DOCSLIB.ORG

GHG Protocol Corporate Standard

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
GHG Protocol Corporate Standard The Greenhouse Gas Protocol — 390 — 370 — 350 — 330 — 310 — 290 — 270 ppm Year: 1000 1500 2000 A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard REVISED EDITION WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE GHG Protocol Initiative Team Janet Ranganathan World Resources Institute Laurent Corbier World Business Council for Sustainable Development Pankaj Bhatia World Resources Institute Simon Schmitz World Business Council for Sustainable Development Peter Gage World Resources Institute Kjell Oren World Business Council for Sustainable Development Revision Working Group Brian Dawson & Matt Spannagle Australian Greenhouse Office Mike McMahon BP Pierre Boileau Environment Canada Rob Frederick Ford Motor Company Bruno Vanderborght Holcim Fraser Thomson International Aluminum Institute Koichi Kitamura Kansai Electric Power Company Chi Mun Woo & Naseem Pankhida KPMG Reid Miner National Council for Air and Stream Improvement Laurent Segalen PricewaterhouseCoopers Jasper Koch Shell Global Solutions International B.V. Somnath Bhattacharjee The Energy Research Institute Cynthia Cummis US Environmental Protection Agency Clare Breidenich UNFCCC Rebecca Eaton World Wildlife Fund Core Advisors Michael Gillenwater Independent Expert Melanie Eddis KPMG Marie Marache PricewaterhouseCoopers Roberto Acosta UNFCCC Vincent Camobreco US Environmental Protection Agency Elizabeth Cook World Resources Institute Table of Contents Introduction The Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative 2 Chapter 1 GHG Accounting and Reporting Principles STANDARD GUIDANCE 6 Chapter 2 Business Goals and Inventory Design GUIDANCE 10 Chapter 3 Setting Organizational Boundaries STANDARD GUIDANCE 16 Chapter 4 Setting Operational Boundaries STANDARD GUIDANCE 24 Chapter 5 Tracking Emissions Over Time STANDARD GUIDANCE 34 Chapter 6 Identifying and Calculating GHG Emissions GUIDANCE 40 Chapter 7 Managing Inventory Quality GUIDANCE 48 Chapter 8 Accounting for GHG Reductions GUIDANCE 58 Chapter 9 Reporting GHG Emissions STANDARD GUIDANCE 62 Chapter 10 Verification of GHG Emissions GUIDANCE 68 Chapter 11 Setting GHG Targets GUIDANCE 74 Appendix A Accounting for Indirect Emissions from Electricity 86 Appendix B Accounting for Sequestered Atmospheric Carbon 88 Appendix C Overview of GHG Programs 90 Appendix D Industry Sectors and Scopes 92 Acronyms 95 Glossary 96 References 103 Contributors 104 Introduction he Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative is a multi-stakeholder partnership of businesses, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), governments, and others T convened by the World Resources Institute (WRI), a U.S.-based environmental NGO, and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), a Geneva-based coalition of 170 international companies. Launched in 1998, the Initiative’s mission is to develop internationally accepted greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting and reporting standards for business and to promote their broad adoption. The GHG Protocol Initiative comprises two separate but linked standards: • GHG Protocol Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (this document, which provides a step-by-step guide for companies to use in quantifying and reporting their GHG emissions) • GHG Protocol Project Quantification Standard (forthcoming; a guide for quantifying reductions from GHG mitigation projects) 2 INTRODUCTION 3 The first edition of the GHG Protocol Corporate Accounting and The business value of a GHG inventory Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol Corporate Standard), published in Global warming and climate change have come to the fore as a September 2001, enjoyed broad adoption and acceptance around the key sustainable development issue. Many governments are taking globe by businesses, NGOs, and governments. Many industry, NGO, steps to reduce GHG emissions through national policies that and government GHG programs1 used the standard as a basis for include the introduction of emissions trading programs, voluntary their accounting and reporting systems. Industry groups, such programs, carbon or energy taxes, and regulations and standards as the International Aluminum Institute, the International Council on energy efficiency and emissions. As a result, companies must of Forest and Paper Associations, and the WBCSD Cement be able to understand and manage their GHG risks if they are to Sustainability Initiative, partnered with the GHG Protocol Initiative ensure long-term success in a competitive business environment, to develop complementary industry-specific calculation tools. and to be prepared for future national or regional climate policies. Widespread adoption of the standard can be attributed to the inclu- A well-designed and maintained corporate GHG inventory can sion of many stakeholders in its development and to the fact that serve several business goals, including: it is robust, practical, and builds on the experience and expertise of numerous experts and practitioners. • Managing GHG risks and identifying reduction opportunities This revised edition of the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard is the • Public reporting and participation in voluntary GHG programs culmination of a two-year multi-stakeholder dialogue, designed • Participating in mandatory reporting programs to build on experience gained from using the first edition. It includes additional guidance, case studies, appendices, and a new chapter • Participating in GHG markets on setting a GHG target. For the most part, however, the first edition • Recognition for early voluntary action. of the Corporate Standard has stood the test of time, and the changes in this revised