| 24 | | Invitation to participate to the "Retraite of CMC" the next two days. |
| 25 | | |
| 26 | | Explanation and summary of the reconstruction using NMVOC as a proxy for N,,2,,O emissions. |
| 27 | | Two methods were tested: the first one from 1970 to 2019 using the csv data, reconstruction per sector and per region; the second one from 1850 to 2019 using the proxy, reconstruction per region. It exists a slight difference in total emissions between the two. |
| 28 | | |
| 29 | | => Need to check where it comes from. 2 hypothesis: reconstruction from proxy uses the 2000's netCDF file as a reference and not the 1970's file (because 1970 is the year used for the reconstruction); the average of the eight factors calculated per sector doesn't correspond to the factor computed per region. |
| | 25 | 2. Black box model: from emissions, use a little model in order to reconstruct concentration. This works well from 1950 to the end of the period but we get a plateau before that. This plateau is explained by the constant emissions we have for this period. By making an inverted model, it is possible to reconstruct emissions from concentration (from observations in CMIP6). It shows we need to get two or three small bumps. The absence of these emissions in ours could result in an absence of ENSO for the oceanic part or in imprecise industrial emissions for this period or a modification in land use surfaces... |
| 32 | | * See the coupled configuration; |
| 33 | | * Check where the difference between reconstructed emissions comes from; |
| 34 | | * With Didier, black box model with land, ocean, ant emissions. |
| | 28 | * Write a document explaining reconstruction methods and the transformation into netCDF file; |
| | 29 | * Investigate the difference between the two methods (either by region or by region+sector), a solution could by to use a weighted factor for the sector part; |
| | 30 | * Continue development on the coupled model. |
