Search Results
The value of climate-resilient seeds for smallholder adaptation in sub-Saharan Africa
2020, Cacho, Oscar J., Moss, Jonathan, Thornton, Philip K., Herrero, Mario, Henderson, Ben, Bodirsky, Benjamin L., Humpenöder, Florian, Popp, Alexander, Lipper, Leslie
Climate change is threatening food security in many tropical countries, where a large proportion of food is produced by vulnerable smallholder farmers. Interventions are available to offset many of the negative impacts of climate change on agriculture, and they can be tailored to local conditions often through relative modest investments. However, little quantitative information is available to guide investment or policy choices at a time when countries and development agencies are under pressure to implement policies that can help achieve Sustainable Development Goals while coping with climate change. Among smallholder adaptation options, developing seeds resilient to current and future climate shocks expected locally is one of the most important actions available now. In this paper, we used national and local data to estimate the costs of climate change to smallholder farmers in Malawi and Tanzania. We found that the benefits from adopting resilient seeds ranged between 984 million and 2.1 billion USD during 2020–2050. Our analysis demonstrates the benefits of establishing and maintaining a flexible national seed sector with participation by communities in the breeding, delivery, and adoption cycle. © 2020, The Author(s).
Environmental co-benefits and adverse side-effects of alternative power sector decarbonization strategies
2019, Luderer, Gunnar, Pehl, Michaja, Arvesen, Anders, Gibon, Thomas, Bodirsky, Benjamin L., de Boer, Harmen Sytze, Fricko, Oliver, Hejazi, Mohamad, Humpenöder, Florian, Iyer, Gokul, Mima, Silvana, Mouratiadou, Ioanna, Pietzcker, Robert C., Popp, Alexander, van den Berg, Maarten, van Vuuren, Detlef, Hertwich, Edgar G.
A rapid and deep decarbonization of power supply worldwide is required to limit global warming to well below 2 °C. Beyond greenhouse gas emissions, the power sector is also responsible for numerous other environmental impacts. Here we combine scenarios from integrated assessment models with a forward-looking life-cycle assessment to explore how alternative technology choices in power sector decarbonization pathways compare in terms of non-climate environmental impacts at the system level. While all decarbonization pathways yield major environmental co-benefits, we find that the scale of co-benefits as well as profiles of adverse side-effects depend strongly on technology choice. Mitigation scenarios focusing on wind and solar power are more effective in reducing human health impacts compared to those with low renewable energy, while inducing a more pronounced shift away from fossil and toward mineral resource depletion. Conversely, non-climate ecosystem damages are highly uncertain but tend to increase, chiefly due to land requirements for bioenergy.
The global economic long-term potential of modern biomass in a climate-constrained world
2014, Klein, David, Humpenöder, Florian, Bauer, Nico, Dietrich, Jan Philipp, Popp, Alexander, Bodirsky, Benjamin Leon, Bonsch, Markus, Lotze-Campen, Hermann
Low-stabilization scenarios consistent with the 2 °C target project large-scale deployment of purpose-grown lignocellulosic biomass. In case a GHG price regime integrates emissions from energy conversion and from land-use/land-use change, the strong demand for bioenergy and the pricing of terrestrial emissions are likely to coincide. We explore the global potential of purpose-grown lignocellulosic biomass and ask the question how the supply prices of biomass depend on prices for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the land-use sector. Using the spatially explicit global land-use optimization model MAgPIE, we construct bioenergy supply curves for ten world regions and a global aggregate in two scenarios, with and without a GHG tax. We find that the implementation of GHG taxes is crucial for the slope of the supply function and the GHG emissions from the land-use sector. Global supply prices start at $5 GJ−1 and increase almost linearly, doubling at 150 EJ (in 2055 and 2095). The GHG tax increases bioenergy prices by $5 GJ−1 in 2055 and by $10 GJ−1 in 2095, since it effectively stops deforestation and thus excludes large amounts of high-productivity land. Prices additionally increase due to costs for N2O emissions from fertilizer use. The GHG tax decreases global land-use change emissions by one-third. However, the carbon emissions due to bioenergy production increase by more than 50% from conversion of land that is not under emission control. Average yields required to produce 240 EJ in 2095 are roughly 600 GJ ha−1 yr−1 with and without tax.
