Search

Animal production faces challenges related to thermal comfort, air quality, and carbon dioxide (CO 2) emissions, thereby the need for more efficient and sustainable systems due to climate change. This study examines green roofs and their potential to absorb atmospheric CO 2 and reduce heat load through photosynthesis and evapotranspiration, resulting in decreased energy consumption and increased CO 2 emissions. The maximum CO 2 concentration limit in animal production facilities is 3000 ppm. Depending on the ventilation system used in broiler production facilities, the CO 2 concentration can exceed 2000 ppm. Dark House poultry facilities tend to have higher concentrations reaching up to 777 ppm. In pig farming, the nursery sector has higher concentrations of CO 2 , exceeding 1200 ppm. In dairy farming, the number of milkings, the type of ventilation system and local climatic conditions can affect the CO 2 concentration, reaching values of up to 1401 ppm. C3 plants have a CO 2 saturation point at 800 ppm and C4 plants at 200 ppm. The CO 2 balance in animal production facilities that use a green roof can be done considering the CO 2 produced and the CO 2 absorbed. Green roofs are therefore considered a sustainable solution for animal production. Its implementation enhances air quality in the facilities, supporting the reduction of environmental impacts and mitigation of climate change effects caused by the agroindustry. This investigation underscores the significance of green roofs, emphasizing their environmental, social, and economic benefits, as well as their applicability in animal production. • It is possible to estimate the CO 2 balance in animal production facilities with a green roof. • Green roof can improve air quality in animal production. • Green roof can reduce the thermal stress of the animals in the premises. • Green roof can contribute to the sustainability of animal production. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights • 2050 primary energy use can be the same as in 2010 with a 7-fold increase in GDP. • Coal use can peak around 2020, then oil in 2033, and natural gas in 2045. • Non-fossil energy is 28% in 2030, higher than China's Paris Agreement goal of 20%. • Industry CO 2 emissions can peak ∼2020, buildings ∼2029, and transportation ∼2035. • CO 2 emissions can peak in 2025, earlier than China's Paris Agreement goal of 2030. Abstract As part of its Paris Agreement commitment, China pledged to peak carbon dioxide (CO 2) emissions around 2030, striving to peak earlier, and to increase the non-fossil share of primary energy to 20% by 2030. Yet by the end of 2017, China emitted 28% of the world's energy-related CO 2 emissions, 76% of which were from coal use. How China can reinvent its energy economy cost-effectively while still achieving its commitments was the focus of a three-year joint research project completed in September 2016. Overall, this analysis found that if China follows a pathway in which it aggressively adopts all cost-effective energy efficiency and CO 2 emission reduction technologies while also aggressively moving away from fossil fuels to renewable and other non-fossil resources, it is possible to not only meet its Paris Agreement Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) commitments, but also to reduce its 2050 CO 2 emissions to a level that is 42% below the country's 2010 CO 2 emissions. While numerous barriers exist that will need to be addressed through effective policies and programs in order to realize these potential energy use and emissions reductions, there are also significant local environmental (e.g., air quality), national and global environmental (e.g., mitigation of climate change), human health, and other unquantified benefits that will be realized if this pathway is pursued in China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: In this study the life cycle primary energy use and carbon dioxide (CO2) emission of an eight-storey wood-framed apartment building are analyzed. All life cycle phases are included, including acquisition and processing of materials, on-site construction, building operation, demolition and materials disposal. The calculated primary energy use includes the entire energy system chains, and carbon flows are tracked including fossil fuel emissions, process emissions, carbon stocks in building materials, and avoided fossil emissions due to biofuel substitution. The results show that building operation uses the largest share of life cycle energy use, becoming increasingly dominant as the life span of the building increases. The type of heating system strongly influences the primary energy use and CO2 emission; a biomass-based system with cogeneration of district heat and electricity achieves low primary energy use and very low CO2 emissions. Using biomass residues from the wood products chain to substitute for fossil fuels significantly reduces net CO2 emission. Excluding household tap water and electricity, a negative life cycle net CO2 emission can be achieved due to the wood-based construction materials and biomass-based energy supply system. This study shows the importance of using a life cycle perspective when evaluating primary energy and climatic impacts of buildings. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This study aims to provide an Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) perspective of the production and distribution of alternative marine fuels in Brazilian ports, considering the International Maritime Organization (IMO) emission reduction target for 2050 (IMO2050). Although other mitigation measures are available, it is likely that alternative fuels will be required, implying additional costs and entailing relevant impacts on other energy chains and land use. Hence, the national IAM BLUES model is adapted to represent the relevant part of the international shipping sector. A set of scenarios is developed considering different fuel alternatives, demand assumptions and national mitigation targets. Findings show that taking into account emissions of CO 2 only or of all greenhouse gases (GHGs) within the IMO strategy significantly impacts the optimal technological portfolio. Furthermore, achieving the IMO2050 goal without considering a national decarbonization strategy may result in potential spillovers. The intense use of the energy sector could partially compromise the gains obtained by maritime decarbonization or even surpass it. Therefore, only an integrated mitigation strategy would lead to more effective decarbonization of the entire marine supply. • There is no single optimal portfolio of alternative fuels for shipping. • Brazil can fulfil any low-carbon marine fuel strategy. • Marine fuels should be part of all national decarbonization strategies. • The decarbonization of shipping should be part of Brazil's deep mitigation pathways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]