This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
working_groups:cp:collection_of_publications [2021/12/16 14:40] ameier |
working_groups:cp:collection_of_publications [2021/12/22 11:53] (current) ameier |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | ==== Collection of Publications ==== | + | ==== Collection of Publications |
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
Here is a quick and dirty hack to access non-open-access articles in case they are included in the journals that the UPC has subscriptions for and supposing that you have UPC credentials. This method is particularly useful for DOI searches (That the UPC Library tries to keep a secret it seemed to me...): | Here is a quick and dirty hack to access non-open-access articles in case they are included in the journals that the UPC has subscriptions for and supposing that you have UPC credentials. This method is particularly useful for DOI searches (That the UPC Library tries to keep a secret it seemed to me...): | ||
- | [[https:// | + | 1) Visit: |
- | Then grab the tail of your DOI html address like " | + | 2) Then grab the DOI of interest as in this example |
- | | + | If that fails, then try this hack [[.collection_of_publications:ups_doi_access_hack| UPC DOI access hack]] |
- | or directly from (restrictive) publisher site like this one | + | |
- | https:// | + | |
- | and paste it in the DOI search field and hit enter. | + | |
- | If you are lucky your publication may be found and accessed that way as in this example.... | + | |
+ | == Tables of Literature potentially useful to our work... == | ||
+ | Feel free to create more sub-pages as you see fit. | ||
+ | Please insert any additions alphabetically by sir name of the first author. | ||
- | https:// | + | [[.collection_of_publications:carbon_cycle |
- | == Table of Literature potentially useful to our work... == | + | [[.collection_of_publications: |
- | Please insert any additions alphabetically by sir name of the first author. | + | |
+ | [[.collection_of_publications: | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[.collection_of_publications: | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[.collection_of_publications: | ||
^ Author | ^ Author | ||
- | | Masayuki Kondo | State of the science in reconciling top-down and bottom-up approaches for terrestrial CO2 budget | | + | | Pete Smith | Which practices co-deliver food security, climate change mitigation |
- | | 2019 | Their set of atmospheric inversions and bio-sphere models, showed a high level of agreement for global | + | | 2019 | | |
- | | | https:// | + | | | https:// |
- | | | {{ : | + | | | {{ : |
- | | Andreas Krause | Legacy Effects from Historical Environmental Changes Dominate Future Terrestrial Carbon Uptake | | + | |
- | | 2020 | They use LPJ‐GUESS to quantify legacy effects for the 21st century. LUH2 (historic) | + | |
- | | | https:// | + | |
- | | | + | |
- | | Andreas Krause | Large uncertainty in carbon uptake potential of land-based climate-change mitigation efforts | | + | |
- | | 2018 | {{ : | + | |
- | | | https:// | + | |
- | | | + | |
- | | Philip Vergragt et al | Comparison of forest above-ground biomass from dynamic global vegetation models with spatially explicit remotely sensed observation-based estimates | | + | |
- | | 2011 | This paper investigates if and how carbon capture and storage (CCS) could help to avoid reinforcing fossil fuel lock-in. The outcome is that a large-scale BECCS development could be feasible under certain conditions, thus largely avoiding the risk of reinforced fossil fuel lock-in. //Keywords: Carbon capture and storage, Biomass, Fossil fuel// | | + | |
- | | | https:// | + | |
- | | | {{ : | + | |
- | | Hui Yang | Comparison of forest above-ground biomass from dynamic global vegetation models with spatially explicit remotely sensed observation-based estimates | | + | |
- | | 2020 | Uses the GlobBiomass data set of forest above-ground biomass (AGB) density for the year 2010, obtained from multiple remote sensing and in situ observations at 100 m spatial resolution to evaluate AGB estimated by nine dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs).Model estimates are 365 ± 66 Pg C compared to 275 (±13.5%) Pg C from GlobBiomass. The results suggest that TRENDY v6 DGVMs tend to underestimate biomass loss from anthropogenic disturbances.| | + | |
- | | | https:// | + | |
- | | | {{ : | + | |