edition will not affect the results of most GHG inventories. Who should use this standard? This GHG Protocol Corporate Standard provides standards and This standard is written primarily from the perspective of a busi- guidance for companies and other types of organizations2 ness developing a GHG inventory. However, it applies equally to preparing a GHG emissions inventory. It covers the accounting other types of organizations with operations that give rise to GHG and reporting of the six greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto emissions, e.g., NGOs, government agencies, and universities.3 Protocol — carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide It should not be used to quantify the reductions associated with (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), GHG mitigation projects for use as offsets or credits—the and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6). The standard and guidance were forthcoming GHG Protocol Project Quantification Standard will designed with the following objectives in mind: provide standards and guidance for this purpose. • To help companies prepare a GHG inventory that represents Policy makers and architects of GHG programs can also use rele- a true and fair account of their emissions, through the use of vant parts of this standard as a basis for their own accounting standardized approaches and principles and reporting requirements. • To simplify and reduce the costs of compiling a GHG inventory • To provide business with information that can be used to build an effective strategy to manage and reduce GHG emissions • To provide information that facilitates participation in voluntary and mandatory GHG programs • To increase consistency and transparency in GHG accounting and reporting among various companies and GHG programs. Both business and other stakeholders benefit from converging on a common standard. For business, it reduces costs if their GHG inventory is capable of meeting different internal and external information requirements. For others, it improves the consistency, transparency, and understandability of reported information, making it easier to track and compare progress over time. Introduction Relationship to other GHG programs GHG calculation tools It is important to distinguish between the GHG Protocol Initiative To complement the standard and guidance provided here, and other GHG programs. The GHG Protocol Corporate Standard a number of cross-sector and sector-specific calculation tools focuses only on the accounting and reporting of emissions. It does are available on the GHG Protocol Initiative website not require emissions information to be reported to WRI or WBCSD. (www.ghgprotocol.org), including a guide for small office-based In addition, while this standard is designed to develop a verifiable organizations (see chapter 6 for full list). These tools provide step- inventory, it does not provide a standard for how the verification by-step guidance and electronic worksheets to help users process should be conducted. calculate GHG emissions from specific sources or industries. The tools are consistent with those proposed by the Intergovernmental The GHG Protocol Corporate Standard has been designed to be Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for compilation of emissions program or policy neutral. However, many existing GHG programs at the national level (IPCC, 1996). They have been refined to be use it for their own accounting and reporting requirements and it user-friendly for non-technical company staff and to increase the is compatible with most of them, including: accuracy of emissions data at a company level. Thanks to help • Voluntary GHG reduction programs, e.g., the World Wildlife Fund from many companies, organizations, and individual experts (WWF) Climate Savers, the U.S. Environmental Protection through an intensive review of the tools, they are believed to Agency (EPA) Climate Leaders, the Climate Neutral Network, represent current “best practice.” and the Business Leaders Initiative on Climate Change (BLICC) • GHG
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Public Lands
    The Climate Report 2020: Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Public Lands As the world works to respond to the dire regulations meant to protect the public and the warnings issued last fall by the United Nations environment from these exact decisions. New Environment Programme, the Trump policies have made it cheaper and easier for administration continues to open up as much fossil energy corporations to gain and hold of our shared public lands as possible to fossil control of public lands. And they have hidden fuel extraction.1 And while doing so, the federal from public view the implications of these government continues to keep the public (aka decisions for taxpayers and the planet. the owners of these resources) in the dark on This report seeks to pull the curtain back on the mounting greenhouse gas emissions that this situation and shed light on the range of would result from drilling on our public lands. potential climate consequences of these At the same time, we’ve seen this leasing decisions. administration water down policies and 1 UN. 26 Nov. 2019. stories/press-release/cut-global-emissions-76- https://www.unenvironment.org/news-and- percent-every-year-next-decade-meet-15degc Key Takeaways: The federal government cannot manage development of these leases could be as what it does not measure, yet the Trump high as 6.6 billion MT CO2e. administration is actively seeking to These leasing decisions have significant suppress disclosure of climate emissions and long-term ramifications for our climate from fossil energy leases on public lands. and our ability to stave off the worst The leases issued during the Trump impacts of global warming.
