Advertisement
Advertisement

More Related Content

Slideshows for you(20)

Advertisement

Similar to Importance of developing regional greenhouse gas emission factors(20)

More from ILRI(20)

Advertisement

Recently uploaded(20)

Importance of developing regional greenhouse gas emission factors

  1. Importance of developing regional greenhouse gas emission factors David E. Pelster, John Goopy, Lutz Merbold and Klaus Butterbach-Bahl Greenhouse Gas Inventory Roundtable Meeting ILRI, Nairobi, 3-4 May 2016
  2. How do we calculate the emissions? From FAO. Global Livestock Environmental Accounting Model (GLEAM)
  3. How do we calculate the emissions? From Opio et al. 2013. Greenhouse gas emissions from ruminant supply chains
  4. Richards et al. in prep Why we need empirical studies 0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 200 400 600 800 1,000PredictedCO2ekg/ha Measured CO2e kg/ha Maize Zimbabwe Maize China Maize Tanzania Tea Kenya Vegetables Kenya or Tanzania Measured (CO2e kg ha-1 season-1) PredictedbyCFT(CO2ekgha-1season-1) Prediction error for smallholder cropping systems Models likely using incorrect emission factors Hickman et al. 2014 Why are the emission factors incorrect? • Limited dataset •Models use emission factors from other regions •These other regions have different climate / soils / management / animal breeds, etc
  5. What do the preliminary data look like? From livestock manure on rangelands: • N2O • IPCC estimates: 2% of grazing cattle manure N • Preliminary data => between 10 and 40% of IPCC (EF from 0.2 to 0.8%) • CH4 • Between 9 and 25% of IPCC emission factors Pelster et al. 2016 From cropping systems: • N2O • IPCC estimates: 1% of applied N • Preliminary data => between 1 and 10% of IPCC estimates (0.01 and 0.1% of applied N) (Hickman et al. 2015); or • Low fertilizer application rates resulted in no noticeable increase in N2O emissions (Rosenstock et al. 2016; Pelster et al. 2016) • An on-going study in sugar cane has similar results
  6. Why is this important? • National inventories for IPCC • Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMA) • LEDs • Financing • Verification. i.e. Is “climate smart agriculture” really climate smart?
  7. “Climate Smart Agriculture” • No-till (or conservation tillage) is often promoted as a “climate smart practice” • There are current projects that promote no-till to improve maize yields and sequester carbon Rusinamhodzi et al. 2011. Agronomy Sust. Developm.
  8. “Climate Smart Agriculture” • No-till (or conservation tillage) is often promoted as a “climate smart practice” • There are current projects that promote no-till to improve maize yields and sequester carbon • But…. Do they truly mitigate climate change? • Need to understand and account for the local conditions Six et al. 2002. Agronomie Angers and Eriksen-Hamel 2008. SSSAJ Poirier et al. 2009. SSSAJ
  9. Targeting development strategies to reduce emissions? From Opio et al. 2013. Greenhouse gas emissions from ruminant supply chains
  10. The presentation has a Creative Commons licence. You are free to re-use or distribute this work, provided credit is given to ILRI. better lives through livestock ilri.org For more information contact: dpelster@cgiar.org

Editor's Notes

  1. There MUST be a CGIAR logo or a CRP logo. You can copy and paste the logo you need from the final slide of this presentation. Then you can delete that final slide   To replace a photo above, copy and paste this link in your browser: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ilri/sets/72157632057087650/detail/   Find a photo you like and the right size, copy and paste it in the block above.
  2. FPCM stands for “fat and protein corrected milk”
  3. Predictions from cool farm tool Similar issues were found with the Ex-Act model as well
  4. Hickman paper goes up to 100 kg N per ha; Todd’s does as well, while our landscape plots had application rates up to 30 kg per ha. Also, data from Theodora’s work, indicates an emission factor of about 0.5%... Which is consistent with all the others (up to 100 kg N per ha)
  5. Rusinamhodzi et al. Rain-fed maize production in semi-arid and sub-humid climates NTR = No tillage with rotation.
  6. Rusinamhodzi et al. Rain-fed maize production in semi-arid and sub-humid climates NTR = No tillage with rotation. Six et al. Soil organic matter, biota and aggregation in temperate and tropical soils – Effects of no tillage The farmers’ reasons for switching from conventional tillage (CT) to NT differed somewhat between the Great Plains and the Corn Belt. In the Great Plains, the high moisture retention under NT was a major incentive for adoption of NT practices in this semi-arid region [14, 41, 236, 261]. The high moisture retention allowed farmers to reduce the frequency of fallow, leading to cropping intensification. In the Corn Belt soil erosion control was a major incentive for NT practices. In both regions, the economical advantages of NT have played a role in the adoption of the practice [141]. For Vincent’s study, it was just on one site, humid climate with clay loam soils
  7. FPCM stands for “fat and protein corrected milk”
Advertisement