Literature DB >> 30542169

Assessing the efficiency of changes in land use for mitigating climate change.

Timothy D Searchinger1,2, Stefan Wirsenius3, Tim Beringer4, Patrice Dumas5,6.   

Abstract

Land-use changes are critical for climate policy because native vegetation and soils store abundant carbon and their losses from agricultural expansion, together with emissions from agricultural production, contribute about 20 to 25 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions1,2. Most climate strategies require maintaining or increasing land-based carbon3 while meeting food demands, which are expected to grow by more than 50 per cent by 20501,2,4. A finite global land area implies that fulfilling these strategies requires increasing global land-use efficiency of both storing carbon and producing food. Yet measuring the efficiency of land-use changes from the perspective of greenhouse gas emissions is challenging, particularly when land outputs change, for example, from one food to another or from food to carbon storage in forests. Intuitively, if a hectare of land produces maize well and forest poorly, maize should be the more efficient use of land, and vice versa. However, quantifying this difference and the yields at which the balance changes requires a common metric that factors in different outputs, emissions from different agricultural inputs (such as fertilizer) and the different productive potentials of land due to physical factors such as rainfall or soils. Here we propose a carbon benefits index that measures how changes in the output types, output quantities and production processes of a hectare of land contribute to the global capacity to store carbon and to reduce total greenhouse gas emissions. This index does not evaluate biodiversity or other ecosystem values, which must be analysed separately. We apply the index to a range of land-use and consumption choices relevant to climate policy, such as reforesting pastures, biofuel production and diet changes. We find that these choices can have much greater implications for the climate than previously understood because standard methods for evaluating the effects of land use4-11 on greenhouse gas emissions systematically underestimate the opportunity of land to store carbon if it is not used for agriculture.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30542169     DOI: 10.1038/s41586-018-0757-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nature        ISSN: 0028-0836            Impact factor:   49.962


  24 in total

Review 1.  Xylose utilization in Saccharomyces cerevisiae during conversion of hydrothermally pretreated lignocellulosic biomass to ethanol.

Authors:  Heeyoung Park; Deokyeol Jeong; Minhye Shin; Suryang Kwak; Eun Joong Oh; Ja Kyong Ko; Soo Rin Kim
Journal:  Appl Microbiol Biotechnol       Date:  2020-02-19       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 2.  The environmental impacts of palm oil in context.

Authors:  Erik Meijaard; Thomas M Brooks; Kimberly M Carlson; Eleanor M Slade; John Garcia-Ulloa; David L A Gaveau; Janice Ser Huay Lee; Truly Santika; Diego Juffe-Bignoli; Matthew J Struebig; Serge A Wich; Marc Ancrenaz; Lian Pin Koh; Nadine Zamira; Jesse F Abrams; Herbert H T Prins; Cyriaque N Sendashonga; Daniel Murdiyarso; Paul R Furumo; Nicholas Macfarlane; Rachel Hoffmann; Marcos Persio; Adrià Descals; Zoltan Szantoi; Douglas Sheil
Journal:  Nat Plants       Date:  2020-12-07       Impact factor: 15.793

3.  Global stocks and capacity of mineral-associated soil organic carbon.

Authors:  Katerina Georgiou; Robert B Jackson; Olga Vindušková; Rose Z Abramoff; Anders Ahlström; Wenting Feng; Jennifer W Harden; Adam F A Pellegrini; H Wayne Polley; Jennifer L Soong; William J Riley; Margaret S Torn
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2022-07-01       Impact factor: 17.694

4.  Infectious Diseases and Meat Production.

Authors:  Romain Espinosa; Damian Tago; Nicolas Treich
Journal:  Environ Resour Econ (Dordr)       Date:  2020-08-04

5.  A Detoxification-Free Process for Enhanced Ethanol Production From Corn Fiber Under Semi-Simultaneous Saccharification and Fermentation.

Authors:  Yingjie Guo; Jiamin Huang; Nuo Xu; Hexue Jia; Xuezhi Li; Jian Zhao; Yinbo Qu
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2022-03-30       Impact factor: 5.640

6.  The greenhouse gas impacts of converting food production in England and Wales to organic methods.

Authors:  Laurence G Smith; Guy J D Kirk; Philip J Jones; Adrian G Williams
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 14.919

7.  Agriculture's Contribution to Climate Change and Role in Mitigation Is Distinct From Predominantly Fossil CO2-Emitting Sectors.

Authors:  John Lynch; Michelle Cain; David Frame; Raymond Pierrehumbert
Journal:  Front Sustain Food Syst       Date:  2021-02-03

8.  Natural climate solutions versus bioenergy: Can carbon benefits of natural succession compete with bioenergy from short rotation coppice?

Authors:  Gerald Kalt; Andreas Mayer; Michaela C Theurl; Christian Lauk; Karl-Heinz Erb; Helmut Haberl
Journal:  Glob Change Biol Bioenergy       Date:  2019-06-13       Impact factor: 4.745

Review 9.  Sustainable Food Systems and the Mediterranean Diet.

Authors:  Elliot M Berry
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2019-09-16       Impact factor: 5.717

10.  Social and environmental analysis of food waste abatement via the peer-to-peer sharing economy.

Authors:  Tamar Makov; Alon Shepon; Jonathan Krones; Clare Gupta; Marian Chertow
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-03-10       Impact factor: 14.919

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.