Attributing ocean acidification to major carbon producers

© The Author(s), 2019. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Licker, R.; Ekwurzel, B.; Doney, S. C.; Cooley, S. R.; Lima, I. D.; Heede, R.; Frumhoff, P. C. Attributing ocean acidification to major carbon producers. Environmental Research Letters. 14(12), (2019): 124060, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ab5abc.Recent research has quantified the contributions of CO2 and CH4 emissions traced to the products of major fossil fuel companies and cement manufacturers to global atmospheric CO2, surface temperature, and sea level rise. This work has informed societal considerations of the climate responsibilities of these major industrial carbon producers. Here, we extend this work to historical (1880–2015) and recent (1965–2015) acidification of the world's ocean. Using an energy balance carbon-cycle model, we find that emissions traced to the 88 largest industrial carbon producers from 1880–2015 and 1965–2015 have contributed ~55% and ~51%, respectively, of the historical 1880–2015 decline in surface ocean pH. As ocean acidification is not spatially uniform, we employ a three-dimensional ocean model and identify five marine regions with large declines in surface water pH and aragonite saturation state over similar historical (average 1850–1859 to average 2000–2009) and recent (average 1960–1969 to average of 2000–2009) time periods. We characterize the biological and socioeconomic systems in these regions facing loss and damage from ocean acidification in the context of climate change and other stressors. Such analysis can inform societal consideration of carbon producer responsibility for current and near-term risks of further loss and damage to human communities dependent on marine ecosystems and fisheries vulnerable to ocean acidification.The approach of using equation (1) benefited from discussions with Myles R Allen (University of Oxford) and Inez Fung (University of California, Berkeley). M W Dalton provided insights for the incorporation of the updated carbon producers data. Chloe Ames provided support for references. S Doney acknowledges support from the US National Science Foundation and the University of Virginia Environmental Resilience Institute. R Licker, B Ekwurzel and P C Frumhoff acknowledge the support of the Grantham Foundation for the Protection of the Environment, Wallace Global Fund, and Rockefeller Family Fund to the Union of Concerned Scientists. R Heede gratefully acknowledges the financial support of Wallace Global Fund, Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and Union of Concerned Scientists. We thank two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments, which greatly improved our manuscript

Wood dynamics in headwater streams of the Colorado Rocky Mountains

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Library Resources Utilization: determining high yield resources for medical students

The University of Hawaii (UH) Health Sciences Library (HSL) provides a variety of resources critical for science and medical education at the UH, John A. Burns School of Medicine (JABSOM). These resources are accessible by all of the UH students and faculty, including affiliated sites. To provide tailored services for medical students, their educational needs must be identified. Currently, there is no standardized system that evaluates this. The usage data of HSL resources is collected through the number of log-in’s through the UH library system by all of UH Manoa users. As such, it does not distinguish between medical students and other UH users. We propose that resource utilization by medical students differs from those utilized by other UH users. The objectives of the survey were three-fold: 1) To identify utilization of HSL resources by medical students; 2) Compare the pattern of utilization of the HSL resources by medical students with UH Manoa users by comparing our survey results to 2021 HSL usage data; and 3) To identify utilization of resources not available through HSL system. An online survey was emailed to all current JABSOM medical students. The six item survey included two likert scale questions regarding utilization of library resources available and not available through the JABSOM library. Items were assigned a numerical value; Never =1, Rarely=2, Sometimes=3, Very Often=4, and Always=5 and an average value was calculated for each resource. The remaining four items were open-ended. Sixty-six total responses were obtained with 21% first years, 35% second years, 18% third years, and 26% fourth years. The most utilized HSL resources were Access Medicine, PubMed, Textbooks, and Clinical Keys. The least used library resources were Health and Psychology instruments, Natural Medicine database, JoVE, and Psych Articles. For both medical students and UH Manoa users, Access Medicine and Clinical Key were among the most used, whereas Health and Psych instruments, JoVE, and Natural Medicine database were among the least used. On the other hand, Cochrane was ranked higher and Psych Articles was ranked lower in overall relative usage among medical students compared to the relative ranking among UH Manoa users. The most utilized non-HSL resources among medical students were Boards and Beyond, Sketchy, Pathoma, and AMBOSS, respectively. In conclusion, our study assessed medical student resource utilization of library and non-library resources at the JABSOM library. The rank order of the utilized resources were similar between medical students and UH Manoa users, with some exceptions. The results identified the utility of non-HSL resources, suggesting they are key supplemental tools in medical education. Further studies should investigate why some resources are used more or less to guide efforts in improving availability of these services

