Greenhouse gas emissions still an issue

Jun 07, 2013
Greenhouse gas emissions still an issue
Credit: Shutterstock

The amount of greenhouse gases (GHGs) released into the atmosphere as a result of human activities is cause for concern as evidence of major climate change begins to mount. A European research team spanning 15 countries is tackling this challenge by improving our understanding of the problem.

The GHG-Europe ('Greenhouse Gas Management in European Land Use Systems') project is working to increase awareness of environmental issues, such as drawing attention to the changing uses of Europe's land for agricultural and (i.e. estimated to be over 50 %), and the importance of better to reduce .

With EU-funding of EUR 6.6 million, the project is being led by Dr Annette Freibauer from the Thünen Institute of Climate-Smart Agriculture in Germany and includes a consortium of 41 partners.

The GHG-Europe team seeks to quantify the annual to decadal variability of all three major GHGs - carbon dioxide, and nitrous oxide - in in Europe. Therefore it is important to know which part of the GHG balance can be managed and which part is driven by . In doing so, the most vulnerable carbon pools, GHG processes and the associated risks with in the 21st century can be correctly identified.

The project, which is due to end this summer has gathered data from more than 40 GHG measurement stations distributed across all European climatic regions and ecosystems. Additional data has been integrated from previous European projects, such as CarboEurope and NitroEurope. Together with spatial data on climate, soil and land management, this information provides the basis for model validation and integrated assessment.

With this data, the GHG-Europe team now have the means to assess the future vulnerability of carbon pools and the risks within the climate-carbon system. This has been achieved through novel fingerprinting techniques to identify critical drivers and situations, scenario analyses with biophysical models, as well as the integration of feedback from EU climate and land-use policies and the effects of socioeconomic changes.

Dr Freibauer says: 'The project results will provide new insights - quantitative and qualitative - and a better foundation for decision-making in the international climate policy negotiations. Furthermore, GHG-Europe will provide the scientific basis for factoring out natural variability and human management effects on the GHG balance, which is at the heart of the international climate negotiations for the post-Kyoto regime. Thus, we will quantify the possible contribution of agriculture and forestry to mitigate GHGs.'

Later in the year, GHG-Europe will host a conference entitled, 'Open Science Conference: Greenhouse Gas Management in European Land Use Systems', which will be held in Antwerp, Belgium.

Explore further: Is Hawaii prepared for the impacts of climate change?

More information: GHG-Europe www.ghg-europe.eu/

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

A balancing act for carbon stock preservation

Mar 29, 2013

More accurate data regarding the extent to which greenhouse gases stemming from human activity interplays with the balance of carbon stocks in Europe will soon be available to inform policies. But would that ...

Limiting greenhouse gas emissions from land use in Europe

Apr 10, 2013

Not only do humans emit greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, but they also do things that help remove these gases from the atmosphere—for example, planting more forests or other land management techniques can lead to greater ...

US greenhouse gas emissions and capture, regionally

Aug 12, 2010

A new report, Agriculture's Role in Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Capture, commissioned by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America, examines the evidence for greenhouse ...

Canada must addess real climate-change challenge, report says

May 15, 2013

To reach Canada's goal of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 17 per cent below the 2005 level by the year 2020, federal and provincial governments, led by the Prime Minister and provincial premiers, must reach agreement ...

Predicting a low carbon future for Toronto

Feb 06, 2013

Cities are major players in the climate change game. More than half of the world's population lives in urban areas and over 70% of global GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions can be attributed to cities. A case study of Toronto ...

Recommended for you

Is Hawaii prepared for the impacts of climate change?

48 minutes ago

The Hawaiian Islands represent a wide diversity of ecosystems and environments, including areas of breathtaking natural beauty as well as densely populated coastal cities. These unique environments are already ...

Water in the Netherlands–past, present, and future

5 hours ago

The storm in the Netherlands began on a Saturday afternoon in February 1953. Ria Geluk, who was 6 years old, told me that it peaked during the night when nationwide communications were on their nightly pause. ...

User comments : 14

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

deatopmg
2 / 5 (21) Jun 07, 2013
Why aren't they proposing to manage THE absolutely major GHG that could give the biggest bang for the euro? Because this conference is really about justifying and saving their jobs, not saving the planet. Oh, that GHG is H2O.

And who really believes that this will be an "OPEN science conference:..."? History shows that these conferences are never "open" but instead always one sided by design.

Let them explain this http://www.drroys...ans1.png then explain why the conference is important.
Howhot
4.2 / 5 (15) Jun 07, 2013
Ohh here we go again.
Oh, that GHG is H2O.
, just to clear this fallacy up about H20, CO2 lingers in the atmosphere for couple hundred year trapping heat. H2O is much less. (years). H2O only is lofted in the air from heat and evaporation so the more CO2 there is dumped in the atmosphere, the more H2O there will be.in the atmosphere from greenhouse heating. It's called a FEEDBACK mechanism and is of very big concern to scientists.

As far as your other points, it's just rightwing dribble.

deatopmg
1.7 / 5 (18) Jun 08, 2013
For http://www.drroys...ans1.png the 73 model results are from the left wing cabal of universities and gov't agencies and the 2 satellite and 3 radiosonde data are from the same left wing cabal of universities and gov't agencies, not some right wing conspiracy. The left wing data trumps any and all of the left wing models.

Bottom line: in spite of the $100's of billion$ having already been spent and more being spent every day, there is still scant evidence of CO2 driven warming and lots of evidence that the feedback is tiny and insignificant.

@Howhot et al Those "scientists" who have a "big" concern about FEEDBACK are really more concerned about their incomes vanishing than saving the world. More so with the politicians. Did you mean to use drivel, instead of dribble?

