global and human emissions of greenhouse gases

[moinsdewatt]

Annual emissions of CO2 since the end of the 19ieme siécle:



Source: International Energy Agency.
http://dr-petrole-mr-carbone.com/climat ... mmediates/

See also the pascal47 post of the day: http://www.oleocene.org/phpBB3/viewtopi ... 50#p349050

1er confession of the IEA: "The world is not on track to reach the target set by governments to limit to 2 degrees Celsius (° C) the long-term rise in global average temperature (...) On the basis of current or ongoing policies, average temperatures are likely to increase from 3,6 ° C to 5,3 ° C from pre-industrial levels, with most of this increase occurring during this century. "

and 30 page of the IEA report, by country:

[Remundo]

Thanks Less than Watt,

Very interesting.

[moinsdewatt]

without surprise :

The concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has never been higher

The World | 06.11.2013 to

Never before has the concentration of the three main greenhouse gases causing global warming been as high in the world as in 2012, the World Meteorological Organization, an agency of the World Meteorological Organization, announced on Wednesday in Geneva. UN.


Between 1990 and 2012, "the radiative forcing of the atmosphere by greenhouse gases, which induces global warming, increased by 32%", due to CO2 and other heat-retaining gases, writes l 'WMO in its greenhouse gas bulletin.

Radiative forcing is the ability or not to absorb the energy of the sun. Positive radiative forcing, as is currently the case, therefore indicates a warming of the atmosphere. In the previous study, concerning 2011, this differential was only 30%.

"CATASTROPHIC CONSEQUENCES"

According to Michel Jarraud, Secretary General of the WMO, if the world continues on this path, "the average temperature of the globe at the end of the century could exceed by 4,6 degrees what it was before the industrial era [1750] , and even more in certain regions, the consequences would be catastrophic ".

Carbon dioxide is the main cause of global warming. Its concentration in the atmosphere increased in 2012 of 2,2 ppm (parts per million), compared with an increase of 2,0 ppm in 2011. The average increase over the past 10 years was 2,02 ppm, and the 2012 figures show an "accelerating trend".

CO2 "remains in the atmosphere for hundreds or even thousands of years", explains the WMO, "most aspects of climate change will persist for centuries even if CO2 emissions cease immediately."

http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2 ... _3244.html

[moinsdewatt]

2013 is not completely finished, but we have a small idea of ​​what it will give CO2 question rejected by humans:

CO2 emissions set new record in 2013

LONDON (Reuters) 19 Nov 2013

Global carbon dioxide emissions are expected to reach record levels this year 36 billion tons, according to estimates from a group of researchers published Tuesday.

The Global Carbon Project report illustrates the inability of policymakers to reduce emissions of CO2, the main greenhouse gas, a factor in global warming.

The estimate, calculated annually from data from research institutes around the world, represents an increase of 2,1% compared to 2012 and 61% compared to 1990, the reference year of the Kyoto Protocol, to date the only global agreement setting quantified targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The publication of this report coincides with the holding in Warsaw of a new international conference under the aegis of the UN to try to negotiate the successor of the Kyoto Protocol.

"Governments must find an agreement on the means to reverse this trend. Emissions must fall substantially and rapidly if we are to contain climate change below the 2 ° C threshold", underlines Corinne Le Quéré, climatologist at the British University of East Anglia and responsible for this study.

The threshold of 2 ° C is included in the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which estimates that beyond this limit, global warming would lead to climatic events (floods, droughts, storms). ) extreme.

According to Glen Peters, a climatologist at the Norwegian Cicero Institute, the increase in CO2 emissions can be explained by the strong growth in global coal consumption, which exceeds progress in developing renewable energy.

"Although the company is witnessing many positive developments in renewable energy, these increased production capacities do not supplant the consumption of coal," he emphasizes.

http://www.lepoint.fr/fil-info-reuters/ ... 72_240.php

[moinsdewatt]

Greenhouse gases: emissions in France stagnated in 2012

The Monde.fr | 18.04.2014

Greenhouse gas emissions stagnated in France in 2012 compared to the previous year, despite a notable increase in the residential sector mainly due to the weather, reports the Interprofessional Center for Studies of Air Pollution (Citepa) .

In 2012, GHG emissions amounted to 490,1 billion tons equivalent CO2, against 490 for 2011. If since 1990, the base year, the greenhouse gas emissions of France are generally down (- 12%), the pace is not strong enough to reach the goal of division by four emissions by 2050, says the Citepa.