Macroeconomic impact of stranded fossil-fuel assets

Several major economies rely heavily on fossil-fuel production and exports, yet current low-carbon technology diffusion, energy efficiency and climate policy may be substantially reducing global demand for fossil fuels.1-4 This trend is inconsistent with observed investment in new fossil-fuel ventures1,2, which could become stranded as a result. Here we use an integrated global economy environment simulation model to study the macroeconomic impact of stranded fossil-fuel assets (SFFA). Our analysis suggests that part of the SFFA would occur as a result of an already ongoing technological trajectory, irrespective of whether new climate policies are adopted or not; the loss would be amplified if new climate policies to reach the 2°C target are adopted and/or if low-cost producers (some OPEC countries) maintain their level of production (‘sell-out’) despite declining demand; the magnitude of the loss from SFFA may amount to a discounted global wealth loss of $1-4tn; and there are clear distributional impacts, with winners (e.g. net importers such as China or the EU) and losers (e.g. Russia, the US or Canada, which could see their fossil-fuel industries nearly shut down), although the two effects would largely offset each other at the level of aggregate global GDP.The authors acknowledge C-EERNG and Cambridge Econometrics for support, and funding from EPSRC (JFM, fellowship no. EP/ K007254/1); the Newton Fund (JFM, PS, JV, EPSRC grant no EP/N002504/1 and ESRC grant no ES/N013174/1), NERC (NRE, PH, HP, grant no NE/P015093/1), CONICYT (PS), the Philomathia Foundation (JV), the Cambridge Humanities Research Grants Scheme (JV), and Horizon 2020 (HP, JFM; Sim4Nexus project)

Nurse staffing, medical staffing and mortality in intensive care: an observational study

Objectives: To investigate whether the size of the workforce (nurses, doctors and support staff) has an impact of the survival chances of critically ill patients both in the intensive care unit (ICU) and in the hospital. Background: Investigations of intensive care outcomes suggest that some of the variation in patient survival rates might be related to staffing levels and workload, but the evidence is still equivocal. Data: Information about patients, including the outcome of care (whether the patient lived or died) came from the Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre (ICNARC) Case Mix Programme. An Audit Commission survey of ICUs conducted in 1998 gave information about staffing levels. The merged dataset had information on 65 ICUs and 38,168 patients. This is currently the best available dataset for testing the relationship between staffing and outcomes in UK ICUs Design: A cross-sectional, retrospective, risk adjusted observational study. Methods: Multivariable, multilevel logistic regression. Outcome Measures: ICU and in-hospital mortality. Results: After controlling for patient characteristics and workload we found that higher numbers of nurses per bed and higher numbers of consultants were associated with higher survival rates. Further exploration revealed that the number of nurses had the greatest impact on patients at high risk of death whereas the effect of medical staffing was across the range of patient acuity. No relationship between patient outcomes and the number of support staff was found. Distinguishing between direct care and supernumerary nurses and restricting the analysis to patients who had been in the unit for more than 8 hours made little difference to the results. Separate analysis of in-unit and in-hospital survival showed that the clinical workforce in intensive care had a greater impact on ICU mortality than on hospital mortality which gives the study additional credibility. Conclusion: This study supports claims that the availability of medical and nursing staff is associated with the survival of critically ill patients and suggests that future studies should focus on the resources of the health care team. The results emphasise the urgent need for a prospective study of staffing levels and the organisation of care in ICUs

Comparative LCA of concrete with recycled aggregates: a circular economy mindset in Europe

