1
|
Perugini L, Pellis G, Grassi G, Ciais P, Dolman H, House JI, Peters GP, Smith P, Günther D, Peylin P. Emerging reporting and verification needs under the Paris Agreement: How can the research community effectively contribute? Environ Sci Policy 2021; 122:116-126. [PMID: 34345221 PMCID: PMC8171125 DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2021.04.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2020] [Revised: 04/16/2021] [Accepted: 04/18/2021] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Abstract
Greenhouse gas (GHG) emission inventories represent the link between national and international political actions on climate change, and climate and environmental sciences. Inventory agencies need to include, in national GHG inventories, emission and removal estimates based on scientific data following specific reporting guidance under the United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Paris Agreement, using the methodologies defined in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Guidelines. Often however, research communities and inventory agencies have approached the problem of climate change from different angles and by using terminologies, metrics, rules and approaches that do not always match. This is particularly true dealing with "Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry" (LULUCF), the most challenging among the inventory sectors to deal with, mainly because of high level of complexity of its carbon dynamics and the difficulties in disaggregating the fluxes between those caused by natural and anthropogenic processes. In this paper, we facilitate the understanding by research communities of the current (UNFCCC) and future (under the Paris Agreement) reporting requirements, and we identify the main issues and topics that should be considered when targeting improvement of the GHG inventory. In relation to these topics, we describe where and how the research community can contribute to producing useful inputs, data, methods and solutions for inventory agencies and policy makers, on the basis of available literature. However, a greater effort by both communities is desirable for closer cooperation and collaboration, for data sharing and the understanding of respective and common aims.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucia Perugini
- Foundation Euro-Mediterranean Center on Climate Change (CMCC), Division on Climate Change Impacts on Agriculture, Forests and Ecosystem Services (IAFES), Viale Trieste n. 127, 01100, Viterbo, Italy
| | - Guido Pellis
- Foundation Euro-Mediterranean Center on Climate Change (CMCC), Division on Climate Change Impacts on Agriculture, Forests and Ecosystem Services (IAFES), Viale Trieste n. 127, 01100, Viterbo, Italy
| | - Giacomo Grassi
- European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Directorate for Sustainable Resources, Via Enrico Fermi n. 2749, 21027, Ispra, VA, Italy
| | - Philippe Ciais
- Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l’Environnement, (LSCE) CEA CNRS UVSQ UPSACLAY, 91191, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
| | - Han Dolman
- Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Earth Sciences, Faculty of Science, Boelelaan 1085, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Joanna I. House
- University of Bristol, School of Geographical Science, University Road, BS8 1SS, Bristol, UK
| | - Glen P. Peters
- CICERO Center of International Climate Research, Pb. 1129 Blindern, 0318, Oslo, Norway
| | - Pete Smith
- University of Aberdeen, Institute of Biological and Environmental Sciences, 23 St Machar Drive, AB24 3UU, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Dirk Günther
- Umweltbundesamt / German Environment Agency, Postfach 1406, 06813, Dessau-Roßlau, Germany
| | - Philippe Peylin
- Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l’Environnement, (LSCE) CEA CNRS UVSQ UPSACLAY, 91191, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Heinrich VHA, Dalagnol R, Cassol HLG, Rosan TM, de Almeida CT, Silva Junior CHL, Campanharo WA, House JI, Sitch S, Hales TC, Adami M, Anderson LO, Aragão LEOC. Large carbon sink potential of secondary forests in the Brazilian Amazon to mitigate climate change. Nat Commun 2021; 12:1785. [PMID: 33741981 PMCID: PMC7979697 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-22050-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2020] [Accepted: 02/19/2021] [Indexed: 01/31/2023] Open
Abstract
