Lecture 7 - Mitigation Issues in Agriculture 2024 PDF

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Mitigation options in Agriculture Climate Smart Agriculture WSG35806 Ruchita Ingle and Ronald Hutjes Climate Smart Agriculture 2 Climate Smart Agriculture ▪ Impacts Agriculture on Climate Direct emissions: livestock, C-seq, N-appl...

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Mitigation options in Agriculture Climate Smart Agriculture WSG35806 Ruchita Ingle and Ronald Hutjes Climate Smart Agriculture 2 Climate Smart Agriculture ▪ Impacts Agriculture on Climate Direct emissions: livestock, C-seq, N-appl Indirect emissions: land use change, bio-economy ▪ Impacts Climate on Agriculture Direct: weather - climate variability - climate change Indirect: water resources, pests ▪ Food security Intensification, diversification, socio-economics 3 Agricultural Emissions & Mitigation 1997 Higher emissions from LULUCF in South East Asia (fire) High uncertainty  Agricultural Emissions & Mitigation Important Agricultural Emissions & Mitigation IAM = integrated assessment models (policy driven) Highest potential Eastern Europe has lowest mitigation potential Agricultural Emissions & Mitigation Agricultural Emissions & Mitigation ◼ Processes and management Nitrious oxide and methane ◼ Monitoring Reporting and Verification ◼ Real variability vs UNFCCC reporting ◼ Forestry ◼ Grasslands ◼ Croplands ◼ Principles UNFCCC reporting National inventory report Specific guidelines from IPCC Emission = activity * emission factor Agricultural Emissions UNFCCC reporting ▪ National Inventory Report (NIR) ▪ IPCC GPG 2006/2014 ▪ Emission = Activity x Emission Factor = A x Ef Forestry: Activity is area forest + changes; single (or stratified) Emission factors Croplands: Ef (CO2)= zero in NL Ef (N2O) = f(N applied, soil type) Cattle: Activity is number of cattle; Ef (CH4) per cattle category (Milk cattle, young cattle, etc.) Type of livestock Ef (CH4, N2O) Separate for manure storage and application Ef(CH4, enteric ferm) = f(species, feed, etc) Ef generally poorly known (large uncertainty) Act generally very precisely known Climate Smart Agriculture In the end, we want to get CO2 equivalent Impacts Agriculture on Climate: Nitrous Oxide sources Global estimates of total Nitrogen Conversion from N to N2O Molecular weight of N2O= 2(14)+ 16 =44 (17.3*44)/14 = 27.2 MtN2O/year Conversion to CO2 equivalent Mention on which GWP : 265 assessment this is based 298 on 265*27.2 = 7.2 GtCO2-e This was for assessment 5 10 Nitrous Oxide: part of N-cycle ▪ Production: (nitrification &) denitrification Applied N on soil; native N in SOM; manure storage Denitrification only in anaerobic conditions Sensitive to rainfall; to water logging; to application form (spray/inject); Leaching emissions On site (direct emissions); Off site (indirect emissions) leaching of NO3 groundwater; volatilisation NH3 & atmospheric transport & deposition of ammonia Anaerobic conditions Indirect emissions 11 Nitrous Oxide: part of N-cycle ▪ Production: (nitrification &) denitrification Applied N on soil; native N in SOM; manure storage Denitrification only in anaerobic conditions On site (direct emissions); Off site (indirect emissions) ▪ Manage Application manure/fertilizer/residues; Slow-release fertiliser/residues trade-off NH3, N2O Releases nitrogen gradually Nitrification inhibitors Can be added to slow down nitrification https://youtu.be/k22EX3Vbr1s 12  Nitrous Oxide: part of N-cycle ▪ Management options Application manure/fertilizer/residues; trade-off NH3, N2O Slow-release fertiliser: controlled release