Prioritisation of pesticides and target organ systems for dietary cumulative risk assessment based on the 2019–2021 monitoring cycle
In: EFSA journal, Band 22, Heft 2
ISSN: 1831-4732
42 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: EFSA journal, Band 22, Heft 2
ISSN: 1831-4732
The growth in anthropogenic carbon dioxide ( CO 2 ) emissions acts as a major climate change driver, which has widespread implications across society, influencing the scientific, political, and public sectors. For an increased understanding of the CO 2 emission sources, patterns, and trends, a link between the emission inventories and observed CO 2 concentrations is best established via Earth system modelling and data assimilation. Bringing together the different pieces of the puzzle of a very different nature (measurements, reported statistics, and models), it is of utmost importance to know their level of confidence and boundaries well. Inversions disaggregate the variation in observed atmospheric CO 2 concentration to variability in CO 2 emissions by constraining the regional distribution of CO 2 fluxes, derived either bottom-up from statistics or top-down from observations. The level of confidence and boundaries for each of these CO 2 fluxes is as important as their intensity, though often not available for bottom-up anthropogenic CO 2 emissions. This study provides a postprocessing tool CHE_UNC_APP for anthropogenic CO 2 emissions to help assess and manage the uncertainty in the different emitting sectors. The postprocessor is available under https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5196190 (Choulga et al., 2021). Recommendations are given for regrouping the sectoral emissions, taking into account their uncertainty instead of their statistical origin; for addressing local hot spots; for the treatment of sectors with small budget but uncertainties larger than 100 %; and for the assumptions around the classification of countries based on the quality of their statistical infrastructure. This tool has been applied to the EDGARv4.3.2_FT2015 dataset, resulting in seven input grid maps with upper- and lower-half ranges of uncertainty for the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Integrated Forecasting System. The dataset is documented and available under https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3967439 (Choulga et al., 2020). While the uncertainty in most emission groups remains relatively small (5 %–20 %), the largest contribution (usually over 40 %) to the total uncertainty is determined by the OTHER group (of fuel exploitation and transformation but also agricultural soils and solvents) at the global scale. The uncertainties have been compared for selected countries to those reported in the inventories submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and to those assessed for the European emission grid maps of the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research. Several sensitivity experiments are performed to check (1) the country dependence (by analysing the impact of assuming either a well- or less well-developed statistical infrastructure), (2) the fuel type dependence (by adding explicit information for each fuel type used per activity from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), and (3) the spatial source distribution dependence (by aggregating all emission sources and comparing the effect against an even redistribution over the country). The first experiment shows that the SETTLEMENTS group (of energy for buildings) uncertainty changes the most when development level is changed. The second experiment shows that fuel-specific information reduces uncertainty in emissions only when a country uses several different fuels in the same amount; when a country mainly uses the most globally typical fuel for an activity, uncertainty values computed with and without detailed fuel information are the same. The third experiment highlights the importance of spatial mapping.