Tropical secondary forests sequester carbon up to 20 times faster than old-growth forests. This rate does not capture spatial regrowth patterns due to environmental and disturbance drivers. Here we quantify the influence of such drivers on the rate and spatial patterns of regrowth in the Brazilian Amazon using satellite data. Carbon sequestration rates of young secondary forests (<20 years) in the west are ~60% higher (3.0 ± 1.0 Mg C ha-1 yr-1) compared to those in the east (1.3 ± 0.3 Mg C ha-1 yr-1). Disturbances reduce regrowth rates by 8-55%. The 2017 secondary forest carbon stock, of 294 Tg C, could be 8% higher by avoiding fires and repeated deforestation. Maintaining the 2017 secondary forest area has the potential to accumulate ~19.0 Tg C yr-1 until 2030, contributing ~5.5% to Brazil's 2030 net emissions reduction target. Implementing legal mechanisms to protect and expand secondary forests whilst supporting old-growth conservation is, therefore, key to realising their potential as a nature-based climate solution.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Viola H. A. Heinrich
- grid.5337.20000 0004 1936 7603School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Ricardo Dalagnol
- grid.419222.e0000 0001 2116 4512Earth Observation and Geoinformatics Division, National Institute for Space Research (INPE), São José dos Campos, Brazil
| | - Henrique L. G. Cassol
- grid.419222.e0000 0001 2116 4512Earth Observation and Geoinformatics Division, National Institute for Space Research (INPE), São José dos Campos, Brazil
| | - Thais M. Rosan
- grid.8391.30000 0004 1936 8024College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Catherine Torres de Almeida
- grid.419222.e0000 0001 2116 4512Earth Observation and Geoinformatics Division, National Institute for Space Research (INPE), São José dos Campos, Brazil
| | - Celso H. L. Silva Junior
- grid.419222.e0000 0001 2116 4512Earth Observation and Geoinformatics Division, National Institute for Space Research (INPE), São José dos Campos, Brazil
| | - Wesley A. Campanharo
- grid.419222.e0000 0001 2116 4512Earth Observation and Geoinformatics Division, National Institute for Space Research (INPE), São José dos Campos, Brazil
| | - Joanna I. House
- grid.5337.20000 0004 1936 7603School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK ,grid.5337.20000 0004 1936 7603Cabot institute, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Stephen Sitch
- grid.8391.30000 0004 1936 8024College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Tristram C. Hales
- grid.5600.30000 0001 0807 5670School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - Marcos Adami
- grid.419222.e0000 0001 2116 4512Amazon Regional Center, National Institute for Space Research (INPE), Belém, Brazil
| | - Liana O. Anderson
- National Center for Monitoring and Early Warning of Natural Disaster (CEMADEN), São José dos Campos, Brazil
| | - Luiz E. O. C. Aragão
- grid.419222.e0000 0001 2116 4512Earth Observation and Geoinformatics Division, National Institute for Space Research (INPE), São José dos Campos, Brazil ,grid.8391.30000 0004 1936 8024College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Silva Junior CHL, Heinrich VHA, Freire ATG, Broggio IS, Rosan TM, Doblas J, Anderson LO, Rousseau GX, Shimabukuro YE, Silva CA, House JI, Aragão LEOC. Benchmark maps of 33 years of secondary forest age for Brazil. Sci Data 2020; 7:269. [PMID: 32796858 PMCID: PMC7427968 DOI: 10.1038/s41597-020-00600-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/25/2020] [Accepted: 07/13/2020] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
The restoration and reforestation of 12 million hectares of forests by 2030 are amongst the leading mitigation strategies for reducing carbon emissions within the Brazilian Nationally Determined Contribution targets assumed under the Paris Agreement. Understanding the dynamics of forest cover, which steeply decreased between 1985 and 2018 throughout Brazil, is essential for estimating the global carbon balance and quantifying the provision of ecosystem services. To know the long-term increment, extent, and age of secondary forests is crucial; however, these variables are yet poorly quantified. Here we developed a 30-m spatial resolution dataset of the annual increment, extent, and age of secondary forests for Brazil over the 1986-2018 period. Land-use and land-cover maps from MapBiomas Project (Collection 4.1) were used as input data for our algorithm, implemented in the Google Earth Engine platform. This dataset provides critical spatially explicit information for supporting carbon emissions reduction, biodiversity, and restoration policies, enabling environmental science applications, territorial planning, and subsidizing environmental law enforcement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Celso H L Silva Junior
- Tropical Ecosystems and Environmental Sciences lab - TREES, São José dos Campos, Brazil.
- Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE), São José dos Campos, Brazil.
| | | | - Ana T G Freire
- Programa de Pós-graduação em Biodiversidade e Conservação, Universidade Federal do Maranhão (UFMA), São Luís, Brazil
| | - Igor S Broggio
- Tropical Ecosystems and Environmental Sciences lab - TREES, São José dos Campos, Brazil
- Laboratório de Ciências Ambientais, Centro de Biociências e Biotecnologia, Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense Darcy Ribeiro (UENF), Campos dos Goytacazes, Brazil
| | | | - Juan Doblas
- Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE), São José dos Campos, Brazil
| | - Liana O Anderson
- Tropical Ecosystems and Environmental Sciences lab - TREES, São José dos Campos, Brazil
- Centro Nacional de Monitoramento e Alertas de Desastres Naturais (Cemaden), São José dos Campos, Brazil
| | - Guillaume X Rousseau
- Programa de Pós-graduação em Agroecologia, Universidade Estadual do Maranhão (UEMA), São Luís, Brazil
| | - Yosio E Shimabukuro
- Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE), São José dos Campos, Brazil
| | - Carlos A Silva
- University of Maryland, College Park, United States of America
- University of Florida, Gainesville, United States of America
| | | | - Luiz E O C Aragão
- Tropical Ecosystems and Environmental Sciences lab - TREES, São José dos Campos, Brazil
- Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE), São José dos Campos, Brazil
- University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Abstract
This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/ncomms15519.
Collapse
|
5
|
Smith P, House JI, Bustamante M, Sobocká J, Harper R, Pan G, West PC, Clark JM, Adhya T, Rumpel C, Paustian K, Kuikman P, Cotrufo MF, Elliott JA, McDowell R, Griffiths RI, Asakawa S, Bondeau A, Jain AK, Meersmans J, Pugh TAM. Global change pressures on soils from land use and management. Glob Chang Biol 2016; 22:1008-28. [PMID: 26301476 DOI: 10.1111/gcb.13068] [Citation(s) in RCA: 191] [Impact Index Per Article: 23.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/14/2015] [Accepted: 08/17/2015] [Indexed: 05/08/2023]
Abstract
Soils are subject to varying degrees of direct or indirect human disturbance, constituting a major global change driver. Factoring out natural from direct and indirect human influence is not always straightforward, but some human activities have clear impacts. These include land-use change, land management and land degradation (erosion, compaction, sealing and salinization). The intensity of land use also exerts a great impact on soils, and soils are also subject to indirect impacts arising from human activity, such as acid deposition (sulphur and nitrogen) and heavy metal pollution. In this critical review, we report the state-of-the-art understanding of these global change pressures on soils, identify knowledge gaps and research challenges and highlight actions and policies to minimize adverse environmental impacts arising from these global change drivers. Soils are central to considerations of what constitutes sustainable intensification. Therefore, ensuring that vulnerable and high environmental value soils are considered when protecting important habitats and ecosystems, will help to reduce the pressure on land from global change drivers. To ensure that soils are protected as part of wider environmental efforts, a global soil resilience programme should be considered, to monitor, recover or sustain soil fertility and function, and to enhance the ecosystem services provided by soils. Soils cannot, and should not, be considered in isolation of the ecosystems that they underpin and vice versa. The role of soils in supporting ecosystems and natural capital needs greater recognition. The lasting legacy of the International Year of Soils in 2015 should be to put soils at the centre of policy supporting environmental protection and sustainable development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pete Smith
- Institute of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Scottish Food Security Alliance-Crops & ClimateXChange, University of Aberdeen, 23 St Machar Drive, Aberdeen, AB24 3UU, UK
| | - Joanna I House
- Cabot Institute, School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, University Road, Bristol, BS8 1SS, UK
| | - Mercedes Bustamante
- Departamento de Ecologia, Universidade de Brasília, I.B. C.P. 04457, Campus Universitário Darcy Ribeiro - UnB. D.F., CEP: 70919-970, Brasília, Brazil
