PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 12, 2017Earth system science data2,588 citationsOpen Access

Global fire emissions estimates during 1997–2016

View Full Paper
GWGuido R. van der WerfJRJames T. RandersonLGLouis Giglio

Key Points

  • To quantify global fire emissions and analyze changes due to various environmental drivers from 1997 to 2016.
  • Developed the fourth version of the Global Fire Emissions Database (GFED4) using advanced modeling techniques.
  • Incorporated new estimates of burned areas, including small fires, and optimized fuel consumption parameters based on field data.
  • Utilized a higher spatial resolution model and updated emission factors for trace gases and aerosols.
  • Global mean carbon emissions during 1997–2016 were 2.2 Pg C yr−1, peaking in 1997 at 3.0 Pg C yr−1 and reaching a low of 1.8 Pg C yr−1 in 2013.
  • Emissions estimates were 11% higher than previous estimates (GFED3), primarily due to a 37% increase in burned area from small fires.
  • Excluding small fire data, average emissions dropped to 1.5 Pg C yr−1, showing significant regional differences in emissions.

Abstract

Abstract. Climate, land use, and other anthropogenic and natural drivers have the potential to influence fire dynamics in many regions. To develop a mechanistic understanding of the changing role of these drivers and their impact on atmospheric composition, long-term fire records are needed that fuse information from different satellite and in situ data streams. Here we describe the fourth version of the Global Fire Emissions Database (GFED) and quantify global fire emissions patterns during 1997–2016. The modeling system, based on the Carnegie–Ames–Stanford Approach (CASA) biogeochemical model, has several modifications from the previous version and uses higher quality input datasets. Significant upgrades include (1) new burned area estimates with contributions from small fires, (2) a revised fuel consumption parameterization optimized using field observations, (3) modifications that improve the representation of fuel consumption in frequently burning landscapes, and (4) fire severity estimates that better represent continental differences in burning processes across boreal regions of North America and Eurasia. The new version has a higher spatial resolution (0.25°) and uses a different set of emission factors that separately resolves trace gas and aerosol emissions from temperate and boreal forest ecosystems. Global mean carbon emissions using the burned area dataset with small fires (GFED4s) were 2.2 × 1015 grams of carbon per year (Pg C yr−1) during 1997–2016, with a maximum in 1997 (3.0 Pg C yr−1) and minimum in 2013 (1.8 Pg C yr−1). These estimates were 11 % higher than our previous estimates (GFED3) during 1997–2011, when the two datasets overlapped. This net increase was the result of a substantial increase in burned area (37 %), mostly due to the inclusion of small fires, and a modest decrease in mean fuel consumption (−19 %) to better match estimates from field studies, primarily in savannas and grasslands. For trace gas and aerosol emissions, differences between GFED4s and GFED3 were often larger due to the use of revised emission factors. If small fire burned area was excluded (GFED4 without the s for small fires), average emissions were 1.5 Pg C yr−1. The addition of small fires had the largest impact on emissions in temperate North America, Central America, Europe, and temperate Asia. This small fire layer carries substantial uncertainties; improving these estimates will require use of new burned area products derived from high-resolution satellite imagery. Our revised dataset provides an internally consistent set of burned area and emissions that may contribute to a better understanding of multi-decadal changes in fire dynamics and their impact on the Earth system. GFED data are available from http://www.globalfiredata.org.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Werf et al. (2017) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d753bb086f9d6299f30769https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-9-697-2017
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper