1 / 27

DOE-OBER Workshop on Carbon Cycling & Biosequestration

DOE Office of Science. DOE-OBER Workshop on Carbon Cycling & Biosequestration. Joseph Graber AAAS Science & Technology Policy Fellow U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science Office of Biological & Environmental Research May 20 th , 2008 joseph.graber@science.doe.gov.

hedwig
Télécharger la présentation

DOE-OBER Workshop on Carbon Cycling & Biosequestration

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. DOE Office of Science DOE-OBER Workshop on Carbon Cycling & Biosequestration Joseph Graber AAAS Science & Technology Policy Fellow U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science Office of Biological & Environmental Research May 20th, 2008 joseph.graber@science.doe.gov

  2. Mission Challengesfor Biology

  3. Rationale Statement A major mission of BER research programs focuses on increasing our understanding of carbon cycling in the earth’s marine and terrestrial ecosystems, examining potential means of biological sequestration of carbon, and determining how biological processes that influence carbon cycling and biosequestration are affected by climate change. Of particular interest are the linkage of global biogeochemical processes to genome-based ecophysiology of plant and microbial communities and the potential to enhance carbon biosequestration in ecosystems. These studies will be critical in developing increasingly sophisticated models of global biogeochemical cycling and climate change and will inform potential carbon biosequestration strategies.

  4. Workshop Purpose • Identify research needs and opportunities for understanding biological carbon cycling and biosequestration • Provide an assessment of where the science and technology now stand and where barriers to progress might exist • Describe potential directions for fundamental research that can be pursued to meet these goals

  5. Workshop Organization • Model: DOE Biomass to Biofuels Workshop • Life & Medical Sciences Division • Joe Graber • Sharlene Weatherwax • Dan Drell • Climate Change Research Division • Jeff Amthor • Roger Dahlman • Mike Knotek & Betty Mansfield

  6. Working Groups • Terrestrial Plant Productivity & Biosequestration • Biological Cycling of Carbon in Terrestrial Environments • Biological Cycling of Carbon in Ocean Environments • Effects of Climate Change on Carbon Cycling & Biosequestration • Crosscutting Science, Technology, & Infrastructure

  7. Pre-Workshop Development • Assemble Working Group Co-chairs, Participants • Mix of biologists, ecologists, modelers, etc. • Conference Calls • Working Group Participants (scoping and discussion) • Working Group Chairs (coordination and integration) • Workshop Webpage (restricted access) • Basic Research Need Plans (BRNPs) • short write-ups of key topics, issues, or questions

  8. The Workshop(s) • Working Groups 1, 2, 4, & 5 (i.e. all terrestrial groups plus crosscutting) met March 4th-6th in Rockville, MD with plenary presentations by: • Jae Edmonds, PNNL • Scott Denning, Colorado State Univ. • Working Group 3 (marine carbon cycling) and sub-set of crosscutting participants met March 17th-18th in Denver, CO • Currently in the process of organizing and integrating output from all working groups and developing workshop report

  9. Working Group 1: Terrestrial Plant Productivity & Biosequestration Co-Chairs: Stan Wullschleger Oak Ridge Natl. Lab Dan Bush Colorado State Univ. Participants: Doug Cook Univ. California – Davis Gloria Coruzzi New York Univ. Jonathan Lynch Penn State Univ. Steve Long Univ. Illinois Urbana-Champaign Jocelyn Malamy Univ. Chicago Alistair Rogers Brookhaven Natl. Lab Melinda Smith Yale Univ. Don Ort Univ. Illinois Urbana-Champaign Nate McDowell Los Alamos Natl. Lab Thomas Mitchell-Olds Duke Univ.

  10. Working Group 1: Terrestrial Plant Productivity & Biosequestration • Identify basic processes and molecular controls underlying gross primary productivity (GPP), net primary productivity (NPP), and carbon partitioning in plants; assess mechanistic studies that could lead to enhanced carbon biosequestration strategies • Consider molecular basis of resource acquisition and utilization (e.g. nutrients and water) and interactions between carbon and other resources that are determinative of rate, magnitude, or sustainability of biosequestration • Assess need for dynamic models of genetic regulatory networks that can inform potential manipulations of GPP/NPP resulting in enhanced carbon biosequestration • Consider role of genetic variation of plant populations & communities in determining NPP, carbon biosequestration, and ecosystem responses to global climate change

  11. Working Group 2: Biological Cycling of Carbon in Terrestrial Environments Co-Chairs: Don Zak Univ. Michigan Mary Firestone Univ. California Berkeley, LBNL Participants: Josh Schimel Univ. California – Santa Cruz Tom Schmidt Michigan State Univ. Marcus Kleber Oregon State Univ. Steve Allison Univ. California - Irvine Eoin Brodie Lawrence Berkeley Natl. Lab Serita Frey Univ. New Hampshire Matt Wallenstein Colorado State Univ. Jennifer Pett-Ridge Lawrence Livermore Natl. Lab Allan Konopka Pacific Northwest Natl. Lab David Hibbett Clark Univ. Jason Neff Univ. Colorado - Boulder

  12. Working Group 2: Biological Cycling of Carbon in Terrestrial Environments • Linkage of metabolic processes of soil microbial communities (i.e. prokaryotes and fungi) to the global carbon cycle, with special attention to integration across genetic, organismal, community, and ecosystem scales • Need to identify critical characteristics of microbial communities relevant to understanding environmental controls on biogeochemical processes in soil and determine relative value of functional and phylogenetic information • How does microbial community composition define or constrain function in regard to soil carbon cycling, influence interaction with overlying plant communities, and determine responses to changing environmental variables? • Are soil microbial processes correctly represented in terrestrial biogeochemical models? Will increased integration of these processes improve predictions of how climate chance will influence soil carbon storage?

