New Uses of Old Tools? Greenhouse Gas Mitigation with Agriculture Sector Policies (original) (raw)
Related papers
2012
Following the failure of legislative proposals for a multi-sector greenhouse gas (GHG) cap-and-trade policy, the shift in focus to energy sector policies ignores the perhaps substantial potential for GHG mitigation from agriculture/forestry. We review estimates of the current U.S. agriculture sector contribution to GHG mitigation from a portfolio of existing sector policies in bioenergy, conservation, and research and development to compare accomplishments across programs. We then consider what opportunities and challenges may exist for increasing sector GHG mitigation by retargeting and/or expanding current programs-or for bioenergy-related mitigation, implementing proposed new programs-to serve as an alternative to cap-and-trade.
Featured Article New Uses of Old Tools? Greenhouse Gas Mitigation with Agriculture Sector Policies
Applied Economics Perspectives and Policy, 2013
Following the failure of legislative proposals for a multi-sector greenhouse gas (GHG) cap-and-trade policy, the shift in focus to energy sector policies ignores the perhaps substantial potential for GHG mitigation from agriculture/forestry. We review estimates of the current U.S. agriculture sector contribution to GHG mitigation from a portfolio of existing sector policies in bioenergy, conservation, and research and development to compare accomplishments across programs. We then consider what opportunities and challenges may exist for increasing sector GHG mitigation by retargeting and/or expanding current programs—or for bioenergy-related mitigation, implementing proposed new programs—to serve as an alternative to cap-and-trade. Key words: Climate change, Greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation,
Global estimates of potential mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions by agriculture
Nutrient Cycling in …, 1997
Technologies to reduce net emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide within the agriculture sector were reviewed to estimate the global potential for mitigation of these radiatively active greenhouse gases. Our estimates of the potential reduction of radiative forcing by the agricultural sector range from 1.15-3.3 Gt C equivalents per year. Of the total potential reduction, approximately 32% could result from reduction in CO 2 emissions, 42% of carbon offsets by biofuel production on 15% of existing croplands, 16% from reduced CH 4 emissions and 10% from reduced emissions of N 2 O. Agriculture encompasses large regional differences in management practices and rates of potential adoption of mitigation practices. Acceptability of mitigation options will depend on the extent to which sustainable production will be achieved or maintained and benefits will accrue to farmers. Technologies such as no-till farming and strategic fertilizer placement and timing are now being adopted for reasons other than concern for climate change issues.
Climate Change Mitigation: Don’t forget about agriculture!
The European Union (EU) has set ambitious greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction targets for the year 2020 (20% below 1990 levels) and for 2050 (80 -95% below 1990 levels). Most of the focus and modelling analysis has been on energy-related CO 2 emissions, which is understandable as they represent 80% of EU GHG emissions. Agriculture has received less attention and accounts for 9% of EU GHG emissions. Clearly however, as significant cuts are made in energy-related CO 2 emissions, the role of agricultural emissions grows in importance. This paper addresses this gap by modelling a range of future mitigation scenarios in which agricultural emissions are excluded and included, to illustrate the dangers of ignoring agriculture. The focus is on one EU Member State, Ireland, chosen because (nonenergy emissions in) agriculture represents 29% of GHG emissions, more than three times higher than the EU share. While the focus is on Ireland this analysis could be applied similarly in other EU and non-EU countries. The paper treats separately the short term (to 2020) and longer term (to 2050) targets, as there is i) greater certainty regarding short term targets (there are firm legal instruments in place) and ii) different challenges related to meeting these targets (due to timeframes and ambition). For 2020 the focus is on GHG emissions that are outside of the EU emissions trading scheme (i.e. non-ETS emissions). The paper compares results for the energy system when ignoring agriculture (i.e. by imposing a 20% reduction on energy-related CO 2 non-ETS emissions) with those which take agriculture into account (by imposing a 20% reduction on GHG non-ETS emissions that translates into an imposed 31.5% reduction on energy-related CO 2 non-ETS emissions). Similarly for the period 2050, the paper compares results for the energy system when ignoring agriculture (imposing an 80% reduction on energy-related CO 2 emissions) with those which take agriculture into account (by assuming a 50% reduction in agricultural GHG emissions, resulting in a 95% reduction on energy-related CO 2 emissions). This analysis is carried using the Irish TIMES model, a bottom-up, technology rich energy systems model. Agriculture emissions projections are exogenous to but not ignored by Irish TIMES. This represents a first step towards an integrated modelling approach where the agriculture and energy systems will be modelled together to provide overall least cost pathways to climate mitigation.