Literature DB >> 28464416

Trade-offs for food production, nature conservation and climate limit the terrestrial carbon dioxide removal potential.

Lena R Boysen1,2,3,4, Wolfgang Lucht1,2,3, Dieter Gerten1,2.   

Abstract

Large-scale biomass plantations (BPs) are a common factor in climate mitigation scenarios as they promise double benefits: extracting carbon from the atmosphere and providing a renewable energy source. However, their terrestrial carbon dioxide removal (tCDR) potentials depend on important factors such as land availability, efficiency of capturing biomass-derived carbon and the timing of operation. Land availability is restricted by the demands of future food production depending on yield increases and population growth, by requirements for nature conservation and, with respect to climate mitigation, avoiding unfavourable albedo changes. We integrate these factors in one spatially explicit biogeochemical simulation framework to explore the tCDR opportunity space on land available after these constraints are taken into account, starting either in 2020 or 2050, and lasting until 2100. We find that assumed future needs for nature protection and food production strongly limit tCDR potentials. BPs on abandoned crop and pasture areas (~1,300 Mha in scenarios of either 8.0 billion people and yield gap reductions of 25% until 2020 or 9.5 billion people and yield gap reductions of 50% until 2050) could, theoretically, sequester ~100 GtC in land carbon stocks and biomass harvest by 2100. However, this potential would be ~80% lower if only cropland was available or ~50% lower if albedo decreases were considered as a factor restricting land availability. Converting instead natural forest, shrubland or grassland into BPs could result in much larger tCDR potentials ̶ but at high environmental costs (e.g. biodiversity loss). The most promising avenue for effective tCDR seems to be improvement of efficient carbon utilization pathways, changes in dietary trends or the restoration of marginal lands for the implementation of tCDR.
© 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bioenergy; climate change; ecosystem change; food production; mitigation

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28464416     DOI: 10.1111/gcb.13745

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Glob Chang Biol        ISSN: 1354-1013            Impact factor:   10.863


  2 in total

1.  Which practices co-deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification?

Authors:  Pete Smith; Katherine Calvin; Johnson Nkem; Donovan Campbell; Francesco Cherubini; Giacomo Grassi; Vladimir Korotkov; Anh Le Hoang; Shuaib Lwasa; Pamela McElwee; Ephraim Nkonya; Nobuko Saigusa; Jean-Francois Soussana; Miguel Angel Taboada; Frances C Manning; Dorothy Nampanzira; Cristina Arias-Navarro; Matteo Vizzarri; Jo House; Stephanie Roe; Annette Cowie; Mark Rounsevell; Almut Arneth
Journal:  Glob Chang Biol       Date:  2019-12-14       Impact factor: 13.211

2.  Global Sequestration Potential of Increased Organic Carbon in Cropland Soils.

Authors:  Robert J Zomer; Deborah A Bossio; Rolf Sommer; Louis V Verchot
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-11-14       Impact factor: 4.379

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.