Ag burning russia2011pp


Published on

Black Carbon and Agricultural Burning in Russia

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Error bar on BC snow -87 to +240, or about same as atmospheric to (alone) equal CO2
  • Modeling by Flanner (2007) suggests that the impact of BC on climate may be greatest in the mid-latitudes of Central and East Asia because of the BC-snow forcing. The greatest forcing is over the Tibetan Plateau, averaging 1.5 W m-2 over all land. In the HKHT region, BC-snow forcing is at a maximum in the spring, the time when it has the greatest influence on snowmelt rate (Flanner et al., 2007). During some spring months BC-snow forcing exceeds 10 W m-2 over parts of eastern China and 20 W m-2 over the Tibetan Plateau. The forcing is greatest over the Plateau because lower latitudes are exposed to more solar radiation (closer to the equator), have less vegetation cover, and are closer to the sources of black carbon.
  • Global and regional temperature differences relative to the ‘current legislation’ reference due to the combined emissions control measures.
  • Ag burning russia2011pp

    1. 1. Reducing Black Carbon and Agricultural Burning:Benefitting Health, Climate and Agriculture Pam Pearson International Cryosphere Climate Initiative (ICCI) August 19, 2011
    2. 2. Summary• Black carbon’s impact on the Arctic – and the Arctic’s impact on global climate change• Why open burning in Russia is so important to the Arctic• Planned programs and funding• Discussion: where should programs focus? 2
    3. 3. Arctic Sea Ice Extent: 2007 “Moved the Mean”
    4. 4. Backdrop• Arctic is warming over twice as fast as the rest of the globe• Economic emphasis on opening region to industry, but enormous negative consequences: – Highly unpredictable weather patterns: drought followed by flooding followed by…? – More intense weather patterns (extreme cold/heat or dry/wet) – Sea level rise: Arctic Council estimates at least 1 meter by 2100, possibly more – Greenland melt alone would lead to 7 meter rise is sea level – Changes in Arctic increase warming globally (loss of polar reflection of sunlight, release of very large stores of greenhouse gas methane in permafrost)• Need to slow and eventually stop these changes to maintain stable environment 5
    5. 5. Black Carbon’s Importance in the Arctic Quinn, Impact of Short-Lived Pollutants on Arctic Climate, presented at AMAP, Oslo, September 15 2008 6
    6. 6. BC on Snow/Ice Causes Warming and Melting • Forcing greatest in spring, during melt season. • Melting increases BC concentration → positive feedback. • During some spring months, BC- snow forcing exceeds 10 W m2 (huge in climate terms where 1 W m2 is considered large)BC and Climate Change at Flanner, 2009the Third pole | Slide 7
    7. 7. So Why Are Agriculture, Grass, Forest Etc Fires In Russia So Important?
    8. 8. Transport of fire emissions into the European Arctic
    9. 9. Extreme pollution Picture courtesy: Ann-Christine Engvall
    10. 10. Dramatic effects on pollution levelsAt Zeppelin, new records set for practically all measured compoundsEven for ozone and aerosol optical depth, which are both measured since 18 years Black Carbon (soot) – a light absorbing aerosolStohl et al., ACP, 2007
    11. 11. Arctic Council Special Working Group: Emissions of BC Lamarque et al., ACP, 2010 Domestic Energy + Transport Agricultural Grass + Forest Industrial + Waste Fires Fires
    12. 12. Some Russian government sourcesreport intentional agricultural fires asthe source of 98% of forest, grass andpeat fires.
    13. 13. Growing Interest Internationally• Arctic Council• United Nations: UN Environment Programme (UNEP), UNFCCC (climate change negotiations)• Convention on Long-range Transboudnary Air Pollution (CLRTAP), Geneva• Targeted Financing (methane, cookstoves)
    14. 14. UNEP 2011 Study: Temperature Response to Decreases in Black Carbon and MethaneReduced Arctic warming by over 0.7 oC by 2040 compared to the reference scenario,with measures taken 2010-2030. Mitigating ~2/3 of projected 1.2 degrees warming
    15. 15. Arctic Council• Eight member nations (Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, U.S.)• Official and ad hoc observers: EC, U.K., Germany, Italy, Netherlands, France, Spain, China, South Korea• “SLCF” (Short-lived Climate Forcer) Task Force, SLCF Demonstration Project group and SLCF research group
    16. 16. Current Efforts• USDA funding for research and conferences• NGO grants for forest area pilot projects: $100,000 2011 season, $200,000 2012 season• Arctic Council: several million in potential pipeline• NGOs: Bellona Russia 17
    17. 17. Reducing Ag Burning Largely “No regrets”• Health impacts• Loss of life and property• Least expensive among BC measures (diesel retrofits $1500/car, $5-6000/truck)• More cost-effective for farmers to use other methods to deal with stubble (harvest, fertilizer), HOWEVER capital investment needed and significant barrier
    18. 18. Future Efforts:• Where methods best in Russian agricultural environment (no-till, gather straw for fuel, etc)?• What support needed in Russian context: – Micro-financing for new equipment? – Seminars? – Using agricultural organizations, extension service? – Demonstration farms? – Working Group on Burning: Spring 2012 19
    19. 19. For more information and additional presentations: