Literature DB >> 33730045

Offsetting unabated agricultural emissions with CO2 removal to achieve ambitious climate targets.

Nicoletta Brazzola1, Jan Wohland1, Anthony Patt1.   

Abstract

The Representative Concentration Pathway 2.6 (RCP2.6), which is broadly compatible with the Paris Agreement's temperature goal by 1.5-2°C, contains substantial reductions in agricultural non-CO2 emissions besides the deployment of Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR). Failing to mitigate agricultural methane and nitrous oxide emissions could contribute to an overshoot of the RCP2.6 warming by about 0.4°C. We explore using additional CDR to offset alternative agricultural non-CO2 emission pathways in which emissions either remain constant or rise. We assess the effects on the climate of calculating CDR rates to offset agricultural emission under two different approaches: relying on the 100-year global warming potential conversion metric (GWP100) and maintaining effective radiative forcing levels at exactly those of RCP2.6. Using a reduced-complexity climate model, we find that the conversion metric leads to a systematic underestimation of needed CDR, reaching only around 50% of the temperature mitigation needed to remain on the RCP2.6 track. This is mostly because the metric underestimates, in the near term, forcing from short-lived climate pollutants such as methane. We test whether alternative conversion metrics, the GWP20 and GWP*, are more suitable for offsetting purposes, and found that they both lead to an overestimation of the CDR requirements. Under alternative agricultural emissions pathways, holding to RCP2.6 total radiative forcing requires up to twice the amount of CDR that is already included in the RCP2.6. We examine the costs of this additional CDR, and the effects of internalizing these in several agricultural commodities. Assuming an average CDR cost by $150/tCO2, we find increases in prices of up to 41% for beef, 14% for rice, and 40% for milk in the United States relative to current retail prices. These figures are significantly higher (for beef and rice) under a global scenario, potentially threatening food security and welfare. Although the policy delivers a mechanism to finance the early deployment of CDR, using CDR to offset remaining high emissions may well hit other non-financial constraints and can thus only support, and not substitute, emission reductions.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33730045      PMCID: PMC7968634          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247887

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  17 in total

1.  Inequality, climate impacts on the future poor, and carbon prices.

Authors:  Francis Dennig; Mark B Budolfson; Marc Fleurbaey; Asher Siebert; Robert H Socolow
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-12-07       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Decoupling of greenhouse gas emissions from global agricultural production: 1970-2050.

Authors:  Eskild H Bennetzen; Pete Smith; John R Porter
Journal:  Glob Chang Biol       Date:  2016-01-06       Impact factor: 10.863

3.  Estimating and tracking the remaining carbon budget for stringent climate targets.

Authors:  Joeri Rogelj; Piers M Forster; Elmar Kriegler; Christopher J Smith; Roland Séférian
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2019-07-17       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  The trouble with negative emissions.

Authors:  Kevin Anderson; Glen Peters
Journal:  Science       Date:  2016-10-14       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  The Carnism Inventory: Measuring the ideology of eating animals.

Authors:  Christopher A Monteiro; Tamara M Pfeiler; Marcus D Patterson; Michael A Milburn
Journal:  Appetite       Date:  2017-02-09       Impact factor: 3.868

6.  The Economic Lives of the Poor.

Authors:  Abhijit V Banerjee; Esther Duflo
Journal:  J Econ Perspect       Date:  2007

7.  A Precautionary Assessment of Systemic Projections and Promises From Sunlight Reflection and Carbon Removal Modeling.

Authors:  Sean Low; Matthias Honegger
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2020-07-28       Impact factor: 4.302

8.  Structural change as a key component for agricultural non-CO2 mitigation efforts.

Authors:  Stefan Frank; Robert Beach; Petr Havlík; Hugo Valin; Mario Herrero; Aline Mosnier; Tomoko Hasegawa; Jared Creason; Shaun Ragnauth; Michael Obersteiner
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 14.919

9.  Demonstrating GWP*: a means of reporting warming-equivalent emissions that captures the contrasting impacts of short- and longlived climate pollutants.

Authors:  John Lynch; Michelle Cain; Raymond Pierrehumbert; Myles Allen
Journal:  Environ Res Lett       Date:  2020-01-20       Impact factor: 6.793

10.  Improved calculation of warming-equivalent emissions for short-lived climate pollutants.

Authors:  Michelle Cain; John Lynch; Myles R Allen; Jan S Fuglestvedt; David J Frame; Adrian H Macey
Journal:  NPJ Clim Atmos Sci       Date:  2019-09-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.