Posted on

Accelerated deforestation in the EU

Forests are vital to our society. In the EU, forests make up around 38% of the total land area. They are important carbon sinks as they eliminate around 10% of EU greenhouse gases. Efforts to conserve them are a key part of EU climate targets. However, the increasing demand for forest products poses challenges for sustainable forest management.

According to a report recently published in the renowned science magazine Nature, the EU’s deforested area has increased by 49% and with it the loss of biomass (69%). This is due to large-scale deforestation, which reduces the continent’s carbon absorption capacity and accelerates climate change.

The analyzed a series of very detailed satellite data. The authors of the report show that deforestation occurred primarily on the Iberian Peninsula, the Baltic States, and Scandinavia. Deforestation of forest areas increased by 49% between 2016 and 2018. Satellite images also show that the average area of ​​harvested land across Europe has increased by 34 percent, with potential implications for biodiversity, soil erosion and water regulation.

The accelerating deforestation could thwart the EU’s strategy to combat climate change, which aims in particular to protect forests in the coming years, the experts warn in their study. For this reason, the increasing use of forests is challenging to maintain the existing balance between the demand for wood and the need to preserve these key ecosystems for the environment. Typically, industries such as bioenergy or the paper industry are the driving forces behind deforestation.

The greatest acceleration in deforestation was recorded in Sweden and Finland. In these two countries, more than 50% of the increase in deforestation in Europe has been recorded. Next in line are Spain, Poland, France, Latvia, Portugal and Estonia, which together account for six to 30% of the increase, the study said.

Experts suggest linking deforestation and carbon emissions in model calculations before setting new climate targets. The increase in forest harvest is the result of the recent expansion of global wood markets, as evidenced by economic indicators for forestry, timber bioenergy and international trade. If such a high forest harvest continues, the EU’s vision of forest-based mitigation after 2020 could be compromised. The additional carbon losses from forests would require additional emission reductions in other sectors to achieve climate neutrality.

At Frontis Energy, we find the competition between bioenergy and this important carbon sink particularly disturbing, as both are strategies to mitigate global warming.

(Photo: Picography / Pixabay)

Posted on

Framework for a global carbon budget

Over the past decade, numerous studies have shown that global warming is roughly proportional to the concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere. In this way one can estimate our remaining carbon budget. This is the total amount of man-made carbon dioxide that can still be released into the atmosphere before reaching a set global temperature limit. The nations of the world agreed on this limit in the 2015 Paris Agreement. It should not exceed 1.5°C, and in any case be well below 2.0°C. However, diverging estimates have been made for the remaining carbon budget, which has a negative impact on policy-making. Now, an international research group of renown climate experts has published a framework for the calculation of the global CO2 budget in Nature. The researchers suggest that the application of this framework should help to overcome the differences when estimating the carbon budget, which will help to reduce uncertainties in research and policy.

Since the fifth report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the concept of a carbon budget has become more important as an instrument for guiding climate policy. Over the past decade, a series of studies  has clarified why the increase in the global average temperature is roughly proportional to the total amount of CO2 emissions caused by human activity since the Industrial Revolution. In the framework, the research group cites numerous published documents that provide evidence for the linearity of this correlation. This literature has allowed scientists to define the linear relationship between warming and CO2 emissions as a transient climate response to cumulative CO2 emissions (TCRE). The linearity is an appealing concept because of the complexity of the Earth’s response to our CO2 emissions. Additional processes that affect future warming have been included in recent models, among them, for example, the thawing of the Arctic permafrost. These additional processes increase the uncertainty of current climate  models. In addition, global warming is not just caused by CO2 emissions. Other greenhouse gases, such as methane, fluorinated gases or nitrous oxide, as well as aerosols and their precursors affect global temperatures. This further complicates the relationship between future CO2.