[EN] Purpose Construction and demolition waste (C&DW) is the largest waste stream in the European Union (EU) and all over the world. Proper management of C&DW and recycled materials¿including the correct handling of hazardous waste¿can have major benefits in terms of sustainability and the quality of life. The Waste Framework Directive 2008/98/EC aims to have 70% of C&DW recycled by 2020. However, except for a few EU countries, only about 50% of C&DW is currently being recycled. In the present research, the environmental impact of concrete with recycled aggregates and with geopolymer mixtures is analysed. The aim of the present research is to propose a comparative LCA of concrete with recycled aggregates in the context of European politics. Methods Life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology is applied using Simapro© software. A cradle to grave analysis is carried out. The results are analysed based on the database Ecoinvent 3.3 and Impact 2002+. Results Results show that the concrete with 25% recycled aggregates is the best solution from an environmental point of view. Furthermore, geopolymer mixtures could be a valid alternative to reduce the phenomenon of ¿global warming¿; however, the production of sodium silicate and sodium hydroxide has a great environmental impact. Conclusions A possible future implementation of the present study is certainly to carry out an overall assessment and to determine the most cost-effective option among the different competing alternatives through the life cycle cost analysis.Colangelo, F.; Gómez-Navarro, T.; Farina, I.; Petrillo, A. (2020). Comparative LCA of concrete with recycled aggregates: a circular economy mindset in Europe. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 25(9):1790-1804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01798-6S17901804259Akhtar A, Sarmah (2018) Construction and demolition waste generation and properties of recycled aggregate concrete: a global perspective. J Cleaner Prod 186:262–281Bare JC, Hofstetter P, Penningtonne DW, Helias A, de Haes U (2000) Midpoints versus endpoints: the sacrifices and benefits. Int J Life Cycle Assess 5(6):319–326Blengini GA, Garbarino E (2010) Resources and waste management in Turin (Italy): the role of recycled aggregates in the sustainable supply mix. J Clean Prod 18(10–11):1021–1030Blengini GA, Garbarino E, Šolar S, Shields DJ, Hámor T, Vinai R, Agioutantis Z (2012) Life cycle assessment guidelines for the sustainable production and recycling of aggregates: the sustainable aggregates resource management project (SARMa). J Clean Prod 27:177–181Blengini GA, Garbarino E, Bevilacqua P (2017) Sustainability and integration between mineral resources and C&DW management: overview of key issues towards a resource-efficient Europe. Env Eng Man J 16(2):493–502Borghi G, Pantini S, Rigamonti L (2018) Life cycle assessment of non-hazardous construction and demolition waste (CDW) management in Lombardy region (Italy). J Clean Prod 184:815–825Braga AM, Silvestre JD, de Brito J (2017) Compared environmental and economic impact from cradle to gate of concrete with natural and recycled coarse aggregates. J Clean Prod 162:529–543Chen C, Habert G, Bouzidi Y, Jullien A, Ventura A (2010) LCA allocation procedure used as an incitative method for waste recycling: an application to mineral additions in concrete. Res Con Rec 54(12):1231–1240Chen Z, Gu H, Bergman RD, Liang S (2020) Comparative life-cycle assessment of a high-rise mass timber building with an equivalent reinforced concrete alternative using the Athena impact estimator for buildings. Sustainability (Switzerland) 12(11):4708Colangelo F, Cioffi R (2017) Mechanical properties and durability of mortar containing fine fraction of demolition wastes produced by selective demolition in South Italy. Comp Part B: Eng 115:43–50Colangelo F, Petrillo A, Cioffi R, Borrelli C, Forcina A (2018a) Life cycle assessment of recycled concretes: a case study in southern Italy. Sci Total Env 615:1506–1517Colangelo F, Forcina A, Farina I, Petrillo A (2018b) Life cycle assessment (LCA) of different kinds of concrete containing waste for sustainable construction. Buildings 8(5):70Colangelo F, Navarro TG, Petrillo A, Farina I, Cioffi R (2020) Life-cycle impact of concrete with recycled materials. Encyclopedia of Renewable and Sustainable Materials, Volume 5(2020):414–421COM (2012) 433, COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Strategy for the sustainable competitiveness of the construction sector and its enterprises, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/procedure/EN/201859, Brussels, 31.7.2012, COM(2012) 433 finalCOM (2014) 445, COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/pdf/SustainableBuildingsCommunication.pdf, Brussels, 1.7.2014 COM(2014) 445 finalDavidovits J (2018) Geopolymers based on natural and synthetic metakaolin a critical review. Ceramic Eng Science Proc 38(3):201–214Di Maria A, Eyckmans J, Van Acker K (2018) Downcycling