| | - Jaroslava Sobocká
- National Agriculture and Food Centre Lužianky, Soil Science and Conservation Research Institute Bratislava, Gagarinova 10, 827 13, Bratislava, Slovakia
| | - Richard Harper
- School of Veterinary and Life Sciences, Murdoch University, South Street, Murdoch, WA, 6150, Australia
| | - Genxing Pan
- Institute of Resources, Environment and Ecosystem of Agriculture, Nanjing Agricultural University, 1 Weigang, Nanjing, 210095, China
| | - Paul C West
- Global Landscapes Initiative, Institute on the Environment (IonE), University of Minnesota, 325 Learning & Environmental Sciences, 1954 Buford Ave, St. Paul, MN, 55108, USA
| | - Joanna M Clark
- Soil Research Centre, Department of Geography and Environmental Science, School of Archaeology, Geography and Environmental Science, The University of Reading, Whiteknights, PO Box 227, Reading, RG6 6AB, UK
| | - Tapan Adhya
- School of Biotechnology, KIIT University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, 751024, India
| | - Cornelia Rumpel
- CNRS, IEES (UMR 7618 UPMC-CNRS-UPEC-IRD) CentreAgroParisTech-INRA, Bâtiment EGER, Thiverval-Grignon, France and INRA, UMR 1402 INRA-AgroParisTech ECOSYS, F-78850, Thiverval-Grignon, France
| | - Keith Paustian
- Department of Soil and Crop Sciences & Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, 80523-1499, USA
| | - Peter Kuikman
- Alterra Wageningen UR, PO Box 47, 6700AA, Wageningen, The Netherlands
| | - M Francesca Cotrufo
- Department of Soil and Crop Sciences & Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, 80523-1499, USA
| | - Jane A Elliott
- National Hydrology Research Centre, Environment Canada, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 3H5, Canada
| | - Richard McDowell
- Invermay Agricultural Centre, AgResearch, Private Bag, Mosgiel, 50034, New Zealand
| | - Robert I Griffiths
- Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Maclean Building, Benson Lane, Crowmarsh Gifford, Wallingford, OX10 8BB, UK
| | - Susumu Asakawa
- Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences, Nagoya University, Chikusa, Nagoya, 464-8601, Japan
| | - Alberte Bondeau
- Institut Méditerranéen de Biodiversité et d'Ecologie marine et continentale, Aix Marseille Université, CNRS, IRD, Avignon Université, BP 80, Aix-en-Provence, 13545, France
| | - Atul K Jain
- Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 105 S. Gregory Street, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA
| | - Jeroen Meersmans
- Department of Geography, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Armory Building, Renes Drive, Exeter, EX4 4RJ, UK
| | - Thomas A M Pugh
- Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Institute of Meteorology and Climate Research/Atmospheric Environmental Research (IMK-IFU), Kreuzeckbahnstrasse 19, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, 82467, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Jain AK, Meiyappan P, Song Y, House JI. CO2 emissions from land-use change affected more by nitrogen cycle, than by the choice of land-cover data. Glob Chang Biol 2013; 19:2893-906. [PMID: 23529747 DOI: 10.1111/gcb.12207] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2013] [Accepted: 03/18/2013] [Indexed: 05/18/2023]
Abstract
The high uncertainty in land-based CO2 fluxes estimates is thought to be mainly due to uncertainty in not only quantifying historical changes among forests, croplands, and grassland, but also due to different processes included in calculation methods. Inclusion of a nitrogen (N) cycle in models is fairly recent and strongly affects carbon (C) fluxes. In this study, for the first time, we use a model with C and N dynamics with three distinct historical reconstructions of land-use and land-use change (LULUC) to quantify LULUC emissions and uncertainty that includes the integrated effects of not only climate and CO2 but also N. The modeled global average emissions including N dynamics for the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000-2005 were 1.8 ± 0.2, 1.7 ± 0.2, and 1.4 ± 0.2 GtC yr(-1) , respectively, (mean and range across LULUC data sets). The emissions from tropics were 0.8 ± 0.2, 0.8 ± 0.2, and 0.7 ± 0.3 GtC yr(-1) , and the non tropics were 1.1 ± 0.5, 0.9 ± 0.2, and 0.7 ± 0.1 GtC yr(-1) . Compared to previous studies that did not include N dynamics, modeled net LULUC emissions were higher, particularly in the non tropics. In the