urea (CRU) Slow -release fertilizer Nitrogen use efficiency = the effectiveness of how plants use nitrogen for plant biomass 13 Nitrous Oxide: part of N-cycle ▪ Management options Application manure/fertilizer/residues; trade-off NH3, N2O Slow-release fertiliser: controlled release urea (CRU) Decrease in emissions Decrease in leaching No significant effect 14 Nitrous Oxide: part of N-cycle Footprint = emissions / yield low footprint -> more food with less emissions ▪ Production: (nitrification &) denitrification Applied N on soil; native N in SOM; manure storage Denitrification only in anaerobic conditions On site (direct emissions); Off site (indirect emissions) ▪ Manage Application manure/fertilizer/residues; absolute vs footprint Slow-release fertiliser/residues GHG vs GHG/yield Nitrification inhibitors https://youtu.be/k22EX3Vbr1s 15 Nitrous Oxide: part of N-cycle ▪ Management options Application manure/fertilizer/residues; footprint: GHG/yield maize China has much more emissions than N- America China has a much bigger footprint N application rate Yield NUE GHG footprint kg CO2-e kg N/ha Mg/ha % kg CO2-e / Mg yld China 272 6.1 30 4739 777 N-America 209 11.1 70 2703 244 16 Nitrous Oxide: part of N-cycle ▪ Management options Application manure/fertilizer/residues; footprint: GHG/yield Maize China irrigated vs rainfed 17 Nitrous Oxide: part of N-cycle ▪ Production: (nitrification &) denitrification Applied N on soil; native N in SOM; manure storage Denitrification only in anaerobic conditions On site (direct emissions); Off site (indirect emissions) ▪ Management ▪ Reporting Country specific : countries come up with a EF Conceptual overview of reporting Tier 1 : emission factors from IPCC 18 Middelaar, 2013 Nitrous Oxide: part of N-cycle ▪ Production: (nitrification &) denitrification ▪ Management ▪ Reporting vs reality Average Diurnal pattern of N2O emissions from a Dairy grassland in NL which was heavily fertilized No big peaks, quite stable 19 Kroon, 2010 Nitrous Oxide: part of N-cycle ▪ Production: (nitrification &) denitrification ▪ Management ▪ Reporting vs reality Longer timescale may show other results 20 Kroon, 2010 Nitrous Oxide: take home messages 21 Climate Smart Agriculture Impacts Agriculture on Climate: Methane sources Global estimates of total Methane Conversions GWP : 28 Conversion to CO2 equivalent 678*28 = 18.9 GtCO2-e Conversion to C 678*12/16 = 508 MtC/yr C CH4 22 Methane: rice paddies & wetlands ▪ Production: anaerobic decomposition in (reduced) soil Partially oxidised again in aerated (oxidised) soil on top; methanotroph bacteria Transport through plants (aerenchym), ebullition (bubbles) and/or diffusion (water/soil) 23 Methane: rice paddies & wetlands ▪ Production: anaerobic decomposition in (reduced) soil Partially oxidised again in aerated (oxidised) soil on top; methanotroph bacteria Transport through plants (aerenchym), ebullition (bubbles) and/or diffusion (water/soil) Rewetting wetlands reduces CO2 emissions but increases CH4 emissions More waterlogged condition for longer duration leads to higher methane emissions 24 Methane: rice paddies & wetlands ▪ Production: anaerobic decomposition in (reduced) soil Partially oxidised again in aerated (oxidised) soil on top; methanotroph bacteria Transport through plants (aerenchym), ebullition (bubbles) and/or diffusion (water/soil) 25 Methane: rice paddies & wetlands ▪ Production: anaerobic decomposition in (reduced) soil Partially oxidised again in aerated (oxidised) soil on top; methanotroph bacteria Transport through plants (aerenchym), ebullition (bubbles) and/or diffusion (water/soil) ▪ Management Flooding/aeration in cropping and fallow season Fertilizer/OM (straw/residues) application ▪ Manure similar process/similar management Better to dry manure to reduce methane emissions 26 Methane: rice paddies & wetlands ▪ Management Flooding/aeration in cropping and fallow season Fertilizer/OM (straw/residues) application AWD is a better option in 27 terms of footprint Methane: rice paddies & wetlands ▪ Management absolute Flooding/aeration in cropping and fallow season vs footprint Fertilizer/OM (straw/residues) application GHG vs GHG/yield 28 Methane: rice paddies & wetlands ▪ Management absolute Flooding/aeration in cropping and fallow season vs footprint Fertilizer/OM (straw/residues) application GHG vs GHG/yield China is doing quite well : improved water management of rice paddles China uses more fertilizer 29 Methane: rice paddies & wetlands ▪ Production: anaerobic decomposition in (reduced) soil Partially oxidised again in aerated (oxidised) soil on top; methanotroph bacteria Transport through plants (aerenchym), ebullition (bubbles) and/or diffusion (water/soil) ▪ Management Flooding/aeration in cropping and fallow season Fertilizer/OM (straw/residues) application ▪ Reporting ijk = different ecosystems Emissions = Σijk (EFijk tijk Aijk 10-6) Gg/yr EFi = Efc SFw SFp SFo SFs,r EFc = baseline emission factors SF = scaling factors of different activities 30 Methane: rice paddies & wetlands ▪ Production: anaerobic decomposition in (reduced) soil ▪ Management ▪ Reporting vs reality Average Diurnal pattern of CH4 emissions from a Dairy grassland in NL with intense cattle on the field Variation on a daily basis 31 Kroon, 2010  Methane: rice paddies & wetlands ▪ Production: anaerobic decomposition in (reduced) soil ▪ Management ▪ Reporting vs reality High variation over a longer time period 32 Kroon, 2010 Methane: take home messages not fixed 33 Methane: livestock ▪ Production: anaerobic decomposition OM Enteric fermentation in stomach ruminants Anaerobic digestion in manure storage More on Friday 34 Land use change for agriculture ▪ Land use change for croplands ▪ Decrease in ag/bg carbon stocks Klein Goldewijk, K., A. Beusen, et al. (2011). "The HYDE 3.1 spatially explicit database of human-induced global land-use change over the past 12,000 years." Global Ecology and Biogeography 20(1): 73-86. Carbon cycle ▪ Land use change Most of those emissions in the tropics ▪ 50% of the global net LUC CO2 emissions from Brazil, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Indonesia IPCC WGIII AR6 / GCP13 Land use change for agriculture (pre) historic LUC emissions ▪ Prehistoric land cover change Preindustrial global emissions 343 GtC, industrial 108 GtC ▪ Presently: pasture 3.4 Gha; half are crops 1.5 Gha ▪ Contemporary LUC emissions Negative: EU/EIT/US -> recovering from past deforestation Positive: LAM, AFR, ASIA (stabilizing?) CO2 uptake of European forests NIR generally neglected Luysaert et al. (2010, GCB) Schulze et al. (2009, NGeo) Variability of CO2 exchange from grasslands? Only sand and minerals ▪ NIR: CO2 exchange mineral soils assumed negligible Based on loss organic material from drained peatland Peat soils have OM 1 number for grassland on organic soils? ? = Variability of CO2 exchange NL grasslands Source Sink Sink Source Jacobs et al. (2007) Biogeosciences 4, 803-816  IPCC-T1 Grassland on organic soils Variability CO2 exchange NL grasslands deep drained = 610gC.m-2.yr- 1 500 CO2 uptake or release (gC/m2/a) 400 Source shallow drained = 360gC.m-2.yr-1 300 200 100 Sink 0 -100 -200 2002 2003 -300 2004 -400 2005 -500 Oukoop