MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212879846 · doi:10.1016/j.fmre.2022.02.001

The status of carbon neutrality of the world's top 5 CO2 emitters as seen by carbon satellites

2022· article· en· W4212879846 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFundamental Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaCenter for High Performance ComputingNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational University's Basic Research Foundation of ChinaFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNanjing UniversityMinistry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of ChinaNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsCarbon neutralityChinaEnvironmental scienceCarbon fibersGreenhouse gasEuropean unionAtmospheric sciencesGeographyInternational tradeMathematicsGeologyBusinessOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it