I wonder what sort of reactions will occur when the CO2 police come knocking on individual doors saying “you need to turn off your heater, you are killing the planet”? A video follows.
From Arizona State University:
Study maps greenhouse gas emissions to building, street level for US cities
Project to help overcome barriers to an international climate change treaty
TEMPE, Ariz. – Arizona State University researchers have developed a new software system capable of estimating greenhouse gas emissions across entire urban landscapes, all the way down to roads and individual buildings. Until now, scientists quantified carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions at a much broader level.
Dubbed “Hestia” after the Greek goddess of the hearth and home, researchers presented the new system in an article published October 9 in Environmental Science and Technology. Hestia combines extensive public database “data-mining” with traffic simulation and building-by-building energy-consumption modeling. Its high-resolution maps clearly identify CO2 emission sources in a way that policy-makers can utilize and the public can understand.
“Cities have had little information with which to guide reductions in greenhouse gas emissions – and you can’t reduce what you can’t measure,” said Kevin Gurney, an associate professor in ASU’s School of Life Sciences, and senior scientist with the Global Institute of Sustainability. “With Hestia, we can provide cities with a complete, three-dimensional picture of where, when and how carbon dioxide emissions are occurring.”
The research team collected data from a wide variety of sources such as local air pollution reports, traffic counts, and tax assessor parcel information. The data is then combined within a modeling system for quantifying CO2 emissions at the level of individual buildings and street segments.
So far, scientists have applied Hestia to the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, and work is ongoing for the cities of Los Angeles, California and Phoenix, Arizona. They hope to ultimately map the CO2 emissions in all major cities across the United States, which accounts for nearly one-quarter of all global CO2 emissions. The Hestia research team believes this type of detailed emissions information can help determine what we as a society, can do locally and globally about climate change.
“As a community, we must take a leadership role in sustaining our relationship with the environment,” said ASU President Michael M. Crow. “This research, and its implications for global engagement regarding climate change, is an exciting step forward. Hestia gives us the next tool we need to help policy-makers create effective greenhouse gas legislation.”
“These results may also help overcome current barriers to the United States joining an international climate change treaty,” agreed Gurney, Hestia’s lead scientist. “Many countries are unwilling to sign a treaty when greenhouse gas emission reductions cannot be independently verified.”
According to researchers, Hestia’s increased detail and accuracy will help cities, and possibly even other nations, identify where an investment in energy and greenhouse gas savings would have the greatest impact.
“Leading in sustainability is not easy; however, as Mayor, I am committed to doing so,” Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton said. “Undoubtedly, Hestia will be a good tool to help us make more informed decisions as leaders in Phoenix and the Valley around issues of air quality, health and a sustainable future.”
Although climate change presents society with tough challenges, Gurney believes this new system enables concrete, positive steps towards mitigating the problem.
“Hestia offers practical information we can use to identify the most cost-effective ways to reduce emissions and track progress over time,” Gurney said. “Scientists have spent decades describing the seriousness of climate change. Now, we are offering practical information to help do something about it.”
Purdue Showalter Trust, Knauf Insulation, and the National Institute for Standards and Technology funded the three-year Hestia project, which involved researchers Bedrich Benes and Michael Abdul-Massih from Purdue’s University Department of Computer Graphics and Technology.
Note:
Hestia is part of a larger effort that combines information about emissions with ground and satellite-based measurements of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration. It is now part of the INFLUX experiment in Indianapolis and is expected to complement NASA’s planned December 2013 launch of the Orbital Carbon Observatory satellite, which will measure the concentration of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere.
ASU’s School of Life Sciences is an academic unit of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences.
===================================================
“… developed a new software system capable of estimating greenhouse gas emissions …”
“Software” “estimating” … this feels like yet another model
No, they have an estimate created using a model. Presumably, the input will include your height, weight, BMI, daily activity level and what you had for lunch.