Horstermeer Haastrecht Cabauw Haarweg Focht_veen Stein Leliestad Jacobs et al. (2007) Biogeosciences 4, 803-816 Variability CO2 exchange NL grasslands Grassland on organic soils 500 NIR=519gC.m-2.yr-1 CO2 uptake or release (gC/m2/a) 400 300 Source 200 100 0 -100 Sink -200 2002 2003 -300 2004 -400 2005 -500 Oukoop Horstermeer Haastrecht Cabauw Haarweg Focht_veen Stein Leliestad Jacobs et al. (2007) Biogeosciences 4, 803-816 Variability GHG exchange NL grasslands CO2 equiv. emissies Veenweide scenarios Drained -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 modern Medium drained historisch moeras/broekbos biomassa Not drained Jacobs et al. (2007) vd Born et al. 2003 Biogeosciences 4, 803-816 Variability GHG exchange NL grasslands CO2 equiv. emissies IPCC T1 Veenweide scenarios -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 modern IPCC T2, NL historisch moeras/broekbos biomassa Jacobs et al. (2007) vd Born et al. 2003 Biogeosciences 4, 803-816  CO2 uptake European grasslands What is produced is completely consumed NIR generally (CO2) neglected Schulze et al. (2009, NGeo) Variability CO2 exchange from croplands? ▪ National reporting: CO2 budget ~ 0 ? = 0 C-budget EU croplands in cropping period Sink Source All Wheat Maize Average -38 -54 -269 gC m-2 (C-import?) s 251 256 208 gC m-2 Moors et al. (2011) AGEE Carbon budget EU croplands totals NIR generally (CO2) neglected Schulze et al. (2009 NGeo) UNFCCC reporting: take home messages ▪ NIR uses (generally) one (average) number for Ef Interannual variation NEE large Variations within crops, grasslands and forests large ▪ NIR report  net emissions to atmosphere NIR UNCCC reporting ▪ Emission = Activity x Emission Factor = A x Ef IPCC Guidelines Reporting levels Tier 1-3 1 IPCC global default values for Ef 2 National adapted values for Ef Based on case studies 3 Model based estimates for E Process based models A always national statistics precisely known  UNFCCC reporting + six categories of pigs + 11 categories of poultry +..... NIR NL2009 (2010) UNFCCC reporting ▪ Land based emissions Carbon stocks inventories, mostly only above ground biomass Crops/grassland zero Forest quite strong negative ▪ Emission = Activity x Emission Factor = A x Ef Land based emissions : Activity precisely known, Ef poorly UNFCCC reporting as % of total activity data Contribution Uncertainty Uncertainty Uncertainty Uncertainty level (tier) factor (%) emissions emissions emissions reporting emission national national Sector Sector to total code Gas (%) (%) 6A1 Solid waste disposal sites 30 15 34 8 methane CH4 4B Agriculture: Manure management 2 2% 10 100 100 7 Agriculture: enteric fermentation 2-3 3% 5 20 21 4 4A cattle 4B Agriculture: Manure management 1-2 0% 10 100 100 4 oxide N2O nitrous Agriculture: emissions 1-2 4% indirect 50 200 206 30 4D from agricultural soils direct 10 60 61 14 LULUCF: staying grassland or 2 3% 25 50 56 11 5C conversion to grassland LULUCF: staying forest or conversion 2 -2% 25 62 67 7 carbon dioxide CO2 5A to forest Stationary combustion : 20 1 20 9 1A4a Commercial/Institutional Stationary combustion : Petroleum 10 10 14 6 1A1b Refining liquids Mobile combustion: diesel road 5 0 5 5 1A3b vehicles Olivier et al. (2010)  UNFCCC reporting Emission factor Emission function (model) Ef def ? Tier 1 IPCC National Ideal situation, involving interactions Tier 2 Ef nat Ef 1,2,…,n Tier 3 Kuikman et al. (2007) Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Mitigation options in Agriculture Enhanced C-sequestration or biofuels next Monday GHG Emissions and Mitigation in Agriculture Questions ? 56