Soil Management Strategies to Mitigate Climate Change. Synergies and Tradeoffs with Water Resource Management and Energy Security

Transcription

1 Soil Management Strategies to Mitigate Climate Change Synergies and Tradeoffs with Water Resource Management and Energy Security Christian Bugge Henriksen 1 and Peter E. Holm 2 University of Copenhagen, Faculty of LIFE Sciences 1 Department of Agriculture and Ecology 2 Department of Basic Sciences and Environment Slide 1

2 What can we use the soil for? Ecological functions F1: Production of biomass (food, non-food, energy) F2: Biological filter (filtering, degradation, neutralisation) F3: Habitate for animal and plants (biodiversity, genetic reserve) Antropogenic functions F4: Medium for construction (houses, roads, land fills) and recreation (parks, green areas) F5: Natural resources (sand, clay, humus) F6: Protection of the past (historical sites, cultural landscapes) Slide 2 Vismandsrapport 2002 m.fl.

3 Soil and climate change Soil is the largest carbon sink on our planet 15 Gt carbon is stored in soil Changes in agricultural practices may potentially increase carbon sequestration IPCC has identified a number of soil management strategies to mitigate climate change Slide 3

4 Soil management strategies to mitigate climate change Crop management: t CO2-eq ha-1yr-1 Nutrient management: t CO2-eq ha-1yr-1 Tillage and residue management: t CO2-eq ha-1yr-1 Water management: Soil restoration: 1.1 t CO2-eq ha-1 yr t CO2-eq ha-1yr-1 Bioenergy: t CO2-eq ha-1yr-1 Slide 4

5 What are the synergies and tradeoffs of GHG mitigating soil management strategies with water resources and energy security? Slide 5

6 Crop management example: Conversion to grassland Area of crops in EU 2007 Permanent grass ha Temporary grass: ha Cereals: ha Silage maize: ha A likely scenario: Shift from silage maize to grass for dairy production 50% conversion of the area with silage maize to permanent grass = -1.2 Mt CO2-eq 50% conversion of the area with silage maize to temporary grass = -0.8 Mt CO2-eq Synergy with water resources since grass production requires less water and a higher level of soil organic matter increases soil water holding capacity Synergy with energy security since grass production requires less energy use Slide 6

7 Other synergies and tradeoffs for crop management Synergies with water resources since the soil water holding capacity is increased due to soil organic matter build-up with: - high carbon in crop residues - high yield varieties - avoiding bare fallow - introducing winter cover crops Synergies with energy security since: - Energy for producing fertilizers are saved with leguminous crops - Energy from biomass is potentially increased with high carbon crops - Energy consumption is reduced with high yielding varieties Tradeoffs with energy security since: - Energy is needed for cultivating the soil with avoidance of bare fallow - Energy is needed for planting cover crops Slide 7

8 Nutrient management example: Fertilizer efficiency Potential for reducing GHG emissions by increasing fertilizer efficiency Emissions from fertilizer production: kg CO2-eq per kg fertilizer-n EU consumption of N-fertilizer in 2008: t Nitrogen surplus: t (55 kg N/ha) Potential reduction: 6-71 Mt CO2-eq per year Synergy with water resources since water for fertilizer production is saved and water quality is improved due to less leaching Synergy with energy security energy for fertilizer production is saved Slide 8

9 Water management example: Water efficiency Potential for increasing water efficiency by applying partial root zone drying Fraction of irrigated global arable land: 18% Potential water saving with PRD: 30% Yield difference: 0% Deficit irrigation schemes such as PRD, improved irrigation systems and crop diversification have: Synergies with water resources since less water is used Synergies with energy security since energy for irrigation is reduced Slide 9

10 Bioenergy example: Biofuels from food crops Bioelectricity and biofuels Bioelectricity is 108% more effective than biofuels to reduce GHG emissions Bioelectricity is 81% more effective than biofuels as energy source for vehicles Both bioelectricity and biofuels adversly affects food security! Synergy with water resources if measures to improve water use efficiency are integrated in the transition to bioenergy Tradeoffs with water resources if water and fertilizer use are increased Synergy with energy security since bioenergy will reduce dependency on fossil fuels Slide 10

11 Conclusion: Most GHG mitigating soil management strategies show synergies with water resources and energy security...but what about the EU policy level? Slide 11

12 Main EU policies affecting soil, water and energy: Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) Water Framework Directive (WFD) Climate Action and Renewable Energy Package (CARE) Slide 12

13 Common Agricultural Policy Main support schemes under CAP Single Payment Support (SPS) scheme: 37.7 billion euros in 2009 Fund for rural development (EAFRD): 13.6 billion euros in 2009 Direct market interventions: 3.4 billion euros in 2009 How well do the support schemes promote GHG mitigating soil management? SPS payments are determined by earlier payments during a reference period or the number of hectares farmed during the first year of implementation of the scheme EAFRD does support farmers who improve the environment and the countryside, but the definition of how the environment can be improved is very broad Direct market interventions are not linked to how the products are produced Slide 13

14 Water Framework Directive (WFD) Key elements of the WFD Water resource management is taking place at the river basin level All water bodies must reach good ecological and chemical status by 2015 For each river basin a River Basin Management Plan (RBMP) is made every six years Current status Most RBMPs do not adequately provide objectives and suggest measures to ensure good ecological and chemical status of surface waters Many RBMPs apply for an extension of the 2015 deadline or argue for lower objectives In some RBMPs specific sectors are not required to implement any measures Only a few RBMPs include effective measures to save water resources The RBMPs are only considering climate change adaptation and not mitigation Slide 14

15 Climate Action and Renewable Energy (CARE) package Key elements of the CARE package EU commitment to a 20% reduction of GHG emissions by 2020 Conditional commitment to 30% reduction depending on other countries Mandatory target of 20% renewables in overall energy consumption by 2020 Minimum share of 10% biofuels in transport petrol and diesel consumption by 2020 Evaluation of the CARE package Land required to meet 10% biofuels exceeds available land area in EU Meeting the 10% biofuels target will require large imports of biofuels Bioelectricity from heat combustion of biomass is currently 100% more effective Incitement for developing non-biological renewables are not adequate Energy policies which do not imply the return of organic matter to soil is suboptimal! Slide 15

16 Synergies and tradeoffs at the EU policy level CAP with WFD and CARE - EAFRD funding can be used to support water management and climate change mitigation programmes - SPS delays development of sustainable farming practices and thereby delays meeting of WFD and CARE objectives WFD with CAP - When RBMPs include measures for the agricultural sector - When RBMPs argue that public interest in rural development makes it necessary to accept less stringent objectives CARE with CAP - Incentive to develop renewable energy technologies for the agricultural sector - Unbalanced focus on bioenergy may harm rural development WFD with CARE and vice versa - Resources for adaptation in RBMPs will reduce resources for mitigation - Establishment of hydropower plants may put water resources at risk Slide 16

17 Recommended action for policy integration Common Agricultural Policy - Phase out the SPS scheme and transfer the funds to EAFRD - Allocate EAFRD funds directly to PES and farmers implementing measures specified by the RMBPs and CARE package Water Framework Directive - Measures for the agricultural sector in all RMBPs, including GHG mitigating soil management strategies - Applications to establish hydropower plants should be carefully evaluated against the RMBP for the affected water body Climate Action and Renewable Energy package - GHG mitigation potential of water saving measures should be quantified and counted as emission credits - Abandon the 10% minimum share of biofuels Slide 17

18 Thank you For more information Please contact: Peter E. Holm Christian B. Henriksen LIFE water initiative Slide 18