Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: 2019 CO2 emissions  (Read 1736 times)

Tom_Mazanec

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 509
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 16
2019 CO2 emissions
« on: April 11, 2019, 04:40:14 PM »
As long ago as early December, 2018 it was reported that 2018 had hit an all-time record for CO2 emissions.
Do we have some early indications five months later how 2019 is trending?
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

Jim Hunt

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4032
    • View Profile
    • The Arctic sea ice Great White Con
  • Liked: 172
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: 2019 CO2 emissions
« Reply #1 on: April 11, 2019, 04:59:24 PM »
Perhaps look in "2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels"?
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one - Albert Einstein

Tom_Mazanec

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 509
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: 2019 CO2 emissions
« Reply #2 on: April 11, 2019, 05:12:17 PM »
I thought emissions is how much H. sapiens actually put into the atmosphere through burning gas, oil, coal, wood, etc. while the Mauna Loa levels reflect the exhalation of animals, fossil fuel burning, sequestering in plants, and other carbon cycles.
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 901
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 39
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: 2019 CO2 emissions
« Reply #3 on: April 11, 2019, 06:05:14 PM »
Perhaps look in "2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels"?

Atmospheric levels represent the actions of all sources (natural and anthropogenic) and sinks, and there is a significant amount of natural variation (e.g. La Nina/El Nino). There is also the possibility of feedbacks increasing natural emissions and reducing sinks. So probably not a good link between the two, especially in the short-term.

Coal Usage
Maybe the best proxy is coal usage in China and India, as the increase in coal usage accounted for 70% of the rise in emissions in 2017 and 2018. Forecasts are for 4% growth in India coal usage ongoing and it looks like China is quietly building new coal-fired power stations, so they may not peak for quite a while. Coal consumption statistics are usually quite delayed in reporting though. I ignore any reduction due to increased natural gas usage, as the significantly underreported fugitive methane leaks make it as bad as coal (yes, that means that emissions grew by more than reported in 2018).

Wind and Solar Electricity Generation
Another could be the forecast for the increase in wind and solar electricity generation (not capacity addition which is very misleading due to differing capacity factors) versus the forecast increase in overall electricity generation (growing at about 2.5% per year). If the ratio is greater than 1 (currently less than 0.5) electricity generation is decarbonizing. I ignore hydroelectricity (growth limited and net up-front emissions due to construction and the flooding of vegetation) and the highly questionable bio-fuels (e.g. wood pellets may be just as bad as coal and therefore UK emissions probably did not fall by as much as claimed).

In 2017 humanity utilized approximately 22,000 Terawatt hours of electricity, wind provided 5% of that, and solar 2% of that. Their combined share grew by 1%, which was much less than the 2.6% growth in overall generation. The growth rate would need to treble to start decarbonizing. You can get the data for look-back IRENA (International Renewable Energy Association) and look-forward data from GWEC (Global Wind Energy Council) and Solar Power Europe. Their forecasts for 2019 (which are usually pretty good) point to slowing growth rates in wind and solar, so not decarbonization. Same to 2022.

Internal Combustion Engine Car Fleet
As long as this is growing (as it is rapidly in China and probably soon India, and slowly in the US and Europe) emissions will tend to increase, offset a little by more efficient engines (offset a lot by increases in the size of cars). In 2019 car sales may fall somewhat, but the overall ICE car fleet will continue to grow. Until EV's are a significant share of sales in the USA and Europe this increase will continue. Monthly sales numbers, and EV share, are published monthly. Still too low to reduce the ICE fleet in the USA and EU.

Sorry that its not that simple to do. I track these things in detail because it is necessary for my PhD, it can be quite a pain tracking down accurate (and not misrepresented) data. My take is that, short of a recession, emissions will increase between now and 2022.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/secret-coal-plants-reveal-chinas-strategy-of-the-green-mirage_2860707.html

https://yearbook.enerdata.net/electricity/electricity-domestic-consumption-data.html

https://yearbook.enerdata.net/renewables/wind-solar-share-electricity-production.html

https://www.irena.org/publications/2019/Mar/Capacity-Statistics-2019

https://gwec.net/global-wind-report-2018/

http://www.solarpowereurope.org/global-market-outlook-2018-2022/
« Last Edit: April 11, 2019, 06:13:40 PM by rboyd »

