The present study on a proposed greenhouse-gas information system (GHGIS) was undertaken without the benefit of requirements and specifications that will ultimately drive its choices and architecture. The discussion in this chapter attempts to develop a requirements framework that can be relied on to make choices between desired accuracy, precision, and confidence, vs. cost, schedule, and other elements. The accuracy or precision of the GHGIS (top-down) components required to validate reporting and international commitments depends on factors determined by the nature of the commitments as well as the goals of the users. The present study focuses on the task of measuring GHG emissions and attributing anthropogenic surface fluxes. This chapter explores possible emissions pathways that depart from targets and makes a number of assumptions about the needs of users to detect and quantify such departures, regardless of whether they are the result of inadvertent or willful reporting errors. Such user needs would be used to set GHGIS requirements. Findings 1. GHGIS requirements from which specifications on accuracy, precision, data and modeling uncertainty quantification (UQ) can be derived have not been set. 2. Based on assumptions documented below, if GHGIS is to validate total, country-level GHG emissions against annual targets, then accuracies will likely need to be in the range of ± 5-18%, depending on emissions pathways and the required levels of confidence. These estimates would be refined or adjusted, accordingly, in response to requirements. 3. If GHGIS must quantify changes in emissions relative to a baseline year and based on the same assumptions as in Item 2, above, then the required precision is ±5-18%. 4. High precision is easier to achieve than high accuracy and may require a GHGIS that is operational in the baseline year. 5. The need for high precision could be somewhat relaxed if top-down GHGIS components are used in combination with bottom-up inventories, however, at the cost of losing some benefits of (independent) validation. Recommendations (Phase-1 Development) 1. GHGIS development should include the ability to establish reliable baseline estimates in regions of interest early on. Recommendations (Phase-2 Development) 3. As a guideline, GHGIS should adopt a methodology that will yield an overall precision of A Greenhouse-Gas Information System Requirements Framework 2-2 anthropogenic emissions of ±10%, or better. 4. GHGIS should be capable of measuring multiple greenhouse gases, including CO 2 , methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2 O), as well as carbon monoxide (CO), and a number of fluorinated gases. 5. GHGIS should aim to also attribute emissions by economic sector. 6. GHGIS should be designed to provide periodic emissions estimates, such as quarterly and annually, covering specific countries, emitters, industries, or economic sectors in response to GHGIS-customer needs. Recommendations Overview and Reasoning GHGIS includes an important top-down component based on measurements, which aims to monito...

Executive SummaryCurrent GHG-mitigating regimes, whether internationally agreed or self-imposed, rely on the aggregation of self-reported data, with limited checks for consistency and accuracy, for monitoring. As nations commit to more stringent GHG emissions-mitigation actions and as economic rewards or penalties are attached to emission levels, self-reported data will require independent confirmation that they are accurate and reliable, if they are to provide the basis for critical choices and actions that may be required.Supporting emissions-mitigation efforts and agreements, as well as monitoring energy-and fossil-fuel intensive national and global activities would be best achieved by a process of 1. monitoring of emissions and emission-mitigation actions, based, in part, on, 2. (self-) reporting of pertinent bottom-up inventory data, 3. verification that reported data derive from and are consistent with agreed-upon processes and procedures, and 4. validation that reported emissions and emissions-mitigation action data are correct, based on independent measurements (top-down) derived from a suite of sensors in space, air, land, and, possibly, sea, used to deduce and attribute anthropogenic emissions.These data would be assessed and used to deduce and attribute measured GHG concentrations to anthropogenic emissions, attributed geographically and, to the extent possible, by economic sector. The validation element is needed to provide independent assurance that emissions are in accord with reported values, and should be considered as an important addition to the accepted MRV process, leading to a MRV&V process.This study and report focus on attributes of a greenhouse-gas information system (GHGIS) needed to support MRV&V needs. These needs set the function of such a system apart from scientific/research monitoring of GHGs and carbon-cycle systems, and include (not exclusively): the need for a GHGIS that is operational, as required for decision-support; the need for a system that meets specifications derived from imposed requirements; the need for rigorous calibration, verification, and validation (CV&V) standards, processes, and records for all measurement and modeling/data-inversion data; the need to develop and adopt an uncertainty-quantification (UQ) regimen for all measurement and modeling data; and the requirement that GHGIS products can be subjected to third-party questioning and scientific scrutiny.This report examines and assesses presently available capabilities that could contribute to a future GHGIS. These capabilities include sensors and measurement technologies; data analysis and data uncertainty quantification (UQ) practices and methods; and model-based data-inversion practices, methods, and their associated UQ. The report further examines the need for traceable calibration, verification, and validation processes and attached metadata; differences between present science-/research-oriented needs and those that would be required for an operational GHGIS; the development, operation, and maintenance ...

National Laboratory is truly a national security science laboratory, tackling some of the world's most challenging science and engineering issues. We are interested in the potential future impacts of climate change on global security, such as the coastal e ects of sea level rise, increased number of extreme storms, and the consequences of extensive regional tree mortality. Gaining a better understanding of the forces behind global climate change-how these forces operate, how they may a ect us, and how we might mitigate their negative impacts-brings together biologists, physicists, mathematicians, geologists, electrical engineers, computer programmers, and chemists. e Laboratory has more than 300 formal collaborations with other research institutions across the globe. Our geographic reach is equally broad-extending from the piñon and juniper forests on Laboratory property to the high Southwest desert, to the tundra of Alaska, and above the Arctic Circle in Norway.