Periodic Reporting for period 1 - OceanICU (Ocean-ICU Improving Carbon Understanding)
Période du rapport: 2022-11-01 au 2024-04-30
The ocean plays a pivotal role in the ocean C cycle, assimilating about 25% of the CO2 we emit to the atmosphere, with biological processes separately storing enough carbon to keep atmospheric CO2 about 200ppm lower than it would be if the ocean were abiotic. The future evolution of all these terms will affect the cost, intensity and timing of climate change and conventionally we assume that this biological term has been unchanged by human activities. However, the current and future scale of human impacts via processes such as fishing, mining, trawling, dredging and drilling are potentially so large that this assumption is questionable. This offers the prospect that active management of these processes may allow the impacts of climate change to be reduced. Nevertheless, a great deal of information is required to test this assumption. Based on this context OceanICU aims to:
1. Define the baseline of ocean C uptake occurring now against which change can be judged
2. Investigate processes in ocean C sequestration and storage that are particularly susceptible to disruption by human activities
3. Use this new information to generate new computer models that will allow policy makers, industrialists and the wider public to assess the effects of different resource extraction activities on the ocean C cycle.
1. Define the baseline of ocean C uptake occurring now against which change can be judged
2. Investigate processes in ocean C sequestration and storage that are particularly susceptible to disruption by human activities
3. Use this new information to generate new computer models that will allow policy makers, industrialists and the wider public to assess the effects of different resource extraction activities on the ocean C cycle.
OceanICU has made substantial progress in closing knowledge gaps during the 1st reporting period. We managed the project effectively, overseeing financial aspects, internal and external communication, and data management. Within our scientific work packages, we developed new estimates of the global ocean carbon sink and linked changes in the biological carbon pump in the North Atlantic to AMOC changes. We conducted fieldwork, began synthesizing data, and started developing models to understand the impact of climate multi-stressors on the biological carbon pump. Our team created a Global Biogeochemical Argo database to estimate mean particle size in the upper 100m of the ocean, quantify the role of zooplankton and higher trophic levels in particle flux, and measure microbial carbon fixation and respiration in the North Atlantic. We collated literature on the environmental consequences of mining and trawling, developed modeling scenarios, and adapted and extended benthic and pelagic biogeochemical models. We extended the FABM-based model platform, prepared models for various physical and biogeochemical processes, and initiated collaboration with other work packages. In collaboration with the European Digital Twin Ocean project, we developed a prototype of the “GOTM-FABM” decision support tool. To bridge the gap between science and policy, we engaged stakeholders, recruited industry and NGO participants, and compiled data sources for a new map layer in the European Atlas of the Seas.
The current state of the art in the three major areas of OceanICU work:
1) Our current best estimate of ocean C uptake derived from data diverges significantly from the one derived from models,
2) Our knowledge of some key ocean C cycling processes, particularly those susceptible to ocean resource extraction processes, are not able to simulate the response of the ocean C cycle to the increasing level of ocean resource extraction we anticipate occurring
3) We do not have simple tools containing new models which can allow policy makers, industrial corporations and wider society to address the impact of their activities on the ocean C cycle and hence to design mitigation measures adequately.
Although we are making significant strides in these areas, we expect the full benefits of OceanICU to be fully realized in future reporting periods. Firstly, work within WP2 is indicating that using a completely separate set of atmospheric observations will yield a sink strength consistent with the ocean observations. We anticipate this result will be highly significant for the global carbon project's interpretation of the global carbon cycle and subsequent policy development. Additionally, we are beginning to understand the relationship between the AMOC and the ocean carbon cycle, which suggests a negative feedback is likely; any slowdown in AMOC strength could lead to enhanced biological carbon storage. Our pathway to impact for these key results is through the IPCC and Global Carbon projects, with which we are well connected.
Secondly, WP3-WP5 are focusing on understanding key biological processes, including the role of various factors in regulating particle sinking (currently, there is no unified model explaining the observations) and the biological contributions to the inorganic carbon cycle (our current understanding is limited to a crude knowledge of ballast and the role of higher trophic levels above zooplankton).
Thirdly, we are developing new models and tools to enable non-experts to assess the impact of their activities on the ocean carbon cycle using the EU Digital Twin as the primary model platform. This is informed by new understandings of likely future scenarios (WP6, WP7, and WP8).
1) Our current best estimate of ocean C uptake derived from data diverges significantly from the one derived from models,
2) Our knowledge of some key ocean C cycling processes, particularly those susceptible to ocean resource extraction processes, are not able to simulate the response of the ocean C cycle to the increasing level of ocean resource extraction we anticipate occurring
3) We do not have simple tools containing new models which can allow policy makers, industrial corporations and wider society to address the impact of their activities on the ocean C cycle and hence to design mitigation measures adequately.
Although we are making significant strides in these areas, we expect the full benefits of OceanICU to be fully realized in future reporting periods. Firstly, work within WP2 is indicating that using a completely separate set of atmospheric observations will yield a sink strength consistent with the ocean observations. We anticipate this result will be highly significant for the global carbon project's interpretation of the global carbon cycle and subsequent policy development. Additionally, we are beginning to understand the relationship between the AMOC and the ocean carbon cycle, which suggests a negative feedback is likely; any slowdown in AMOC strength could lead to enhanced biological carbon storage. Our pathway to impact for these key results is through the IPCC and Global Carbon projects, with which we are well connected.
Secondly, WP3-WP5 are focusing on understanding key biological processes, including the role of various factors in regulating particle sinking (currently, there is no unified model explaining the observations) and the biological contributions to the inorganic carbon cycle (our current understanding is limited to a crude knowledge of ballast and the role of higher trophic levels above zooplankton).
Thirdly, we are developing new models and tools to enable non-experts to assess the impact of their activities on the ocean carbon cycle using the EU Digital Twin as the primary model platform. This is informed by new understandings of likely future scenarios (WP6, WP7, and WP8).