Stephan

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 481
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 144
  • Likes Given: 75
Re: 2019 CO2 emissions
« Reply #4 on: April 11, 2019, 08:26:15 PM »
Thank you for sharing your information sources and their relative weight and importance.
Please keep us updated if newer and more precise information is available and finally good luck with your PhD thesis :-)

b_lumenkraft

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1652
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 359
  • Likes Given: 1595
Re: 2019 CO2 emissions
« Reply #5 on: April 11, 2019, 08:39:20 PM »
I track these things in detail because it is necessary for my PhD,

Good luck with that! :)

If it helps you, there are very accurate emission stats for Germany from Frauenhofer.

All coal plants >> https://www.energy-charts.de/emissions_de.htm?source=lignite&view=absolute&emission=co2&year=all

Percentage renewables >> https://www.energy-charts.de/ren_share_de.htm

Solar and wind >> https://www.energy-charts.de/energy_de.htm?source=solar-wind&period=weekly&year=2019

Feel free to ask me for translation if necessary.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 901
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 39
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: 2019 CO2 emissions
« Reply #6 on: April 12, 2019, 06:37:47 AM »
Thankyou, actually google translate tends to do a very good job.

b_lumenkraft

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1652
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 359
  • Likes Given: 1595
Re: 2019 CO2 emissions
« Reply #7 on: April 12, 2019, 07:26:47 AM »
Thankyou, actually google translate tends to do a very good job.

You are welcome R.

So cool Google translates even this site. Thumbs up!  :)

Tom_Mazanec

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 509
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: 2019 CO2 emissions
« Reply #8 on: April 13, 2019, 09:22:14 PM »
Well, I don't know if Google Translate does a very good job...I usually get just pretty good (although I admit it is slowly improving).
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 901
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 39
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: 2019 CO2 emissions
« Reply #9 on: April 15, 2019, 11:31:12 PM »
Increase in lake emissions equivalent to 13% of fossil fuel related emissions due to "moderate levels of eutrophication" due to increased temperatures

We are rapidly getting to the point where cuts in anthropogenic emissions could be matched by increased sources and reduced sinks.The UNIPCC takes absolutely no account of this.

Quote
Our study shows that GHG emissions from lakes and impoundments are equivalent to ∼ 20% of global fossil fuel CO2 emission (9.3 Pg C‐CO2 yr−1; Le Quéré et al. 2016) and that emissions will rise even further with the continued eutrophication of Earth's lentic ecosystems.

[quote This analysis suggests that these moderate levels of enhanced eutrophication could increase the atmospheric effect of GHGs emitted from lakes and impoundments by 5%, 26%, or 42%, respectively (Supporting Information Table S7). This increased emission would be equivalent to around 1 Pg CO2eq yr−1 or about 13% of the effect of the current global emission of CO2 by the combustion of fossil fuels, and about equal to the excess CO2 emissions to the atmosphere from global land use change (Ciais et al. 2013).[/quote]

https://aslopubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/lol2.10073

wdmn

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 290
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 66
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: 2019 CO2 emissions
« Reply #10 on: April 24, 2019, 01:14:28 AM »
Oilsands CO2 emissions may be far higher than companies report, scientists say
https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/oilsands-carbon-emissions-study-1.5106809

A number of major oilsands operations in northern Alberta seem to be emitting significantly more carbon pollution than companies have been reporting, newly published research from federal scientists suggests, which could have profound consequences for government climate-change strategies.

The researchers, mainly from Environment Canada, calculated emissions rates for four major oilsands surface mining operations using air samples collected in 2013 on 17 airplane flights over the area.

In results published today in the journal Nature Communications, the scientists say the air samples from just those surface mining operations suggest their carbon dioxide emissions are 64 per cent higher, on average, than what the companies themselves report to the federal government using the standard United Nations reporting framework for greenhouse gases.

...

The lead author of the paper, John Liggio of Environment Canada, was quick to point out that the lower emissions rates reported by companies are in no way due to data-toggling or dishonesty on their part. Instead, the differences between his team's estimates and previously reported numbers are related to methodology.

"They're just doing exactly what they've been told to do. They're not doing anything on purpose," Liggio said in an interview Monday.

