Right, so if we estimate 0.4GT CO2 from this season of Amazon fires (up from 0.23 now, i.e. adding a bit from now until end-of-season - and I admit based on absolutely no scientific basis whatsoever, but just to make the numbers easy); then the Amazon will contribute 1 percent of annual CO2 emissions this year.
Now, if we assume there is no additional 'magic' capacity to absorb CO2 created; and that the loss of forest diminishes absorption capacity, then the best case is that all that extra CO2 persists in the atmosphere. So if 'about half' of annual CO2 is now absorbed, then c. 20 GT per annum persists. So Amazon fires this year could add 2 percent not 1 percent to that. Unless ocean-absorption ramps up in line with increased CO2 emission, for example of a carbon sink response. I also note the article quoted by ASLR in Ice Apocalypse thread regarding VPD (vapour pressure deficit), indicating a reduction in plant uptake of CO2 due to atmospheric moisture conditions.
Putting this all together, and it seems to me that wildfires have the potential to cause disproportionate climate change impact, due to their scale and suddeness, compared to 'BAU' CO2 emissions.
Thoughts?