  13. Working Group 3: Biological Cycling of Carbon in Ocean Environments Co-Chairs: Ginger Armbrust Univ. Washington Scott Elliott* Los Alamos Natl. Lab Participants: Craig Carlson Univ. California – Santa Barbara Andy Allen J. Craig Venter Inst. Bob Morris Univ. Washington Francisco Chavez Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Inst. Mick Follows MIT Cecilia Bitz Univ. Washington Jean Francois Lamarque Natl. Center for Atmospheric Research Heidi Sosik Woods Hole Oceanographic Inst. Alex Worden Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Inst. Matt Maltrud Los Alamos Natl. Lab Grant Heffelfinger* Sandia Natl Lab Jim Fredrickson* Pacific Northwest Natl. Lab Peter Thornton* Natl. Center for Atmospheric Research

  14. Working Group 3: Biological Cycling of Carbon in Ocean Environments • Linkage of metabolic processes of marine microbial communities to the global carbon cycle, integrating information across multiple scales of organization • What are the roles of genomic/metagenomic studies in characterizing photosynthetic and metabolic systems involved in carbon assimilation? How are the massive amounts of data generated best managed, utilized, and integrated into modeling efforts? • Integration of research on microbial community function with large-scale biogeochemical datasets being generated by ocean time series programs • Factors effecting the “biological carbon pump”: • availability of iron, phosphorous, nitrogen, and other nutrients, as well as linkages of relevant biogeochemical cycles • impacts of climate change (warming, ocean acidification, etc.) • connections with terrestrial systems

  15. Working Group 4:Effects of Climate Change on Carbon Cycling & Biosequestration Co-Chairs: Jim Ehleringer Univ. Utah Rich Norby Oak Ridge Natl. Lab Participants: Peter Thornton National Center for Atmospheric Research Mike Goulden Univ. California - Irvine Bev Law Oregon State Univ. Mac Post Oak Ridge Natl. Lab Yiqi Luo Univ. Oklahoma Evan DeLucia Univ. Illinois Urbana-Champaign Susan Trumbore Univ. California - Irvine Damon Matthews Concordia Univ.

  16. Working Group 4:Effects of Climate Change on Carbon Cycling & Biosequestration • Consider potential effects of climate change variables on carbon cycling and storage in terrestrial ecosystems (with special emphasis on less understood biomes) • Linkage of carbon, nitrogen, and water cycles in determining ecosystem productivity and carbon sequestration potential • Identify fundamental science questions necessary to evaluate effects of changing land use and disturbance regimes on stability of carbon stocks • What are the best model structures to reflect carbon processes in ecosystems and how can these be improved to project ecosystem responses to global change?

  17. Working Group 5:Crosscutting Science, Technology, & Infrastructure Co-Chairs: Jim Fredrickson Pacific Northwest Natl. Lab Scott Elliott Los Alamos Natl. Lab Circulating Participants: Susannah Tringe Joint Genome Inst., Los Alamos Natl. Lab Ken Kemner Argonne Natl. Lab Grant Heffelfinger Sandia Natl. Lab “Embedded” Participants: Gloria Coruzzi New York Univ. Nate McDowell Los Alamos Natl. Lab Jennifer Pett-Ridge Lawrence Livermore Natl. Lab Allan Konopka Pacific Northwest Natl. Lab Peter Thornton National Center for Atmospheric Research Yiqi Luo Univ. Oklahoma

  18. Working Group 5:Crosscutting Science, Technology, & Infrastructure • Scientific Issues: • Linkage of genome-based information to function • Incorporation of experimental data in ecosystem/climate models • Scaling issues (molecular to ecosystem) • Technologies & Methodologies • Application of genome-enabled methods to understanding complex environmental systems • New approaches for in situ monitoring of biological activities • New imaging technologies for monitoring properties and processes • Data Mining, Integration, & Systems Simulation • Diagnostic, prognostic, and integrated modeling approaches • Necessary analytical tools and cyberinfrastructure • Improved data assimilation techniques to incorporate experimental & observational data into models

  19. Knowledge Integration and Synthesis Information from genomics level used to Improve mechanistic representation and fill knowledge gaps along critical pathways to Earth System Models (ESM) Blank box text

  20. Outcomes • Currently developing workshop report and executive summary • Organizing and integrating large volume of written material produced by working groups • Follow-up communication with working group co-chairs and participants • Target date for report: August 2008

More Related