Steve Smith

Please note the ability of Italy in being not green and neither cheaper

Our paper comparing a number of top down and bottom up methane emission estimates from China and the US is out!

That's a particularly large difference for advanced cookstoves.

"for example, an average of 8.9 g/kgfuel (field) compared to 5.2 g/kgfuel (lab) for traditional cookstoves and 4.0 g/kgfuel (field) compared to 1.3 g/kgfuel (lab) for advanced cookstoves"

Biomass cookstove emissions—a systematic review on aerosol and particle properties of relevance for health, climate, and the environment - IOPscience Biomass cookstove emissions—a systematic review on aerosol and particle properties of relevance for health, climate, and the environment, García-López, Natxo, Ingabire, Ange Sabine, Bailis, Rob, Eriksson, Axel C, Isaxon, Christina, Boman, Christoffer

Nice review paper on cookstoves. Particularly :
" field studies consistently report particle emission factors (PM2.5) higher than the ... under laboratory conditions"
iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1...

But it would be similar for
electric generation since the largest part of electricity is coal.

The most parsimonious solution is to get carbon monitor to use this. Seems like they should

Gridded emissions out to 2023 are already up at ESGF. note that a user found a discontinuity in the seasonal cycle for 2023. So we are replacing the data to fix that. Other years are not impacted.

Change in Hydro looks to be about the right magnitude to offset the seasonal change in goal.

Note that renewables are about the same order of magnitude Hydro, and will also have seasonal patterns.

Yes, we could use that. There is seasonality in latest CEDS, but it’s small and inconsistent from year to year.

I note that the signal you show not that large. That might be overwhelmed by seasonality in atmospheric chemistry and transport.

But still worth improving the emissions, of course.

I haven’t noticed anything missing from EIA. Any specifics.

Two new Maryland climate working group reports will help guide the state's energy transition and meet its ambitious climate goals, established by Maryland's Climate Solutions Now Act.
Check out the research, supported by CGS and led by the CGS Maryland Program Dir. @kmkennedy6.bsky.social, below:

2/2 so it’s really about truth in marketing and accountability - which is not generally present.

The culture tends to perpetuate that the academic route is the only true “success”, and that’s a problem.

That doesn’t excuse the overuse of postdocs as cheap labor with no stable career path.

1/2 This “leave academia“ or even “leave science” wording is counterproductive.

The system is set up to overproduce postdocs, the incentives for that haven’t changed. So this shouldn’t surprise anyone.

It’s not ness a bad thing if not all are doing research, PhD’s are useful in other places.

Sorry to hear this very sad news.

Impacts of EPA’s finalized power plant greenhouse gas standards Emissions reductions may be met with relatively small costs

Read the full paper here: www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adt5665

Thanks to my stellar coauthors on this collaborative effort!

@aafawcett.bsky.social @jessedjenkins.com @nicholasroy.me @aliciaszhao.bsky.social @rff.org @ctrglobsust.bsky.social @nrdc.org @andlingercenter.bsky.social

He’s talking about a different sort of aerosols - small particles in the atmosphere (such as formed by sulfur dioxide emissions ) that reflect sunlight back into space.

Wow!

Congratulations to Phil Jones, climatologist at UEA’s Climatic Research Unit, on being awarded an OBE for his services to climatology

They Fell Sick After Cleaning Up a TVA Toxic Disaster. A New Book Details Their Legal Battle - Inside Climate News “Valley So Low” covers a decade-long courtroom drama stemming from the 2008 disaster that helped nudge the EPA into adopting its first national regulations of coal ash.

Workers who claimed cleaning up a giant TVA coal ash disaster sickened them received a settlement after a decade of litigation. A new book details their struggles.

Our paper last year demonstrating the importance of the assumed SO2 injection height.
egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/20...

Note that, particularly for industrial (not power plant) sources, the emission height will vary even more widely - from substantial emissions at the surface to emissions from some sources that loft higher than power plants. This will also vary by emission species.

The community needs to consider how emission height information should be provided to modelers.

Slide discusses what type of guidance should be provided to modelers

While models can't incorporate this new information in time for CMIP7 fast track simulations, the implications of this new information should be evaluated in parallel.

Slide shows regionally averaged results from Guevara et al.

While the weighted average regional height distribution varies somewhat by region, the emissions height is higher than the AeroCOM assumptions used by many modelers.

A global catalogue of CO2 emissions and co-emitted species from power plants, including high-resolution vertical and temporal profiles Abstract. We present a high-resolution global emission catalogue of CO2 and co-emitted species (NOx, SO2, CO, CH4) from thermal power plants for the year 2018. The construction of the database follows...

Recent analysis indicates that power plant emissions are injected much higher into the atmosphere than previously assumed.
essd.copernicus.org/articles/16/...

Last part of my #AGU24 talk on model assumptions for effective injection height (stack height plus plume rise). Assuming emissions are injected into the model surface layer will bias results, sometimes substantially.

Slide describes the reasons that the most recent emission estimates are particularly uncertain.

While we will release data out to 2023 in January, the last 1-2 years of this data, in particular, contain many assumptions and approximations. This means these values are more likely to change in future releases.A

Slide describes current and future CEDS air pollutant (e.g. SLCF) emissions data

Emissions out to 2022 are now available for evaluation and testing. CMIP7 historical emissions will be released in Jan 2025. Extension from 2021 through 2024 released in July 2025 as part of future scenario data.

2) In following years this allows us to provide extension data anchored at the CMIP historical stop year. This will facilitate extension of the CMIP historical ensembles to simulate historical climate over recent years.