In the case of global warming caused by CO2, every tonne contributes to warming, whether that ton is emitted in future, now or in the last century. This means that global CO2 emissions must be reduced to zero, and then remain zero. This also means that the more we emit in the next years, the faster we have to reduce our emissions later. At zero emissions, warming would stabilize, but not disappear. It may also reverse. An overdraft of the carbon budget would have to be compensated by removing the CO2 later. One way of removing CO2 from the atmosphere would be a technology called direct air capture, which we reported earlier. Ultimately, this will probably be the only way left, as carbon neutral renewable energy source sources only make up 5% of our energy mix. Establishing a global carbon budget will further highlights the urgency of our clean energy transition. Unfortunately, there is a large divergence when it comes the amount of the CO2 remaining in our carbon budget. In their framework, the researchers cite numerous studies on carbon budgets to maintain our 1.5°C target. Starting 2018, these range from 0 tonnes of CO2 to 1,000 gigatons. For the 2.0°C target, our carbon budget ranges from around 700 gigatons to nearly 2,000 gigatons of remaining CO2 emissions. The aim of the researchers is to limit this uncertainty by establishing a budget framework. The central element is the equation for calculating the remaining carbon budget:

Blim = (TlimThistTnonCO2Thist) / TCRE − EEsfb

The budget of the remaining CO2 emissions (Blim) for the specific temperature limit (Tlim) is a function of five terms that represent aspects of the geophysical and human-environment systems: the historical man-made warming (Thist), the non-CO2 contribution to the future temperature increase (TnonCO2), the zero emission commitment (TZEC), the TCRE, and an adaptation for sources from possible unrepresented Earth system feedback (EEsfb).


Term Key choices or uncertainties Type Level of understanding
Temperature limit Tlim Choice of temperature metrics that allow global warming, the choice of pre-industrial reference and consistency with global climate targets Choice Medium to high
Historical man-made warming Thist Incomplete data and methods for estimating the man-made component; see also Tlim Choice and uncertainty Medium to high
Non-CO2 contribution to future global warming TnonCO2 The level of non-CO2 contributions coinciding with global net zero CO2 emissions; depends on policy choices, but also on the uncertainty of their implementation Choice and uncertainty Medium
Non-CO2 contribution to future global warming TnonCO2 Climate reaction to non-CO2 forcers, such as aerosols and methane Uncertainty Low to medium
Zero-emissions commitment TZEC The extent of the decadal zero emission commitment and near-zero annual carbon emissions Uncertainty Low
Transient climate response to cumulative emissions of CO2 TCRE TCRE uncertainty, linearity and cumulative CO2 emissions that affect temperature metrics of the TCRE estimate Uncertainty Low to medium
Transient climate response to cumulative emissions of CO2 TCRE Uncertainty of the TCRE linearity, value and distribution beyond peak heating which is affected by cumulative CO2 emissions reduction
Uncertainty Low
Unrepresented Earth system feedback mechanisms EEsfb Impact of permafrost thawing and duration as well as methane release from wetlands on geomodels and feedback Uncertainty Very low

In the CO2 budget, the unrepresented Earth system feedback (EEsfb) is arguably the greatest uncertainty. These feedback processes are typically associated with the thawing of permafrost and the associated long-term release of CO2 and CH4. However, other sources of feedback have been identified as well. This include, for example, the variations of CO2 uptake by the vegetation and the associated nitrogen availability. Further feedback processes involve changes in surface albedo, cloud cover, or fire conditions.

It remains a challenge to adequately characterize the uncertainties surrounding the estimates of our carbon budget. In some cases, the reason of these uncertainties is inaccurate knowledge of the underlying processes or inaccurate measurements. In other cases the terminology is used inconsistently. For better comparability and flexibility, the researchers propose to routinely measure global surface air temperature values. This method gives robust data for models and model runs over selected time periods. More detailed comparisons between published estimates of the carbon budget are currently difficult because the original data used for publication often are missing. The researchers therefore propose to provide these in the future along with publications.

Breaking down the carbon budget into its individual factors makes it possible to identify a number of promising pathways for future research. One area of ​​research that might advance this field is to look more closely at the TCRE. Future research is expected to narrow down the range of TCRE uncertainties. Another promising area of ​​research is the study of the correlation between individual factors and their associated uncertainties, for example, between uncertainties in Thist and TnonCO2. This could be achieved by developing methods that allow a more reliable estimate of historical human-induced warming. It is also clear that less complex climate models are useful to further reduce the uncertainties of climate models, and hence the carbon budget. Currently, each factor of the framework presented by yhr researchers has its own uncertainties, and there is no method to formally combine them.

At Frontis Energy, too, we think that progress in these areas would improve our understanding of the estimates of our carbon budget. A systematic understanding of the carbon budget and is crucial for effectively addressing global warming challenges.