versus recycling of construction and demolition waste: combining LCA and LCC to support sustainable policy making. Waste Man 75:3–21Directive 2008/98/EC on waste (Waste Framework Directive), http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008L0098EN 1992-1-1:(2004) Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures - Part 1–1: General rules and rules for buildingsEstanqueiro B, Dinis Silvestre J, de Brito J, Duarte Pinheiro M (2018) Environmental life cycle assessment of coarse natural and recycled aggregates for concrete. Eur J Env Civ Eng 22(4):429–449Etxeberria M, Vázquez E, Marí A, Barra M (2007) Influence of amount of recycled coarse aggregates and production process on properties of recycled aggregate concrete. Cem Conc Res 37(5):735–742EU construction & demolition waste management protocol (2016) BrusselsGálvez-Martos J-L, Styles D, Schoenberger H, Zeschmar-Lahl B (2018) Construction and demolition waste best management practice in Europe. Res Con Rec 136:166–178Gluth, G.J.G., Arbi, K., Bernal, S.A., Bondar, D., Castel, A., Chithiraputhiran, S., Dehghan, A., Dombrowski-Daube, K., Dubey, A., Ducman, V., Peterson, K., Pipilikaki, P., Valcke, S.L.A., Ye, G., Hajimohammadi, A., van Deventer, J.S.J., 2017. Characterisation of one-part geopolymer binders made from fly ash. Waste Biom Val, 8(1), pp. 225–233Gomes R, Silvestre JD, de Brito J (2020) Environmental, economic and energy life cycle assessment “from cradle to cradle” (3E-C2C) of flat roofs. Journal of Building Engineering 32:101436ISO 14040 (2006) Environmental management life cycle assessment. Principles and Framework. ISO, GenevaISO 14044 (2006) Environmental management. Life cycle assessment. Requirements and Guidelines. ISO, GenevaJafary Nasab T, Monavari SM, Jozi SA, Majedi H (2020) Assessment of carbon footprint in the construction phase of high-rise constructions in Tehran. Int J Environ Sci Technol 17(6):3153–3164Jolliet O, Margni M, Charles R, Humbert S, Payet J, Rebitzer G, Rosenbaum R (2003) Impact 2002+: a new life cycle impact assessment methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8(6):324–333Khan MW, Ali Y, De Felice F, Salman A, Petrillo A (2019) Impact of brick kilns industry on environment and human health in Pakistan. Sci Total Environ 678:383–389Knoeri C, Sanyé-Mengual E, Althaus H-J (2013) Comparative LCA of recycled and conventional concrete for structural applications. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(5):909–918Lu W, Yan H (2011) A framework for understanding waste management studies in construction. Waste Man 31:1252–1260Marinković S, Radonjanin V, Malešev M, Ignjatović I (2010) Comparative environmental assessment of natural and recycled aggregate concrete. Waste Man 30(11):2255–2264Mercante IT, Bovea MD, Ibáñez-Forés V, Arena AP (2012) Life cycle assessment of construction and demolition waste management systems: a Spanish case study. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17(2):232–241Pantini S, Giurato M, Rigamonti L (2019) A LCA study to investigate resource-efficient strategies for managing post-consumer gypsum waste in Lombardy region (Italy). Res Con Rec 147:157–168Petrillo A, Cioffi R, De Felice F, Colangelo F, Borrelli C (2016) An environmental evaluation: a comparison between geopolymer and OPC concrete paving blocks manufacturing process in Italy. Env Prog Sus Energy 35(6):1699–1708Provis JL (2017) Alkali-activated cementitious materials and concretes - steps towards standardization, American Concrete Inst, ACI Special Publication 2017-January (SP 320), pp. 444-448Sayagh S, Ventura A, Hoang T, François D (2010) Sensitivity of the LCA allocation procedure for BFS recycled into pavement structures. Res cons rec 54(6):348–358Tangtinthai N, Heidrich O, Manning DAC (2019) Role of policy in managing mined resources for construction in Europe and emerging economies. J Env Man 236:613–621Tošić N, Marinković S, Dašić T, Stanić M (2015) Multicriteria optimization of natural and recycled aggregate concrete for structural use. J Clean Prod 87(1):766–776Van den Heede P, De Belie N (2012) Environmental impact and life cycle assessment (LCA) of traditional and ‘green’ concretes: literature review and theoretical calculations. Cem Conc Comp 34(4):431–442Vossberg C, Mason-Jones K, Cohen B (2014) An energetic life cycle assessment of C&D waste and container glass recycling in Cape Town, South Africa. Res Con Rec 88:39–49Walling SA, Notman S, Watts P, Govan N, Provis JL (2019) Portland cement based immobilization/destruction of chemical weapon agent degradation products. Industrial Eng Chemistry Res 58(24):10383–10393Wu H, Zuo J, Yuan H, Zillante G, Wang J (2019) A review of performance assessment methods for construction and demolition waste management. Res Cons Recycling 150:104407Zhang C, Hu M, Dong L, Gebremariam A, Mirand-Xicotencatl B, Di Maio F, Tukker A (2019) Eco-efficiency assessment of technological innovations in high-grade concrete recycling. Res Cons Recycling 149:649–66

