Fei Jiang

Prof. Fei Jiang

International Institute for Earth System Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

20Years (2007-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
5 December 2023 in Earth System Science Data
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PFPierre Friedlingstein
Pierre Friedlingstein
MOMichael O'SUllivan
Michael O'SUllivan
MJMatthew W. Jones
Matthew W. Jones
RARobbie M. Andrew
Robbie M. Andrew
DBDorothee C. E. Bakker
Dorothee C. E. Bakker
BZBo Zheng
Bo Zheng
Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere in a changing climate is critical to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe and synthesize data sets and methodology to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFOS) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC), mainly deforestation, are based on land-use and land-use change data and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly, and its growth rate (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) is estimated with global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-based f CO2 products. The terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated with dynamic global vegetation models. Additional lines of evidence on land and ocean sinks are provided by atmospheric inversions, atmospheric oxygen measurements, and Earth system models. The resulting carbon budget imbalance (BIM), the difference between the estimated total emissions and the estimated changes in the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere, is a measure of imperfect data and incomplete understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the year 2022, EFOS increased by 0.9 % relative to 2021, with fossil emissions at 9.9±0.5 Gt C yr−1 (10.2±0.5 Gt C yr−1 when the cement carbonation sink is not included), and ELUC was 1.2±0.7 Gt C yr−1, for a total anthropogenic CO2 emission (including the cement carbonation sink) of 11.1±0.8 Gt C yr−1 (40.7±3.2 Gt CO2 yr−1). Also, for 2022, GATM was 4.6±0.2 Gt C yr−1 (2.18±0.1 ppm yr−1; ppm denotes parts per million), SOCEAN was 2.8±0.4 Gt C yr−1, and SLAND was 3.8±0.8 Gt C yr−1, with a BIM of −0.1 Gt C yr−1 (i.e. total estimated sources marginally too low or sinks marginally too high). The global atmospheric CO2 concentration averaged over 2022 reached 417.1±0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2023 suggest an increase in EFOS relative to 2022 of +1.1 % (0.0 % to 2.1 %) globally and atmospheric CO2 concentration reaching 419.3 ppm, 51 % above the pre-industrial level (around 278 ppm in 1750). Overall, the mean of and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2022, with a near-zero overall budget imbalance, although discrepancies of up to around 1 Gt C yr−1 persist for the representation of annual to semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from multiple approaches and observations shows the following: (1) a persistent large uncertainty in the estimate of land-use changes emissions, (2) a low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, and (3) a discrepancy between the different methods on the strength of the ocean sink over the last decade. This living-data update documents changes in methods and data sets applied to this most recent global carbon budget as well as evolving community understanding of the global carbon cycle. The data presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2023 (Friedlingstein et al., 2023).

