Science Framework and Implementation

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Science Framework and Implementation ESSP Report No.1 GCP Report No.1 The Global Carbon Project A framework for Internationally Co-ordinated Research on the Global Carbon Cycle www.globalcarbonproject.org Global Carbon Project The Science Framework and Implementation Editors: Josep G. Canadell, Robert Dickinson, Kathy Hibbard, Michael Raupach & Oran Young Prepared by the Scientific Steering Committee of the Global Carbon Project: Michael Apps, Alain Chedin, Chen-Tung Arthur Chen, Peter Cox, Robert Dickinson, Ellen R.M. Druffel, Christopher Field, Patricia Romero Lankao, Louis Lebel, Anand Patwardhan, Michael Raupach, Monika Rhein, Christopher Sabine, Riccardo Valentini, Yoshiki Yamagata, Oran Young Please, cite this document as: Global Carbon Project (2003) Science Framework and Implementation. Earth System Science Partnership (IGBP, IHDP, WCRP, DIVERSITAS) Report No. 1; Global Carbon Project Report No. 1, 69pp, Canberra. Cover photo credits: Forest Fire: Brian Stocks; Smoke stack: www.freephoto.com; Ocean: Christopher Sabine. Preface We are pleased to launch the Earth System Science We believe that this document will help to encourage, Partnership (ESSP) report series with the publication of promote and shape carbon cycle research around the the Science Framework and Implementation Strategy of world for at least the next decade. Furthermore, we believe the Global Carbon Project. This report marks the that it will provide the framework for a substantially beginning of a new era in international global change enhanced knowledge base for dealing more effectively research, as well as a significant departure from the usual with the challenge of transforming energy systems and way of treating the carbon cycle. managing the global carbon cycle. The ESSP, comprising four global change programmes - Michel Loreau the International Programme of Biodiversity Science Chair, DIVERSITAS (DIVERSITAS); the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP); the International Human Anne Larigauderie Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Executive Director, DIVERSITAS Change (IHDP); and the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) - has been formed for the integrated Guy Brasseur study of the Earth System, the changes that are occurring Chair, IGBP to this System, and the implications of these changes for Will Steffen global sustainability. The Global Carbon Project, along Executive Director, IGBP with other ESSP projects on food systems, water resources and human health, are designed to make the links between the fundamental research on global change and Coleen Vogel the Earth System carried out in the programmes them- Chair, IHDP selves and issues of vital concern for people. Barbara Göbel Executive Director, IHDP Carbon cycle research is often carried out in isolation from research on energy systems and normally focuses Peter Lemke only on the biophysical patterns and processes of carbon Chair, WCRP sources and sinks. The Global Carbon Project represents a significant advance beyond the status quo in several impor- David Carson tant ways. First, the problem is conceptualised from the Director, WCRP outset as one involving fully integrated human and natural components; the emphasis is on the carbon-climate- human system (fossil-fuel based energy systems + biophys- ical carbon cycle + physical climate system) and not simply on the biophysical carbon cycle alone. Secondly, the development of new methodologies for analysing and modelling the integrated carbon cycle is a central feature of the project. Thirdly, the project provides an internally consistent framework for the coordination and integration of the many national and regional carbon cycle research programmes that are being established around the world. Fourthly, the project addresses questions of direct policy relevance, such as the management strategies and sustain- able regional development pathways required to achieve stabilisation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Finally, the Global Carbon Project goes beyond the traditional set of stakeholders for a global change research project by seeking to engage the industrial and energy sectors as well as the economic development and resource management sectors in the developing regions of the world. Table of Contents Preface Executive Summary 3 1. Introduction 6 The Carbon Challenge .......................................................................................................................................................6 The Vision..........................................................................................................................................................................9 Mandate and Approach ....................................................................................................................................................10 2. Science Themes 11 Theme 1: Patterns and Variability..............................................................................................................................11 Motivation.................................................................................................................................................11 Knowledge base .........................................................................................................................................11 Current research.........................................................................................................................................12 Areas of uncertainty and research priorities................................................................................................19 Theme 2: Processes