Benefits of dealing with uncertainty in greenhouse gas inventories: introduction

The assessment of greenhouse gases emitted to and removed from the atmosphere is high on the international political and scientific agendas. Growing international concern and cooperation regarding the climate change problem have increased the need for policy-oriented solutions to the issue of uncertainty in, and related to, inventories of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The approaches to addressing uncertainty discussed in this Special Issue reflect attempts to improve national inventories, not only for their own sake but also from a wider, systems analytical perspective—a perspective that seeks to strengthen the usefulness of national inventories under a compliance and/or global monitoring and reporting framework. These approaches demonstrate the benefits of including inventory uncertainty in policy analyses. The authors of the contributed papers show that considering uncertainty helps avoid situations that can, for example, create a false sense of certainty or lead to invalid views of subsystems. This may eventually prevent related errors from showing up in analyses. However, considering uncertainty does not come for free. Proper treatment of uncertainty is costly and demanding because it forces us to make the step from “simple to complex” and only then to discuss potential simplifications. Finally, comprehensive treatment of uncertainty does not offer policymakers quick and easy solutions. The authors of the papers in this Special Issue do, however, agree that uncertainty analysis must be a key component of national GHG inventory analysis. Uncertainty analysis helps to provide a greater understanding and better science helps us to reduce and deal with uncertainty. By recognizing the importance of identifying and quantifying uncertainties, great strides can be made in ongoing discussions regarding GHG inventories and accounting for climate change. The 17 papers in this Special Issue deal with many aspects of analyzing and dealing with uncertainty in emissions estimates.

[1]  Mykola Gusti,et al.  Terrestrial full carbon account for Russia: revised uncertainty estimates and their role in a bottom-up/top-down accounting exercise , 2010 .

[2]  T. M. White.  Uncertainty in Greenhouse Gas Inventories , 2007 .

[3]  Erik Kropat,et al.  The impact of uncertain emission trading markets on interactive resource planning processes and international emission trading experiments , 2010 .

[4]  G. Fischer,et al.  Carbon emission trading and carbon taxes under uncertainties , 2010 .

[5]  Quirin Schiermeier.  G8 climate target questioned , 2009, Nature.

[6]  Gregg Marland,et al.  Carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels: a procedure for estimation and results for 1950-1982 , 1984 .

[7]  R. Dickinson,et al.  Couplings between changes in the climate system and biogeochemistry , 2007 .

[8]  Zbigniew Nahorski,et al.  Accounting for Climate Change. Uncertainties in Greenhouse Gas Inventories - Verification, Compliance, and Trading , 2007 .

[9]  Gregg Marland,et al.  Uncertainties in Accounting for CO2 From Fossil Fuels , 2008 .

[10]  Myroslava Lesiv,et al.  Verification of compliance with GHG emission targets: annex B countries , 2010 .

[11]  G. Janssens-Maenhout,et al.  Verifying Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Methods to Support International Climate Agreements , 2011 .

[12]  Wilfried Winiwarter,et al.  Statistical dependence in input data of national greenhouse gas inventories: effects on the overall inventory uncertainty , 2010 .

[13]  Amanda M. Thomson,et al.  Toward Bayesian uncertainty quantification for forestry models used in the United Kingdom Greenhouse Gas Inventory for land use, land use change, and forestry , 2010 .

[14]  Martin Heimann,et al.  European CO2 fluxes from atmospheric inversions using regional and global transport models , 2010 .

[15]  Jarosław Stańczak,et al.  CO2 emission trading model with trading prices , 2010 .

[16]  Z. Nahorski,et al.  Comparison of preparatory signal analysis techniques for consideration in the (post-)Kyoto policy process , 2010 .

[17]  Joanna Horabik,et al.  Compliance and emission trading rules for asymmetric emission uncertainty estimates , 2010 .

[18]  H. L. Miller,et al.  Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis , 2007 .

[19]  Ian McCallum,et al.  Can the uncertainty of full carbon accounting of forest ecosystems be made acceptable to policymakers? , 2010 .

[20]  F. Wagner,et al.  Good Practice Guidance for Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry , 2003 .

[21]  J. Penman,et al.  Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories CH 4 Emissions from Solid Waste Disposal 419 CH 4 EMISSIONS FROM SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL , 2022 .

[22]  Joanna Horabik,et al.  A statistical model for spatial inventory data: a case study of N2O emissions in municipalities of southern Norway , 2010 .

[23]  Adrian Leip,et al.  Quantitative quality assessment of the greenhouse gas inventory for agriculture in Europe , 2010 .

[24]  P. Ciais,et al.  Atmospheric inversions for estimating CO2 fluxes: methods and perspectives , 2010 .

[25]  N. Meinshausen,et al.  Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2 °C , 2009, Nature.

[26]  Z. Nahorski,et al.  Dealing with Uncertainty in GHG Inventories: How to Go About It? , 2010 .

[27]  Frank Veroustraete,et al.  Remotely sensed soil moisture integration in an ecosystem carbon flux model. The spatial implication , 2010 .

[28]  Zbigniew Nahorski,et al.  Accounting for Climate Change , 2021, Academia Letters.

[29]  J. Szemesova,et al.  Uncertainty analysis for estimation of landfill emissions and data sensitivity for the input variation , 2010 .

[30]  Mykola Gusti,et al.  Spatial GHG inventory at the regional level: accounting for uncertainty , 2010 .