Impacts of Transport Uncertainty on CO <sub>2</sub> Over North America: Insights From Assessments of Two Global Models With Aircraft and Tower Measurements

Abstract Accurate representation of CO 2 transport is important for reliable flux inversions with global inversion systems. Previous studies have revealed systematic discrepancies between two widely used global transport models, GEOS‐Chem and TM5, in simulated CO 2 distributions at mid‐latitudes. However, the causes of these discrepancies and potential transport biases in the models remain unclear without constraints of intensive measurements. Here, we drive GEOS‐Chem and TM5 with identical surface CO 2 fluxes and perform simulations with and without parameterized convection. By comparing the simulated spatial‐temporal distributions of [CO 2 ] to intensive aircraft and tower measurements collected by the Atmospheric Carbon Transport (ACT)‐America project and NOAA's airborne profiling and tower networks across four seasons, we identify potential transport biases in both models over North America. Model discrepancies in vertical transport produce seasonal‐mean planetary boundary layer (PBL)–free‐troposphere [CO 2 ] differences of up to ∼4 ppm and PBL height differences of ∼100–400 m. In summer, GEOS‐Chem underestimates transport through moist convection but overestimates PBL mixing depth, whereas TM5 exhibits more realistic total vertical mixing (moist convection and PBL depth). In spring and winter, TM5 underestimates PBL mixing while potentially overestimating mixing through moist convection, whereas GEOS‐Chem more accurately represents vertical mixing. These transport biases are likely to contribute to discrepancies in the meridional gradient of zonal‐mean [CO 2 ] and propagate into differences in posterior flux estimates from the OCO‐2 Model Intercomparison Project inversions using the two transport models over North America. Expanded vertically resolved [CO 2 ] measurements beyond North America can further advance the current understanding of transport uncertainties at larger spatial scales.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres
Published
2026-01-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1029/2025jd044053
Primary Topic
Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Impacts of Transport Uncertainty on CO 2 Over North America: Insights From Assessments of Two Global Models With Aircraft and Tower Measurements

A. R. Jacobson, Li Zhang, Andrew Schuh, Kenneth J. Davis
Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres
Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
article

Impacts of Transport Uncertainty on CO 2 Over North America: Insights From Assessments of Two Global Models With Aircraft and Tower Measurements

A. R. Jacobson, Li Zhang, Andrew Schuh, Kenneth J. Davis
article en

Abstract

Abstract Accurate representation of CO 2 transport is important for reliable flux inversions with global inversion systems. Previous studies have revealed systematic discrepancies between two widely used global transport models, GEOS‐Chem and TM5, in simulated CO 2 distributions at mid‐latitudes. However, the causes of these discrepancies and potential transport biases in the models remain unclear without constraints of intensive measurements. Here, we drive GEOS‐Chem and TM5 with identical surface CO 2 fluxes and perform simulations with and without parameterized convection. By comparing the simulated spatial‐temporal distributions of [CO 2 ] to intensive aircraft and tower measurements collected by the Atmospheric Carbon Transport (ACT)‐America project and NOAA's airborne profiling and tower networks across four seasons, we identify potential transport biases in both models over North America. Model discrepancies in vertical transport produce seasonal‐mean planetary boundary layer (PBL)–free‐troposphere [CO 2 ] differences of up to ∼4 ppm and PBL height differences of ∼100–400 m. In summer, GEOS‐Chem underestimates transport through moist convection but overestimates PBL mixing depth, whereas TM5 exhibits more realistic total vertical mixing (moist convection and PBL depth). In spring and winter, TM5 underestimates PBL mixing while potentially overestimating mixing through moist convection, whereas GEOS‐Chem more accurately represents vertical mixing. These transport biases are likely to contribute to discrepancies in the meridional gradient of zonal‐mean [CO 2 ] and propagate into differences in posterior flux estimates from the OCO‐2 Model Intercomparison Project inversions using the two transport models over North America. Expanded vertically resolved [CO 2 ] measurements beyond North America can further advance the current understanding of transport uncertainties at larger spatial scales.

Journal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresVol. 131(3)
Pennsylvania State University (US), California Air Resources Board (US), Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (US), University of Colorado Boulder (US), Colorado State University (US)
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Openalex Percentile: Top 82%
Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.