Investigating afforestation and bioenergy CCS as climate change mitigation strategies
2014, Humpenöder, Florian, Popp, Alexander, Dietrich, Jan Philip, Klein, David, Lotze-Campen, Hermann, Bonsch, Markus, Bodirsky, Benjamin Leon, Weindl, Isabelle, Stevanovic, Miodrag, Müller, Christoph
The land-use sector can contribute to climate change mitigation not only by reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, but also by increasing carbon uptake from the atmosphere and thereby creating negative CO2 emissions. In this paper, we investigate two land-based climate change mitigation strategies for carbon removal: (1) afforestation and (2) bioenergy in combination with carbon capture and storage technology (bioenergy CCS). In our approach, a global tax on GHG emissions aimed at ambitious climate change mitigation incentivizes land-based mitigation by penalizing positive and rewarding negative CO2 emissions from the land-use system. We analyze afforestation and bioenergy CCS as standalone and combined mitigation strategies. We find that afforestation is a cost-efficient strategy for carbon removal at relatively low carbon prices, while bioenergy CCS becomes competitive only at higher prices. According to our results, cumulative carbon removal due to afforestation and bioenergy CCS is similar at the end of 21st century (600–700 GtCO2), while land-demand for afforestation is much higher compared to bioenergy CCS. In the combined setting, we identify competition for land, but the impact on the mitigation potential (1000 GtCO2) is partially alleviated by productivity increases in the agricultural sector. Moreover, our results indicate that early-century afforestation presumably will not negatively impact carbon removal due to bioenergy CCS in the second half of the 21st century. A sensitivity analysis shows that land-based mitigation is very sensitive to different levels of GHG taxes. Besides that, the mitigation potential of bioenergy CCS highly depends on the development of future bioenergy yields and the availability of geological carbon storage, while for afforestation projects the length of the crediting period is crucial.
Harmonization of global land use change and management for the period 850–2100 (LUH2) for CMIP6
2020, Hurtt, George C., Chini, Louise, Sahajpal, Ritvik, Frolking, Steve, Bodirsky, Benjamin L., Calvin, Katherine, Doelman, Jonathan C., Fisk, Justin, Fujimori, Shinichiro, Klein Goldewijk, Kees, Hasegawa, Tomoko, Havlik, Peter, Heinimann, Andreas, Humpenöder, Florian, Jungclaus, Johan, Kaplan, Jed O., Kennedy, Jennifer, Krisztin, Tamás, Lawrence, David, Lawrence, Peter, Ma, Lei, Mertz, Ole, Pongratz, Julia, Popp, Alexander, Poulter, Benjamin, Riahi, Keywan, Shevliakova, Elena, Stehfest, Elke, Thornton, Peter, Tubiello, Francesco N., van Vuuren, Detlef P., Zhang, Xin
Human land use activities have resulted in large changes to the biogeochemical and biophysical properties of the Earth's surface, with consequences for climate and other ecosystem services. In the future, land use activities are likely to expand and/or intensify further to meet growing demands for food, fiber, and energy. As part of the World Climate Research Program Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), the international community has developed the next generation of advanced Earth system models (ESMs) to estimate the combined effects of human activities (e.g., land use and fossil fuel emissions) on the carbon–climate system. A new set of historical data based on the History of the Global Environment database (HYDE), and multiple alternative scenarios of the future (2015–2100) from Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) teams, is required as input for these models. With most ESM simulations for CMIP6 now completed, it is important to document the land use patterns used by those simulations. Here we present results from the Land-Use Harmonization 2 (LUH2) project, which smoothly connects updated historical reconstructions of land use with eight new future projections in the format required for ESMs. The harmonization strategy estimates the fractional land use patterns, underlying land use transitions, key agricultural management information, and resulting secondary lands annually, while minimizing the differences between the end of the historical reconstruction and IAM initial conditions and preserving changes depicted by the IAMs in the future. The new approach builds on a similar effort from CMIP5 and is now provided at higher resolution (0.25∘×0.25∘) over a longer time domain (850–2100, with extensions to 2300) with more detail (including multiple crop and pasture types and associated management practices) using more input datasets (including Landsat remote sensing data) and updated algorithms (wood harvest and shifting cultivation); it is assessed via a new diagnostic package. The new LUH2 products contain > 50 times the information content of the datasets used in CMIP5 and are designed to enable new and improved estimates of the combined effects of land use on the global carbon–climate system.
