the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Interannual and seasonal variability of the air-sea CO2 exchange at Utö in the coastal region of the Baltic Sea
Abstract. Oceans alleviate the accumulation of atmospheric CO2 by absorbing approximately a quarter of all anthropogenic emissions. In the deep oceans, carbon uptake is dominated by aquatic phase chemistry, whereas in biologically active coastal seas the marine ecosystem and biogeochemistry play an important role in the carbon uptake. Coastal seas are hotspots of organic and inorganic matter transport between the land and the oceans, and thus important for the marine carbon cycling. In this study, we investigate the net air-sea CO2 exchange at the Utö Atmospheric and Marine Research Station, located at the southern edge of the Archipelago Sea within the Baltic Sea, using the data collected during 2017–2021. The air-sea fluxes of CO2 were measured using the eddy covariance technique, supported by the flux parametrization based on the pCO2 and wind speed measurements. During the spring-summer months (April–August), the sea was gaining carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, with the highest monthly sink fluxes typically occurring in May, being -0.26 μmol m-2 s-1 on average. The sea was releasing the CO2 to the atmosphere in September–March, and the highest source fluxes were typically observed in September, being 0.42 μmol m-2 s-1 on average. On the annual basis, the study region was found to be a net source of atmospheric CO2, and on average, the annual net exchange was 27.1 gC m-2 y-1, which is comparable to the exchange observed in the Gulf of Bothnia, the Baltic Sea. The annual net air-sea CO2 exchanges varied between 18.2 gC m-2 y-1 (2018) and 39.1 gC m-2 y-1 (2017). During the coldest year, 2017, the spring-summer sink fluxes remained low compared to the other years, as a result of relatively high seawater pCO2 in summer, which never fell below 220 μatm during that year. The spring-summer phytoplankton blooms of 2017 were weak, possibly due to the cloudy summer and deeply mixed surface layer, which restrained the photosynthetic fixation of dissolved inorganic carbon in the surface waters. The algal blooms in spring-summer 2018 and the consequent pCO2 drawdown were strong, fueled by high pre-spring nutrient concentrations. The systematic positive annual CO2 balances suggest that our coastal study site is affected by carbon flows originating from elsewhere, possibly as organic carbon which is remineralized and released to the atmosphere as CO2. This coastal source of CO2 fueled by the organic matter originating probably from land ecosystems stresses the importance of understanding the carbon cycling in the land-sea continuum.
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(6826 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(6826 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-628', Anonymous Referee #1, 24 Apr 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-628/egusphere-2024-628-RC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Martti Honkanen, 10 Jun 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-628/egusphere-2024-628-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Martti Honkanen, 10 Jun 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-628', Anonymous Referee #2, 30 Apr 2024
The manuscript presents an extensive data-series of valuable data of air-sea exchange using EC technique as well as bulk calculated fluxes. The data shows the seasonal cycle and net excheange over one region in the Baltic Sea and is a valuable analysis. Some significant clarifications are needed to enrure full understanding of the use of the different methods and the accuracy.
Comments: The gas transfer velcocity is controlled bu severla factors (line 45 page 2), this is of particular importance for a coastal site and should be further discussed (see eg Garbet et al ., 2014).
Page 7, line 160. The choice of accurate data is unclear (26% of the time), is this due to wind directions only, what about fluxes below detection limit and other errors in the data. Is the non-stationarity the only quality control criteria?
Page 8,line 175: The parameteirsation is stated to be site specific, why is this? What makes the parameterisation site specific. it is enerally thought that the transfer coefficient could be generally described in terms of forcing processes.
Line 180: three sources of data: EC, Bulk and reconstructed, it is unclear how much data of each category and the distribution of situations. Does this in some way bias the analysis?
section 3.4: How are the large drops in salinity explained?
section 3.5: How can the variability in Chl-a be explained?
section 3.7: Also the variability in the wind is relevant, this should be discussed.
Page 13, line 340: Here upwelling is discussed as one explanation, it would require some further discussion on the relevance and frequency of upwelling at this site.
line 344: What is here meant by atmospheric deposition (of what)?
Line 352: Uncertainty estimates on these numbers should be discussed. In addition there are several other estimates to compare with, based on observations and/or modelling.
Appendix A: The EC method, Again, it is unclear if the non-stationalrity is enough as quality criteria (what about detection limit).
Two different criteria seems to be used for EC data (for budgets and estimates of transfer velocity). This should be further described and discussed.
Description of error estimate is unclear.
Garbe C S et al 2014 Ocean-Atmosphere Interactions of Gases and Particles eds P Liss and M
Johnson (Springer-Verlag) 55-112Suggested upwelling literature:
Lehmann, A., Myrberg, K., 2008. Upwelling in the Baltic Sea - A review. J. Mar. Syst. 74, S3–S12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2008.02.010.