and Interactions..........................................................................................................................20 Motivation.................................................................................................................................................20 Knowledge base .........................................................................................................................................21 Current research.........................................................................................................................................22 Areas of uncertainty and research priorities................................................................................................26 Theme 3: Carbon Management.................................................................................................................................27 Motivation.................................................................................................................................................27 Knowledge base .........................................................................................................................................28 Current research.........................................................................................................................................28 Areas of uncertainty and research priorities................................................................................................30 3. Implementation Strategy 33 Theme 1: Patterns and Variability..............................................................................................................................33 Activity 1.1: Enhancing observations of major carbon stocks and fluxes....................................................33 Task 1.1.1: Coordination and standardisation of stock and flux measurements ..............................34 Task 1.1.2: Observations of lateral movement of carbon ................................................................34 Task 1.1.3: Observations of other relevant carbon compounds.......................................................36 Activity 1.2: Model development and model-data fusion...........................................................................36 Task 1.2.1: Improvement of forward and inverse models................................................................37 Task 1.2.2: Development of model-data fusion techniques.............................................................37 Activity 1.3: Comprehensive national, regional and sectoral carbon budgets .............................................38 Task 1.3.1: Development of standardized methodologies for estimating comprehensive carbon budgets at regional and basin scales ..................................................................38 Task 1.3.2: Developing methodologies for tracking and projecting temporal changes in regional and basin scale carbon budgets .......................................................................38 Task 1.3.3 Geographic and sectoral analysis of human-induced changes in the carbon cycle..........39 The Science Framework and Implementation Global Carbon Project 1 Theme 2: Processes and Interactions.................................................................................................................................39 Activity 2.1: Mechanisms and feedbacks controlling carbon stocks and fluxes...........................................39 Task 2.1.1: Integrated study of the mechanisms determining ocean carbon dynamics....................39 Task 2.1.2: Integrated study of the mechanisms determining terrestrial carbon dynamics..............40 Task 2.1.3: Integrated study of anthropogenic carbon emissions....................................................40 Activity 2.2: Emergent properties of the coupled carbon-climate system ...................................................40
Recommended publications
  • Global Methane Budget 2020 Japanese Press Release: Thursday 6Th August 2020 Tsukuba, Japan
    Global Methane Budget 2020 Japanese Press release: Thursday 6th August 2020 Tsukuba, Japan Global Methane Emissions have risen by nearly 10 per cent over the last 20 years. Major contributors are human activities in the agriculture and waste sector and in the production and consumption of fossil fuels On July 15th, 2020, the Global Carbon Project (GCP) publishes an updated and more comprehensive global methane (CH4) budget with all methane sources and sinks. It also provides insights into the geographical regions and economic sectors where the emission changed the most over the most recent two decades (2000-2017). The update employs the state-of-the-art bottom-up and top-down methods to improve the accuracy of the methane gas accounting in each category, which took three years to process. The estimated global methane budget for the recent decade (2008-2017) is shown in Figure 1. Figure 1: Global Methane Budget 2008 - 2017 (https://www.globalcarbonproject.org/methanebudget/index.htm) Page 1 of 4 The study also shows the emission rate has increased by 9 % (about 50 million tons of CH4 per year) between the reference period (2000-2006) and the last year of the presented budget (2017). This increase in methane emissions is completely attributed to the increase in anthropogenic emissions which account for 60% of the total methane emissions. The rest comes from natural sources which have not changed over the past two decades despite their diversity: wetland, lakes, reservoirs, termites, geological sources, hydrates etc. The sectors that primarily contributed to this increase are the fossil fuel sector (production and consumption) and activities in agriculture and waste sectors.