Key determinants of global land-use projections
2019, Stehfest, Elke, van Zeist, Willem-Jan, Valin, Hugo, Havlik, Petr, Popp, Alexander, Kyle, Page, Tabeau, Andrzej, Mason-D’Croz, Daniel, Hasegawa, Tomoko, Bodirsky, Benjamin L., Calvin, Katherine, Doelman, Jonathan C., Fujimori, Shinichiro, Humpenöder, Florian, Lotze-Campen, Hermann, van Meijl, Hans, Wiebe, Keith
Land use is at the core of various sustainable development goals. Long-term climate foresight studies have structured their recent analyses around five socio-economic pathways (SSPs), with consistent storylines of future macroeconomic and societal developments; however, model quantification of these scenarios shows substantial heterogeneity in land-use projections. Here we build on a recently developed sensitivity approach to identify how future land use depends on six distinct socio-economic drivers (population, wealth, consumption preferences, agricultural productivity, land-use regulation, and trade) and their interactions. Spread across models arises mostly from diverging sensitivities to long-term drivers and from various representations of land-use regulation and trade, calling for reconciliation efforts and more empirical research. Most influential determinants for future cropland and pasture extent are population and agricultural efficiency. Furthermore, land-use regulation and consumption changes can play a key role in reducing both land use and food-security risks, and need to be central elements in sustainable development strategies.
Targeted policies can compensate most of the increased sustainability risks in 1.5 °C mitigation scenarios
2018, Bertram, Christoph, Luderer, Gunnar, Popp, Alexander, Minx, Jan Christoph, Lamb, William F, Stevanović, Miodrag, Humpenöder, Florian, Giannousakis, Anastasis, Kriegler, Elmar
Meeting the 1.5 °C goal will require a rapid scale-up of zero-carbon energy supply, fuel switching to electricity, efficiency and demand-reduction in all sectors, and the replenishment of natural carbon sinks. These transformations will have immediate impacts on various of the sustainable development goals. As goals such as affordable and clean energy and zero hunger are more immediate to great parts of global population, these impacts are central for societal acceptability of climate policies. Yet, little is known about how the achievement of other social and environmental sustainability objectives can be directly managed through emission reduction policies. In addition, the integrated assessment literature has so far emphasized a single, global (cost-minimizing) carbon price as the optimal mechanism to achieve emissions reductions. In this paper we introduce a broader suite of policies—including direct sector-level regulation, early mitigation action, and lifestyle changes—into the integrated energy-economy-land-use modeling system REMIND-MAgPIE. We examine their impact on non-climate sustainability issues when mean warming is to be kept well below 2 °C or 1.5 °C. We find that a combination of these policies can alleviate air pollution, water extraction, uranium extraction, food and energy price hikes, and dependence on negative emissions technologies, thus resulting in substantially reduced sustainability risks associated with mitigating climate change. Importantly, we find that these targeted policies can more than compensate for most sustainability risks of increasing climate ambition from 2 °C to 1.5 °C.
Climate extremes, land–climate feedbacks and land-use forcing at 1.5°C
2018, Seneviratne, Sonia I., Wartenburger, Richard, Guillod, Benoit P., Hirsch, Annette L., Vogel, Martha M., Brovkin, Victor, van Vuuren, Detlef P., Schaller, Nathalie, Boysen, Lena, Calvin, Katherine V., Doelman, Jonathan, Greve, Peter, Havlik, Petr, Humpenöder, Florian, Krisztin, Tamas, Mitchell, Daniel, Popp, Alexander, Riahi, Keywan, Rogelj, Joeri, Schleussner, Carl-Friedrich, Sillmann, Jana, Stehfest, Elke
This article investigates projected changes in temperature and water cycle extremes at 1.5°C of global warming, and highlights the role of land processes and land-use changes (LUCs) for these projections. We provide new comparisons of changes in climate at 1.5°C versus 2°C based on empirical sampling analyses of transient simulations versus simulations from the ‘Half a degree Additional warming, Prognosis and Projected Impacts’ (HAPPI) multi-model experiment. The two approaches yield similar overall results regarding changes in climate extremes on land, and reveal a substantial difference in the occurrence of regional extremes at 1.5°C versus 2°C. Land processes mediated through soil moisture feedbacks and land-use forcing play a major role for projected changes in extremes at 1.5°C in most mid-latitude regions, including densely populated areas in North America, Europe and Asia. This has important implications for low-emissions scenarios derived from integrated assessment models (IAMs), which include major LUCs in ambitious mitigation pathways (e.g. associated with increased bioenergy use), but are also shown to differ in the simulated LUC patterns. Biogeophysical effects from LUCs are not considered in the development of IAM scenarios, but play an important role for projected regional changes in climate extremes, and are thus of high relevance for sustainable development pathways.
