Inorganic carbon fluxes through the boundaries of the Greenland Sea Basin based on in situ observations and water transport estimates

A carbon budget for the exchange of total dissolved inorganic carbon C_T between the Greenland Sea and the surrounding seas has been constructed for winter and summer situations. An extensive data set of C_T collected over the years 1994–1997 within the European Sub-polar Ocean Programmes (ESOP1 and ESOP2) are used for the budget calculation. Based on these data, mean values of C_T in eight different boxes representing the inflow and outflow of water through the boundaries of the Greenland Sea Basin are estimated. The obtained values are then combined with simulated water transports taken from the ESOP2 version of the Miami Isopycnic Coordinate Ocean Model (MICOM). The fluxes of inorganic carbon are presented for three layers; a surface mixed layer, an intermediate layer and a deep layer, and the imbalance in the fluxes are attributed to air–sea exchange, biological fixation of inorganic carbon, and sedimentation. The main influx of carbon is found in the surface and the deep layers in the Fram Strait, and in the surface waters of direct Atlantic origin, whereas the main outflux is found in the surface layer over the Jan Mayen Fracture Zone and the Knipovich Ridge, transporting carbon into the Atlantic Ocean via the Denmark Strait and towards the Arctic Ocean via the Norwegian Sea, respectively. The flux calculation indicates that there is a net transport of carbon out of the Greenland Sea during wintertime. In the absence of biological activity, this imbalance is attributed to air sea exchange, and requires an oceanic uptake of CO₂ of 0.024±0.006 Gt C yr⁻¹. The flux calculations from the summer period are complicated by biological fixation of inorganic carbon, and show that data on organic carbon is required in order to estimate the air–sea exchange in the area.     

ITS Solutions and Accident Risks: Prospective and Limitations

Abstract

This article investigates the prospective and limitations in the application of potential intelligent transport system (ITS) functions to reduce accident risks, using a cause‐treatment relationship. The main causes of road accidents are described and appropriate ITS solutions (including advanced driver assistance systems and advanced traveller information systems) are presented as countermeasures. Anticipated impacts are discussed and indicate that several ITS have the potential of improving road safety and addressing specific accident causes. However, attention is required on particular aspects of their implementation as they may trigger adverse effects by imposing behavioural adaptation risks, and overestimation and over‐reliance on system capabilities. Further, user acceptability and strategic implementation issues are paramount to the successful introduction of these systems.