Including Harvested Grain Biogenic <scp>CO<sub>2</sub></scp> to Address a Critical Flaw in Climate Accounting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The international climate accounting system excludes both the biogenic CO 2 sequestered in harvested crops and the biogenic CO 2 emissions that occur when grain is digested or burned as biofuel. Despite being described in the literature as a critical flaw in climate accounting all parties within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change continue to treat these large biogenic CO 2 fluxes as carbon‐neutral activities, while analysis of the accounting issue remains largely absent from the extensive literature examining international carbon leakage and GHG mitigation policy. Using a partial‐equilibrium trade model, I analyse the economic implications of measuring harvested‐grain biogenic CO 2 and find in the presence of traded grain and internationally heterogeneous GHG mitigation policy, measurement would change optimal domestic agricultural GHG mitigation policy. Given estimated CO 2 damage costs of $185/t, the unmeasured external biogenic benefit from grain production, and the unmeasured external biogenic cost from grain consumption, are equal in magnitude to the price of grain. Including the biogenic harvested‐grain CO 2 in Canada's national inventory reduces measured emissions by 80 million tonnes per year. The size of these effects suggest that the measurement of harvested‐grain biogenic CO 2 could be extremely consequential for the design of optimal GHG mitigation policy. JEL Classifications : Q15, Q54
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".