This study tests how well satellite and ground-based CO2 observations can recover extreme carbon flux events like droughts and wildfires. Using simulated data from NASA's OCO-2, researchers found the satellite detects more extremes than ground stations alone, but under realistic conditions it identifies only about 16% of extreme locations. Even in an error-free scenario, only about half are found, and inferred event sizes are consistently underestimated. Detection works better for large, long-lasting, hot and dry events. Cold and wet extremes are harder to spot because clouds block satellite views. That means current space-based carbon monitoring has real blind spots, especially in regions with sparse coverage. The results support plans for future missions with wider coverage and show why atmospheric CO2 data should not be treated as a complete picture of carbon cycle extremes.
