Indicate separate contributions of long-lived and short-lived greenhouse gases in emission targets

Does 'net zero' mean zero cows?

A significant share of anthropogenic global warming comes from livestock production. There is debate about whether there can be any role for livestock in a climatically sustainable future; the debate is particularly heated for cows and sheep, largely due to the methane they burp out. However, short-lived gases like methane affect climate in a fundamentally different way than long-lived gases like carbon dioxide. Consequently, climate stabilization does not require zeroing-out cattle herds. But this doesn't mean we can eat our beef and have it (a tolerable climate) too-livestock still contribute to global warming. Preventing or limiting future growth in livestock-related emissions can represent a sensible part of the portfolio of responses to the climate crisis, particularly when carbon dioxide emissions are not on track to reach net zero sufficiently quickly.

The impact of environmental tournament on CO2 emissions from the perspective of synergizing the reduction of pollution and carbon emissions

Synergizing the reduction of pollution and carbon emissions is the essential way for the construction of ecological civilization in the new era. Based on the panel data of 278 Chinese cities from 2006 to 2020, we study the effect of environmental tournament on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. The results show that environmental tournaments have both effectiveness and limitations. The effectiveness is reflected in the fact that the environmental tournament is beneficial for the reduction of the pollution and CO2 emissions, and possesses a long-term effect. Green technology innovation, official promotion and foreign investment are identified as the main channels of influence. Moreover, the carbon reduction of the environmental tournament involves a positive spatial spillover effect, which means that the CO2 reduction can be radiated to the neighboring areas. However, environmental tournaments also have limitations. The results of the environmental tournament in the last year could bring pressure on cities to reduce pollution in the current year. The present study reveals a positive U-shaped relationship between the pollution reduction pressure and CO2 emissions. The pressure is beneficial to CO2 emissions reduction as the pollution reduction pressure is less than the extreme point; otherwise, CO2 emissions increase. The government's environmental attention strengthens the internal motivation of local participation in the environmental championship through policy orientation, and alleviates the negative impact caused by the limited nature of the environmental championship. The results of this study provide new ideas for improving China's environmental governance policy system and improving the governance efficiency of local governments.

Blue and green ammonia production: A techno-economic and life cycle assessment perspective

Blue and green ammonia production have been proposed as low-carbon alternatives to emissions-intensive conventional ammonia production. Although much attention has been given to comparing these alternatives, it is still not clear which process has better environmental and economic performance. We present a techno-economic analysis and full life cycle assessment to compare the economics and environmental impacts of blue and green ammonia production. We address the importance of time horizon in climate change impact comparisons by employing the Technology Warming Potential, showing that methane leakage can exacerbate the climate change impacts of blue ammonia in short time horizons. We represent a constrained renewable electricity availability scenario by comparing the climate change impact mitigation efficiency per kWh of renewable electricity. Our work emphasizes the importance of maintaining low natural gas leakage for sustainability of blue ammonia, and the potential for technological advances to further reduce the environmental impacts of photovoltaics-based green ammonia.

Improvement of Lithium-Sulfur Battery Performance by Porous Carbon Selection and LiFSI/DME Electrolyte Optimization

High-concentration lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide/1,2-dimethoxyethane (LiFSI/DME) electrolytes are promising candidates for highly reversible lithium-metal anodes. However, the performance of lithium-sulfur (Li-S) batteries with a high concentration of LiFSI/DME declines because LiFSI reacts irreversibly with lithium polysulfide, which is formed during the charge-discharge process of Li-S batteries. Hence, to apply high-concentration LiFSI/DME to Li-S batteries, we investigated carbon with an appropriate pore size for use in a sulfur composite cathode and optimized the composition of high-concentration LiFSI/DME. The results showed that the combination of carbon with mesopores of 2-3 nm diameter and 3 M LiFSI in DME/1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl 2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropylether (HFE) (1:1 by vol.) provided a high-rate capability (943 mA h g-1 at a rate of 2 C). Moreover, the ratio of the 50th discharge capacity to the 2nd discharge capacity (capacity retention) improved from 50.0 to 61.6% with HFE dilution of high-concentration LiFSI/DME. The improved performance was achieved by suppressing the dissolution of lithium polysulfide, decreasing the viscosity of the electrolyte, and forming a thin solid electrolyte interface on the lithium-metal anode due to HFE dilution.