BASE
The growth in anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions acts as a major climate change driver, which has widespread implications across society, influencing the scientific, political, and public sectors. For an increased understanding of the CO2 emission sources, patterns, and trends, a link between the emission inventories and observed CO2 concentrations is best established via Earth system modelling and data assimilation. Bringing together the different pieces of the puzzle of a very different nature (measurements, reported statistics, and models), it is of utmost importance to know their level of confidence and boundaries well. Inversions disaggregate the variation in observed atmospheric CO2 concentration to variability in CO2 emissions by constraining the regional distribution of CO2 fluxes, derived either bottom-up from statistics or top-down from observations. The level of confidence and boundaries for each of these CO2 fluxes is as important as their intensity, though often not available for bottom-up anthropogenic CO2 emissions. This study provides a postprocessing tool CHE_UNC_APP for anthropogenic CO2 emissions to help assess and manage the uncertainty in the different emitting sectors. The postprocessor is available under https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5196190 (Choulga et al., 2021). Recommendations are given for regrouping the sectoral emissions, taking into account their uncertainty instead of their statistical origin; for addressing local hot spots; for the treatment of sectors with small budget but uncertainties larger than 100 %; and for the assumptions around the classification of countries based on the quality of their statistical infrastructure. This tool has been applied to the EDGARv4.3.2_FT2015 dataset, resulting in seven input grid maps with upper- and lower-half ranges of uncertainty for the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Integrated Forecasting System. The dataset is documented and available under https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3967439 (Choulga et al., 2020). While the uncertainty in most emission groups remains relatively small (5 %–20 %), the largest contribution (usually over 40 %) to the total uncertainty is determined by the OTHER group (of fuel exploitation and transformation but also agricultural soils and solvents) at the global scale. The uncertainties have been compared for selected countries to those reported in the inventories submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and to those assessed for the European emission grid maps of the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research. Several sensitivity experiments are performed to check (1) the country dependence (by analysing the impact of assuming either a well- or less well-developed statistical infrastructure), (2) the fuel type dependence (by adding explicit information for each fuel type used per activity from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), and (3) the spatial source distribution dependence (by aggregating all emission sources and comparing the effect against an even redistribution over the country). The first experiment shows that the SETTLEMENTS group (of energy for buildings) uncertainty changes the most when development level is changed. The second experiment shows that fuel-specific information reduces uncertainty in emissions only when a country uses several different fuels in the same amount; when a country mainly uses the most globally typical fuel for an activity, uncertainty values computed with and without detailed fuel information are the same. The third experiment highlights the importance of spatial mapping.
BASE
Anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions and their observed growing trends raise awareness in scientific, political and public sectors of the society as the major driver of climate-change. For an increased understanding of the CO 2 emission sources, patterns and trends, a link between the emission inventories and observed CO 2 concentrations is best established via Earth system modelling and data assimilation. In this study anthropogenic CO 2 emission inventories are processed into gridded maps to provide an estimate of prior CO 2 emissions for 7 main emissions groups: 1) power generation super-emitters and 2) energy production average-emitters, 3) manufacturing, 4) settlements, 5) aviation, 6) transport and 7) others, with estimation of their uncertainty and covariance to be included in the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Integrated Forecasting System (IFS). The emission inventories are sourced from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories and revised information from its 2019 Refinements, and the global grid-maps of Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR) inventory. The anthropogenic CO 2 emissions for 2012 and 2015, (EDGAR versions 4.3.2 and 4.3.2_FT2015 respectively) are considered, updated with improved apportionment of the energy sector, energy usage for manufacturing and diffusive CO 2 emissions from coal mines. These emissions aggregated into 7 ECMWF groups with their emission uncertainties are calculated per country considering its statistical infrastructure development level and sector considering the most typical fuel type and use the IPCC recommended error propagation method assuming fully uncorrelated emissions to generate covariance matrices of parsimonious dimension (7×7). While the uncertainty of most groups remains relatively small, the largest contribution to the total uncertainty is determined by the group with usually the smallest budget, consisting of oil refineries and transformation industry, fuel exploitation, coal production, agricultural soils and solvents and products use emissions. Several sensitivity studies are performed: for country type (with well-/less well-developed statistical infrastructure), for fuel type specification, and for national emission source distribution (highlights the importance of 30 accurate point source mapping). Uncertainties are compared with United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO) data. Upgraded anthropogenic CO 2 emission maps with their yearly and monthly uncertainties are combined into the CHE_EDGAR-ECMWF_2015 dataset (Choulga et al., 2020) available from https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3712339 .
