CMIP6 models agree on similar carbon cycle feedbacks between enhancing terrestrial and marine carbon sinks

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is a crucial component of climate mitigation required to reach international climate targets. However, gaps exist in our understanding of the responses and feedbacks of the Earth system to the deployment of CDR. In this study, we compare two complementary approaches that enhance the terrestrial and marine carbon sinks with afforestation and reforestation (A/R) and ocean alkalinity enhancement (OAE), respectively, under the high emission scenario SSP5-8.5. Eight CMIP6 Earth system models are utilized, enabling a quantification of both inter-model and internal variability. By mid-century, simulated large-scale deployment of A/R and OAE individually reduces atmospheric CO 2 concentrations by up to 20 ppm. For both methods, while carbon removal from the atmosphere is robust, it is difficult to detect the effects on global mean temperature, posing challenges for monitoring, reporting and verification of mitigation efforts. To quantify the carbon cycle feedbacks, we define the carbon cycle feedback ratio of A/R (OAE) as the ratio of changes in the marine (terrestrial) sink to changes in the terrestrial (marine) sink. We show that the carbon cycle feedback ratios of A/R and OAE have similar magnitudes, which are −16% and −13%, respectively. Moreover, although inter-model differences of the simulated amounts of carbon removal due to A/R are large, the corresponding carbon cycle feedback ratios of A/R are similar

Atmospheric sciences · Biology · Carbon cycle · Carbon fibers · Carbon flux · Carbon sink · Climate change · Ecosystem · Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics · Computer Science · Environmental Science · Ecology · Geology

• The coupled uncertainties in carbon dioxide removal and transient climate response to cumulative CO 2 emissions

  Open Access•Carla Maria Di Natale, Theresa Schaber et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2025

  Incluir item

• Effective carbon dioxide removal requires a One-Earth approach

  Open Access•Philip W Boyd, Jean‐pierre Gattuso et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2025

  Incluir item

• Efficacy of individual and combined terrestrial and marine carbon dioxide removal

  Open Access•Anusha Sathyanadh, H Esfandiari et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2025

  Incluir item

• Harmonization of global land use change and management for the period 850–2100 (LUH2) for CMIP6

  Open Access•G C Hurtt, Louise Chini et al.•Geoscientific Model Development•2020

  Incluir item

• Global emissions pathways under different socioeconomic scenarios for use in CMIP6

  Open Access•Matthew Gidden, Keywan Riahi et al.•Geoscientific Model Development•2019

  Incluir item

• Climate–Carbon Cycle Feedback Analysis

  Pierre Friedlingstein, Peter M Cox et al.•Journal of Climate•2006

  Incluir item

• Uncertainty in climate change projections

  Open Access•Clara Deser, Adam Phillips et al.•Climate Dynamics•2012

  Incluir item

• The Community Earth System Model Version 2 (Cesm2)

  Open Access•Gökhan Danabasoglu, Jean‐François Lamarque et al.•Journal of Advances in Modeling…•2020

  Incluir item

• Uncertainty in carbon budget estimates due to internal climate variability

  Open Access•Katarzyna Tokarska, Vivek K Arora et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2020

  Incluir item

• The signature of internal variability in the terrestrial carbon cycle

  Open Access•Gordon B Bonan, Danica Lombardozzi et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2020

  Incluir item

• On the emission-path dependency of the efficiency of ocean alkalinity enhancement

  Open Access•Jörg Schwinger, Timothée Bourgeois et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2024

  Incluir item

• Exploring SSP land-use dynamics using the Image model

  Open Access•Jonathan Doelman, Jonathan C Doelman et al.•Global Environmental Change•2017

  Incluir item

• Fossil-fueled development (SSP5)

  Open Access•Elmar Kriegler, Nico Bauer et al.•Global Environmental Change•2016

  Incluir item