The concept and name of the carbon footprint was derived from the ecological footprint concept,[15] which was developed by William E. Rees and Mathis Wackernagel in the 1990s at the University of British Columbia. While carbon footprints are usually reported in tons of emissions (CO2-equivalent) per year, ecological footprints are usually reported in comparison to what the planet can renew. This assesses the number of "earths" that would be required if everyone on the planet consumed resources at the same level as the person calculating their ecological footprint. The carbon footprint is one part of the ecological footprint. Carbon footprints are more focused than ecological footprints since they merely measure emissions of gases that cause climate change into the atmosphere.
footprints 2 tests pdf free
The idea of a personal carbon footprint was popularized by a large advertising campaign of the fossil fuel company BP in 2005, designed by Ogilvy.[10][15] It instructed people to calculate their personal footprints and provided ways for people to "go on a low-carbon diet".[17] This strategy, also employed by other major fossil fuel companies[18] borrowed heavily from previous campaigns by the tobacco industry[19] and plastics industry to shift the blame for negative consequences of those industries (under-age smoking,[20] cigarette butt pollution,[21] and plastic pollution[22]) onto individual choices.
For calculating personal carbon footprints, several free online carbon footprint calculators exist[27][28] including a few supported by publicly available peer-reviewed data and calculations including the University of California, Berkeley's CoolClimate Network research consortium and CarbonStory.[29][30][31] These websites ask you to answer more or less detailed questions about your diet, transportation choices, home size, shopping and recreational activities, usage of electricity, heating, and heavy appliances such as dryers and refrigerators, and so on. The website then estimates your carbon footprint based on your answers to these questions. A systematic literature review was conducted to objectively determine the best way to calculate individual/household carbon footprints. This review identified 13 calculation principles and subsequently used the same principles to evaluate the 15 most popular online carbon footprint calculators. A recent study's results by Carnegie Mellon's Christopher Weber found that the calculation of carbon footprints for products is often filled with large uncertainties. The variables of owning electronic goods such as the production, shipment, and previous technology used to make that product, can make it difficult to create an accurate carbon footprint. It is important to question, and address the accuracy of Carbon Footprint techniques, especially due to its overwhelming popularity.[32]
In the UK, DEFRA provides emission factors going back to 2002 covering scope 1, 2 and 3.[43] DEFRA no longer provide international emission factors and refer visitors to the IEA who provide free highlights and paid for details covering Scope 1 and 2.[44]
Three studies concluded that hydroelectric, wind, and nuclear power produced the least CO2 per kilowatt-hour of any other electricity sources.These figures do not include emissions due to accidents or terrorism. Wind power and solar power emit no carbon from their operation, but do leave a footprint during construction and maintenance. Hydropower from reservoirs also has large footprints from initial removal of vegetation and ongoing methane (stream detritus decays anaerobically to methane in bottom of reservoir, rather than aerobically to CO2 if it had stayed in an unrestricted stream).[50]
This section gives representative figures for the carbon footprint of the fuel burned by different transport types (not including the carbon footprints of the vehicles or related infrastructure themselves). The precise figures vary according to a wide range of factors.
Several organizations offer footprint calculators for public and corporate use, and several organizations have calculated carbon footprints of products.[58] The US Environmental Protection Agency has addressed paper, plastic (candy wrappers), glass, cans, computers, carpet and tires. Australia has addressed lumber and other building materials. Academics in Australia, Korea and the US have addressed paved roads. Companies, nonprofits and academics have addressed mailing letters and packages. Carnegie Mellon University has estimated the CO2 footprints of 46 large sectors of the economy in each of eight countries. Carnegie Mellon, Sweden and the Carbon Trust have addressed foods at home and in restaurants.
