghui Xie

AR by Matthias JONAS on behalf of the Authors (14 Feb 2022) Author's response Manuscript

Download

Article (1956 KB)
Full-text XML

Short summary

We interpret carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel burning and land use as a global stress–strain experiment to reflect the overall behavior of the atmosphere–land and ocean system in response to increasing CO₂ emissions since 1850. The system has been trapped progressively in terms of persistence, while its ability to build up memory has been reduced. We expect system failures globally well before 2050 if the current trend in emissions is not reversed immediately and sustainably.