Are single global warming potential impact assessments adequate for carbon footprints of agri-food systems?

The vast majority of agri-food climate-based sustainability analyses use global warming potential (GWP100) as an impact assessment, usually in isolation; however, in recent years, discussions have criticised the 'across-the-board' application of GWP100 in Life Cycle Assessments (LCAs), particularly of food systems which generate large amounts of methane (CH4) and considered whether reporting additional and/or alternative metrics may be more applicable to certain circumstances or research questions (e.g. Global Temperature Change Potential (GTP)). This paper reports a largescale sensitivity analysis using a pasture-based beef production system (a high producer of CH4 emissions) as an exemplar to compare various climatatic impact assessments: CO2-equivalents using GWP100 and GTP100, and 'CO2-warming-equivalents' using 'GWP Star', or GWP*. The inventory for this system was compiled using data from the UK Research and Innovation National Capability, the North Wyke Farm Platform, in Devon, SW England. LCAs can have an important bearing on: (i) policymakers' decisions; (ii) farmer management decisions; (iii) consumers' purchasing habits; and (iv) wider perceptions of whether certain activities can be considered 'sustainable' or not; it is, therefore, the responsibility of LCA practitioners and scientists to ensure that subjective decisions are tested as robustly as possible through appropriate sensitivity and uncertainty analyses. We demonstrate herein that the choice of climate impact assessment has dramatic effects on interpretation, with GWP100 and GTP100 producing substantially different results due to their different treatments of CH4 in the context of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalents. Given its dynamic nature and previously proven strong correspondence with climate models, out of the three assessments covered, GWP* provides the most complete coverage of the temporal evolution of temperature change for different greenhouse gas emissions. We extend previous discussions on the limitations of static emission metrics and encourage LCA practitioners to consider due care and attention where additional information or dynamic approaches may prove superior, scientifically speaking, particularly in cases of decision support.

Mitigating climate disruption in time: A self-consistent approach for avoiding both near-term and long-term global warming

This study clarifies the need for comprehensive CO₂ and non-CO₂ mitigation approaches to address both near-term and long-term warming. Non-CO₂ greenhouse gases (GHGs) are responsible for nearly half of all climate forcing from GHG. However, the importance of non-CO₂ pollutants, in particular short-lived climate pollutants, in climate mitigation has been underrepresented. When historical emissions are partitioned into fossil fuel (FF)- and non-FF-related sources, we find that nearly half of the positive forcing from FF and land-use change sources of CO₂ emissions has been masked by coemission of cooling aerosols. Pairing decarbonization with mitigation measures targeting non-CO₂ pollutants is essential for limiting not only the near-term (next 25 y) warming but also the 2100 warming below 2 °C.

The ongoing and projected impacts from human-induced climate change highlight the need for mitigation approaches to limit warming in both the near term (<2050) and the long term (>2050). We clarify the role of non-CO₂ greenhouse gases and aerosols in the context of near-term and long-term climate mitigation, as well as the net effect of decarbonization strategies targeting fossil fuel (FF) phaseout by 2050. Relying on Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change radiative forcing, we show that the net historical (2019 to 1750) radiative forcing effect of CO₂ and non-CO₂ climate forcers emitted by FF sources plus the CO₂ emitted by land-use changes is comparable to the net from non-CO₂ climate forcers emitted by non-FF sources. We find that mitigation measures that target only decarbonization are essential for strong long-term cooling but can result in weak near-term warming (due to unmasking the cooling effect of coemitted aerosols) and lead to temperatures exceeding 2 °C before 2050. In contrast, pairing decarbonization with additional mitigation measures targeting short-lived climate pollutants and N₂O, slows the rate of warming a decade or two earlier than decarbonization alone and avoids the 2 °C threshold altogether. These non-CO₂ targeted measures when combined with decarbonization can provide net cooling by 2030 and reduce the rate of warming from 2030 to 2050 by about 50%, roughly half of which comes from methane, significantly larger than decarbonization alone over this time frame. Our analysis demonstrates the need for a comprehensive CO₂ and targeted non-CO₂ mitigation approach to address both the near-term and long-term impacts of climate disruption.