6 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
- ItemHow tight are the limits to land and water use? - Combined impacts of food demand and climate change(MĂĽnchen : European Geopyhsical Union, 2005) Lotze-Campen, H.; Lucht, W.; MĂĽller, C.; Bondeau, A.; Smith, P.In the coming decades, world agricultural systems will face serious transitions. Population growth, income and lifestyle changes will lead to considerable increases in food demand. Moreover, a rising demand for renewable energy and biodiversity protection may restrict the area available for food production. On the other hand, global climate change will affect production conditions, for better or worse depending on regional conditions. In order to simulate these combined effects consistently and in a spatially explicit way, we have linked the Lund-Potsdam-Jena Dynamic Global Vegetation Model (LPJ) with a "Management model of Agricultural Production and its Impact on the Environment" (MAgPIE). LPJ represents the global biosphere with a spatial resolution of 0.5 degree. MAgPIE covers the most important agricultural crop and livestock production types. A prototype has been developed for one sample region. In the next stage this will be expanded to several economically relevant regions on a global scale, including international trade. The two models are coupled through a layer of productivity zones. In the paper we present the modelling approach, develop first joint scenarios and discuss selected results from the coupled modelling system.
- ItemEnvironmental co-benefits and adverse side-effects of alternative power sector decarbonization strategies([London] : Nature Publishing Group UK, 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.
- ItemReply to Burgess et al: Catastrophic climate risks are neglected, plausible, and safe to study(Washington, DC : National Acad. of Sciences, 2022) Kemp, Luke; Xu, Chi; Depledge, Joanna; Ebi, Kristie L.; Gibbins, Goodwin; Kohler, Timothy A.; Rockström, Johan; Scheffer, Marten; Schellnhuber, Hans Joachim; Steffen, Will; Lenton, Timothy M.
- ItemModelling the role of livestock grazing in C and N cycling in grasslands with LPJmL5.0-grazing(Katlenburg-Lindau : Copernicus, 2023) Heinke, Jens; Rolinski, Susanne; MĂĽller, ChristophTo represent the impact of grazing livestock on carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) dynamics in grasslands, we implement a livestock module into LPJmL5.0-tillage, a global vegetation and crop model with explicit representation of managed grasslands and pastures, forming LPJmL5.0-grazing. The livestock module uses lactating dairy cows as a generic representation of grazing livestock. The new module explicitly accounts for forage quality in terms of dry-matter intake and digestibility using relationships derived from compositional analyses for different forages. Partitioning of N into milk, feces, and urine as simulated by the new livestock module shows very good agreement with observation-based relationships reported in the literature. Modelled C and N dynamics depend on forage quality (C:N ratios in grazed biomass), forage quantity, livestock densities, manure or fertilizer inputs, soil, atmospheric CO2 concentrations, and climate conditions. Due to the many interacting relationships, C sequestration, GHG emissions, N losses, and livestock productivity show substantial variation in space and across livestock densities. The improved LPJmL5.0-grazing model can now assess the effects of livestock grazing on C and N stocks and fluxes in grasslands. It can also provide insights about the spatio-temporal variability of grassland productivity and about the trade-offs between livestock production and environmental impacts.
- ItemIntegrating Life Cycle and Impact Assessments to Map Food's Cumulative Environmental Footprint(Amsterdam : Elsevier, 2020) Kuempel, Caitlin D.; Frazier, Melanie; Nash, Kirsty L.; Jacobsen, Nis Sand; Williams, David R.; Blanchard, Julia L.; Cottrell, Richard S.; McIntyre, Peter B.; Moran, Daniel; Bouwman, Lex; Froehlich, Halley E.; Gephart, Jessica A.; Metian, Marc; Többen, Johannes; Halpern, Benjamin S.Producing food exerts pressures on the environment. Understanding the location and magnitude of food production is key to reducing the impacts of these pressures on nature and people. In this Perspective, Kuempel et al. outline an approach for integrating life cycle assessment and cumulative impact mapping data and methodologies to map the cumulative environmental pressure of food systems. The approach enables quantification of current and potential future environmental pressures, which are needed to reduce the net impact of feeding humanity. © 2020 The AuthorsFeeding a growing, increasingly affluent population while limiting environmental pressures of food production is a central challenge for society. Understanding the location and magnitude of food production is key to addressing this challenge because pressures vary substantially across food production types. Applying data and models from life cycle assessment with the methodologies for mapping cumulative environmental impacts of human activities (hereafter cumulative impact mapping) provides a powerful approach to spatially map the cumulative environmental pressure of food production in a way that is consistent and comprehensive across food types. However, these methodologies have yet to be combined. By synthesizing life cycle assessment and cumulative impact mapping methodologies, we provide guidance for comprehensively and cumulatively mapping the environmental pressures (e.g., greenhouse gas emissions, spatial occupancy, and freshwater use) associated with food production systems. This spatial approach enables quantification of current and potential future environmental pressures, which is needed for decision makers to create more sustainable food policies and practices. © 2020 The Authors
- ItemWe need biosphere stewardship that protects carbon sinks and builds resilience(Washington, DC : National Acad. of Sciences, 2021) Rockström, Johan; Beringer, Tim; Hole, David; Griscom, Bronson; Mascia, Michael B.; Folke, Carl; Creutzig, Felix[no abstract available]