Posted on

Melting ice sheets in Greenland contribute 25% to sea level rise

Recently we reported the loss of snow cover in Europe. The snow is not only gone in many parts of Europe, also Greenland’s ice cover is melting. The Greenland ice sheet contributes 25% to global sea-level rise. This makes it the largest contribution of the cryosphere. The increased mass loss of Greenland ice during the 21st century is mainly due to the increased surface water runoff, of which ~93% come directly from the small ablation zone of the ice sheet (~22% of the ice surface). As the snow melts in the summer, bare glacier ice is more exposed in this ablation zone. Naked ice is darker and less porous than snow. It absorbs more than twice the solar radiation while also holding back less meltwater. Smooth ice produces a large proportion (~78%) of the total outflow of Greenland into the sea, although in summer only a small area of ​​the ice is exposed. Accurately capturing the reduced albedo and the full extent of bare ice in climate models is critical to determining Greenland’s present and future runoff contribution to sea-level rise.

The mass loss of the Greenland ice sheet has recently increased due to the accelerated melting of its surface. As this melting is critically affected by surface albedo, understanding the processes and potential feedbacks regardinng the albedo is required for accurately forecasting mass loss. The resulting radiation variability of the ablation zone caused the ice layer to melt five times faster compared with hydrological and biological processes, which also darken the ice sheet. Variations in the snow limits due to the shallower ice layer at higher altitudes have an even greater impact on melt when the climate is warmer. As a result of these fluctuations, the mapped ice surface during the summer of 2012, the record year of snowmelt, was the largest and had an area of 300,050 km2. That is, bare ice accounted for 16% of the ice surface. The smallest extent of bare ice was 184,660 km2 and was observed in 2006. This corresponded to 10% of the ice surface, i.e. almost 40% less area than in 2012. However, the observed snowpack variation was high and the observation period was too short for a solid trend assessment.

Current climate models are too inaccurate in predicting the sea level rise during flood years, leading to uncertainty in the estimation of Greenland’s contribution to global sea level rise. To understand the factors that influence melting, Jonathan Ryan of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, and his colleagues have investigated Greenland’s snow line. At altitudes below the snow line, the darker ice is not covered by snow. This snow line moves up or down during Greenland’s seasons. The researchers mapped these movements between 2001 and 2017 using satellite images. The average height of the snow line at the end of the summer in 2009 was between 1,330 m and then 1,650 m in 2012. The fluctuations in the snow line are the most important factor when it comes to how much solar energy the ice sheet absorbs. Modelers must consider this effect to improve their predictions. Knowing how much and how fast the Greenland ice melts will help us to take better protective measures. At Frontis Energy, we think that the best protection against sea-level rise is the prevention and recycling of CO2.

(Photo: Wikipedia)

Posted on

Economic losses caused by flooding due to global warming

In Europe, floods are linked to high fluctuations of atmospheric pressure. These variations are also known as the North Atlantic Oscillation. Stefan Zanardo and his colleagues at Risk Management Solutions, London, UK, analyzed historical records of severe floodings in Europe since 1870. They compared patterns of atmospheric pressure at the time of the floods. When the North Atlantic Oscillation is in a positive state, a depression over Iceland drives wind and storm throughout northern Europe. In a negative state, however, it makes southern Europe moister than usual. Normally, floods occur in northern Europe. They cause the most damage if the North Atlantic Oscillation was positive in winter. If enough rain has already fallen to saturate the soil, high risk conditions for flooding are met. Air pressure in Europe may change with global warming and public administrations should take this into account when assessing flood risk in a region, the researchers say.

This is important because flooding in Europe often causes loss of life, significant property damage , and business interruptions. Global warming will further worsen this situation. Risk distribution will change as well. The frequent occurrence of catastrophic flooding in recent years has sparked strong interest in this problem in both the public and private sectors. The public sector has been working to improve early warning systems. In fact, these early warning systems have economic benefits. In addition, various risk mitigating strategies have been implemented in European countries. These include flood protection, measures to increase risk awareness, and risk transfer through better dissemination of flood insurance. The fight against the root cause, global warming that is, however, is still far behind to what is needed.

Correlations between large-scale climate patterns, and in particular the North Atlantic Oscillation, and extreme events in the water cycle on the European continent have long been described in the literature. With with more severe and more often flooding as well as alarming global warming scenarios, raising concerns over future flood-related economic losses have become the focus of public attention. Although it is known that climatic patterns also control meteorological events, it is not always clear whether this link will affect the frequency and severeness fo flooding and the associated economic losses. In their study, the researchers relate the North Atlantic Oscillation to economic flood losses.