    [Show full text]
  • Media Release
    Media Release EMBARGOED TO 11pm 25 September 2008 Ref Emissions rising faster this decade than last The latest figures on the global carbon budget to be released in Washington and Paris today indicate a four-fold increase in growth rate of human-generated carbon dioxide emissions since 2000. “This is a concerning trend in light of global efforts to curb emissions,” says Global Carbon Project (GCP) Executive-Director, Dr Pep Canadell, a carbon specialist based at CSIRO in Canberra. Releasing the 2007 data, Dr Canadell said emissions from the combustion of fossil fuel and land use change almost reached the mark of 10 billion tonnes of carbon in 2007. Using research findings published last year in peer-reviewed journals such as Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Nature and Science, Dr Canadell said atmospheric carbon dioxide growth has been outstripping the growth of natural carbon dioxide sinks such as forests and oceans. The new results were released simultaneously in Washington by Dr Canadell and in Paris by Dr Michael Raupach, GCP co-Chair and a CSIRO scientist. Dr Raupach said Australia’s position remains unique as a developed country with rapidly growing emissions. “Since 2000, Australian fossil-fuel emissions have grown by two per cent per year. For Australia to achieve a 2020 fossil-fuel emissions target 10 per cent lower than 2000 levels, the target referred to by Professor Garnaut this month, we would require a reduction in emissions from where they are now by 1.5 per cent per year. Every year of continuing growth makes the future reduction requirement even steeper.” The Global Carbon Project (GCP) is a joint international project on the global carbon cycle sponsored by the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP), the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Research (IHDP), and the World Climate Research Program.
    [Show full text]
  • 18 September 2013 New Study Explains the Rise and Rise of Methane
    18 September 2013 New study explains the rise and rise of methane The most comprehensive study yet of global methane shows that human activities are emitting as much methane as all natural sources together, largely from fossil fuel extraction and processing, livestock, and rice cultivation. The three-year international study, published today in the journal Nature Geoscience, traces and attributes the natural and man-made sources, the mechanisms that help to moderate methane’s influence, and describes how it is changing atmospheric composition. Methane is also the second most important greenhouse gas, and is responsible for about 20% of the direct warming caused by long-lived gases since pre-industrial times. Co-author on the study and Executive-Director of the Global Carbon Project, CSIRO's Dr Pep Canadell, said that atmospheric methane was stable from the late 1990s to 2006. “This was most likely due to decreasing-to-stable fossil fuel emissions, particularly industrial and mining fugitive emissions and emissions from rice cultivation, combined with stable-to-increasing microbial emissions. "Since 2006 to the present, we show that the rise in natural wetland emissions and fossil fuel emissions are likely to explain the renewed increase in global methane levels," Dr Canadell said. He said year-to-year fluctuations in methane concentrations are largely driven by changes in wetland emissions in the tropics and cold regions of the Northern Hemisphere, and to lesser extent by large- scale fires. "Any changes brought about by climate change that alter rainfall and temperature, which effect wetland extend and fire regimes, will therefore have significant implications for methane emissions," he said.
    [Show full text]
  • Earth. 2017. “Global Carbon Dioxide Emissions Set to Rise After Three
    NEWS RELEASE EMBARGOED UNTIL: Monday, 13 Nov. at 09:30 CET Global carbon dioxide emissions set to rise after three stable years MEDIA By the end of 2017, global emissions of carbon dioxide from QUERIES fossil fuels and industry are projected to rise by about 2% compared with the preceding year, with an uncertainty range Alistair Scrutton, between 0.8% and 3%. The news follows three years of emis- Future Earth, sions staying relatively flat. Director of Communications, That’s the conclusion of the 2017 Global Carbon Budget, that Sweden: will be published 13 November by the Global Carbon Project alistair.scrutton@ (GCP) in the journals Nature Climate Change, Environmental futureearth.org Research Letters and Earth System Science Data Discussions. +46 707 211098 The announcement comes as nations meet in Bonn, Germany, for the annual United Nations climate negotiations (COP23). INTERVIEWS Lead researcher Prof Corinne Le Quéré, director of the Tyndall Glen Peters, Centre for Climate Change Research at the University of East CICERO, Norway: Anglia, said: “Global carbon dioxide emissions appear to be glen.peters@ going up strongly once again after a three-year stable period. cicero.oslo.no This is very disappointing.” +47 9289 1638 “With global CO2 emissions from all human activities estimated Corinne Le Quéré, at 41 billion tonnes for 2017, time is running out on our ability Tyndall Centre, UK: to keep warming well below 2 ºC let alone 1.5 ºC.” [email protected] “This year we have seen how climate change can amplify the +44 (0) 1603 impacts of hurricanes with stronger downpours of rain, higher 592764 sea levels and warmer ocean conditions favouring more pow- erful storms.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Fire Behavior Modeling (2012)