    [Show full text]
  • Net Zero by 2050 a Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector Net Zero by 2050
    Net Zero by 2050 A Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector Net Zero by 2050 A Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector Net Zero by 2050 Interactive iea.li/nzeroadmap Net Zero by 2050 Data iea.li/nzedata INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY The IEA examines the IEA member IEA association full spectrum countries: countries: of energy issues including oil, gas and Australia Brazil coal supply and Austria China demand, renewable Belgium India energy technologies, Canada Indonesia electricity markets, Czech Republic Morocco energy efficiency, Denmark Singapore access to energy, Estonia South Africa demand side Finland Thailand management and France much more. Through Germany its work, the IEA Greece advocates policies Hungary that will enhance the Ireland reliability, affordability Italy and sustainability of Japan energy in its Korea 30 member Luxembourg countries, Mexico 8 association Netherlands countries and New Zealand beyond. Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Republic Spain Sweden Please note that this publication is subject to Switzerland specific restrictions that limit Turkey its use and distribution. The United Kingdom terms and conditions are available online at United States www.iea.org/t&c/ This publication and any The European map included herein are without prejudice to the Commission also status of or sovereignty over participates in the any territory, to the work of the IEA delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. Source: IEA. All rights reserved. International Energy Agency Website: www.iea.org Foreword We are approaching a decisive moment for international efforts to tackle the climate crisis – a great challenge of our times.
    [Show full text]
  • Enagás' CH4 Emissions Reporting, Mitigation and Commitment
    Enagás’ CH4 emissions reporting, mitigation and commitment Initial condition Enagás is a midstream company. It is a leading natural gas infrastructure company in Spain and the Technical Manager of the Spanish gas system. The company's activities include the management, operation and maintenance of gas infrastructure. In Spain Enagás has approximately 12,000 km of gas pipelines, 19 compressor stations, 493 regulation and metering stations, and 3 underground storage facilities. It also owns 4 LNG regasification plants, and it is the main shareholder of other two. Traditionally, Enagás managed methane emissions predominantly from the safety requirements perspective. However, as energy efficiency and GHG emissions reduction have become strategic priorities for the company, emissions of methane, being a potent short-lived climate pollutant, came to the forefront. The most relevant aspects addressed by Enagás in its climate change management model are: public commitment and the setting of targets, emissions reduction and compensation measures, as well as reporting on performance and results, following TCFD1 recommendations. Since 2013, the company voluntarily started to annually calculate and verify its Carbon Footprint, which constitutes the base for its emission reduction strategy. Quantification of methane emissions is a part of that process, which is subject to an independent third-party verification in accordance with standard ISO 14064. Process: the role of leaks detection and repair Methane emissions account for approximately 20% of Enagás’ greenhouse gas emissions (scope 1 and 2). 70% of these are fugitive methane emissions while the remainder (30%) is primary caused by safety precautions, or by design of equipment (vents). Due to the relatively large share of fugitive emissions, in 2013 Enagás started to carry out leak detection and repair campaigns (LDAR).
