3 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- ItemModeling forest plantations for carbon uptake with the LPJmL dynamic global vegetation model(Göttingen : Copernicus Publ., 2019) Braakhekke, Maarten C.; Doelman, Jonathan C.; Baas, Peter; Müller, Christoph; Schaphoff, Sibyll; Stehfest, Elke; van Vuuren, Detlef P.We present an extension of the dynamic global vegetation model, Lund-Potsdam-Jena Managed Land (LPJmL), to simulate planted forests intended for carbon (C) sequestration. We implemented three functional types to simulate plantation trees in temperate, tropical, and boreal climates. The parameters of these functional types were optimized to fit target growth curves (TGCs). These curves represent the evolution of stemwood C over time in typical productive plantations and were derived by combining field observations and LPJmL estimates for equivalent natural forests. While the calibrated model underestimates stemwood C growth rates compared to the TGCs, it represents substantial improvement over using natural forests to represent afforestation. Based on a simulation experiment in which we compared global natural forest versus global forest plantation, we found that forest plantations allow for much larger C uptake rates on the timescale of 100 years, with a maximum difference of a factor of 1.9, around 54 years. In subsequent simulations for an ambitious but realistic scenario in which 650Mha (14% of global managed land, 4.5% of global land surface) are converted to forest over 85 years, we found that natural forests take up 37PgC versus 48PgC for forest plantations. Comparing these results to estimations of C sequestration required to achieve the 2°C climate target, we conclude that afforestation can offer a substantial contribution to climate mitigation. Full evaluation of afforestation as a climate change mitigation strategy requires an integrated assessment which considers all relevant aspects, including costs, biodiversity, and trade-offs with other land-use types. Our extended version of LPJmL can contribute to such an assessment by providing improved estimates of C uptake rates by forest plantations. © 2019 American Institute of Physics Inc.. All rights reserved.
- ItemFreshwater resources under success and failure of the Paris climate agreement(Göttingen : Copernicus Publ., 2019) Heinke, Jens; Müller, Christoph; Lannerstad, Mats; Gerten, Dieter; Lucht, WolfgangPopulation growth will in many regions increase the pressure on water resources and likely increase the number of people affected by water scarcity. In parallel, global warming causes hydrological changes which will affect freshwater supply for human use in many regions. This study estimates the exposure of future population to severe hydrological changes relevant from a freshwater resource perspective at different levels of global mean temperature rise above pre-industrial level (ΔTglob). The analysis is complemented by an assessment of water scarcity that would occur without additional climate change due to population change alone; this is done to identify the population groups that are faced with particularly high adaptation challenges. The results are analysed in the context of success and failure of implementing the Paris Agreement to evaluate how climate mitigation can reduce the future number of people exposed to severe hydrological change. The results show that without climate mitigation efforts, in the year 2100 about 4.9 billion people in the SSP2 population scenario would more likely than not be exposed to severe hydrological change, and about 2.1 billion of them would be faced with particularly high adaptation challenges due to already prevailing water scarcity. Limiting warming to 2 °C by a successful implementation of the Paris Agreement would strongly reduce these numbers to 615 million and 290 million, respectively. At the regional scale, substantial water-related risks remain at 2 °C, with more than 12% of the population exposed to severe hydrological change and high adaptation challenges in Latin America and the Middle East and north Africa region. Constraining δTglob to 1.5 °C would limit this share to about 5% in these regions. ©2019 Author(s).
- ItemA multi-model analysis of teleconnected crop yield variability in a range of cropping systems(Göttingen : Copernicus Publ., 2020) Heino, Matias; Guillaume, Joseph H.A.; Müller, Christoph; Iizumi, Toshichika; Kummu, MattiClimate oscillations are periodically fluctuating oceanic and atmospheric phenomena, which are related to variations in weather patterns and crop yields worldwide. In terms of crop production, the most widespread impacts have been observed for the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO), which has been found to impact crop yields on all continents that produce crops, while two other climate oscillations - the Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD) and the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) - have been shown to especially impact crop production in Australia and Europe, respectively. In this study, we analyse the impacts of ENSO, IOD, and NAO on the growing conditions of maize, rice, soybean, and wheat at the global scale by utilising crop yield data from an ensemble of global gridded crop models simulated for a range of crop management scenarios. Our results show that, while accounting for their potential co-variation, climate oscillations are correlated with simulated crop yield variability to a wide extent (half of all maize and wheat harvested areas for ENSO) and in several important crop-producing areas, e.g. in North America (ENSO, wheat), Australia (IOD and ENSO, wheat), and northern South America (ENSO, soybean). Further, our analyses show that higher sensitivity to these oscillations can be observed for rainfed and fully fertilised scenarios, while the sensitivity tends to be lower if crops were to be fully irrigated. Since the development of ENSO, IOD, and NAO can potentially be forecasted well in advance, a better understanding about the relationship between crop production and these climate oscillations can improve the resilience of the global food system to climate-related shocks. © 2020 American Institute of Physics Inc.. All rights reserved.