Dear Philip, Thank you for your suggestion. I hope that Martin can confirm whether it would be useful to add the sentence about the mass to the definitions. Personally, I think that it would be a useful clarification.
Best wishes, Alison ------ Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065 NCAS/British Atmospheric Data Centre Email: [email protected] STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory R25, 2.22 Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K. > -----Original Message----- > From: Cameron-smith, Philip [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 06 July 2012 18:12 > To: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP); [email protected]; cf- > [email protected] > Subject: RE: Re: [CF-metadata] Warming up old stuff - 4 (emissions) > > Hi All, > > There are endless ways to slice, dice, and combine emission categories. > In practice, Martin's proposal is about as good as it gets, and > although there is the theoretical possibility for massive numbers of > std_names, I think in practice it will be large but manageable. > > The most important thing with emissions is to know clearly what is and > isn't included, and these descriptions are better than others I have > had to work with. > > I therefore support these std_names, with one recommendation: > > One common source of confusion for emissions is what the mass refers > to. It is common to find emissions quantified by the 'main' element > rather than the whole molecule (eg emissions of carbon rather than > carbon dioxide). To avoid such confusion, I recommend we add a > sentence to each description saying 'The mass is the total mass of the > molecules'. > > Note that if people want to specify the emissions by an element mass > only, then we already have a natural way to extend these std_names > using '_expressed_as_'. > > Best wishes, > > Philip > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > Dr Philip Cameron-Smith, [email protected], Lawrence Livermore National Lab. > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: CF-metadata [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > > Of [email protected] > > Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 3:01 AM > > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Warming up old stuff - 4 (emissions) > > > > Dear Martin, All, > > > > Martin Schultz proposed a set of emission names about 12 months ago > and > > there has been some sporadic discussion since. I would like to draw > this > > discussion to a conclusion so that we are in a position to include > these > > quantities, which are clearly of fundamental importance to the > climate > > community, in the standard name table. > > > > To summarize the situation so far: there has been discussion of the > syntax of > > the names and I think that we quite quickly reached a consensus on > > tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_X_due_to_emission_from_Y > > (kg m-2 s-1) where X is the chemical species and Y is the emission > sector. I > > think also that there is no problem about the chemical species names > that > > have been proposed. The remaining question is therefore one of > describing > > and defining the emissions sectors and Martin has provided references > to > > IPCC documentation describing "source categories". Steven Smith and > > Gregory Frost supported the proposals for the sectors; Heiko Klein > suggested > > that they are too tied to IPCC and that a more general list of > sectors would be > > desirable. Martin replied that there is scope for future activity in > developing > > an emissions vocabulary, but it seems as though that work that is > still very > > much in progress. Martin (off list) has also expressed the view that > there are > > currently only two can didates for describing emissions sectors: > IPCC and > > something called 'SNAP'. Apparently the two definitions overlap, but > are not > > identical. Martin's proposal follows the recommendations of GEIA (the > Global > > emissions inventory activity). There have not been any other comments > on > > this set of proposals since 10th March. > > > > First a reminder of the proposed emission categories (twelve in all), > followed > > by my suggestion for how we should proceed. > > > > > > > tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_X_due_to_emission_from_e > > nergy_p > > > roduction_and_distribution > > > Definition: The 'energy production and distribution' sector refers > to > > > the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) source > categories > > > 1A1 and 1B as defined in the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national > > > greenhouse gas inventories. It comprises fuel combustion activities > > > related to energy industries (1A1) and fugitive emissions from > fuels > > > (1B). It may also include any not-classified or "other" combustion, > > > which is commonly included in energy-related inventory data. > > > > > > > tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_X_due_to_emission_from_in > > dustri > > > al_processes_and_combustion > > > Definition: The 'industrial processes and combustion' sector refers > to > > > the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) source > categories > > > 1A2, 2A, 2B, 2C, 2D and 2E as defined in the 2006 IPCC guidelines > for > > > national greenhouse gas inventories. It comprises fuel combustion > > > activities related to manufacturing industries and construction > (1A2) > > > and industrial processes related to the mineral products (2A), the > > > chemical industry (2B), the metal production (2C), the pulp, paper, > > > food and drink production (2D), and non-energy use of > lubricants/waxes > > > (2G). It may also include any not-classified or "other" combustion, > > > which is commonly included in industry-related inventory data. > > > > > > > tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_X_due_to_emission_from_re > > sident > > > ial_and_commercial_combustion > > > Definition: The 'residential and commercial combustion' sector > refers > > > to the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) source > > > category > > > 1A4 as defined in the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse > gas > > > inventories. It comprises fuel combustion activities related to the > > > commercial/institutional sector (1A4a), the residential sector > (1A4b) > > > and the agriculture/forestry/fishing sector (1A4c). It may also > > > include any not-classified or "other" combustion, which is commonly > > > included in the inventory data. > > > > > > > tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_X_due_to_emission_from_so > > lvent_ > > > production_and_use > > > Definition: The 'solvent production and use' sector refers to the > IPCC > > > (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) source categories 2F > and 3 > > > as defined in the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas > > > inventories. It comprises industrial processes related to the > > > consumption of halocarbons and SF6 (2F) and solvent and other > product > > > use (3). > > > > > > > tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_X_due_to_emission_from_ag > > ricult > > > ural_production > > > Definition: The 'agricultural production' sector refers to the IPCC > > > (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) source categories 4A, > 4B, > > > 4C, 4D and 4G as defined in the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national > > > greenhouse gas inventories. It comprises the agricultural processes > > > enteric fermentation (4A), manure management (4B), rice cultivation > > > (4C), agricultural soils (4D) and other (4G). It may also include > any > > > not-classified or "other" combustion, which is commonly included in > > > industry-related inventory data. > > > > > > > tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_X_due_to_emission_from_ag > > ricult > > > ural_waste_burning > > > Definition: The 'agricultural waste burning' sector refers to the > IPCC > > > (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) source category 4F as > > > defined in the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas > > > inventories. It comprises field burning of agricultural residues > (4F). > > > > > > > tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_X_due_to_emission_from_w > > aste_tr > > > eatment_and_disposal > > > Definition: The 'waste treatment and disposal' sector refers to the > > > IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) source category 6 > as > > > defined in the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas > > > inventories. It comprises solid waste disposal on land (6A), > > > wastewater handling (6B), waste incineration (6C) and other (6D). > > > > > > > tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_X_due_to_emission_from_fo > > rest_f > > > ires > > > Definition: The 'forest fires' sector refers to the IPCC > > > (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) source category 5 as > > > defined in the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas > > > inventories. It comprises the burning of living or dead vegetation > in > > > forests (natural and human-induced). > > > > > > > tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_X_due_to_emission_from_sa > > vanna_ > > > and_grassland_fires > > > Definition: The 'savanna and grassland fires' sector refers to the > > > IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) source category 5 > as > > > defined in the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas > > > inventories. It comprises the burning of living or dead vegetation > in > > > non-forested areas (natural and human-induced). It excludes field > > > burning of agricultural residues (source category 4F). > > > > > > > tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_X_due_to_emission_from_la > > nd_tra > > > nsport > > > Definition: The 'land transport' sector refers to the IPCC > > > (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) source categories 1A3b, > > > 1A3c and 1A3e as defined in the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national > > > greenhouse gas inventories. It includes fuel combustion activities > > > related to road transportation (1A3B), railways (1A3c) and other > > > transportation (1A3e). > > > > > > > tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_X_due_to_emission_from_m > > aritime > > > _transport > > > Definition: The 'maritime transport' sector refers to the IPCC > > > (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) source category 1A3d as > > > defined in the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas > > > inventories. It includes fuel combustion activities related to > > > maritime transport (1A3d). > > > > > > > tendency_of_mass_concentration_of_X_in_air_due_to_emission_from_avi > > ati > > > on > > > Definition: The 'aviation' sector refers to the IPCC > > > (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) source category 1A3a as > > > defined in the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas > > > inventories. It includes fuel combustion activities related to > civil > > > aviation (1A3a). > > > > Clearly each proposed name involves a grouping together of a 'basket' > of > > processes and doubtless different combinations could be chosen than > those > > arrived at by the IPCC. For example, one could imagine a dataset that > > combined 'land_transport' and 'maritime_transport' into a > > 'surface_transport' category. Equally, one could imagine a dataset > that > > subdivided the emissions into more categories than the IPCC process, > e.g., > > 'extraction_and_distribution_of_natural_gas', > > 'extraction_and_refinement_of_crude_oil', and so on. The current > proposals > > would certainly not prevent us from introducing such names for > broader or > > narrower categories if they were required in the future. Equally they > would > > not prevent us from introducing names for categories that overlap two > or > > more of the current proposals, e.g., > > 'commercial_and_industrial_combustion'. In all these cases we would > be > > able to construct meaningful standard names that would allow data > users to > > answer the question of whether two quanti ties are comparable (the > central > > purpose of standard names). Furthermore, it seems unlikely, based on > the > > discussion so far in this thread, that we could design a set of > standard names > > now that will definitively describe all possible categories and > combinations of > > emissions that will be needed for datasets in the future. Therefore I > think > > that we should accept Martin's proposals while recognizing that we > will > > almost certainly need to introduce new standard names for emissions > as new > > datasets become available. > > > > I wonder, however, whether we could generalize the definitions a > little so > > that the proposed names could be used for variables containing both > IPCC- > > like and other data that fall into broadly the same categories. I > think we could > > achieve this by using the wording that Martin has provided and > > recommending that additional metadata be provided as to exactly which > > processes are included in a particular dataset (in the same way that > we ask > > for extra detail when using group chemical names such as 'alkanes'). > For > > example, Martin proposes > > > > > > > tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_X_due_to_emission_from_e > > nergy_p > > > roduction_and_distribution > > > Definition: The 'energy production and distribution' sector refers > to > > > the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) source > categories > > > 1A1 and 1B as defined in the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national > > > greenhouse gas inventories. It comprises fuel combustion activities > > > related to energy industries (1A1) and fugitive emissions from > fuels > > > (1B). It may also include any not-classified or "other" combustion, > > > which is commonly included in energy-related inventory data. > > > > Perhaps we could adjust this to: 'The "energy production and > distribution" > > sector comprises fuel combustion activities related to energy > industries and > > fugitive emissions from fuels. It may also include any not-classified > or "other" > > combustion, which is commonly included in energy-related inventory > data. > > "Energy production and distribution" is the term used in standard > names to > > describe a collection of emission sources. Where possible, the data > variable > > should be accompanied by a complete description of the individual > sources > > that are included, for example, by using a comment attribute. The > comment > > attribute could be a list of sources or a reference such as "IPCC > > (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) source categories > > 1A1 and 1B as defined in the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national > greenhouse > > gas inventories".' > > > > Would this be an acceptable way forward? If anyone thinks we should > take a > > much different approach to dealing with the emissions standard names, > > please can I ask for specific suggestions rather than general > comments as we > > do need to make progress on finalising these quantities. > > > > Best wishes, > > Alison > > > > ------ > > Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065 > > NCAS/British Atmospheric Data Centre Email: > [email protected] > > STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory > > R25, 2.22 > > Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K. > > > > > > -- > > Scanned by iCritical. > > _______________________________________________ > > CF-metadata mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata -- Scanned by iCritical. _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