BASE
In: Janssens-Maenhout , G , Crippa , M , Guizzardi , D , Muntean , M , Schaaf , E , Dentener , F , Bergamaschi , P , Pagliari , V , Olivier , J G J , Peters , J A H W , Van Aardenne , J A , Monni , S , Doering , U , Petrescu , A M R , Solazzo , E & Oreggioni , G D 2019 , ' EDGAR v4.3.2 Global Atlas of the three major greenhouse gas emissions for the period 1970-2012 ' , Earth System Science Data , vol. 11 , no. 3 , pp. 959-1002 . https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-959-2019
The Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR) compiles anthropogenic emissions data for greenhouse gases (GHGs), and for multiple air pollutants, based on international statistics and emission factors. EDGAR data provide quantitative support for atmospheric modelling and for mitigation scenario and impact assessment analyses as well as for policy evaluation. The new version (v4.3.2) of the EDGAR emission inventory provides global estimates, broken down to IPCC-relevant source-sector levels, from 1970 (the year of the European Union's first Air Quality Directive) to 2012 (the end year of the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, KP). Strengths of EDGAR v4.3.2 include global geo-coverage (226 countries), continuity in time, and comprehensiveness in activities. Emissions of multiple chemical compounds, GHGs as well as air pollutants, from relevant sources (fossil fuel activities but also, for example, fermentation processes in agricultural activities) are compiled following a bottom-up (BU), transparent and IPCC-compliant methodology. This paper describes EDGAR v4.3.2 developments with respect to three major long-lived GHGs (HYDRO, CH 4 , and HYDRO) derived from a wide range of human activities apart from the land-use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector and apart from savannah burning; a companion paper quantifies and discusses emissions of air pollutants. Detailed information is included for each of the IPCC-relevant source sectors, leading to global totals for 2010 (in the middle of the first KP commitment period) (with a 95% confidence interval in parentheses): HYDRO PgCO HYDRO yr HYDRO, HYDRO PgCH HYDRO yr HYDRO, and HYDRO TgN HYDRO Oyr HYDRO. We provide uncertainty factors in emissions data for the different GHGs and for three different groups of countries: OECD countries of 1990, countries with economies in transition in 1990, and the remaining countries in development (the UNFCCC non-Annex I parties). We document trends for the major emitting countries together with the European Union in more for each source sector.
BASE
International audience ; Emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and removals from land, including both anthropogenic and natural fluxes, require reliable quantification, including estimates of uncertainties, to support credible mitigation action under the Paris Agreement. This study provides a state-of-the-art scientific overview of bottom-up anthro-pogenic emissions data from agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) in the European Union (EU28 1). The data integrate recent AFOLU emission inventories with ecosystem data and land carbon models and summarize GHG emissions and removals over the period 1990-2016. This compilation of bottom-up estimates of the AFOLU GHG emissions of European national greenhouse gas inventories (NGHGIs), with those of land carbon models and observation-based estimates of large-scale GHG fluxes, aims at improving the overall estimates of the GHG balance in Europe with respect to land GHG emissions and removals. Whenever available, we present uncertainties, its propagation and role in the comparison of different estimates. While NGHGI data for the EU28 provide consistent quantification of uncertainty following the established IPCC Guidelines, uncertainty in the estimates produced with other methods needs to account for both within model uncertainty and the spread from different model results. The largest inconsistencies between EU28 estimates are mainly due to different sources of data related to human activity, referred to here as activity data (AD) and methodologies (tiers) used for calculating emissions and removals from AFOLU sectors. The referenced datasets related to figures are visualized at https://doi.org/10.
BASE
International audience ; Emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and removals from land, including both anthropogenic and natural fluxes, require reliable quantification, including estimates of uncertainties, to support credible mitigation action under the Paris Agreement. This study provides a state-of-the-art scientific overview of bottom-up anthro-pogenic emissions data from agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) in the European Union (EU28 1). The data integrate recent AFOLU emission inventories with ecosystem data and land carbon models and summarize GHG emissions and removals over the period 1990-2016. This compilation of bottom-up estimates of the AFOLU GHG emissions of European national greenhouse gas inventories (NGHGIs), with those of land carbon models and observation-based estimates of large-scale GHG fluxes, aims at improving the overall estimates of the GHG balance in Europe with respect to land GHG emissions and removals. Whenever available, we present uncertainties, its propagation and role in the comparison of different estimates. While NGHGI data for the EU28 provide consistent quantification of uncertainty following the established IPCC Guidelines, uncertainty in the estimates produced with other methods needs to account for both within model uncertainty and the spread from different model results. The largest inconsistencies between EU28 estimates are mainly due to different sources of data related to human activity, referred to here as activity data (AD) and methodologies (tiers) used for calculating emissions and removals from AFOLU sectors. The referenced datasets related to figures are visualized at https://doi.org/10.
