2 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
- ItemAwassi sheep keeping in the Arabic steppe in relation to nitrous oxide emission from soil(Amsterdam : Elsevier, 2013) Hijazi, Omar; Berg, Werner; Moussa, Samouil; Ammon, Christian; von Bobrutzki, Kristina; Brunsch, ReinerSheep husbandry is the main source of income for farmers in arid zones. Increasing sheep production on steppes may increase the greenhouse gas production. The objective of this study was to investigate the nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions from the steppes for Awassi sheep keeping and feed cropping in arid zones such as Syria. The methodology developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was used to estimate N2O emissions. A survey was conducted on 64 farms in Syria to gather data for analysis. Precipitation and crop yield data from 2001 to 2009 were also used for calculation and modelling. Sheep-keeping systems, precipitation, year and the region have significant effects on N2O emissions (p<0.05). Emissions of N2O from lands with extensive, semi-intensive and intensive systems were 0.30 ± 0.093, 0.598± 0.113 and 2.243± 0.187 kg sheep1year1, respectively. Crop production was higher in regions with high precipitation levels, which helped to reduce N2O emissions. Using more residuals of wheat, cotton and soya as feed for sheep in the keeping systems evaluated may decrease the overuse of steppe regions and N2O emissions. Nitrous oxide emissions of N2O from sheep-keeping areas can be reduced by changing sheep-keeping systems and increasing the crop production in arid zones through artificial irrigation.
- ItemThe Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and their energy, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: An overview(Amsterdam : Elsevier, 2016) Riahi, Keywan; van Vuuren, Detlef P.; Kriegler, Elmar; Edmonds, Jae; O’Neill, Brian C.; Fujimori, Shinichiro; Bauer, Nico; Calvin, Katherine; Dellink, Rob; Fricko, Oliver; Lutz, Wolfgang; Popp, Alexander; Crespo Cuaresma, Jesus; KC, Samir; Leimbach, Marian; Jiang, Leiwen; Kram, Tom; Rao, Shilpa; Emmerling, Johannes; Ebi, Kristie; Hasegawa, Tomoko; Havlik, Petr; Humpenöder, Florian; Aleluia Da Silva, Lara; Smith, Steve; Stehfest, Elke; Bosetti, Valentina; Eom, Jiyong; Gernaat, David; Masui, Toshihiko; Rogelj, Joeri; Strefler, Jessica; Drouet, Laurent; Krey, Volker; Luderer, Gunnar; Harmsen, Mathijs; Takahashi, Kiyoshi; Baumstark, Lavinia; Doelman, Jonathan C.; Kainuma, Mikiko; Klimont, Zbigniew; Marangoni, Giacomo; Lotze-Campen, Hermann; Obersteiner, Michael; Tabeau, Andrzej; Tavoni, MassimoThis paper presents the overview of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) and their energy, land use, and emissions implications. The SSPs are part of a new scenario framework, established by the climate change research community in order to facilitate the integrated analysis of future climate impacts, vulnerabilities, adaptation, and mitigation. The pathways were developed over the last years as a joint community effort and describe plausible major global developments that together would lead in the future to different challenges for mitigation and adaptation to climate change. The SSPs are based on five narratives describing alternative socio-economic developments, including sustainable development, regional rivalry, inequality, fossil-fueled development, and middle-of-the-road development. The long-term demographic and economic projections of the SSPs depict a wide uncertainty range consistent with the scenario literature. A multi-model approach was used for the elaboration of the energy, land-use and the emissions trajectories of SSP-based scenarios. The baseline scenarios lead to global energy consumption of 400–1200 EJ in 2100, and feature vastly different land-use dynamics, ranging from a possible reduction in cropland area up to a massive expansion by more than 700 million hectares by 2100. The associated annual CO2 emissions of the baseline scenarios range from about 25 GtCO2 to more than 120 GtCO2 per year by 2100. With respect to mitigation, we find that associated costs strongly depend on three factors: (1) the policy assumptions, (2) the socio-economic narrative, and (3) the stringency of the target. The carbon price for reaching the target of 2.6 W/m2 that is consistent with a temperature change limit of 2 °C, differs in our analysis thus by about a factor of three across the SSP marker scenarios. Moreover, many models could not reach this target from the SSPs with high mitigation challenges. While the SSPs were designed to represent different mitigation and adaptation challenges, the resulting narratives and quantifications span a wide range of different futures broadly representative of the current literature. This allows their subsequent use and development in new assessments and research projects. Critical next steps for the community scenario process will, among others, involve regional and sectoral extensions, further elaboration of the adaptation and impacts dimension, as well as employing the SSP scenarios with the new generation of earth system models as part of the 6th climate model intercomparison project (CMIP6).