The researchers used recent data from flood databases as well as disaster models to establish this relation. The models allowed the quantification of the economic losses that ultimately caused by the North Atlantic Oscillation. These losses vary widely between the countries within the influence of the North Atlantic Oscillation. The study shows that the North Atlantic Oscillation can well predict the average losses in the long term. Based on the predictability of the North Atlantic Oscillation, the researchers argue that, in particular, the temporal variations of the flood risks caused by climate oscillations can be forecast. This can help to take encounter catastrophic flood events early on. As a result, flood damage can be minimized or even avoided. As scientists improve their predictions for the North Atlantic Oscillation, society will be better prepared for future flooding.

(Photo: Wikipedia, Stefan Penninger, Sweden)

Posted on

White Christmas, going … gone

In Germany, we seem to remember White Christmas from fairy tales only. Now there is also scientific evidence that winter snow cover in Europe is thinning. Thanks to global warming, the snow cover decrease accelerated

The research group behind Dr. Fontrodona Bach of the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute in De Bilt analyzed snow cover and climate data from six decades from thousands of weather stations across Europe. The researchers found that the mean snow depth, with the exception of some local extremely cold spots, has been decreasing since 1951 at 12% per decade. The researchers recently published their research results in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. The amount of “extreme” snow cover affecting local infrastructure has declined more slowly.

The observed decline, which accelerated after the 80s, is the result of a combination of rising temperatures and the impact of climate change on precipitation. The decreasing snow cover can reduce the availability of fresh water during the spring melt, the authors noted.

(Photo: Doris Wulf)

Posted on

You Can Have the Pie and Eat It

In Paris, humanity has set itself the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 °C. Most people believe that this will be accompanied by significant sacrifice of quality of life. That is one reason why climate protection is simply rejected by many people, even to the point of outright denial. At Frontis Energy, we think we can protect the climate and live better. The latest study published in Nature Energy by a research group around Arnulf Grubler of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Laxenburg, Austria, has now shown that we have good reasons.

The team used computer models to explore the potential of technological trends to reduce energy consumption. Among other things, the researchers said that the use of shared car services will increase and that fossil fuels will give way to solar energy and other forms of renewable energy. Their results show that global energy consumption would decrease by about 40% regardless of population, income, and economic growth. Air pollution and demand for biofuels would also decrease, which would improve health and food supplies.

In contrast to many previous assessments, the group’s findings suggest that humans can limit the temperature rise to 1.5 °C above preindustrial levels without resorting to drastic strategies to extract CO2 from the atmosphere later in the century.

Now, one can argue whether shared car services do not cut quality of life. Nevertheless, we think that individual mobility can be maintained while protecting our climate. CO2 recovery for the production of fuels (CO2 recycling that is) is such a possibility. The Power-to-Gas technology is the most advanced version of CO2 recycling and should certainly be considered in future studies. An example of such an assessment of the power-to-gas technology was published by a Swiss research group headed by Frédéric Meylan, who found that the carbon footprint can be neutralized with conventional technology after just a few cycles.

(Picture: Pieter Bruegel the Elder, The Land of Cockaigne, Wikipedia)

Posted on

The Photosynthetic CO2 Race − Plants vs. Algae

Algae store CO2 but also release it. Some of us may know that. However, so far it was unknown that algae may release additional CO2 due to global warming. That’s what researcher Chao Song and his colleagues of the University of Georgia in Athens, GA, found out.

As they published in the journal Nature Geoscience, the metabolism of algae and other microbes is accelerated by higher water temperatures in large streams. This could lead to some rivers releasing more CO2 than they do now. This could, in turn, further accelerate global warming. Although photosynthesis in algae would accelerate, plants along the river banks would be even faster. Decomposition of the plant material would immediately release the so fixed CO2. With extra nutrients from plants, competing microorganisms would overgrow the river algae or the algae would degrade the plant material themselves.

To calculate the CO2 net effect, scientists monitored temperature, dissolved oxygen, and other parameters in 70 rivers worldwide. Then they used their data for computer models. These models suggest that over time, accelerated photosynthesis in some rivers may not keep pace with plant growth. This net increase of 24% of the CO2 released from rivers could mean an additional global temperature increase of 1 °C.

However, the computer model still lacks some data. For example, the sedimentation rates are not taken into account. In addition, not all banks grow plants. Many rivers pass only sparsely vegetated land. As always, more research is needed to get better answers.

(Photo: Wikipedia)