    [Show full text]
  • The Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism
    Parliament of Australia Department of Parliamentary Services Parliamentary Library Information, analysis and advice for the Parliament BACKGROUND NOTE www.aph.gov.au/library 23 April 2009 The Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism Anita Talberg Science, Technology, Environment and Resources Section Leslie Nielson Economics Section Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 What is the Clean Development Mechanism? ............................................................................ 1 The aims of the CDM ............................................................................................................. 2 How it works .......................................................................................................................... 2 Potential supply of CER units to the CPRS ........................................................................... 3 The CDM projects....................................................................................................................... 4 Countries ................................................................................................................................ 4 Activities/technologies ......................................................................................................... 11 Project scales ........................................................................................................................ 14 Criticisms
    [Show full text]
  • Emission Inventory & Calculation Methodology 2019
    Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory & Calculation Methodology 2019 Quantification and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions in accordance with the Corporate Green- house Gas Protocol December 2020 Content Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1 About RWE and its value chain .............................................................................................................................. 2 Organisational boundary .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Emissions Accounting and Reporting Methodology ................................................................................... 3 Scope 1 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Scope 2 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Scope 3 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Category
    [Show full text]
  • Carbon Dioxide Removal Policy in the Making: Assessing Developments in 9 OECD Cases
    POLICY AND PRACTICE REVIEWS published: 04 March 2021 doi: 10.3389/fclim.2021.638805 Carbon Dioxide Removal Policy in the Making: Assessing Developments in 9 OECD Cases Felix Schenuit 1,2*, Rebecca Colvin 3, Mathias Fridahl 4, Barry McMullin 5, Andy Reisinger 6, Daniel L. Sanchez 7, Stephen M. Smith 8, Asbjørn Torvanger 9, Anita Wreford 10 and Oliver Geden 2 1 Center for Sustainable Society Research, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany, 2 German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), Berlin, Germany, 3 Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia, 4 Department of Thematic Studies, Environmental Change, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden, 5 Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland, 6 Ministry for the Environment, Wellington, New Zealand, 7 Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management (ESPM), University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States, 8 Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom, 9 Center for International Climate Research (CICERO), Oslo, Norway, 10 Agribusiness and Economics Research Unit (AERU), Lincoln University, Christchurch, New Zealand Edited by: William C. Burns, Since the adoption of the Paris Agreement in 2015, spurred by the 2018 IPCC Special American University, United States Report on Global Warming of 1.5◦C, net zero emission targets have emerged as a Reviewed by: new organizing principle of climate policy. In this context, climate policymakers and Phillip Williamson, University of East Anglia, stakeholders have been shifting their attention to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) as United Kingdom an inevitable component of net zero targets. The importance of CDR would increase Charithea Charalambous, Heriot-Watt University, further if countries and other entities set net-negative emissions targets.
    [Show full text]
  • Candidates Nominated to the Board of Directors in Gjensidige Forsikring ASA
    Office translation for information purpose only Appendix 18 Candidates nominated to the Board of Directors in Gjensidige Forsikring ASA Per Andersen Born in 1947, lives in Oslo Occupation/position: Managing Director, Det norske myntverket AS Education/background: Chartered engineer and Master of Science in Business and Economics, officer’s training school, Director of Marketing and Sales and other positions with IBM, CEO of Gjensidige, CEO of Posten Norge and Managing Director of ErgoGroup, senior consultant to the CEO of Posten Norge, CEO of Lindorff. Trond Vegard Andersen Born in 1960, lives in Fredrikstad Occupation/position: Managing Director of Fredrikstad Energi AS Education/background: Certified public accountant and Master of Science in Business and Economics from the Norwegian School of Business Economics and Administration (NHH) Offices for Gjensidige: Member of owner committee in East Norway Organisational experience: Chairman of the Board for all FEAS subsidiaries, board member for Værste AS (regional development in Fredrikstad) Hans-Erik Folke Andersson Born in 1950, Swedish, lives in Djursholm Occupation/position: Consultant, former Managing Director of insurance company Skandia, Nordic Director for Marsh & McLennan and Executive Director of Mercantile & General Re Education/background: Statistics, economy, business law and administration from Stockholm University Offices for Gjensidige: Board member since 2008 Organisational experience: Chairman of the Board of Semcon AB, Erik Penser Bankaktiebolag and Canvisa AB and a board member of Cision AB. Per Engebreth Askildsrud Born in 1950, lives in Jevnaker Occupation/position: Lawyer, own practice Education/background: Law Offices for Gjensidige: Chairman of the owner committee Laila S. Dahlen Born in 1968, lives in Oslo Occupation/position: Currently at home on maternity leave.