    Introduction to Fire Behavior Modeling Introduction to Wildfire Behavior Modeling Introduction Table of Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................ 5 Chapter 1: Background........................................................................................ 7 What is wildfire? ..................................................................................................................... 7 Wildfire morphology ............................................................................................................. 10 By shape........................................................................................................ 10 By relative spread direction ........................................................................... 12 Wildfire behavior characteristics ........................................................................................... 14 Flame front rate of spread (ROS) ................................................................... 15 Heat per unit area (HPA) ................................................................................ 17 Fireline intensity (FLI) .................................................................................... 19 Flame size ..................................................................................................... 23 Major influences on fire behavior simulations ....................................................................... 24 Fuelbed structure .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Summary for Policymakers. In: Global Warming of 1.5°C
    Global warming of 1.5°C An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty Summary for Policymakers Edited by Valérie Masson-Delmotte Panmao Zhai Co-Chair Working Group I Co-Chair Working Group I Hans-Otto Pörtner Debra Roberts Co-Chair Working Group II Co-Chair Working Group II Jim Skea Priyadarshi R. Shukla Co-Chair Working Group III Co-Chair Working Group III Anna Pirani Wilfran Moufouma-Okia Clotilde Péan Head of WGI TSU Head of Science Head of Operations Roz Pidcock Sarah Connors J. B. Robin Matthews Head of Communication Science Officer Science Officer Yang Chen Xiao Zhou Melissa I. Gomis Science Officer Science Assistant Graphics Officer Elisabeth Lonnoy Tom Maycock Melinda Tignor Tim Waterfield Project Assistant Science Editor Head of WGII TSU IT Officer Working Group I Technical Support Unit Front cover layout: Nigel Hawtin Front cover artwork: Time to Choose by Alisa Singer - www.environmentalgraphiti.org - © Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The artwork was inspired by a graphic from the SPM (Figure SPM.1). © 2018 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Revised on January 2019 by the IPCC, Switzerland. Electronic copies of this Summary for Policymakers are available from the IPCC website www.ipcc.ch ISBN 978-92-9169-151-7 Introduction Chapter 2 ChapterSummary 1 for Policymakers 6 Summary for Policymakers Summary for Policymakers SPM SPM Summary SPM for Policymakers Drafting Authors: Myles R.
    [Show full text]
  • Viability: a Priority Criterion for the Mitigation of Climate Change and Other Complex Socio-Ecological Issues
    ARTICLE .77 Viability: A Priority Criterion for the Mitigation of Climate Change and other Complex Socio-Ecological Issues Graeme Taylor Griffith University Australia At present many researchers are exploring ways to improve the resilience of the global system, prevent catastrophic failure, and support the transition to a sustainable global system. This paper makes two interlinked proposals for developing better—and more credible—tools for modeling critical global issues and identifying and managing threats. First, proven risk management methods from other fields can be usefully applied to the assessment and mitigation of large, complex socio- ecological problems. Second, using viability as the priority criterion for the design of our models will not only highlight systemic threats, but also help us develop constructive interventions. socio-ecological, risk management, viability, modeling, non-linear, systems, safety, critical, causal diagrams, Bayesian networks The need for new models and methods Critical global problems like climate change, growing shortages of essential resources (such as water, food, energy and critical minerals) and the loss of biodiversity are getting worse. Many experts (Bierbaum et al., 2007) believe that humanity’s greatest challenge is to find ways to keep these problems from becoming catastrophic. Attention is increasingly focusing on risk assessment and management. Christopher Field, co-chair of the 2014 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on the impacts of rising temperatures, states: “The IPCC has transitioned to what I consider to be a full and rich recognition that the climate change problem is about managing risk” (Reuters, 2013). Awareness is growing also that better methods are needed to assess global risks and ensuring desirable outcomes.