model, N limitation reduces regrowth rates of vegetation in temperate areas resulting in higher net emissions. Our results indicate that exclusion of N dynamics leads to an underestimation of LULUC emissions by around 70% in the non tropics, 10% in the tropics, and 40% globally in the 1990s. The differences due to inclusion/exclusion of the N cycle of 0.1 GtC yr(-1) in the tropics, 0.6 GtC yr(-1) in the non tropics, and 0.7 GtC yr(-1) globally (mean across land-cover data sets) in the 1990s were greater than differences due to the land-cover data in the non tropics and globally (0.2 GtC yr(-1) ). While land-cover information is improving with satellite and inventory data, this study indicates the importance of accounting for different processes, in particular the N cycle.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Atul K Jain
- Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801, USA.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Smith P, Haberl H, Popp A, Erb KH, Lauk C, Harper R, Tubiello FN, de Siqueira Pinto A, Jafari M, Sohi S, Masera O, Böttcher H, Berndes G, Bustamante M, Ahammad H, Clark H, Dong H, Elsiddig EA, Mbow C, Ravindranath NH, Rice CW, Robledo Abad C, Romanovskaya A, Sperling F, Herrero M, House JI, Rose S. How much land-based greenhouse gas mitigation can be achieved without compromising food security and environmental goals? Glob Chang Biol 2013; 19:2285-302. [PMID: 23505220 DOI: 10.1111/gcb.12160] [Citation(s) in RCA: 86] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2013] [Revised: 01/26/2013] [Accepted: 01/29/2013] [Indexed: 05/20/2023]
Abstract
Feeding 9-10 billion people by 2050 and preventing dangerous climate change are two of the greatest challenges facing humanity. Both challenges must be met while reducing the impact of land management on ecosystem services that deliver vital goods and services, and support human health and well-being. Few studies to date have considered the interactions between these challenges. In this study we briefly outline the challenges, review the supply- and demand-side climate mitigation potential available in the Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use AFOLU sector and options for delivering food security. We briefly outline some of the synergies and trade-offs afforded by mitigation practices, before presenting an assessment of the mitigation potential possible in the AFOLU sector under possible future scenarios in which demand-side measures codeliver to aid food security. We conclude that while supply-side mitigation measures, such as changes in land management, might either enhance or negatively impact food security, demand-side mitigation measures, such as reduced waste or demand for livestock products, should benefit both food security and greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation. Demand-side measures offer a greater potential (1.5-15.6 Gt CO2 -eq. yr(-1) ) in meeting both challenges than do supply-side measures (1.5-4.3 Gt CO2 -eq. yr(-1) at carbon prices between 20 and 100 US$ tCO2 -eq. yr(-1) ), but given the enormity of challenges, all options need to be considered. Supply-side measures should be implemented immediately, focussing on those that allow the production of more agricultural product per unit of input. For demand-side measures, given the difficulties in their implementation and lag in their effectiveness, policy should be introduced quickly, and should aim to codeliver to other policy agenda, such as improving environmental quality or improving dietary health. These problems facing humanity in the 21st Century are extremely challenging, and policy that addresses multiple objectives is required now more than ever.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pete Smith
- University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Abstract
Climate change is predicted to become a major threat to biodiversity in the 21st century, but accurate predictions and effective solutions have proved difficult to formulate. Alarming predictions have come from a rather narrow methodological base, but a new, integrated science of climate-change biodiversity assessment is emerging, based on multiple sources and approaches. Drawing on evidence from paleoecological observations, recent phenological and microevolutionary responses, experiments, and computational models, we review the insights that different approaches bring to anticipating and managing the biodiversity consequences of climate change, including the extent of species' natural resilience. We introduce a framework that uses information from different sources to identify vulnerability and to support the design of conservation responses. Although much of the information reviewed is on species, our framework and conclusions are also applicable to ecosystems, habitats, ecological communities, and genetic diversity, whether terrestrial, marine, or fresh water.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Terence P Dawson
