Please note the ability of Italy in being not green and neither cheaper

That's a particularly large difference for advanced cookstoves.

"for example, an average of 8.9 g/kgfuel (field) compared to 5.2 g/kgfuel (lab) for traditional cookstoves and 4.0 g/kgfuel (field) compared to 1.3 g/kgfuel (lab) for advanced cookstoves"

But it would be similar for
electric generation since the largest part of electricity is coal.

The most parsimonious solution is to get carbon monitor to use this. Seems like they should

Gridded emissions out to 2023 are already up at ESGF. note that a user found a discontinuity in the seasonal cycle for 2023. So we are replacing the data to fix that. Other years are not impacted.

Change in Hydro looks to be about the right magnitude to offset the seasonal change in goal.

Note that renewables are about the same order of magnitude Hydro, and will also have seasonal patterns.

Yes, we could use that. There is seasonality in latest CEDS, but it’s small and inconsistent from year to year.

I note that the signal you show not that large. That might be overwhelmed by seasonality in atmospheric chemistry and transport.

But still worth improving the emissions, of course.

I haven’t noticed anything missing from EIA. Any specifics.

2/2 so it’s really about truth in marketing and accountability - which is not generally present.

The culture tends to perpetuate that the academic route is the only true “success”, and that’s a problem.

That doesn’t excuse the overuse of postdocs as cheap labor with no stable career path.

1/2 This “leave academia“ or even “leave science” wording is counterproductive.

The system is set up to overproduce postdocs, the incentives for that haven’t changed. So this shouldn’t surprise anyone.

It’s not ness a bad thing if not all are doing research, PhD’s are useful in other places.

Sorry to hear this very sad news.

Read the full paper here: www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adt5665

Thanks to my stellar coauthors on this collaborative effort!

@aafawcett.bsky.social @jessedjenkins.com @nicholasroy.me @aliciaszhao.bsky.social @rff.org @ctrglobsust.bsky.social @nrdc.org @andlingercenter.bsky.social

He’s talking about a different sort of aerosols - small particles in the atmosphere (such as formed by sulfur dioxide emissions ) that reflect sunlight back into space.

Our paper last year demonstrating the importance of the assumed SO2 injection height.
egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/20...

Note that, particularly for industrial (not power plant) sources, the emission height will vary even more widely - from substantial emissions at the surface to emissions from some sources that loft higher than power plants. This will also vary by emission species.

The community needs to consider how emission height information should be provided to modelers.

While models can't incorporate this new information in time for CMIP7 fast track simulations, the implications of this new information should be evaluated in parallel.

While the weighted average regional height distribution varies somewhat by region, the emissions height is higher than the AeroCOM assumptions used by many modelers.