    [Show full text]
  • Seawifs Technical Report Series Volume 42, Satellite Primary
    NASA/TM-1998-104566, Vol. 42 SeaWiFS Technical Report Series Stanford B. Hooker, Editor Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland Elaine R. Firestone, Technical Editor General Sciences Corporation, Laurel, Maryland Volume 42, Satellite Primary Productivity Data and Algorithm Development: A Science Plan for Mission to Planet Earth Paul G. Falkowski and Michael J. Behrenfeld, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York Wayne E. Esaias, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland William Balch, RSMAS/University of Miami, Miami, Florida Janet W. Campbell, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire Richard L. lverson, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida Dale A. Kiefer, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California Andr_ Morel, Laboratoire de Physique et Chimie Marines, Villefranche-sur-Mer, FRANCE James A. Yoder, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett, Rhode Island National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, Maryland 20771 January 1998 Available from: NASACenter for AeroSpace Information National Technical Information Service 800 Elkxidge Landing Road 5285 Port Royal Road Linthicum Heights, MD 21090-2934 Springfield, VA 22161 Price Code: A17 Price Code: A10 Satellite Primary Productivity Data and Algorithm Development: A Science Plan for Mission to Planet Earth PREFACE he scope of the Sea-viewing Wide Field-of-view Sensor (SeaWiFS) Project encompasses a broad variety of topics, as evidenced by the myriad subjects covered in the Sea WiFS Technical Report Series. Each of the so-called case studies volumes, as well as the calibration topic volumes, contain several chapters discussing topics germane to the subject of calibration and validation. In a departure from this, Volume 42, discusses topics germane to the issue of primary productivity--a critical part of the SeaWiFS Project.
    [Show full text]
  • 5A.4 Forest Fire Impact on Air Quality: the Lancon-De-Provence 2005 Case
    5A.4 FOREST FIRE IMPACT ON AIR QUALITY: THE LANCON-DE-PROVENCE 2005 CASE S. Strada∗ and C. Mari - CNRS - University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France J. B. Filippi and F. Bosseur - CNRS, Corte, France 1. INTRODUCTION et al., 1998). The model was developped jointly between Meteo-France and Laboratoire d’Aerologie In Mediterranean region climate change is mak- (CNRS). In the present study, Meso-NH is run with ing weather conditions more extremes, allowing huge four interactively nested domains whose horizontal forested areas to become ignited. Forest fires are a mesh sizes are, respectively, 25, 5, 1 km and 200 m risk to the environment and to communities, more- (Figure 1). The simulation starts on June 29, over wildfire represent a significant source of gas and 2005, 00:00 UTC, and is integrated for 72 h, with aerosols. Depending on the meteorological condi- different time steps for each domain. The initial and tions, these emissions can efficiently perturb air qual- boundary conditions for the dynamical variables are ity and visibility far away from the sources. taken from ECMWF operational reanalyses. The aim of this work is to simulate the interactions The vertical grid had 72 levels up to 23 km with of a mediterranean fire with its environment both in a level spacing of 40 m near the ground and 600 m terms of dynamics and air quality. at high altitude. The microphysical scheme included the three water phases with five species of precipitat- 2. FIRE-ATMOSPHERE COUPLING ing and nonprecipitating liquid and solid water (Pinty and Jabouille, 1999). The turbulence parametriza- The fire spread model ForeFire has been coupled tion was based on a 1.5-order closure (Cuxart et al., with the French mesoscale atmospheric model Meso- 2000).
