Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 336

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quantifying CO2 Emissions From Individual Power Plants From Space

Open access
Nassar, Ray, Hill, Timothy G., McLinden, Chris A., Wunch, Debra, Jones, Dylan B. A., Crisp, David·2017·Geophysical Research Letters

Abstract

In order to better manage anthropogenic CO 2 emissions, improved methods of quantifying emissions are needed at all spatial scales from the national level down to the facility level. Although the Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 (OCO‐2) satellite was not designed for monitoring power plant emissions, we show that in some cases, CO 2 observations from OCO‐2 can be used to quantify daily CO 2 emissions from individual middle‐ to large‐sized coal power plants by fitting the data to plume model simulations. Emission estimates for U.S. power plants are within 1–17% of reported daily emission values, enabling application of the approach to international sites that lack detailed emission information. This affirms that a constellation of future CO 2 imaging satellites, optimized for point sources, could monitor emissions from individual power plants to support the implementation of climate policies.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/2017gl074702

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 336

Metadata

Authors
Nassar, R., Hill, T. G., McLinden, C. A., Wunch, D., Jones, D. B. A., & Crisp, D.
Venue
Geophysical Research Letters
Published
2017-10-13
Volume
44
Issue
19
ISSN
  • 0094-8276 (ISSN-L)
  • 1944-8007
OpenAlex
W2756223094
Cited by
336
References
22
FWCI
14.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.