Juan C. García

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1222
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 316
  • Likes Given: 416
Re: 2019 CO2 emissions
« Reply #11 on: April 27, 2019, 07:16:23 AM »
"NASA’s new carbon observatory is set for launch despite Trump’s efforts to ax it"
Quote
Trump slashed funding for the Orbiting Carbon Observatory 3 and four other Earth science missions in his proposed spending plan for the 2018 fiscal year, citing “budget constraints” and “higher priorities within Science.” His budget for fiscal year 2019 tried to defund them again.
In both cases, Congress decided to keep the OCO-3 mission going anyway. Now it is set to launch as soon as Tuesday.

How is OCO-3 different than OCO-2?
The main purpose of OCO-3 is to make sure we have a continuous record of carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, but we are adding some new capabilities. One of those is to take a snapshot of carbon levels over an area of 50 miles by 50 miles. This will feed a bunch of science investigations of emission hot spots, like cities or volcanoes.
We can also look at how plant activity changes over the course of a day, which is something OCO-2 could not do.
https://www.latimes.com/science/la-sci-oco-3-orbiting-carbon-observatory-nasa-20190426-story.html#nws=true
Which is the best answer to Sep-2012 ASI lost (compared to 1979-2000)?
50% [NSIDC Extent] or
73% [PIOMAS Volume]

Volume is harder to measure than extent, but 3-dimensional space is real, 2D's hide ~50% thickness gone.
-> IPCC/NSIDC trends [based on extent] underestimate the real speed of ASI lost.

ASILurker

  • Guest
Re: 2019 CO2 emissions
« Reply #12 on: April 29, 2019, 02:43:28 PM »
Co2 in 2050 mentioned previously. I found this via Mako Hansen who regularly update their data grpahs; eyeballing this graph looks like near 550 ppm CO2 about 2050 at RCP 8.5; and out to 2075 looks like ~700 ppm increasing at 6ppm/yr avg.

Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
Long-Term Annual Means with IPCC Scenarios
http://www.columbia.edu/~mhs119/GHGs/

Data: CO2 (Data through 2018, Last updated 2019/03/06)


Whereas an annual CO2 increase of 3 ppm/yr would bring CO2 to about 500 ppm by 2050;
an avg. 2.5 ppm /yr increase would make it ~487 ppm by 2050.
(the 2019 projected base at 410 ppm global mean)
« Last Edit: April 29, 2019, 02:53:49 PM by Lurk »

Tom_Mazanec

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 509
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 16
« Last Edit: June 05, 2019, 04:01:23 PM by Tom_Mazanec »
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

morganism

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 129
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2019 CO2 emissions
« Reply #14 on: June 08, 2019, 09:50:16 PM »
Thermal Decomposition of CO2 with Nuclear Heat

http://toughsf.blogspot.com/2019/06/thermal-decomposition-of-co2-with.html

" We find that at 3000K, 40% of CO2 molecules break up into CO and O particles. The fraction becomes 50% at 3600K. Carbon monoxide has an even higher thermal decomposition temperature, beyond 3800K.

At 4000K, we can expect that from every 1 mole of CO2, we get 0.15 moles of carbon, 0.5 moles of oxygen and 0.2 moles of CO. Each mole of CO2 fully broken up requires to 530kJ. This corresponds to 12 MJ per kg of CO2 that is decomposed.

Thankfully, nuclear heat is in no short supply. Even small reactor cores can produce gigawatts of thermal energy… indeed, most of the cost of a nuclear reactor comes from the difficulty of containing the heat, not in producing it. "

The first step is therefore to filter out the dust, cool the air to condense out water vapor, and then liquefy CO2 by compressing it to over 25 bars at below room temperature. The liquid CO2 rains out of the compressed gas and can be drained away.

oren

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3746
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 520
  • Likes Given: 1041
Re: 2019 CO2 emissions
« Reply #15 on: June 08, 2019, 11:57:30 PM »
All of this to reverse the emission of CO2 from the fossil fuel plant next door? Best not to emit the stuff in the first place.

interstitial

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 108
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 54
Re: 2019 CO2 emissions
« Reply #16 on: June 09, 2019, 04:48:36 AM »

Thermal Decomposition of CO2 with Nuclear Heat

So Nuke fossil fuel plants? :o :o ??? ??? :P :) :D ;D

Hmmmm........
That might work (Just kidding)

Tom_Mazanec

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 509
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 16
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS