IPCC and similar reports contain information to save the planet from crisis like climate change. BUT, they are long, technical and come as dumb PDFs.
Let's take this page from Chapter 8 of IPCC AR2 WG Report (copy-pasted from the PDF). We want you to read it and highlight information you think is most useful.
"A new assessment of projects over the last two decades finds emission reductions or offsets of at least 4 7.9 GtCO2-eq (using GWP100 and a mix of IPCC values for CH4 and N2O) over the last 12 years due to 5 agricultural and forestry activities (Table 7.4). More than 80% of these emission reductions or offsets have been generated by forest-based activities. The total amounts to 0.66 GtCO2 yr-1 6 for the period 7 2010-2019, which is 1.2% of total global, and 5.5% of AFOLU emissions reported in Table 7.1, over 8 the same time period (high confidence). 9 The array of activities in Table 7.4 includes the Clean Development Mechanism, REDD+ activities 10 reported in technical annexes of country biennial update reports to the UNFCCC, voluntary market 11 transactions, and carbon stored as a result of carbon markets in Australia, New Zealand and California 12 in the USA. Although other countries and sub-national units have developed programs and policies, 13 these three regions are presented due to their focus on forest and agricultural carbon mitiga ion, their 14 use of generally accepted protocols or measures and the availability of data to quantify outcomes 15 The largest share of emission reductions or carbon offsets in Table 7.4 has been from slowing 16 deforestation and REDD+, specifically from efforts in Brazil (86% of total), which substantially 17 reduced deforestation rates between 2004 and 2012 (Nepstad et al., 2014), as well as other countries in 18 Latin America. With the exception of Roopsind et al. (2019), estimated reductions in carbon emissions 19 from REDD+ in Table 7.4 are measured relative to a historical baseline. As noted in Brazil's Third 20 Biennial Update Report (Ministry of Foreign Affairs 2019), estimates are made in accordance with 21 established methodologies to determine the benefits of results-based REDD+ payments to Brazil. 22 REDD+ estimates from other countries also have been derived from biennial update reports. 23 Regulatory markets provide the next largest share of carbon removal to date. Data from the Australia 24 Emissions Reduction Fund is an estimate of carbon credits in agriculture and forestry purchased by the 25 Australian government. In the case of California, offset credits from forest and agricultural activities, 26 using methods approved by a third-party certification authority (Climate Action Reserve), have been 27 allowed as part of their state wide cap and trade system. Transaction prices for forest and agricultural credits in California were around USD13 tCO2 -1 28 in 2018, and represented 7.4% of total market 29 compliance. By the end of 2018, 80 MtCO2 had been used for compliance purposes. 30 For New Zealand the carbon reduction in Table 7.4 represents forest removals that were surrendered 31 from post-1989 forests between 2008 and the 2020. Unlike offsets in voluntary markets or in California, 32 where permanence involves long-term contracts or insurance pools, forests in the New Zealand market 33 liable for emissions when harvested or following land use change. This means sellers account for future 34 emission risks related to harvesting when they enter forests into carbon contracts. Offset prices were around USD13 tCO -1 in 2016 but have risen to more than USD20 tCO2 -1 35 in 2020. 36 The voluntary market data in Table 7.4 are offsets developed under the major standard-setting 37 organizations and issued from 2008-2018 (e.g., Hamrick and Gallant 2018). Note that there is some 38 potential for double counting of voluntary offsets that may have been transacted in the California 39 compliance market, however this would only have applied to transactions of US-issued offsets, and the 40 largest share of annual transactions of voluntary AFOLU credits occurs with credits generated in Latin 41 America, followed by Africa, Asia and North America. Europe and Oceania have few voluntary carbon 42 market transactions. Within forestry and agriculture, most of the voluntary offsets were generated by 43 forestry projects. Using historical transaction data from various Forest Trends reports, the offsets generated were valued at USD46.9 million yr-1 44 . Prices for voluntary offset transactions in the period 2014-2016 ranged from USD4.90 to 5.40 tCO2 -1 45 (Hamrick and Gallant 2017a)." - Page 98, AFOLU (Chapter 8)
Here are some useful information:
Was the snippet easy to read? We are sure it was not. Now, there are thousands of paragraphs with such abbreviations, interested terms, and sentences. These are the information we want to look for. Can we automate this, somehow?
There are several challenges:
#semanticClimate is developing tools to address these challenges.