Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Local and regional features of greenhouse gas emissions and absorption, contributing to the formation of their concentrations in the atmosphere, have been the main issues of the scientific climate agenda in recent years. The study region is the Chechen Republic, including 12 landscape-geographical regions and characterized by territorial diversification of land use. In the north of the region, in the semi-desert zone, pastures predominate; in the north-central and central steppe regions – arable lands and urbanized territories; the southern areas of the foothills, lowlands, midlands and highlands are mainly occupied by forests and meadow mountain pastures. The objectives of the work are to analyze the dynamics of greenhouse gas (carbon dioxide and methane) content in the atmosphere of the region and to classify the landscapes of the Chechen Republic by the level of absorption potential for atmospheric carbon. Methods: analysis of satellite images Sentinel-2, Sentinel-5P, OCO-2. It was revealed that the content of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere of the region is uneven: the maximum values are traced in the northern part, in the flat steppe and semi-desert areas with a predominance of pastures; the minimum – in the south, in the low-mountain, mid-mountain and high-mountain areas of mountain forests and meadow pastures. The maximum concentrations of methane are noted in the foothills. A stable trend of annual growth of the content of the considered greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is observed. Five classes of landscapes are distinguished, characterized by different levels of absorption potential. In the northern flat semi-desert pasture region, emission processes prevail over deposition. In the north-central and central steppe regions with a predominance of arable land and urbanized territories, an insignificant predominance of emission over absorption is noted. The balance of the emissionabsorption system in the region begins with the foothill-plain forest-steppe territories and covers the southern forest and meadow mountainous regions, where deposition processes gradually begin to prevail over emission.
carbon dioxide, methane, absorption, deposition, satellite data, landscape absorption potential, Chechen Republic
1. Nayak N., Mehrotra R., Mehrotra S. Carbon biosequestration strategies: a review // Carbon Capture Science & Technology. 2022. Vol. 4. P. 100065. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccst.2022.100065.
2. Zhao Y., Su Q., Li B., et al. Have those countries declaring “zero carbon” or “carbon neutral” climate goals achieved carbon emissions-economic growth decoupling? // Journal of Cleaner Production. 2022. Vol. 363. P. 132450. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132450.
3. Tang Z., Wang Yu., Fu M., et al. The role of land use landscape patterns in the carbon emission reduction: Empirical evidence from China // Ecological Indicators. 2023. Vol. 156. P. 111176. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.111176.
4. Hong C., Burney J.A., Pongratz J., et al. Global and regional drivers of land-use emissions in 1961–2017 // Nature. 2021. Vol. 589. P. 554–561. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-03138-y.
5. Houghton R.A., House J.I., Pongratz J., et al. Carbon emissions from land use and land-cover change // Biogeosciences. 2012. Vol. 9. No. 12. P. 5125–5142. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.5194/bg-9-5125-2012.
6. Quere C.L., Raupach M.R., Canadell J.G., et al. Trends in the sources and sinks of carbon dioxide // Nature Geoscience. 2009. Vol. 2. No. 12. P. 831–836. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo689.
7. Habib S., Tahir F., Hussain F., et al. Current and emerging technologies for carbon accounting in urban landscapes: Advantages and limitations // Ecological Indicators. 2023. Vol. 154. P. 110603. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.110603.
8. Al'ferov A.M., Blinov V.G., Gitarskiy M.L. i dr. Monitoring potokov parnikovyh gazov v prirodnyh ekosistemah / pod red. D.G. Zamolodchikova, D.V. Karelina, M.L. Gitarskogo i dr. Saratov: Amirit, 2017. 279 s.
9. Borken W., Xu Y.J., Davidson E.A., et al. Site and temporal variation of soil respiration in European beech, Norway spruce, and Scots pine forests // Global Change Biology. 2002. Vol. 8. P. 1205–1216. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2002.00547.
10. Raich J.W., Potter C.S., Bhagawati D. Interannual variability in global soil respiration, 1980-94 // Global Change Biology. 2002. Vol. 8. P. 800–812. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2002.00511.x.
11. Bond-Lamberty B., Thomson A. Temperature-associated increases in the global soil respiration record // Nature. 2010. Vol. 464. P. 579–582. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1038/nature08930.
12. Yuan W., Liu S., Yu G., et al. Global estimates of evapotranspiration and gross primary production based on MODIS and global meteorology data // Remote Sensing of Environment. 2010. Vol. 114. P. 1416–1431. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2010.01.022.
13. Curiel Yuste J., Janssens I.A., Carrara A., et al. Interactive effects of temperature and precipitation on soil respiration in a temperate maritime pine forest // Tree Physiology. 2003. Vol. 23. No. 18. P. 1263–1270. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/23.18.1263.
14. Chatterjee A., Jenerette G.D. Changes in soil respiration Q10 during drying-rewetting along a semi-arid elevation gradient // Geoderma. 2011. Vol. 163. P. 171–177. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2011.04.003.
15. Karra K., Kontgis C., Statman-Weil Z., et al. Global land use / land cover with Sentinel-2 and deep learning // Proceedings of the IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium IGARSS (July 11–16, 2021). Brussels, 2021. P. 4704–4707. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1109/IGARSS47720.2021.9553499.
16. Metz E.-M., Vardag S.N., Basu S., et al. Soil respiration-driven CO2 pulses dominate Australia’s flux variability // Science. 2023. Vol. 379. No. 6639. P. 1332–1335. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1126/science.add7833.
17. Nassar R., Hill T.G., McLinden C.A., et al. Quantifying CO2 emissions from individual power plants from space // Geophysical Research Letters. 2017. Vol. 44. No. 19. P. 10,045–10,053. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL074702.
18. Chan K.-L., Xu J., Slijkhuis S., et al. TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument observations of total column water vapour: algorithm and validation // Science of The Total Environment. 2022. Vol. 821. P. 153232. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153232.
19. Myachina K.V., Kerimov I.A., Ryahov R.V. i dr. Izuchenie poglotitel'noy sposobnosti landshaftov v otnoshenii dioksida ugleroda s pomosch'yu DDZ (na primere stepnyh, lesostepnyh i gornolesnyh regionov yuga Rossii) // Geologiya i geofizika Yuga Rossii. 2024. № 14(1). S. 141–151. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.46698/VNC.2024.41.38.010.