14 March 2025 in Earth System Science Data
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PFPierre Friedlingstein
Pierre Friedlingstein
MOMichael O'SUllivan
Michael O'SUllivan
MJMatthew W. Jones
Matthew W. Jones
RARobbie M. Andrew
Robbie M. Andrew
JHJudith Hauck
Judith Hauck
JZJiye Zeng
Jiye Zeng
Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere in a changing climate is critical to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe and synthesize datasets and methodologies to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFOS) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC) are based on land-use and land-use change data and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly, and its growth rate (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The global net uptake of CO2 by the ocean (SOCEAN, called the ocean sink) is estimated with global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-based fCO2 products (fCO2 is the fugacity of CO2). The global net uptake of CO2 by the land (SLAND, called the land sink) is estimated with dynamic global vegetation models. Additional lines of evidence on land and ocean sinks are provided by atmospheric inversions, atmospheric oxygen measurements, and Earth system models. The sum of all sources and sinks results in the carbon budget imbalance (BIM), a measure of imperfect data and incomplete understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the year 2023, EFOS increased by 1.3 % relative to 2022, with fossil emissions at 10.1 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 (10.3 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 when the cement carbonation sink is not included), and ELUC was 1.0 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1, for a total anthropogenic CO2 emission (including the cement carbonation sink) of 11.1 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1 (40.6 ± 3.2 GtCO2 yr−1). Also, for 2023, GATM was 5.9 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1 (2.79 ± 0.1 ppm yr−1; ppm denotes parts per million), SOCEAN was 2.9 ± 0.4 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 2.3 ± 1.0 GtC yr−1, with a near-zero BIM (−0.02 GtC yr−1). The global atmospheric CO2 concentration averaged over 2023 reached 419.31 ± 0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2024 suggest an increase in EFOS relative to 2023 of +0.8 % (−0.2 % to 1.7 %) globally and an atmospheric CO2 concentration increase by 2.87 ppm, reaching 422.45 ppm, 52 % above the pre-industrial level (around 278 ppm in 1750). Overall, the mean of and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2023, with a near-zero overall budget imbalance, although discrepancies of up to around 1 GtC yr−1 persist for the representation of annual to semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from multiple approaches and observations shows the following: (1) a persistent large uncertainty in the estimate of land-use change emissions, (2) low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, and (3) a discrepancy between the different methods on the mean ocean sink. This living-data update documents changes in methods and datasets applied to this most recent global carbon budget as well as evolving community understanding of the global carbon cycle. The data presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2024 (Friedlingstein et al., 2024).

28 March 2018 in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HWHao Wang
Hao Wang
XLXiaopu Lyu
Xiaopu Lyu
Hai GuoHai Guo
Hai Guo
YWYu Wang
Yu Wang
SZShichun Zou
Shichun Zou
JSJin Shen
Jin Shen
Marine atmosphere is usually considered to be a clean environment, but this study indicates that the near-coast waters of the South China Sea (SCS) suffer from even worse air quality than coastal cities. The analyses were based on concurrent field measurements of target air pollutants and meteorological parameters conducted at a suburban site (Tung Chung, TC) and a nearby marine site (Wan Shan, WS) from August to November 2013. The observations showed that the levels of primary air pollutants were significantly lower at WS than those at TC, while the ozone (O3) value was greater at WS. Higher O3 levels at WS were attributed to the weaker NO titration and higher O3 production rate because of stronger oxidative capacity of the atmosphere. However, O3 episodes were concurrently observed at both sites under certain meteorological conditions, such as tropical cyclones, continental anticyclones and sea–land breezes (SLBs). Driven by these synoptic systems and mesoscale recirculations, the interaction between continental and marine air masses profoundly changed the atmospheric composition and subsequently influenced the formation and redistribution of O3 in the coastal areas. When continental air intruded into marine atmosphere, the O3 pollution was magnified over the SCS, and the elevated O3 ( > 100 ppbv) could overspread the sea boundary layer ∼ 8 times the area of Hong Kong. In some cases, the exaggerated O3 pollution over the SCS was recirculated to the coastal inshore by sea breeze, leading to aggravated O3 pollution in coastal cities. The findings are applicable to similar mesoscale environments around the world where the maritime atmosphere is potentially influenced by severe continental air pollution.

1 December 2018 in Atmospheric Environment
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
YLYuanye Lin
Yuanye Lin
FJFei Jiang
Fei Jiang
JZJing Zhao
Jing Zhao
GZGe Zhu
Ge Zhu
XHXiaojing He
Xiaojing He
Haikun WangHaikun Wang
Haikun Wang

1 January 2012 in Journal of Aerosol Science
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
FJFei Jiang
Fei Jiang
QLQian Liu
Qian Liu
XHXiaoxian Huang
Xiaoxian Huang
TWTijian Wang
Tijian Wang
BZBingliang Zhuang
Bingliang Zhuang
MXMin Xie
Min Xie

1 October 2012 in Atmospheric Environment
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
TWTijian Wang
Tijian Wang
FJFei Jiang
Fei Jiang
JDJunjun Deng
Junjun Deng
YSYi Shen
Yi Shen
QFQinyan Fu
Qinyan Fu
DZDanning Zhang
Danning Zhang