Lehmann, A., Myrberg, K., Hoflich, K., 2012. A statistical approach to coastal upwelling in the Baltic Sea based on the analysis of satellite data for 1990–2009. Oceanologia 54, 369–393. https://doi.org/10.5697/oc.54-3.369. Norman, M., Parampil, S.R., Rutgersson, A., Sahl´ee, E., Norman, M.,
Parampil, S.R., Rutgersson, A., Sahl´ee, E., 2013. Influence of coastal upwelling on the air–sea gas exchange of CO 2 in a Baltic Sea Basin. Tellus B Chem. Phys. Meteorol. 65, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v65i0.21831.
Zhang, S., L. Wu, J. Arnqvist, C. Hallgrenand A. Rutgersson. Mapping coastal upwelling in the Baltic Sea from 2002 to 2020 using remote sensing data. Int. J. of Appl. Earth Observation and Geoinformatics, Volume 114, November 2022, 103061, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2022.103061
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-628-RC2 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC2', Martti Honkanen, 10 Jun 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-628/egusphere-2024-628-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC2', Martti Honkanen, 10 Jun 2024
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-628', Anonymous Referee #1, 24 Apr 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-628/egusphere-2024-628-RC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Martti Honkanen, 10 Jun 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-628/egusphere-2024-628-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Martti Honkanen, 10 Jun 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-628', Anonymous Referee #2, 30 Apr 2024
The manuscript presents an extensive data-series of valuable data of air-sea exchange using EC technique as well as bulk calculated fluxes. The data shows the seasonal cycle and net excheange over one region in the Baltic Sea and is a valuable analysis. Some significant clarifications are needed to enrure full understanding of the use of the different methods and the accuracy.
Comments: The gas transfer velcocity is controlled bu severla factors (line 45 page 2), this is of particular importance for a coastal site and should be further discussed (see eg Garbet et al ., 2014).
Page 7, line 160. The choice of accurate data is unclear (26% of the time), is this due to wind directions only, what about fluxes below detection limit and other errors in the data. Is the non-stationarity the only quality control criteria?
Page 8,line 175: The parameteirsation is stated to be site specific, why is this? What makes the parameterisation site specific. it is enerally thought that the transfer coefficient could be generally described in terms of forcing processes.
Line 180: three sources of data: EC, Bulk and reconstructed, it is unclear how much data of each category and the distribution of situations. Does this in some way bias the analysis?
section 3.4: How are the large drops in salinity explained?
section 3.5: How can the variability in Chl-a be explained?
section 3.7: Also the variability in the wind is relevant, this should be discussed.
Page 13, line 340: Here upwelling is discussed as one explanation, it would require some further discussion on the relevance and frequency of upwelling at this site.
line 344: What is here meant by atmospheric deposition (of what)?
Line 352: Uncertainty estimates on these numbers should be discussed. In addition there are several other estimates to compare with, based on observations and/or modelling.
Appendix A: The EC method, Again, it is unclear if the non-stationalrity is enough as quality criteria (what about detection limit).
Two different criteria seems to be used for EC data (for budgets and estimates of transfer velocity). This should be further described and discussed.
Description of error estimate is unclear.
Garbe C S et al 2014 Ocean-Atmosphere Interactions of Gases and Particles eds P Liss and M
Johnson (Springer-Verlag) 55-112Suggested upwelling literature:
Lehmann, A., Myrberg, K., 2008. Upwelling in the Baltic Sea - A review. J. Mar. Syst. 74, S3–S12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2008.02.010.
Lehmann, A., Myrberg, K., Hoflich, K., 2012. A statistical approach to coastal upwelling in the Baltic Sea based on the analysis of satellite data for 1990–2009. Oceanologia 54, 369–393. https://doi.org/10.5697/oc.54-3.369. Norman, M., Parampil, S.R., Rutgersson, A., Sahl´ee, E., Norman, M.,
Parampil, S.R., Rutgersson, A., Sahl´ee, E., 2013. Influence of coastal upwelling on the air–sea gas exchange of CO 2 in a Baltic Sea Basin. Tellus B Chem. Phys. Meteorol. 65, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v65i0.21831.
Zhang, S., L. Wu, J. Arnqvist, C. Hallgrenand A. Rutgersson. Mapping coastal upwelling in the Baltic Sea from 2002 to 2020 using remote sensing data. Int. J. of Appl. Earth Observation and Geoinformatics, Volume 114, November 2022, 103061, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2022.103061
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-628-RC2 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC2', Martti Honkanen, 10 Jun 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-628/egusphere-2024-628-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC2', Martti Honkanen, 10 Jun 2024
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
318 | 88 | 26 | 432 | 39 | 24 |
- HTML: 318
- PDF: 88
- XML: 26
- Total: 432
- BibTeX: 39
- EndNote: 24
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1
Cited
Mika Aurela
Juha Hatakka
Lumi Haraguchi
Sami Kielosto
Timo Mäkelä
Jukka Seppälä
Simo-Matti Siiriä
Ken Stenbäck
Juha-Pekka Tuovinen
Pasi Ylöstalo
Lauri Laakso
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(6826 KB) - Metadata XML