    [Show full text]
  • Distinguished Professor Paul Falkowski Awarded the Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement FEBRUARY 6, 2018 by OFFICE of COMMUNICATIONS
    http://sebsnjaesnews.rutgers.edu/2018/02/the-tyler-prize-for-environmental-achievement-2018/ Distinguished Professor Paul Falkowski Awarded the Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement FEBRUARY 6, 2018 BY OFFICE OF COMMUNICATIONS Rutgers distinguished professor Paul Falkowski. Photo: Katie Voss. The 2018 Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement – often described as the ‘Nobel Prize for the Environment’ – has been awarded to Paul Falkowski and James J. McCarthy, for their decades of leadership in understanding – and communicating – the impacts of climate change. Paul Falkowski, one of the world’s greatest pioneers in the `eld of biological oceanography, is a Rutgers distinguished professor in the departments of Earth and Planetary Sciences and Marine and Coastal Sciences and is the founding director of the Rutgers Energy Institute. James J. McCarthy is from the Department of Biological Oceanography at Harvard University. “Climate change poses a great challenge to global communities. We are recognizing these two great scientists for their enormous contributions to `ghting climate change through increasing our scienti`c understanding of how Earth’s climate works, as well as bringing together that knowledge for the purpose of policy change,” said Julia Marton-Lefèvre, chair of the Tyler Prize Committee. “This is a great message for the world today; that U.S. scientists are leading some of the most promising research into Earth’s climate, and helping to turn that knowledge into policy change,” said Marton-Lefèvre. Human activity has changed Earth’s atmosphere, which in turn is changing the Earth’s climate. However, early climate models were often inaccurate, because science lacked a detailed understanding of how our modern climate originally evolved.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildfire Smoke Effects on Health: Implementing an Air Quality Alert System for UCSD
    Wildfire Smoke Effects on Health: Implementing an Air Quality Alert System for UCSD Melina Cunha June 2019 Acknowledgements This capstone project would not have been possible without the help of my Committee. I would like to thank Tarik Benmarhnia, my Committee Chair and faculty professor at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, for being an amazing mentor and guiding me through this entire process. His guidance in both the scientific basis of climate change and health as well as implementation of the alert system at UCSD has been instrumental to my success. I also want to thank Corey Gabriel for encouraging me to choose wildfires as my direction of study and helping me to brainstorm all of the different directions I could have gone with this project. I want to thank everyone in the Environment, Health, and Safety Emergency Management & Business Continuity Division at UCSD who were involved in the development and implementation of the alert system, including Dismas Abelman, Eric Delucien, and Matt Hussmann. Dismas was enthusiastic from the beginning and eager to do everything he could to help me complete this project. Eric developed the website that I created as a resource for students to get more information about wildfire smoke, air quality, and health. Matt was my initial contact with EH&S who helped me understand the function of Triton Alerts and the Emergency Division and connected me with Dismas. I also want to thank everyone else who discussed my capstone with me throughout the year and in the early days when I was considering other projects. Thank you also to my friends, family, and CSP cohort for supporting and inspiring me this past year.
    [Show full text]
  • A Carbon-Cycle Based Stochastic Cellular Automata Climate Model
    A CARBON-CYCLE BASED STOCHASTIC CELLULAR AUTOMATA CLIMATE MODEL KLAUS LICHTENEGGER, Institut f¨urPhysik, Karl-Franzens-Universit¨atGraz, Institut f¨urAnalysis und Computational Number Theory, Technische Universit¨atGraz; A-8010 Graz, Austria, [email protected] WILHELM SCHAPPACHER, Institute of Mathematics and Scientific Computing, Heinrichstraße 36 Graz University, 8010 Graz, Austria [email protected] March 23rd, 2011 Abstract In this article a stochastic cellular automata model is examined, which has been developed to study a \small" world, where local changes may noticeably alter global characteristics. This is applied to a climate model, where global temperature is determined by an interplay between atmo- spheric carbon dioxide and carbon stored by plant life. The latter can be relased by forest fires, giving rise to significant changes of global conditions within short time. Keywords: Cellular Automata; Forest Fire; Climate Dynamics; Carbon Cycle PACS Nos.: 64.60.ah, 89.75.-k, 89.75.Fb, 89.75.kd 1 Introduction arXiv:1103.4532v1 [nlin.CG] 23 Mar 2011 1.1 A Brief Note on Cellular Automata Cellular Automata (CA), as studied first by von Neumann and Ulam [1], provide systems both interesting from a fundamental point of view and for practical purposes of model builders. Among the systems most frequently studied are CA versions of daisyworld [2, 3, 4] and forest fire models [5, 6, 7, 8, 9]. The main idea is to study a grid or network of identical units (cells), which each can take discrete states, and where the time evolution of each cell is gov- erned by simple local rules: The state si(t) of a cell labelled by i at timestep t 1 is only determined by its previous state si(t − 1) and the states sjk (t − 1) of a small number k of neighbours, labelled by jk.
    [Show full text]