MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409190563 · doi:10.1029/2024gb008310

The North American Greenhouse Gas Budget: Emissions, Removals, and Integration for CO<sub>2</sub>, CH<sub>4</sub>, and N<sub>2</sub>O (2010–2019): Results From the Second REgional Carbon Cycle Assessment and Processes Study (RECCAP2)

2025· article· en· W4409190563 on OpenAlexaffabout
Benjamin Poulter, Guillermo N. Murray‐Tortarolo, Daniel J. Hayes, Philippe Ciais, Robbie M. Andrew, Ana Bastos, Brendan Byrne, David Butman, Josep G. Canadell, Abhishek Chatterjee, Grant M. Domke, Andrew F. Feldman, Kelsey Foster, Neha Hunka, Robert B. Jackson, Werner A. Kurz, Ayia Lindquist, Мaodian Liu, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Arnaud Mialon, A. M. Michalak, J. B. Miller, Wolfgang A. Obermeier, Naiqing Pan, James T. Randerson, Peter A. Raymond, P. Régnier, Laure Resplandy, Gerard Rocher‐Ros, Nemesio Rodríguez-Fernández, Judith A. Rosentreter, Julio César Salazar‐Neira, Suzanne E. Tank, Hanqin Tian, Rodrigo Vargas, Yohanna Villalobos, Jonathan Wang, Xinyuan Wei, Kimberly P. Wickland, C. A. Williams, Lisamarie Windham‐Myers, Christopher W. Woodall, Qing Ying, Zhen Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Biogeochemical Cycles · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
FundersDirección General de Asuntos del Personal Académico, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaCalifornia Institute of TechnologyJet Propulsion LaboratoryNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsGreenhouse gasEnvironmental scienceGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Accurate accounting of greenhouse‐gas (GHG) emissions and removals is central to tracking progress toward climate mitigation and for monitoring potential climate‐change feedbacks. GHG budgeting and reporting can follow either the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change methodologies for National Greenhouse Gas Inventory (NGHGI) reporting or use atmospheric‐based “top‐down” (TD) inversions or process‐based “bottom‐up” (BU) approaches. To help understand and reconcile these approaches, the Second REgional Carbon Cycle Assessment and Processes study (RECCAP2) was established to quantify GHG emissions and removals for carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), for ten‐land and five‐ocean regions for 2010–2019. Here, we present the results for the North American land region (Canada, the United States, Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean). For 2010–2019, the NGHGI reported total net‐GHG emissions of 7,270 TgCO2‐eq yr−1 compared to TD estimates of 6,132 ± 1,846 TgCO2‐eq yr−1 and BU estimates of 9,060 ± 898 TgCO2‐eq yr−1. Reconciling differences between the NGHGI, TD and BU approaches depended on (a) accounting for lateral fluxes of CO2 along the land‐ocean‐aquatic continuum (LOAC) and trade, (b) correcting land‐use CO2 emissions for the loss‐of‐additional‐sink capacity (LASC), (c) avoiding double counting of inland water CH4 emissions, and (d) adjusting area estimates to match the NGHGI definition of the managed‐land proxy. Uncertainties remain from inland‐water CO2 evasion, the conversion of nitrogen fertilizers to N2O, and from less‐frequent NGHGI reporting from non‐Annex‐1 countries. The RECCAP2 framework plays a key role in reconciling independent GHG‐reporting methodologies to support policy commitments while providing insights into biogeochemical processes and responses to climate change.

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)0.000
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 score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations11
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Biogeochemical CyclesSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207