- School of the Environment, University of Dundee, Dundee DD1 4HN, Scotland, UK
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Davis SC, House JI, Diaz-Chavez RA, Molnar A, Valin H, Delucia EH. How can land-use modelling tools inform bioenergy policies? Interface Focus 2011; 1:212-23. [PMID: 22482028 DOI: 10.1098/rsfs.2010.0023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2010] [Accepted: 01/10/2011] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Targets for bioenergy have been set worldwide to mitigate climate change. Although feedstock sources are often ambiguous, pledges in European nations, the United States and Brazil amount to more than 100 Mtoe of biorenewable fuel production by 2020. As a consequence, the biofuel sector is developing rapidly, and it is increasingly important to distinguish bioenergy options that can address energy security and greenhouse gas mitigation from those that cannot. This paper evaluates how bioenergy production affects land-use change (LUC), and to what extent land-use modelling can inform sound decision-making. We identified local and global internalities and externalities of biofuel development scenarios, reviewed relevant data sources and modelling approaches, identified sources of controversy about indirect LUC (iLUC) and then suggested a framework for comprehensive assessments of bioenergy. Ultimately, plant biomass must be managed to produce energy in a way that is consistent with the management of food, feed, fibre, timber and environmental services. Bioenergy production provides opportunities for improved energy security, climate mitigation and rural development, but the environmental and social consequences depend on feedstock choices and geographical location. The most desirable solutions for bioenergy production will include policies that incentivize regionally integrated management of diverse resources with low inputs, high yields, co-products, multiple benefits and minimal risks of iLUC. Many integrated assessment models include energy resources, trade, technological development and regional environmental conditions, but do not account for biodiversity and lack detailed data on the location of degraded and underproductive lands that would be ideal for bioenergy production. Specific practices that would maximize the benefits of bioenergy production regionally need to be identified before a global analysis of bioenergy-related LUC can be accomplished.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah C Davis
- Energy Biosciences Institute , University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign , Urbana, IL , USA
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Schröter D, Cramer W, Leemans R, Prentice IC, Araújo MB, Arnell NW, Bondeau A, Bugmann H, Carter TR, Gracia CA, de la Vega-Leinert AC, Erhard M, Ewert F, Glendining M, House JI, Kankaanpää S, Klein RJT, Lavorel S, Lindner M, Metzger MJ, Meyer J, Mitchell TD, Reginster I, Rounsevell M, Sabaté S, Sitch S, Smith B, Smith J, Smith P, Sykes MT, Thonicke K, Thuiller W, Tuck G, Zaehle S, Zierl B. Ecosystem service supply and vulnerability to global change in Europe. Science 2005; 310:1333-7. [PMID: 16254151 DOI: 10.1126/science.1115233] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1142] [Impact Index Per Article: 60.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/02/2022]
Abstract
Global change will alter the supply of ecosystem services that are vital for human well-being. To investigate ecosystem service supply during the 21st century, we used a range of ecosystem models and scenarios of climate and land-use change to conduct a Europe-wide assessment. Large changes in climate and land use typically resulted in large changes in ecosystem service supply. Some of these trends may be positive (for example, increases in forest area and productivity) or offer opportunities (for example, "surplus land" for agricultural extensification and bioenergy production). However, many changes increase vulnerability as a result of a decreasing supply of ecosystem services (for example, declining soil fertility, declining water availability, increasing risk of forest fires), especially in the Mediterranean and mountain regions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dagmar Schröter
- Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, 14473 Potsdam, Germany.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Abstract
The sensitivity of soil carbon to warming is a major uncertainty in projections of carbon dioxide concentration and climate. Experimental studies overwhelmingly indicate increased soil organic carbon (SOC) decomposition at higher temperatures, resulting in increased carbon dioxide emissions from soils. However, recent findings have been cited as evidence against increased soil carbon emissions in a warmer world. In soil warming experiments, the initially increased carbon dioxide efflux returns to pre-warming rates within one to three years, and apparent carbon pool turnover times are insensitive to temperature. It has already been suggested that the apparent lack of temperature dependence could be an artefact due to neglecting the extreme heterogeneity of soil carbon, but no explicit model has yet been presented that can reconcile all the above findings. Here we present a simple three-pool model that partitions SOC into components with different intrinsic turnover rates. Using this model, we show that the results of all the soil-warming experiments are compatible with long-term temperature sensitivity of SOC turnover: they can be explained by rapid depletion of labile SOC combined with the negligible response of non-labile SOC on experimental timescales. Furthermore, we present evidence that non-labile SOC is more sensitive to temperature than labile SOC, implying that the long-term positive feedback of soil decomposition in a warming world may be even stronger than predicted by global models.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W Knorr
- Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, PO Box 100164, D-07701 Jena, Germany.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Schimel DS, House JI, Hibbard KA, Bousquet P, Ciais P, Peylin P, Braswell BH, Apps MJ, Baker D, Bondeau A, Canadell J, Churkina G, Cramer W, Denning AS, Field CB, Friedlingstein P, Goodale C, Heimann M, Houghton RA, Melillo JM, Moore B, Murdiyarso D, Noble I, Pacala SW, Prentice IC, Raupach MR, Rayner PJ, Scholes RJ, Steffen WL, Wirth C. Recent patterns and mechanisms of carbon exchange by terrestrial ecosystems. Nature 2001; 414:169-72. [PMID: 11700548 DOI: 10.1038/35102500] [Citation(s) in RCA: 959] [Impact Index Per Article: 41.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
Knowledge of carbon exchange between the atmosphere, land and the oceans is important, given that the terrestrial and marine environments are currently absorbing about half of the carbon dioxide that is emitted by fossil-fuel combustion. This carbon uptake is therefore limiting the extent of atmospheric and climatic change, but its long-term nature remains uncertain. Here we provide an overview of the current state of knowledge of global and regional patterns of carbon exchange by terrestrial ecosystems. Atmospheric carbon dioxide and oxygen data confirm that the terrestrial biosphere was largely neutral with respect to net carbon exchange during the 1980s, but became a net carbon sink in the 1990s. This recent sink can be largely attributed to northern extratropical areas, and is roughly split between North America and Eurasia. Tropical land areas, however, were approximately in balance with respect to carbon exchange, implying a carbon sink that offset emissions due to tropical deforestation. The evolution of the terrestrial carbon sink is largely the result of changes in land use over time, such as regrowth on abandoned agricultural land and fire prevention, in addition to responses to environmental changes, such as longer growing seasons, and fertilization by carbon dioxide and nitrogen. Nevertheless, there remain considerable uncertainties as to the magnitude of the sink in different regions and the contribution of different processes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D S Schimel
- Max Planck Institute für Biogeochemie, Jena, Germany.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|