In the context of global climate change, geosciences provide an important geological solution to achieve the goal of carbon neutrality, China’s geosciences and geological technologies can play an important role in solving the problem of carbon neutrality. This paper discusses the main problems, opportunities, and challenges that can be solved by the participation of geosciences in carbon neutrality, as well as China’s response to them. The main scientific problems involved and the geological work carried out mainly fall into three categories: (1) Carbon emission reduction technology (natural gas hydrate, geothermal, hot dry rock, nuclear energy, hydropower, wind energy, solar energy, hydrogen energy); (2) carbon sequestration technology (carbon capture and storage, underground space utilization); (3) key minerals needed to support carbon neutralization (raw materials for energy transformation, carbon reduction technology). Therefore, geosciences and geological technologies are needed: First, actively participate in the development of green energy such as natural gas, geothermal energy, hydropower, hot dry rock, and key energy minerals, and develop exploration and exploitation technologies such as geothermal energy and natural gas; the second is to do a good job in geological support for new energy site selection, carry out an in-depth study on geotechnical feasibility and mitigation measures, and form the basis of relevant economic decisions to reduce costs and prevent geological disasters; the third is to develop and coordinate relevant departments of geosciences, organize and carry out strategic research on natural resources, carry out theoretical system research on global climate change and other issues under the guidance of earth system science theory, and coordinate frontier scientific information and advanced technological tools of various disciplines. The goal of carbon neutrality provides new opportunities and challenges for geosciences research. In the future, it is necessary to provide theoretical and technical support from various aspects, enhance the ability of climate adaptation, and support the realization of the goal of carbon peaking and carbon neutrality. 相似文献
Strong and rapid greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions, far beyond those currently committed to, are required to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement. This allows no sector to maintain business as usual practices, while application of the precautionary principle requires avoiding a reliance on negative emission technologies. Animal to plant-sourced protein shifts offer substantial potential for GHG emission reductions. Unabated, the livestock sector could take between 37% and 49% of the GHG budget allowable under the 2°C and 1.5°C targets, respectively, by 2030. Inaction in the livestock sector would require substantial GHG reductions, far beyond what are planned or realistic, from other sectors. This outlook article outlines why animal to plant-sourced protein shifts should be taken up by the Conference of the Parties (COP), and how they could feature as part of countries’ mitigation commitments under their updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to be adopted from 2020 onwards. The proposed framework includes an acknowledgment of ‘peak livestock’, followed by targets for large and rapid reductions in livestock numbers based on a combined ‘worst first’ and ‘best available food’ approach. Adequate support, including climate finance, is needed to facilitate countries in implementing animal to plant-sourced protein shifts.
Key policy insights
Given the livestock sector’s significant contribution to global GHG emissions and methane dominance, animal to plant protein shifts make a necessary contribution to meeting the Paris temperature goals and reducing warming in the short term, while providing a suite of co-benefits.
Without action, the livestock sector could take between 37% and 49% of the GHG budget allowable under the 2°C and 1.5°C targets, respectively, by 2030.
Failure to implement animal to plant protein shifts increases the risk of exceeding temperate goals; requires additional GHG reductions from other sectors; and increases reliance on negative emissions technologies.
COP 24 is an opportunity to bring animal to plant protein shifts to the climate mitigation table.
Revised NDCs from 2020 should include animal to plant protein shifts, starting with a declaration of ‘peak livestock’, followed by a ‘worst first’ replacement approach, guided by ‘best available food’.
Climate and land use patterns are expected to change dramatically in the coming century, raising concern about their effects on wildfire patterns and subsequent impacts to human communities. The relative influence of climate versus land use on fires and their impacts, however, remains unclear, particularly given the substantial geographical variability in fire-prone places like California. We developed a modeling framework to compare the importance of climatic and human variables for explaining fire patterns and structure loss for three diverse California landscapes, then projected future large fire and structure loss probability under two different climate (hot-dry or warm-wet) and two different land use (rural or urban residential growth) scenarios. The relative importance of climate and housing pattern varied across regions and according to fire size or whether the model was for large fires or structure loss. The differing strengths of these relationships, in addition to differences in the nature and magnitude of projected climate or land use change, dictated the extent to which large fires or structure loss were projected to change in the future. Despite this variability, housing and human infrastructure were consistently more responsible for explaining fire ignitions and structure loss probability, whereas climate, topography, and fuel variables were more important for explaining large fire patterns. For all study areas, most structure loss occurred in areas with low housing density (from 0.08 to 2.01 units/ha), and expansion of rural residential land use increased structure loss probability in the future. Regardless of future climate scenario, large fire probability was only projected to increase in the northern and interior parts of the state, whereas climate change had no projected impact on fire probability in southern California. Given the variation in fire-climate relationships and land use effects, policy and management decision-making should be customized for specific geographical regions. 相似文献