BASE
International audience ; Emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and removals from land, including both anthropogenic and natural fluxes, require reliable quantification, including estimates of uncertainties, to support credible mitigation action under the Paris Agreement. This study provides a state-of-the-art scientific overview of bottom-up anthro-pogenic emissions data from agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) in the European Union (EU28 1). The data integrate recent AFOLU emission inventories with ecosystem data and land carbon models and summarize GHG emissions and removals over the period 1990-2016. This compilation of bottom-up estimates of the AFOLU GHG emissions of European national greenhouse gas inventories (NGHGIs), with those of land carbon models and observation-based estimates of large-scale GHG fluxes, aims at improving the overall estimates of the GHG balance in Europe with respect to land GHG emissions and removals. Whenever available, we present uncertainties, its propagation and role in the comparison of different estimates. While NGHGI data for the EU28 provide consistent quantification of uncertainty following the established IPCC Guidelines, uncertainty in the estimates produced with other methods needs to account for both within model uncertainty and the spread from different model results. The largest inconsistencies between EU28 estimates are mainly due to different sources of data related to human activity, referred to here as activity data (AD) and methodologies (tiers) used for calculating emissions and removals from AFOLU sectors. The referenced datasets related to figures are visualized at https://doi.org/10.
BASE
International audience ; Emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and removals from land, including both anthropogenic and natural fluxes, require reliable quantification, including estimates of uncertainties, to support credible mitigation action under the Paris Agreement. This study provides a state-of-the-art scientific overview of bottom-up anthro-pogenic emissions data from agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) in the European Union (EU28 1). The data integrate recent AFOLU emission inventories with ecosystem data and land carbon models and summarize GHG emissions and removals over the period 1990-2016. This compilation of bottom-up estimates of the AFOLU GHG emissions of European national greenhouse gas inventories (NGHGIs), with those of land carbon models and observation-based estimates of large-scale GHG fluxes, aims at improving the overall estimates of the GHG balance in Europe with respect to land GHG emissions and removals. Whenever available, we present uncertainties, its propagation and role in the comparison of different estimates. While NGHGI data for the EU28 provide consistent quantification of uncertainty following the established IPCC Guidelines, uncertainty in the estimates produced with other methods needs to account for both within model uncertainty and the spread from different model results. The largest inconsistencies between EU28 estimates are mainly due to different sources of data related to human activity, referred to here as activity data (AD) and methodologies (tiers) used for calculating emissions and removals from AFOLU sectors. The referenced datasets related to figures are visualized at https://doi.org/10.
BASE
International audience ; Emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and removals from land, including both anthropogenic and natural fluxes, require reliable quantification, including estimates of uncertainties, to support credible mitigation action under the Paris Agreement. This study provides a state-of-the-art scientific overview of bottom-up anthro-pogenic emissions data from agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) in the European Union (EU28 1). The data integrate recent AFOLU emission inventories with ecosystem data and land carbon models and summarize GHG emissions and removals over the period 1990-2016. This compilation of bottom-up estimates of the AFOLU GHG emissions of European national greenhouse gas inventories (NGHGIs), with those of land carbon models and observation-based estimates of large-scale GHG fluxes, aims at improving the overall estimates of the GHG balance in Europe with respect to land GHG emissions and removals. Whenever available, we present uncertainties, its propagation and role in the comparison of different estimates. While NGHGI data for the EU28 provide consistent quantification of uncertainty following the established IPCC Guidelines, uncertainty in the estimates produced with other methods needs to account for both within model uncertainty and the spread from different model results. The largest inconsistencies between EU28 estimates are mainly due to different sources of data related to human activity, referred to here as activity data (AD) and methodologies (tiers) used for calculating emissions and removals from AFOLU sectors. The referenced datasets related to figures are visualized at https://doi.org/10.
