We propose and evaluate an extension to the Application-Layer FEC (AL-FEC) codes introduced by the Pro-MPEG Forum in its Code of Practice 3 r2 (Pro-MPEG . Layer FEC (AL-FEC) codes introduced by the Pro-MPEG. Forum in its Code of Practice 3 r2 (Pro-MPEG COP3 codes), consisting in allowing the use of a number. [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avformat: Add Pro-MPEG CoP #3-R2 FEC protocol. Vlad Tarca vtarca at Thu Jun 2 CEST.
|Published (Last):||25 July 2013|
|PDF File Size:||8.27 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||3.31 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Australia believes that these accepted IPCC Guidelines provide a reasonable standardised approach for dealing with uncertainties. While there are different interpretations of this statement’s meaning, it is clear that sinks are to be included under the Convention.
How to Install FFmpeg in Ubuntu , | UbuntuHandbook
Should any “national system” established under Article 4 give special consideration of sinks? Australia has used as its base year and has refined the data for that year as it is used in Article 4. Please try to provide a qualitative answer.
No because of most of the information is too subjective. The exclusion of sinks from a QELRO removes much of the incentive to undertake these types of activities. MOP1 will be in a better position to judge adequacy, based on information from the in depth reviews of Second National Communications.
Sinks coop3 therefore important in Australia to sustainable land management.
Increased emissions from land use change would be subtracted from the estimated uptake from projects aimed and enhancing sinks. On the other hand, countries with net losses from sinks eventually reach limits to further deforest, and as a co3 their emissions reach zero.
Please see paragraphs 10 coo3 11, as well as 8,9,12,13 and These scaling factors would then be applied against country emission estimates in much the same cip3 GWPs are used now. Historical national communications should not be used as the basis for measuring compliance. Suggestions have been made that the issue of uncertain emission estimates can more easily be addressed by narrowing the focus of the binding quantified emission limitation and reduction objectives QELROs to the few sources most easily estimated.
Defined as “A statement of a range of values of the quantity in question, usually expressed as a number to be added to or subtracted from the basic value, or simply as a pair of numbers expressing the limits of the range. As such, a more precise definition for anthropogenic sinks is needed and the following is proposed: Please see paragraphs 11 and The Framework Convention also defines a co;3 as ” any process, activity or mechanism which removes a greenhouse gas, an aerosol, or a precursor of a greenhouse gas from the atmosphere “.
The secretariat has made every effort to ensure the correct reproduction of rr2 texts as submitted. Any new methodologies, particularly those that deal with the issue of uncertainties, that are developed and agreed to at a Meeting of the Parties, and available within an appropriate time ckp3 prior to the first budget period, would apply to the first and subsequent budget periods, notwithstanding any future agreements by the Parties.
Anthropogenic sinks are processes which remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and are influenced positively or negatively by human activity. Australia co3 the collection of greenhouse data as presented in greenhouse gas inventory is a relatively cpo3 science, and that for some categories of emissions eg biological sources estimations have much refinement before they can match the precision of the energy sectors.
Furthermore, by narrowing the definition of anthropogenic to direct activities that change carbon stocks after the target year, many of the uncertainties associated with the land-use change and forestry methodologies are reduced. An additional benefit is that the weighting system could also be used for point or project level sources and in a trading system.
ip cop3 r2 pdf – download now
Should any rr2 system” established under Article 4 [Article 5 in the latest draft] give special consideration to sinks? This would require the development of institutional mechanisms for data gathering on sinks if these are missing at present. Conservation of the Hawksbill Turtle Eretmochelys imbricata.
See response to Q8 a above. Canada, along with many other Parties, strongly believe that future changes in the Guidelines are necessary. In the biological sectors, the levels of uncertainties may be higher than for other sectors.
Uncertainty is inherent in estimations of GHG emissions and sinks from all sectors. However, in e2 data for the inventory, and in participation at workshops on LUC, Australia has noted that the issue of the interpretation of the Guidelines has been of concern to Parties.
Determinations of compliance will be based on each Party’s emissions inventory, which should be prepared using methods designed specifically for this purpose; i.
See response to question 1 above. No, for explanation see paragraph 6. Conservation of Loggerhead Sea Turtle Caretta caretta. The uptake resulting form such action should be quantifies using IPCC guidelines. This is a larger uncertainty than usually occurs on an emissions trend. In responding you may wish to consider which budget period or target year. These ckp3 methodologies and guidelines would establish an approach in which all Parties could be assured that those anthropogenic sources and sinks for which a measure of certainty is less precise are, in fact, in compliance 4.
If we were to eliminate some cop33 from an inventory, or a QELRO, solely because of the uncertainty in the emission cop33, we might also be eliminating an area in which large and measurable gains could be made in reducing emissions, or in enhancing the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.