MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4383295202 · doi:10.5194/acp-23-7383-2023

Western European emission estimates of CFC-11, CFC-12 and CCl <sub>4</sub> derived from atmospheric measurements from 2008 to 2021

2023· article· en· W4383295202 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alison L. Redington, Alistair J. Manning, Stephan Henne, Francesco Graziosi, Luke M. Western, Jgor Arduini, Anita L. Ganesan, Christina M. Harth, Michela Maione, Jens Mühle, Simon O’Doherty, Joseph Pitt, Stefan Reimann, Matthew Rigby, Peter K. Salameh, Peter G. Simmonds, T. Gerard Spain, Kieran Stanley, Martin K. Vollmer, Ray F. Weiss, Dickon Young

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHorizon 2020Natural Environment Research CouncilMet OfficeSight Research UKDepartment for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, UK GovernmentConsiglio Nazionale delle RicercheNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsMontreal ProtocolEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesEmission inventoryAtmospheric emissionsMeteorologyClimatologyOzone layerGeographyOzone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Production and consumption of CFC-11 (trichlorofluoromethane, CCl 3 F), CFC-12 (dichlorodifluoromethane, CCl 2 F 2 ) and CCl 4 (carbon tetrachloride) are controlled under the regulations of the Montreal Protocol and have been phased out globally since 2010. Only CCl 4 is still widely produced as a chemical feedstock. After 2010, emissions of CFC-11 and CFC-12 should therefore mostly originate from existing banks (e.g. from foams, mobile air conditioning units and refrigerators); however evidence has emerged of an increase in global emissions of CFC-11 in the last decade, some of which has not been fully accounted for. The motivation for this work was to assess the emissions of CFC-11, CFC-12 and CCl 4 from western Europe. All countries in this region have been subject to the controls of the Montreal Protocol since the late 1980s and, as non-Article 5 Parties, have been prohibited from producing CFCs and CCl 4 for dispersive use since 1996. Four different inverse modelling systems are used to estimate emissions of these gases from 2008 to 2021 using data from four atmospheric measurement stations: Mace Head (Ireland), Jungfraujoch (Switzerland), Monte Cimone (Italy) and Tacolneston (UK). The average of the four model studies found that western European emissions of CFC-11, CFC-12 and CCl 4 between 2008 and 2021 were declining at 3.5 % yr −1 (2.7 % yr −1 –4.8 % yr −1 ), 7.7 % yr −1 (6.3 % yr −1 –8.0 % yr −1 ) and 4.4 % yr −1 (2.6 % yr −1 –6.4 % yr −1 ), respectively. Even though the emissions were declining throughout the period, the area including northern France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg showed consistently elevated emissions of CFC-11 compared with the surrounding regions. Emissions of CFC-12 were slightly elevated in the same region. CCl 4 emissions were the highest in the south of France. France had the highest emissions of all three gases over the period 2008–2021. Emissions from western Europe (2008–2021) were on average 2.4 ± 0.4 Gg (CFC-11), 1.3 ± 0.3 Gg (CFC-12) and 0.9 ± 0.2 Gg (CCl 4 ). Our estimated decline in emissions of CFC-11 is consistent with a western European bank release rate of 3.4 % (2.6 %–4.5 %). This study concludes that emissions of CFC-11, CFC-12 and CCl 4 have all declined from 2008 to 2021 in western Europe. Therefore, no evidence is found that western European emissions contributed to the unexplained part of the global increase in atmospheric concentrations of CFC-11 observed in the last decade.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physics→Same topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols→French-language works237,207→