
EU plans first satellite fleet to monitor CO2 in every country - erentz
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2019/05/27/eu-plans-satellite-fleet-monitor-co2-every-country/
======
SECProto
> The fleet of three satellites is slated for launch in 2025, in time to
> inform the UN’s global stocktake of greenhouse gas emissions three years
> later

This is a very good project. Having independent monitoring of CO2 and CH4
worldwide using the same method will be useful. It's unfortunate it can't get
launched sooner, as data trends are very important (or at least, they're very
interesting to me as a layperson observer).

~~~
spookware
Don't really want the EU to become a carbon police.

~~~
jniedrauer
Why not?

~~~
_Microft
You won't go on with business as usual if you are being monitored.

I remember something about a town that frequently reported a list of their
most polluting local businesses. And the businesses started to become more
environmentally friendly just to not appear on this list! There were no fines
or other disadvantages, they just appeared on the list.

I'll add a link later if I can find something about it (wish me luck, it seems
_ogooglebar_ as Swedes might call it).

~~~
00117
Businesses becoming environmentally friendly sounds like a positive.

~~~
_Microft
I absolutely agree. It was an explanation why some might not even like data
being collected.

~~~
yholio
This works in a social setting, a community, a market but it's much less
likely to work against countries as a whole. The policy makers respond to
local voters (at best) not other countries.

We've named and shamed China for a few years now that it produces 50% of the
world's ocean plastic pollution from a single river. Little has changed.

~~~
SECProto
If, as someone else said, tariffs were imposed to all countries as a function
of greenhouse gas output, it would disincentivise their production, and
incentivize cleaning country-wide emissions.

As with most things, there is no silver bullet, but a combination of
motivators will create the change we need. Independent data monitoring is the
first major step to make it possible.

------
Zenst
Coal power generation is still used in Europe, with some countries even
increasing usage after Fukushima nuclear event, pulling some nuclear plans.
Germany being a classic example of that.
[https://www.banktrack.org/news/civil_society_joins_forces_to...](https://www.banktrack.org/news/civil_society_joins_forces_to_push_europe_beyond_coal)

Problem is, countries tend to place such power generating plants near their
borders. This in many instances will, with prevailing winds - show lots of CO2
present in a country that did not produce it.

Now the EU has laws and fines for exceeding limits, yet if the wind blows the
wrong way - a city/town that by itself sits inside those limits, can tip over
those limits. So that city/town ends up with a fine from the EU, not the other
source that tipped the balance - which probably has some nice carbon credit
deal in-place enabling them to carry on.

Monitoring is good, but satellite monitoring will have its limitations
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-
based_measurements_of_ca...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-
based_measurements_of_carbon_dioxide) when compared to ground based monitoring
stations and weather ballons (which can read the layers better).

However - I've not seen a comparison of satellite monitoring in an area which
also has extensive ground based monitoring stations. That would be most
interesting and insightful. Though I suspect that you could very well see
higher levels on the ground that the satellite measures due to water
vapour/cleaner air in upper layers defusing the results. Equally you could
have clean air at the ground layer and higher pollution in the upper layer and
the satellite will show high co2/pollution levels.

Either way, capture at source is needed more and more as many legacy
industrial infrastructure pumping it out on the back of carbon credits. ]

~~~
TeMPOraL
Nobody in their right mind would even suggest automatically fining countries
or cities based on the colour of pixels on a satellite CO₂ map. If a place
shows unexpectedly high CO₂ levels, I expect an investigation will happen in
order to determine who's emitting it. Weather satellites and ground stations
should resolve doubts about wind direction.

WRT. ground stations, satellite monitoring has the nice benefit that you don't
have to coordinate with the monitoring territories, or even ask them for
permission. The data may be less precise, but it'll be _much_ easier to
gather, and much more consistent.

~~~
Zenst
>Nobody in their right mind would even suggest automatically fining countries
or cities based on the colour of pixels on a satellite CO₂ map.

Didn't say they would, and the point I was making was how a location can go
over those limits due to external factors outside their control. Which may
well be just above normal in themselves, yet combined with another producing
area which in itself would be normal, combined - tip the balance. Sure if you
have a clear cut case, I'd expect due process, but when the lines are
literally blurred, you get a different picture.

Sure sats do give a nice simple big picture, but currently just 2D snapshots
of many layers of 3D space. That may well change over time.

------
DoctorOetker
>Michael Buckwitz, a physicist at Bremen University and an advisor to the
project, said every source of CO2 on earth would be passed over every two to
three days.

Given the predictable orbits, what will prevent nations / companies from
emitting less on "surveillance hour", and emitting more when out of sight?

~~~
mturmon
All the prior emissions will still be downwind and be readily detected.
(Source: I supervise people doing this analysis).

------
JoeDaDude
There is already a terrestrial CO2 measuring network of sensors being built,
see the BeaCO2n net [1]. While coverage is sparse so far, it could be greatly
enhanced, at cost likely to be cheaper than a constellation of satellites.

I'll be watching these projects as I was contemplating setting up my own
amateur atmospheric CO2 measuring station, a not-so-simple task once you
consider sensor accuracy and periodic calibration.

[1] [http://beacon.berkeley.edu/about/](http://beacon.berkeley.edu/about/)

~~~
mturmon
One CO2 monitoring network that already exists and is mature is Aeronet, which
has around 30 sites. The network is used to validate the CO2 satellite data we
have now, including NASAs OCO-2.

[https://www.atmos-meas-
tech.net/12/169/2019/amt-12-169-2019....](https://www.atmos-meas-
tech.net/12/169/2019/amt-12-169-2019.pdf)

~~~
mturmon
Argh! Correct network for CO2 validation is actually TCCON. Aeronet is a
related set of in situ measurements, in some cases collocated with TCCON
sites.

------
TeMPOraL
This is a brilliant idea and I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner. I thought
(but never checked) that weather satellites would have this in their
observation spectrum; apparently, they don't. I strongly hope the project will
happen, and will happen on schedule.

------
Causality1
This is a good idea, but I'm a little surprised we can't already do this with
in-situ assets.

~~~
SECProto
The article shows a graphic of what existing monitoring satellites can do
compared to what these satellites will do. For comparison, NASA launched the
Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 [1] in 2014, and it can monitor a swath 10km
wide. This announcement is about Sentinel-7 [2], and it will monitor a swath
240km wide. This huge increase in monitoring will significantly improve what
it can monitor (eg, montly/annual trends in CO2 production)

edit: It will allow monitoring of all CO2 production sites every two or three
days

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbiting_Carbon_Observatory_2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbiting_Carbon_Observatory_2)

[2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernicus_Programme#Sentinel_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernicus_Programme#Sentinel_missions)

~~~
mturmon
Thanks.

One very important feature that simple in situ monitors don’t provide is
_total column_ CO2. That’s the average concentration from the ground up to the
top of atmosphere.

The satellites, and advanced ground measurements, get total column CO2 by
observing the behavior of slices of the solar spectrum that are affected by
CO2. Basically, the gas absorbs some wavelengths and re-emits in others.

------
aussieguy1234
When a country has proven higher emissions, there should be consequences. Put
a carbon tax on their exports.

That will motivate even the most climate change denying governments to take
action.