Overcoming global inequality is critical for land-based mitigation in line with the Paris Agreement
2022, Humpenöder, Florian, Popp, Alexander, Schleussner, Carl-Friedrich, Orlov, Anton, Windisch, Michael Gregory, Menke, Inga, Pongratz, Julia, Havermann, Felix, Thiery, Wim, Luo, Fei, v. Jeetze, Patrick, Dietrich, Jan Philipp, Lotze-Campen, Hermann, Weindl, Isabelle, Lejeune, Quentin
Transformation pathways for the land sector in line with the Paris Agreement depend on the assumption of globally implemented greenhouse gas (GHG) emission pricing, and in some cases also on inclusive socio-economic development and sustainable land-use practices. In such pathways, the majority of GHG emission reductions in the land system is expected to come from low- and middle-income countries, which currently account for a large share of emissions from agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU). However, in low- and middle-income countries the economic, financial and institutional barriers for such transformative changes are high. Here, we show that if sustainable development in the land sector remained highly unequal and limited to high-income countries only, global AFOLU emissions would remain substantial throughout the 21st century. Our model-based projections highlight that overcoming global inequality is critical for land-based mitigation in line with the Paris Agreement. While also a scenario purely based on either global GHG emission pricing or on inclusive socio-economic development would achieve the stringent emissions reductions required, only the latter ensures major co-benefits for other Sustainable Development Goals, especially in low- and middle-income regions.
Mapping the yields of lignocellulosic bioenergy crops from observations at the global scale
2020, Li, Wei, Ciais, Philippe, Stehfest, Elke, van Vuuren, Detlef, Popp, Alexander, Arneth, Almut, Di Fulvio, Fulvio, Doelma, Jonathan, Humpenöder, Florian, Harper, Anna B., Park, Taejin, Makowski, David, Havlik, Petr, Obersteiner, Michael, Wang, Jingmeng, Krause, Andreas, Liu, Wenfeng
Most scenarios from integrated assessment models (IAMs) that project greenhouse gas emissions include the use of bioenergy as a means to reduce CO2 emissions or even to achieve negative emissions (together with CCS carbon capture and storage). The potential amount of CO2 that can be removed from the atmosphere depends, among others, on the yields of bioenergy crops, the land available to grow these crops and the efficiency with which CO2 produced by combustion is captured. While bioenergy crop yields can be simulated by models, estimates of the spatial distribution of bioenergy yields under current technology based on a large number of observations are currently lacking. In this study, a random-forest (RF) algorithm is used to upscale a bioenergy yield dataset of 3963 observations covering Miscanthus, switchgrass, eucalypt, poplar and willow using climatic and soil conditions as explanatory variables. The results are global yield maps of five important lignocellulosic bioenergy crops under current technology, climate and atmospheric CO2 conditions at a 0:5 0:5 spatial resolution. We also provide a combined "best bioenergy crop" yield map by selecting one of the five crop types with the highest yield in each of the grid cells, eucalypt and Miscanthus in most cases. The global median yield of the best crop is 16.3 tDMha1 yr1 (DM dry matter). High yields mainly occur in the Amazon region and southeastern Asia. We further compare our empirically derived maps with yield maps used in three IAMs and find that the median yields in our maps are 50% higher than those in the IAM maps. Our estimates of gridded bioenergy crop yields can be used to provide bioenergy yields for IAMs, to evaluate land surface models or to identify the most suitable lands for future bioenergy crop plantations. The 0:5 0:5 global maps for yields of different bioenergy crops and the best crop and for the best crop composition generated from this study can be download from https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3274254 (Li, 2019). © 2019 Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved.
- «
- 1 (current)
- 2
- 3
- »