Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36183029›Full record

ArticleCarbon balance and management2022

On the use of Earth Observation to support estimates of national greenhouse gas emissions and sinks for the Global stocktake process: lessons learned from ESA-CCI RECCAP2.

Ana Bastos, Philippe Ciais, Stephen Sitch, Luiz E O C Aragão, Frédéric Chevallier, Dominic Fawcett, Thais M Rosan, Marielle Saunois, Dirk Günther, Lucia Perugini and 8 more

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Carbon balance and management, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Ana BastosDept. of Biogeochemical Integration, Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, 07745, Jena, Germany. abastos@bgc-jena.mpg.de.
Philippe CiaisLaboratoire Des Sciences du Climat Et de L'Environnement, LSCE/IPSL, CEA-CNRS-UVSQ, Université Paris-Saclay, 91191, Gif-sur-Yvette, France.
Stephen SitchDepartment of Geography, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Luiz E O C AragãoDepartment of Geography, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Frédéric ChevallierLaboratoire Des Sciences du Climat Et de L'Environnement, LSCE/IPSL, CEA-CNRS-UVSQ, Université Paris-Saclay, 91191, Gif-sur-Yvette, France.
Dominic FawcettDepartment of Geography, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Thais M RosanDepartment of Geography, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Marielle SaunoisLaboratoire Des Sciences du Climat Et de L'Environnement, LSCE/IPSL, CEA-CNRS-UVSQ, Université Paris-Saclay, 91191, Gif-sur-Yvette, France.
Dirk GüntherUmweltbundesamt (UBA), 14193, Berlin, Germany.
Lucia PeruginiDivision On Climate Change Impacts On Agriculture, Forests and Ecosystem Services (IAFES), Foundation Euro-Mediterranean Center On Climate Change (CMCC), Viterbo, Italy.
Colas RobertDept. AFOLU, Citepa, 42 rue de Paradis, 75010, Paris, France.
Zhu DengDepartment of Earth System Science, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China.
Julia PongratzLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Luisenstr. 37, 80333, Munich, Germany.
Raphael GanzenmüllerLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Luisenstr. 37, 80333, Munich, Germany.
Richard FuchsLand Use Change & Climate Research Group, IMK-IFU, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlsruhe, Germany.
Karina WinklerLand Use Change & Climate Research Group, IMK-IFU, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlsruhe, Germany.
Sönke ZaehleDept. of Biogeochemical Integration, Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, 07745, Jena, Germany.
Clément AlbergelEuropean Space Agency Climate Office, ECSAT, Harwell Campus, Didcot, UK.

Funding

European Space Agency Climate Change Initiative ESRIN/4000123002/18/I-NBHorizon 2020 Framework Programme 776810
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Global Stocktake (GST), implemented by the Paris Agreement, requires rapid developments in the capabilities to quantify annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and removals consistently from the global to the national scale and improvements to national GHG inventories. In particular, new capabilities are needed for accurate attribution of sources and sinks and their trends to natural and anthropogenic processes. On the one hand, this is still a major challenge as national GHG inventories follow globally harmonized methodologies based on the guidelines established by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, but these can be implemented differently for individual countries. Moreover, in many countries the capability to systematically produce detailed and annually updated GHG inventories is still lacking. On the other hand, spatially-explicit datasets quantifying sources and sinks of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide emissions from Earth Observations (EO) are still limited by many sources of uncertainty. While national GHG inventories follow diverse methodologies depending on the availability of activity data in the different countries, the proposed comparison with EO-based estimates can help improve our understanding of the comparability of the estimates published by the different countries. Indeed, EO networks and satellite platforms have seen a massive expansion in the past decade, now covering a wide range of essential climate variables and offering high potential to improve the quantification of global and regional GHG budgets and advance process understanding. Yet, there is no EO data that quantifies greenhouse gas fluxes directly, rather there are observations of variables or proxies that can be transformed into fluxes using models. Here, we report results and lessons from the ESA-CCI RECCAP2 project, whose goal was to engage with National Inventory Agencies to improve understanding about the methods used by each community to estimate sources and sinks of GHGs and to evaluate the potential for satellite and in-situ EO to improve national GHG estimates. Based on this dialogue and recent studies, we discuss the potential of EO approaches to provide estimates of GHG budgets that can be compared with those of national GHG inventories. We outline a roadmap for implementation of an EO carbon-monitoring program that can contribute to the Paris Agreement.

Indexed as

Carbon dioxideEarth observationGreenhouse gasesLand-use changeMethaneParis agreement

Identifiers

PMID36183029
PMCPMC9526973

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.