BASE
An accurate simulation of the absorption properties is key for assessing the radiative effects of aerosol on meteorology and climate. The representation of how chemical species are mixed inside the particles (the mixing state) is one of the major uncertainty factors in the assessment of these effects. Here we compare aerosol optical properties simulations over Europe and North America, coordinated in the framework of the third phase of the Air Quality Model Evaluation International Initiative (AQMEII), to 1 year of AERONET sunphotometer retrievals, in an attempt to identify a mixing state representation that better reproduces the observed single scattering albedo and its spectral variation. We use a single post-processing tool (FlexAOD) to derive aerosol optical properties from simulated aerosol speciation profiles, and focus on the absorption enhancement of black carbon when it is internally mixed with more scattering material, discarding from the analysis scenes dominated by dust. We found that the single scattering albedo at 440nm (omega(0,440)) is on average overestimated (underestimated) by 3-5% when external (core-shell internal) mixing of particles is assumed, a bias comparable in magnitude with the typical variability of the quantity. The (unphysical) homogeneous internal mixing assumption underestimates omega(0,440) by 14%. The combination of external and core-shell configurations (partial internal mixing), parameterized using a simplified function of air mass aging, reduces the omega(0,440) bias to-1/-3%. The black carbon absorption enhancement (E-abs) in core-shell with respect to the externally mixed state is in the range 1.8-2.5, which is above the currently most accepted upper limit of 1.5. The partial internal mixing reduces E-abs to values more consistent with this limit. However, the spectral dependence of the absorption is not well reproduced, and the absorption Angstrom exponent AAE(675)(440) is overestimated by 70-120%. Further testing against more comprehensive campaign data, including a ...
BASE
Emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and removals from land, including both anthropogenic and natural fluxes, require reliable quantification, including estimates of uncertainties, to support credible mitigation action under the Paris Agreement. This study provides a state-of-the-art scientific overview of bottom-up anthropogenic emissions data from agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) in the European Union (EU281). The data integrate recent AFOLU emission inventories with ecosystem data and land carbon models and summarize GHG emissions and removals over the period 1990–2016. This compilation of bottom-up estimates of the AFOLU GHG emissions of European national greenhouse gas inventories (NGHGIs), with those of land carbon models and observation-based estimates of large-scale GHG fluxes, aims at improving the overall estimates of the GHG balance in Europe with respect to land GHG emissions and removals. Whenever available, we present uncertainties, its propagation and role in the comparison of different estimates. While NGHGI data for the EU28 provide consistent quantification of uncertainty following the established IPCC Guidelines, uncertainty in the estimates produced with other methods needs to account for both within model uncertainty and the spread from different model results. The largest inconsistencies between EU28 estimates are mainly due to different sources of data related to human activity, referred to here as activity data (AD) and methodologies (tiers) used for calculating emissions and removals from AFOLU sectors. The referenced datasets related to figures are visualized at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3662371 (Petrescu et al., 2020). ; publishedVersion
BASE
In: Petrescu , A M R , Peters , G G , Janssens-Maenhout , G , Ciais , P , Tubiello , F F , Grassi , G , Nabuurs , G J , Leip , A , Carmona-Garcia , G , Winiwarter , W , Höglund-Isaksson , L , Günther , D , Solazzo , E , Kiesow , A , Bastos , A , Pongratz , J , Nabel , J E M S , Conchedda , G , Pilli , R , Andrew , R R , Schelhaas , M J & Dolman , A A 2020 , ' European anthropogenic AFOLU greenhouse gas emissions : a review and benchmark data ' , Earth System Science Data , vol. 12 , no. 2 , pp. 961-1001 . https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-961-2020
Emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and removals from land, including both anthropogenic and natural fluxes, require reliable quantification, including estimates of uncertainties, to support credible mitigation action under the Paris Agreement. This study provides a state-of-the-art scientific overview of bottom-up anthropogenic emissions data from agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) in the European Union (EU28 1 ). The data integrate recent AFOLU emission inventories with ecosystem data and land carbon models and summarize GHG emissions and removals over the period 1990-2016. This compilation of bottom-up estimates of the AFOLU GHG emissions of European national greenhouse gas inventories (NGHGIs), with those of land carbon models and observation-based estimates of large-scale GHG fluxes, aims at improving the overall estimates of the GHG balance in Europe with respect to land GHG emissions and removals. Whenever available, we present uncertainties, its propagation and role in the comparison of different estimates. While NGHGI data for the EU28 provide consistent quantification of uncertainty following the established IPCC Guidelines, uncertainty in the estimates produced with other methods needs to account for both within model uncertainty and the spread from different model results. The largest inconsistencies between EU28 estimates are mainly due to different sources of data related to human activity, referred to here as activity data (AD) and methodologies (tiers) used for calculating emissions and removals from AFOLU sectors. The referenced datasets related to figures are visualized at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3662371 (Petrescu et al., 2020).
BASE
Emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and removals from land, including both anthropogenic and natural fluxes, require reliable quantification, including estimates of uncertainties, to support credible mitigation action under the Paris Agreement. This study provides a state-of-the-art scientific overview of bottom-up anthropogenic emissions data from agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) in the European Union (EU28 1 ). The data integrate recent AFOLU emission inventories with ecosystem data and land carbon models and summarize GHG emissions and removals over the period 1990–2016. This compilation of bottom-up estimates of the AFOLU GHG emissions of European national greenhouse gas inventories (NGHGIs), with those of land carbon models and observation-based estimates of large-scale GHG fluxes, aims at improving the overall estimates of the GHG balance in Europe with respect to land GHG emissions and removals. Whenever available, we present uncertainties, its propagation and role in the comparison of different estimates. While NGHGI data for the EU28 provide consistent quantification of uncertainty following the established IPCC Guidelines, uncertainty in the estimates produced with other methods needs to account for both within model uncertainty and the spread from different model results. The largest inconsistencies between EU28 estimates are mainly due to different sources of data related to human activity, referred to here as activity data (AD) and methodologies (tiers) used for calculating emissions and removals from AFOLU sectors. The referenced datasets related to figures are visualized at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3662371 (Petrescu et al., 2020).
BASE
Emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and removals from land, including both anthropogenic and natural fluxes, require reliable quantification, including estimates of uncertainties, to support credible mitigation action under the Paris Agreement. This study provides a state-of-the-art scientific overview of bottom-up anthropogenic emissions data from agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) in the European Union (EU281). The data integrate recent AFOLU emission inventories with ecosystem data and land carbon models and summarize GHG emissions and removals over the period 1990–2016. This compilation of bottom-up estimates of the AFOLU GHG emissions of European national greenhouse gas inventories (NGHGIs), with those of land carbon models and observation-based estimates of large-scale GHG fluxes, aims at improving the overall estimates of the GHG balance in Europe with respect to land GHG emissions and removals. Whenever available, we present uncertainties, its propagation and role in the comparison of different estimates. While NGHGI data for the EU28 provide consistent quantification of uncertainty following the established IPCC Guidelines, uncertainty in the estimates produced with other methods needs to account for both within model uncertainty and the spread from different model results. The largest inconsistencies between EU28 estimates are mainly due to different sources of data related to human activity, referred to here as activity data (AD) and methodologies (tiers) used for calculating emissions and removals from AFOLU sectors. The referenced datasets related to figures are visualized at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3662371 (Petrescu et al., 2020).
BASE