Response to Referee, Richard Zeebe
The comments from Drs. Zeebe and Wolf-Gladrow are repeated below in gray (here marked with “…”); our response follows in black. We thank them for the effort that they put into providing this comment.
“Errors and typos in numerical routines that lead to differences in CO2 system calculations should of course be rigorously eliminated. Ideally, numerical routines using the same equations should agree within round-off error. Actual fundamental / systematic differences between packages may be eliminated in the future by agreeing on a common approach.”
For the most part, the packages that we compared in the Discussion paper did follow the same approach, as outlined in the guide for best practices (Dickson et al., 2007). Although that guide did not specify how to perform pressure adjustments of equilibrium constants, packages still followed the same basic approach. They usually differed due to slight variations or errors in implementations.
Please read the whole article here.
Orr J. C., Epitalon J.-M. & Gattuso J.-P., 2014. Interactive comment on “Comparison of seven packages that compute ocean carbonate chemistry” by J. C. Orr et al. Biogeosciences Discuss. 11: C4420–C4431. Article.
