The status of carbon neutrality of the world's top 5 CO2 emitters as seen by carbon satellites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
China, the Unite States (US), the European Union (EU), India, and Russia are the world's top 5 fossil fuel and cement CO2 (FFC) emitting countries or regions (CRs). It is very important to understand their status of carbon neutrality, and to monitor their future changes of net carbon fluxes (NCFs). In this study, we implemented a well-established global carbon assimilation system (GCAS, Version 2) to infer global surface carbon fluxes from May 2009 to December 2019 using both GOSAT and OCO-2 XCO2 retrievals. The reductions of flux uncertainty and XCO2 bias, and the evaluation of posterior flux show that GCAS has comparable and good performance in the 5 CRs. The results suggest that Russia has achieved carbon neutrality, but the other 4 are still far from being carbon neutral, especially China. The mean annual NCFs in China, the US, the EU, India, and Russia are 2.33 ± 0.29, 0.82 ± 0.20, 0.42 ± 0.16, 0.50 ± 0.12, and -0.33 ± 0.23 PgC yr−1, respectively. From 2010 to 2019, the NCFs showed an increasing trend in the US and India, a slight downward trend after 2013 in China, and were stable in the EU. The changes of land sinks in China and the US might be the main reason for their trends. India's trend was mainly due to the increase of FFC emission. The relative contributions of NCFs to the global land net carbon emission of China and the EU have decreased, while those of the US and India have increased, implying the US and India must take more active measures to control carbon emissions or increase their sinks. This study indicates that satellite XCO2 could be successfully used to monitor the changes of regional NCFs, which is of great significance for major countries to achieve greenhouse gas control goals.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".