The Carbon Trust has worked with UK manufacturers on foods, shirts and detergents, introducing a CO2 label in March 2007. The label is intended to comply with a new British Publicly Available Specification (i.e. not a standard), PAS 2050,[59] and is being actively piloted by The Carbon Trust and various industrial partners.[60] As of August 2012 The Carbon Trust state they have measured 27,000 certifiable product carbon footprints.[61]
The precise carbon footprint of different textiles varies considerably according to a wide range of factors. However, studies of textile production in Europe suggest the following carbon dioxide equivalent emissions footprints per kilo of textile at the point of purchase by a consumer:[65]
The concept of a political "carbon footprint" measuring individuals' political choices (e.g. voting) were first introduced in 2021 for the election in Canada[71] by Seth Wynes, Matthew Motta, and Simon Donner; and in parallel for Germany and the UK[72] by Jakob Thomä. This research represents the first attempt to expand the concept of a personal footprint beyond consumption and investment footprints. The analysis for the election in Canada suggests the median "pro-climate" vote translated to 34.2 tons of CO2e emissions reduction, compared to a 2 ton reduction of living car free. The analysis for Germany and UK measured relative footprint reductions by switching the vote to more "pro-climate parties". In the German Elections in 2021, a German voter would have reduced around 7 tons of CO2e emissions per year when switching from the SPD (Labour) party to the Green party, compared to 3 tons associated with switching to a more "sustainable lifestyle". Political carbon footprints typically find significantly higher emissions reduction potential than consumption or investment footprints, given that consumption footprints only capture effects on your own behavior whereas voters determine climate outcomes for both voters for the winning party, voters for the losing party, and non-voters.
Overall, animal-based foods tend to have a higher footprint than plant-based. Lamb and cheese both emit more than 20 kilograms CO2-equivalents per kilogram. Poultry and pork have lower footprints but are still higher than most plant-based foods, at 6 and 7 kg CO2-equivalents, respectively.
Abstract:Cancer genomes accumulate nucleotide sequence variations that number in the tens of thousands per genome. A prominent fraction of these mutations is thought to arise as a consequence of the off-target activity of DNA/RNA editing cytosine deaminases. These enzymes, collectively called activation induced deaminase (AID)/APOBECs, deaminate cytosines located within defined DNA sequence contexts. The resulting changes of the original C:G pair in these contexts (mutational signatures) provide indirect evidence for the participation of specific cytosine deaminases in a given cancer type. The conventional method used for the analysis of mutable motifs is the consensus approach. Here, for the first time, we have adopted the frequently used weight matrix (sequence profile) approach for the analysis of mutagenesis and provide evidence for this method being a more precise descriptor of mutations than the sequence consensus approach. We confirm that while mutational footprints of APOBEC1, APOBEC3A, APOBEC3B, and APOBEC3G are prominent in many cancers, mutable motifs characteristic of the action of the humoral immune response somatic hypermutation enzyme, AID, are the most widespread feature of somatic mutation spectra attributable to deaminases in cancer genomes. Overall, the weight matrix approach reveals that somatic mutations are significantly associated with at least one AID/APOBEC mutable motif in all studied cancers.Keywords: DNA sequence profile; Monte Carlo; mixture of normal distributions; somatic mutation; tumor; mutable motif; activation induced deaminase; AID/APOBEC
A T-Shirt consists of fabric that is sewn together for the end product. The fabric itself also goes through different treatment processes. This is how the above flow model looks like in Mobius (you can access the full model for free by signing up for the 14-day free Mobius trial, our LCA software). Click to expand the picture!
The major contributors to carbon footprints are: food, consumption, transportation, and household energy. Food is a major contributor to carbon footprints, and meat in particular is an issue. Livestock is responsible for a significant amount of greenhouse gas emissions, and beef is one of the biggest contributors. One kilogram of beef has the same amount of emissions as driving your car about 160 miles.[5] Completely eliminating meat is not necessary, but reducing meat intake helps lower your carbon footprint. Transportation of foods, pesticide use, and purchasing food out of season also contribute to carbon footprints. Processed foods have higher emissions than fresh food as it includes transportation, production in factories, and additional packaging.
Chromosomal aneuploidy is the most common birth defect. However, the developmental mechanism and gene expression profile of fetuses with chromosomal aneuploidy are relatively unknown, and the maternal immune changes induced by fetal aneuploidy remain unclear. The inability to obtain the placenta multiple times in real-time is a bottleneck in research on aneuploid pregnancies. Plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) carries the gene expression profile information of its source cells and may be used to evaluate the development of fetuses with aneuploidy and the immune changes induced in the mother owing to fetal aneuploidy. 2ff7e9595c
Commentaires