So, folks, are you saying either there is no global warming or there is, but it’s not a serious issue? There are some things as a society we have to tackle as a society; issues so pervasive individuals alone can not solve them. Global warming, whether you like it or not, seems to be one of them. I am not about to believe I am smarter that hundreds of the finest scientists in the world that say global warming exists, it is alarming and they give factual, physics to back it up.
Let’s fix that headline:
“New technology enables dancing Angel tracking down to the level of a pin’s head.”
1) Identify biggest CO2 emitter
2) Regulate them out of existence.
We don’t have the fancy software here in Germany. We just jack up the electricity rate. Works like a charm.
First aluminum smelters closing. Who’s stupid enough to try to make Aluminum in Germany anyway.
Looks to me like they count emissions twice – once in the power plant when energy is generated, once when that energy is used to heat and operate buildings.
They’re reading the power meters and estimating the CO2 needed to create that power. In the case of Arizona that is probably coming from the Colorado River dams and power plants.
The original dp
CREEPY…. I mean
C-R-E-E-P-Y
Next they will have plot of individuals exhaling… real time….
What i get from the article is that instead of measuring the co2 they are going to get other data and model the co2. I guess that make sense in a alternative universe
“you can’t reduce what you can’t measure”
You can tax what you can estimate, even if it can’t be measured.
“Leading in sustainability is not easy”
Sustainability is not sustainable.
‘Hestia’ (or seomthing very much like it!) is the modeling platform that will be used by governments, from the national level down to city/county local levels, to assess and collect ‘CO2 emissions’ taxes. Bet on it.
MtK
They are missing the important half of a concentration plume model. where and how fast are those emissions sucked up by clouds, soil, vegetation, concrete, and bodies of water? A city plume quickly diffuses to “background levels” indicating most emissions never get very far. The idea that these sinks get saturated and raises the background level is the backbone of the AGW arguement. I don’t think so. The background level has risen and fallen for millions of years.
Noticed they got a grant from NASA. Is NASA part of ICLEI now, monitoring greenhouse gas emissions? You are right, saneromeo, when you said, “agenda 21 anyone?”
Maybe they can measure the CO2 emissions from my 12 gauge. Yeah, stick that probe in that big hole – see what’s in there 😉
Better hope Barry Soetoro AKA Barack Hussein Obama does not win another term or the CO2 police will be knocking on your door.
“Ride your bicycle to work, and don’t breathe too hard while you do it”
City Planner; I have good news Mr Mayor, and bad news.
Mr Mayor; Well, what’s the good newds?
City Planner; We’ve met all our goals for reducing CO2 emissions in the city.
Mr Mayor; That’s great!
City Planner; Yup, once we shut down all the major highways, the airports, the factories, the warehouses, the trucking companies and the office towers, we met our goals and then some.
Mr. Mayor; Fantastic! I knew the plan would work. We’ll be the greenest city in the nation.
City Planner; There’s some bad news as well sir….
Mr Mayor; Nothing can ruin my day now, get on with it, what’s the bad news?
City Planner; Itz just the two of us now sir.
Mr Mayor; Just the two of us?
City Planner; Yes sir. Everyone else moved. Seems they prefer cities with jobs, goods and services, food on the store shelves, and things like that. Who knew? Anyway, like I said, itz just the two of us and I’m leaving too. So…. that leaves you to shut off the lights on your way out of town.
Did I miss something? Where was it described how CO2 is actually measured? Just because you can calculate a number to 6 decimal places does not make in a measurement.
I’m betting that “local air pollution reports” are themselves estimated to a significant degree.
You know what would stop all this nonsense cold? Allow people who claim they suffered damages due to inaccurate CO2 attribution to qualify for class-action status lawsuits against the developers and sellers of these kind of decision support systems. The only way this garbage becomes reality is if the people pushing it are completely insulated from liability.
golfnewsmag says:
October 9, 2012 at 12:09 pm
and they give factual, physics to back it up.
—
That would be a first. When pray tell did they do this. To date they have nothing but highly flawed models to back up their belief system.
