Search

Monitoring the spatial distribution and trends in surface greenhouse gas (GHG) fluxes, as well as flux attribution to natural and anthropogenic processes, is essential to track progress under the Paris Agreement and to inform its Global Stocktake. This study updates earlier syntheses (Petrescu et al., 2020, 2021, 2023) and provides a consolidated synthesis of CH4 emissions using bottom-up (BU) and top-down (TD) approaches for the European Union (EU) and seven additional countries with large anthropogenic and/or natural emissions (USA, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Russia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DR Congo)). The work utilizes updated National GHG Inventories (NGHGIs) reported by Annex I Parties under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 2023 and the latest available Biennial Update Reports (BURs) reported by non-Annex I Parties. The NGHGIs are considered in an integrated analysis that also relies on independent flux estimates from global inventory datasets, process-based models, inverse modeling and, when available, respective uncertainties. Whenever possible, it extends the period to 2021. Comparing NGHGIs with other approaches reveals that differences in the emission sources that are included in the estimate is a key source of divergence between approaches. A key system boundary difference is whether both anthropogenic and natural fluxes are included and, if they are, how fluxes belonging to these two sources are grouped/partitioned. Additionally, the natural fluxes are sensitive to the prior geospatial distribution of emissions in atmospheric inversions. Over the studied period, the total CH4 emissions in the EU, USA, and Russia show a steady decreasing trend since 1990, while for the non-EU emitters analyzed in this study, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, and DR Congo, CH4 emissions have generally increased. In the EU, the anthropogenic BU approaches are reporting relatively similar mean emissions over 2015 to 2020 of 18.5 ± 2.7 Tg CH4 yr-1 for EDGAR v7.0, 16 Tg CH4 yr-1 for GAINS and 19 Tg CH4 yr-1 for FAOSTAT, with the NGHGI estimates of 15 ± 1.8 Tg CH4 yr-1. Inversions give higher emission estimates as they include natural emissions. Over the same period, the three high-resolution regional inversions report a mean emission of 21 (19-25) Tg CH4 yr-1, while the mean of six coarser-resolution global inversions results in emission estimates of 24 (23-25) Tg CH4 yr-1. The magnitude of BU natural emissions (peatland and mineral soils, lakes and reservoirs, geological and biomass burning) accounts for 6.6 Tg CH4 yr-1 (Petrescu et al., 2023a) and explains the differences between the TD inversions and the BU estimates of anthropogenic emissions (including NGHGIs). For the other Annex I Parties in this study (USA and Russia), over 2015 to 2020, the mean of the four anthropogenic BU approaches reports 18.5 (13-27.9) Tg CH4 yr-1 for Russia and 29.1 (23.5- Tg CH4 yr-1 for the USA, against total TD mean estimates of 37 (30-43) Tg CH4 yr-1 and 43.4 (42-48) Tg CH4 yr-1, respectively. The averaged BU and TD natural emissions account for 16.2 Tg CH4 yr-1 for Russia and 14.6 Tg CH4 yr-1 for the USA, partly explaining the gap between the BU anthropogenic and total TD emissions. For the non-Annex I Parties, anthropogenic CH4 estimates from UNFCCC BURs show large differences with the other global inventory-based estimates and even more with atmospheric-based ones. This poses an important potential challenge to monitoring the progress of the global CH4 pledge and the Global Stocktake, not only from the availability of data but also its accuracy. By systematically comparing the BU with TD methods, this study provides recommendations for more robust comparisons of available data sources and hopes to steadily engage more Parties in using observational methods to complement their UNFCCC inventories, as well as considering their natural emissions. With anticipated improvements in atmospheric modeling and observations, as well as modeling of natural fluxes, future development needs to resolve knowledge gaps in both BU and TD approaches and to better quantify remaining uncertainty. Consequently, TD methods may emerge as a powerful tool for verifying emission inventories for CH4, and other GHGs and informing international climate policy. The referenced datasets related to figures are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10276087 (Petrescu et al., 2023b). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Union's relative disregard for the economic, geopolitical and climatic concerns of its peripheral Eastern countries has contributed to making the war in Ukraine possible. Its consequences are now returning in the form of energy dependence and economic instability on the Union as a whole and the risk of economic crisis and deindustrialisation. This should prompt a re-assessment of the EU's strategy towards its eastern neighbours, particularly in the energy and climate policy field. This evaluation starts from the issue of control over cheap energy as a key material foundation of state and interstate power. On this basis, we analyse the struggle between Russia and the European core states over Ukraine in terms of the ability to extract an economic surplus through the unequal exchange of energy. The current escalation should be understood as an attempt by the Russian petrostate to preserve the economic basis of its regime, which is threatened by the prospect of a low-carbon transition in Europe. We conclude that a massive acceleration of the transition away from fossil fuels is the key to economic, geopolitical and climate stabilisation, highlighting possible policy instruments the EU could use to secure its production system and protect citizens' security. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes the possibility to reduce the carbon footprint of exported products by implementing forest climate offset projects amid the introduction of the carbon tax on imports of high-carbon products, including those exported from Russia, by the European Union. The role of forests as absorbers of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions differs significantly in Russia and in the EU. It is suggested that the EU's climate neutrality policy aimed primarily at the reduction of direct CO2 emissions by sectors such as power, industry, and agriculture is a consequence of the insignificant role of European forests in greenhouse gas absorption. By contrast, Russia can achieve climate neutrality not only by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but also by increasing their absorption by forests and implementing forest climate projects (FCPs). Taking into consideration the UNFCCC baseline and additionality requirements, three FCP types can be proposed for implementation in the Russian Federation. The possibility to monetize the carbon sequestration function of Russian forests in the framework of carbon offset projects is assessed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]