    [Show full text]
  • VISCOSITY of a GAS -Dr S P Singh Department of Chemistry, a N College, Patna
    Lecture Note on VISCOSITY OF A GAS -Dr S P Singh Department of Chemistry, A N College, Patna A sketchy summary of the main points Viscosity of gases, relation between mean free path and coefficient of viscosity, temperature and pressure dependence of viscosity, calculation of collision diameter from the coefficient of viscosity Viscosity is the property of a fluid which implies resistance to flow. Viscosity arises from jump of molecules from one layer to another in case of a gas. There is a transfer of momentum of molecules from faster layer to slower layer or vice-versa. Let us consider a gas having laminar flow over a horizontal surface OX with a velocity smaller than the thermal velocity of the molecule. The velocity of the gaseous layer in contact with the surface is zero which goes on increasing upon increasing the distance from OX towards OY (the direction perpendicular to OX) at a uniform rate . Suppose a layer ‘B’ of the gas is at a certain distance from the fixed surface OX having velocity ‘v’. Two layers ‘A’ and ‘C’ above and below are taken into consideration at a distance ‘l’ (mean free path of the gaseous molecules) so that the molecules moving vertically up and down can’t collide while moving between the two layers. Thus, the velocity of a gas in the layer ‘A’ ---------- (i) = + Likely, the velocity of the gas in the layer ‘C’ ---------- (ii) The gaseous molecules are moving in all directions due= to −thermal velocity; therefore, it may be supposed that of the gaseous molecules are moving along the three Cartesian coordinates each.
    [Show full text]
  • Data and Information Committee Agenda 9 June 2021 - Agenda
    Data and Information Committee Agenda 9 June 2021 - Agenda Data and Information Committee Agenda 9 June 2021 Meeting is held in the Council Chamber, Level 2, Philip Laing House 144 Rattray Street, Dunedin Members: Hon Cr Marian Hobbs, Co-Chair Cr Michael Laws Cr Alexa Forbes, Co-Chair Cr Kevin Malcolm Cr Hilary Calvert Cr Andrew Noone Cr Michael Deaker Cr Gretchen Robertson Cr Carmen Hope Cr Bryan Scott Cr Gary Kelliher Cr Kate Wilson Senior Officer: Sarah Gardner, Chief Executive Meeting Support: Liz Spector, Committee Secretary 09 June 2021 02:00 PM Agenda Topic Page 1. APOLOGIES No apologies were received prior to publication of the agenda. 2. PUBLIC FORUM No requests to address the Committee under Public Forum were received prior to publication of the agenda. 3. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA Note: Any additions must be approved by resolution with an explanation as to why they cannot be delayed until a future meeting. 4. CONFLICT OF INTEREST Members are reminded of the need to stand aside from decision-making when a conflict arises between their role as an elected representative and any private or other external interest they might have. 5. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 3 Minutes of previous meetings will be considered true and accurate records, with or without changes. 5.1 Minutes of the 10 March 2021 Data and Information Committee meeting 3 6. OUTSTANDING ACTIONS OF DATA AND INFORMATION COMMITTEE RESOLUTIONS 8 Outstanding actions from resolutions of the Committee will be reviewed. 6.1 Action Register at 9 June 2021 8 7. MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION 9 1 Data and Information Committee Agenda 9 June 2021 - Agenda 7.1 OTAGO GREENHOUSE GAS PROFILE FY2018/19 9 This report is provided to present the Committee with the Otago Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory FY2018/19 and report.