Read the post, picked out ” … estimating greenhouse gas emissions across entire urban landscapes” “modeling system for quantifying CO2 emissions” … Then Gurney says ” .. you can’t reduce what you can’t measure …”. They aren’t actually intending to measure co2. The “data” is apparently coming from b****s**t devices, like the ones you plug in your mains, tells you wot your bigbadcarbonfootprint is. Extraordinary.
Some of us have been using genuine co2 meters for years. One of the simplest ways of monitoring internal air quality, especially in confined construction workplaces where gas welding/soldering etc is taking place.
1% dataloggers start at about $200. Maybe they would learn something if they installed a few in the airflow from natural landscape, eg parks, forestry etc?
Diurnal logs will likely show an 8 – 15% increase in co2 concentration between sunset and sunrise.
Then start adding directional anemometers …
6am here, sun coming up, co2 starting to drop. Ooh – bit of a blip upwards. Breeze coming across from the take-away shop. Independent verification: family dog is looking in that direction and sniffing the air.
others have noted it – I’ll repeat they are ESTIMATING using a MODELwhat the emissions might be. This is not science – it is little more than cartoon animation. They have no idea the occupant loading for commercial buildings and thus cannot make any meaningful estimate of CO2 contribution.
At the very best they can roughly approximate energy use based on square footage of the building. But this too is of marginal benefit at best, as they have no way of knowing the building’s construction, HVAC systems (age, quality, fuel source), or energy efficiency.
You could do a probably better – or at least equal – job simply using Google Earth and writing a visualization based on building footprint and height.
golfnewsmag says:
October 9, 2012 at 12:09 pm
So, folks, are you saying either there is no global warming or there is, but it’s not a serious issue? There are some things as a society we have to tackle as a society; issues so pervasive individuals alone can not solve them. Global warming, whether you like it or not, seems to be one of them. I am not about to believe I am smarter that hundreds of the finest scientists in the world that say global warming exists, it is alarming and they give factual, physics to back it up.
Of course there is global warming. The planet has been warming since the LIA.
It is not a serious issue; global warming is entirely beneficial. And it cannot be ‘solved’ by humans. Further, there is no scientific evidence showing that CO2 causes global warming. It may. But the only empirical evidence available shows that global warming causes increased CO2.
Finally, there are plenty of climatologists who think AGW is something we need not worry about. The planet has been considerably warmer during the current Holocene, with no ill effects. And we have been in a “Goldilocks” climate for the past century and a half: global temperatures have varied only about 0.8ºC. That is extremely stable. At times the planet has warmed and cooled by tens of degrees in a shorter time.
Stick around here for a while, and you will find that you have been spoon-fed a lot of pseudo-scientific nonsense emitted by the climate alarmist crowd.
golfnewsmag says:
October 9, 2012 at 12:09 pm
Stick around a while, check your preconceptions and emotions at the door, and actually LOOK at the “science” involved. It will be difficult at first, as you seem to have gone a along way down the road to global warming. That is ok. Many educated people have been exactly where you are now. Do not take someones word for it. Look for yourself. Ask questions here. You can do that on WUWT? and get reasonable answers and treatment. Invest some time in your opinions. When you find out that much of what you currently believe about man-made global warming is based on VERY tenuous “science”, you will wonder how you ever bought into it in the first place. The closer you look, the more cavernous holes there are. But don’t take my word for it.
There is no physical evidence to back up the claims that this is a serious issue. If they actually had facts to back it up, we wouldn’t need to be discussing this.
The output of models is not data. That applies to this “study” and climate models. In fact, it’s universal. Computer programs do not output data. Models do not output data.
Let me get this straight – they’re just using electricity and fuel usage to come up with these graphics? Is there any ground truth going on? Why not just create an energy tax and leave out the pretty pictures. Public humiliation? Sales pitch?
Ground truth like with remote sensing at CO2 wavelengths. Satellites might not be able to see the cities, but arial sensors should. Perhaps they could contract with Google to add CO2 imagers to the next pass of Google streets. 🙂