The drop in emissions can be explained by energy saving measures in certain sectors such as housing or transport, or the implementation of new chemical processes in the manufacturing industry, but also by the decline in activity. linked to the economic crisis. Excluding residential sector emissions, which rose by almost 7,7%, the others either went down or stagnated.

REDUCE EMISSIONS FROM 40% TO 70% BY 2050

On Sunday, April 13, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released the latest version of its report. In particular, it recommends reducing greenhouse gas emissions by reducing emissions between 40% and 70% by 2050 and bringing them to a "near zero" level by 2100.

For this purpose, the IPCC experts advocate the use of low-carbon energies, the improvement of the energy efficiency of buildings and the development of CO2 capture and storage techniques.

A much awaited law on the energy transition and presented as one of the "priorities" of Prime Minister Manuel Valls, supposed to make France less fossil fuel consuming, will be presented
before summer.

http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2 ... _3244.html

What bullets these journalists.

This is obviously 490 million tons of CO2.

Romandie recopies the same stupidity http://www.romandie.com/news/Climat-les ... 469578.rom
with at the end the correct figure per capita.

In tonnes per capita, the fall is 26% between 1990 and 2012 (9,6 t CO2 equals 1990 and 7,5 t eq CO2 / hab 2012), the population having increased by 12% since 1990.

and we have 490 millions of tons divided 65 millions inhabitants = 7.5 t per inhabitant (eq CO2).

I believe that at the school of journalism we should restore the arithmetic courses.

[dede2002]

"and the rate of increase for methane (middle curve) resumed after a" pause "in the years 2005-2006.
What explanations there above? "

Maybe the cows are starting to eat hay again?
When they eat soy, they do not ruminate ...

I have a question:

How is the impact of methane calculated on the greenhouse effect?
I read 20x more than CO2, but methane naturally oxidizes (in 14 years on average according to wikipedia) while the CO2 remains.

---

ps: Gulf countries are big exporters of nitrogen fertilizer, record 850 kg / cap / year for Qatar (world consumption 17 kg / cap / year).
A form of oil export disguised, what is the gray energy of nitrogen fertilizers?

[dede2002]

Hello,

I did not find the answer to my two questions ...!

While searching on the net I could read that:

- In the industrial livestock sector, "efforts" have been made to reduce the quantity of methane released by cattle, by making them eat fats and proteins, and even paraffin, but the goal is still to 'increase the "energy yield" and therefore financial, methane is an energy that they have paid for and that escapes ... No allusion to the greenhouse effect!

- In the pasture breeding sector, it is accepted that cattle emit GHG methane, emphasizing the fact that meadows and groves are "carbon sinks" that "compensate" ...



The second question is: what is the gray energy of nitrogen fertilizers?

I had heard a long time ago: 2 kg "oil equivalent" for 1 kg of ammonia nitrate.

[chatelot16]

The second question is: what is the gray energy of nitrogen fertilizers?

I had heard a long time ago: 2 kg "oil equivalent" for 1 kg of ammonia nitrate.

the manufacture of fertilizer is an energetic chasm!

at a certain time it was made with the nitrogen of the air at the foot of the big dam in a Nordic country, to use the electricity available

then there was a new process using more pretrole, and the manufacturing moved to the oil producing countries

but the manufacture by the nitrogen of the air could become useful to absorb the solar energy in rab at certain time

I'm talking about the Birkeland-Eyde process that works well in small size, and not only in big gas plant

[dede2002]

Hello

An energy chasm ...
Am I far off the mark with 2 kg (20 kWh) per kg?

In the world, on average, each human consumes 1.5 kg of refined petroleum per day, and 50g of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer, according to FAO figures.
By dividing by country, the numbers are very different!

A+

[chatelot16]

http://www.societechimiquedefrance.fr/e ... texeng.htm
http://www.societechimiquedefrance.fr/e ... cadeng.htm
http://www.societechimiquedefrance.fr/e ... adhno3.htm
http://www.societechimiquedefrance.fr/e ... es/acc.htm

Ammonium nitrate contains a lot of energy! AZF's neighbors know it

so in terms of energy it's already big ... but if we do not count the energy that it contains but the energy that we had to spend to make the figure of 2kg of oil for 1kg amonitrate do not shock not

the total gray energy figure is still rather vague because the manufacturing process is different and the manufacturer does not give all the details

the Birkeland-Eyde process does not have a very good efficiency, but is simple: an electric arc and air: it would be a means of storing electricity in rab for local production of fertilizer