    [Show full text]
  • Viscosity of Gases References
    VISCOSITY OF GASES Marcia L. Huber and Allan H. Harvey The following table gives the viscosity of some common gases generally less than 2% . Uncertainties for the viscosities of gases in as a function of temperature . Unless otherwise noted, the viscosity this table are generally less than 3%; uncertainty information on values refer to a pressure of 100 kPa (1 bar) . The notation P = 0 specific fluids can be found in the references . Viscosity is given in indicates that the low-pressure limiting value is given . The dif- units of μPa s; note that 1 μPa s = 10–5 poise . Substances are listed ference between the viscosity at 100 kPa and the limiting value is in the modified Hill order (see Introduction) . Viscosity in μPa s 100 K 200 K 300 K 400 K 500 K 600 K Ref. Air 7 .1 13 .3 18 .5 23 .1 27 .1 30 .8 1 Ar Argon (P = 0) 8 .1 15 .9 22 .7 28 .6 33 .9 38 .8 2, 3*, 4* BF3 Boron trifluoride 12 .3 17 .1 21 .7 26 .1 30 .2 5 ClH Hydrogen chloride 14 .6 19 .7 24 .3 5 F6S Sulfur hexafluoride (P = 0) 15 .3 19 .7 23 .8 27 .6 6 H2 Normal hydrogen (P = 0) 4 .1 6 .8 8 .9 10 .9 12 .8 14 .5 3*, 7 D2 Deuterium (P = 0) 5 .9 9 .6 12 .6 15 .4 17 .9 20 .3 8 H2O Water (P = 0) 9 .8 13 .4 17 .3 21 .4 9 D2O Deuterium oxide (P = 0) 10 .2 13 .7 17 .8 22 .0 10 H2S Hydrogen sulfide 12 .5 16 .9 21 .2 25 .4 11 H3N Ammonia 10 .2 14 .0 17 .9 21 .7 12 He Helium (P = 0) 9 .6 15 .1 19 .9 24 .3 28 .3 32 .2 13 Kr Krypton (P = 0) 17 .4 25 .5 32 .9 39 .6 45 .8 14 NO Nitric oxide 13 .8 19 .2 23 .8 28 .0 31 .9 5 N2 Nitrogen 7 .0 12 .9 17 .9 22 .2 26 .1 29 .6 1, 15* N2O Nitrous
    [Show full text]
  • Admirable Trees of Through Two World Wars and Witnessed the Nation’S Greatest Dramas Versailles
    Admirable trees estate of versailles estate With Patronage of maison rémy martin The history of France from tree to tree Established in 1724 and granted Royal Approval in 1738 by Louis XV, Trees have so many stories to tell, hidden away in their shadows. At Maison Rémy Martin shares with the Palace of Versailles an absolute Versailles, these stories combine into a veritable epic, considering respect of time, a spirit of openness and innovation, a willingness to that some of its trees have, from the tips of their leafy crowns, seen pass on its exceptional knowledge and respect for the environment the kings of France come and go, observed the Revolution, lived – all of which are values that connect it to the Admirable Trees of through two World Wars and witnessed the nation’s greatest dramas Versailles. and most joyous celebrations. Strolling from tree to tree is like walking through part of the history of France, encompassing the influence of Louis XIV, the experi- ments of Louis XV, the passion for hunting of Louis XVI, as well as the great maritime expeditions and the antics of Marie-Antoinette. It also calls to mind the unending renewal of these fragile giants, which can be toppled by a strong gust and need many years to grow back again. Pedunculate oak, Trianon forecourts; planted during the reign of Louis XIV, in 1668, this oak is the doyen of the trees on the Estate of Versailles 1 2 From the French-style gardens in front of the Palace to the English garden at Trianon, the Estate of Versailles is dotted with extraordi- nary trees.
    [Show full text]
  • ALBEDO ENHANCEMENT by STRATOSPHERIC SULFUR INJECTIONS: a CONTRIBUTION to RESOLVE a POLICY DILEMMA? an Editorial Essay
    ALBEDO ENHANCEMENT BY STRATOSPHERIC SULFUR INJECTIONS: A CONTRIBUTION TO RESOLVE A POLICY DILEMMA? An Editorial Essay Fossil fuel burning releases about 25 Pg of CO2 per year into the atmosphere, which leads to global warming (Prentice et al., 2001). However, it also emits 55 Tg S as SO2 per year (Stern, 2005), about half of which is converted to sub-micrometer size sulfate particles, the remainder being dry deposited. Recent research has shown that the warming of earth by the increasing concentrations of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is partially countered by some backscattering to space of solar radiation by the sulfate particles, which act as cloud condensation nuclei and thereby influ- ence the micro-physical and optical properties of clouds, affecting regional precip- itation patterns, and increasing cloud albedo (e.g., Rosenfeld, 2000; Ramanathan et al., 2001; Ramaswamy et al., 2001). Anthropogenically enhanced sulfate particle concentrations thus cool the planet, offsetting an uncertain fraction of the anthro- pogenic increase in greenhouse gas warming. However, this fortunate coincidence is “bought” at a substantial price. According to the World Health Organization, the pollution particles affect health and lead to more than 500,000 premature deaths per year worldwide (Nel, 2005). Through acid precipitation and deposition, SO2 and sulfates also cause various kinds of ecological damage. This creates a dilemma for environmental policy makers, because the required emission reductions of SO2, and also anthropogenic organics (except black carbon), as dictated by health and ecological considerations, add to global warming and associated negative conse- quences, such as sea level rise, caused by the greenhouse gases.
    [Show full text]