AGW, and especially CAGW, is dead whether you believe it or not. It's the sun, children!

ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (16) Jun 08, 2013
a FEEDBACK mechanism

And this is measured with a low fidelity computer model that cannot model H2O, the most significant IR absorber in the atm, well.
ValeriaT
1 / 5 (9) Jun 08, 2013
And this is measured with a low fidelity computer model that cannot model H2O, the most significant IR absorber in the atm, well
It depends on the size of water droplets - the larger ones do reflect the IR instead of absorbing it, so that the account of water to global warming could be neglected. Anyway it seems, that the cloudiness contributes to global warming, especially if it occurs in higher altitudes (in form of the noctilucent clouds, for example).
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 08, 2013
that the cloudiness contributes to global warming,

Ever notice the difference between daily highs and lows for high humidity locations is only a few degrees as the water vapor retains and blocks heat radiating into space.
How is that modeled and predicted?
runrig
4.6 / 5 (11) Jun 08, 2013
For http://www.drroys...ans1.png the 73 model results are from the left wing cabal of universities and gov't agencies and the 2 satellite and 3 radiosonde data are from the same left wing cabal of universities and gov't agencies, not some right wing conspiracy. The left wing data trumps any and all of the left wing models.


No it doesn't. The MSU data used here isn't reliable (hasn't been filitered to remove contamination from cooling Strat - accounts for ~25% in measurements ).
Also....
"Temperature trends derived from historical radiosonde data often show substantial differences compared to satellite measurements. These differences are especially large for stratospheric levels, and for data in the Tropics, where results are based on relatively few stations"
http://journals.a...LI3717.1

Better data exist for comparison to these "73 models" as Dr Spencer knows - see post from Glenn Tamblyn in the comments section lower down the page.

Howhot
4.6 / 5 (10) Jun 10, 2013
Let me repeat myself, it's called a FEEDBACK mechanism and is of very big concern to scientists. As far as all of your other points, that is just rightwing dribble! Did you get it, RIGHTWING DRIBBLE!

Bottom line: in spite of the $100's of billion$ having already been spent and more being spent every day, there is still scant evidence of CO2 driven warming and lots of evidence that the feedback is tiny and insignificant.

BOTTOM LINE is you full of the brown package dude. If you think there is little evidence for feed back, you haven't been paying attention. The water vapor satellite images demonstrate change day by day.




deepsand
3.7 / 5 (15) Jun 11, 2013
Why aren't they proposing to manage THE absolutely major GHG that could give the biggest bang for the euro? Because this conference is really about justifying and saving their jobs, not saving the planet. Oh, that GHG is H2O.

Choosing to ignore that which has been explained countless times, that the atmospheric level of H2O is self-regulating and essentially constant, such that it is NOT INCREASING RADIATIVE FORCING, is intellectually dishonesty.
deepsand
3.7 / 5 (15) Jun 11, 2013
.. there is still scant evidence of CO2 driven warming and lots of evidence that the feedback is tiny and insignificant.

Not only is this patently false on its face, as is evident to anyone who has a grasp of the facts, but, had you a understanding of the basic Laws of Physics as they apply to radiation, you would know that increased levels of atmospheric CO2 CANNOT NOT increase radiative forcing.

You are an intellectual fraud.
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (12) Jun 11, 2013
as evidence of major climate change begins to mount.
That's a blatant lie. The global climate hasn't significantly changed since the end of the last ice age (there has been some relatively minor variation), and the global temperature hasn't significantly changed in more than 16 years.

http://www.woodfo....2/trend

And, at most, we've only just recovered from a long term cooling trend:

http://phys.org/n...ars.html

deepsand
3.6 / 5 (14) Jun 11, 2013
as evidence of major climate change begins to mount.
That's a blatant lie. The global climate hasn't significantly changed since the end of the last ice age (there has been some relatively minor variation), and the global temperature hasn't significantly changed in more than 16 years.

http://www.woodfo....2/trend

Your are the blatant lies, on all counts.

Global temperatures are the highest that they've been in 4000 years, and increasing at a rate higher than that seen during the preceding 11300 years.

As for your cherry-picked UNADJUSTED HADCRUT3 data, HADCRUT4GL begs to differ.

http://www.woodfo....5/trend
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (9) Jun 11, 2013
Your are the blatant lies, on all counts.
Nope. The lies would be yours.

Global temperatures are the highest that they've been in 4000 years,
Which only serves to prove my previous statement that we've only been recovering from a long term cooling trend!

and increasing at a rate higher than that seen during the preceding 11300 years.
How can that be, when they aren't increasing at all? Even your highly manipulated HadCRUT4 data shows only about a 20th of a degree in the last 16 years;

http://www.woodfo....3/trend

And a cooling trend for more than the last 12 years:

http://www.woodfo....3/trend

But I shouldn't be surprised by your lies. AGWites aren't exactly known for their logic and science skills. To them, it's all about Chicken Little proclamations of doom and gloom.

deepsand
3.7 / 5 (12) Jun 11, 2013
UTube blathered:
Which only serves to prove my previous statement that we've only been recovering from a long term cooling trend!

Idiot; it proves no such thing. Trends are not inherently reversed; there needs to be a cause for the reversal.

How can that be, when they aren't increasing at all? Even your highly manipulated HadCRUT4 data shows only about a 20th of a degree in the last 16 years.

Manipulated? And, any increase at all puts the lie to your claim of cooling.

And a cooling trend for more than the last 12 years

More cherry picking, which anyone can play.

Warming trend for the past 5.5 yars.

http://www.woodfo...o:2013.5

You are an intellectual fraud.