Multiple carbon accounting to support just and effective climate policies

Negotiating reductions in greenhouse gas emission involves the allocation of emissions and of emission reductions to specific agents, and notably, within the current UN framework, to associated countries. As production takes place in supply chains,increasingly extending over several countries, there are various options available in which emissions originating from one and the same activity may be attributed to different agents along the supply chain and thus to different countries. In this way, several distinct types of national carbon accounts can be constructed. We argue that these accounts will typically differ in the information they provide to individual countries on the effects their actions have on global emissions; and they may also, to varying degrees, prove useful in supporting the pursuit of an effective and just climate policy. None of the accounting systems, however, prove 'best' in achieving these aims under real-world circumstances; we thus suggest compiling reliable data to aid in the consistent calculation of multiple carbon accounts on a global level

Attribution: how is it relevant for loss and damage policy and practice?

Attribution has become a recurring issue in discussions about Loss and Damage (L&D). In this highly-politicised context, attribution is often associated with responsibility and blame; and linked to debates about liability and compensation. The aim of attribution science, however, is not to establish responsibility, but to further scientific understanding of causal links between elements of the Earth System and society. This research into causality could inform the management of climate-related risks through improved understanding of drivers of relevant hazards, or, more widely, vulnerability and exposure; with potential benefits regardless of political positions on L&D. Experience shows that it is nevertheless difficult to have open discussions about the science in the policy sphere. This is not only a missed opportunity, but also problematic in that it could inhibit understanding of scientific results and uncertainties, potentially leading to policy planning which does not have sufficient scientific evidence to support it. In this chapter, we first explore this dilemma for science-policy dialogue, summarising several years of research into stakeholder perspectives of attribution in the context of L&D. We then aim to provide clarity about the scientific research available, through an overview of research which might contribute evidence about the causal connections between anthropogenic climate change and losses and damages, including climate science, but also other fields which examine other drivers of hazard, exposure, and vulnerability. Finally, we explore potential applications of attribution research, suggesting that an integrated and nuanced approach has potential to inform planning to avert, minimise and address losses and damages. The key messages are In the political context of climate negotiations, questions about whether losses and damages can be attributed to anthropogenic climate change are often linked to issues of responsibility, blame, and liability. Attribution science does not aim to establish responsibility or blame, but rather to investigate drivers of change. Attribution science is advancing rapidly, and has potential to increase understanding of how climate variability and change is influencing slow onset and extreme weather events, and how this interacts with other drivers of risk, including socio-economic drivers, to influence losses and damages. Over time, some uncertainties in the science will be reduced, as the anthropogenic climate change signal becomes stronger, and understanding of climate variability and change develops. However, some uncertainties will not be eliminated. Uncertainty is common in science, and does not prevent useful applications in policy, but might determine which applications are appropriate. It is important to highlight that in attribution studies, the strength of evidence varies substantially between different kinds of slow onset and extreme weather events, and between regions. Policy-makers should not expect the later emergence of conclusive evidence about the influence of climate variability and change on specific incidences of losses and damages; and, in particular, should not expect the strength of evidence to be equal between events, and between countries. Rather than waiting for further confidence in attribution studies, there is potential to start working now to integrate science into policy and practice, to help understand and tackle drivers of losses and damages, informing prevention, recovery, rehabilitation, and transformation