This presentation was given by Ciniro Costa Jr. (CCAFS) at a Rabobank Climate Change Training Session on March 3, 2021.

1. March 03, 2021
GHG emissions and priority action in climate
mitigation in the agriculture sector
Ciniro Costa Jr
c.costajr@cgiar.org

2. CGIAR: An international agricultural
research consortium
Mission:
Food security and
poverty alleviation
15 centers, 70
regional offices
Plus partner
organizations

3. Agenda
1. Mudanças Climáticas: o efeito estufa, as emissões de GEE, aquecimento
global e impactos.
2. Compromissos globais (Acordo de Paris, 1,5oC, zero emissões e os ODS)
3. Emissões globais de GEE e o papel da agricultura
4. O contexto brasileiro
5. Fontes e sumidouros de GEE na agricultura
6. Mitigação de emissões: opções e potenciais
7. Co-benefícios da mitigação
8. Monitoramento de emissões e remoções de GEE
9. Estudo de caso 1: pecuária
10.Estudo de caso 2: Sistemas integrados / agroflorestal
11.Considerações finais

4. Global warming effect
Courtesy of Carlos Cerri
CO2e
Global warming potential (GWP)
Convert all GHGs into a single unit

5. Impacts of climate change
In preparation (Wollwmberg, Costa Jr, Thornton)

6. Impacts of climate change

7. Paris Agreement and the 1.5oC pathway
challenge
Taskforce on scaling voluntary carbon markets,

8. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

9. Graphic: CDP 2015; data from IPCC 2014
The agricultural sector contributes to 12% of Globa
emissions

10. The Brazil’s context: top 10 Global GHG emitter
SEEG

11. SEEG
Brazil’s Ag-Sector emission: livestock and soil
management (~30% of Country’s emission)

12. Paustian 2006
Sources of emissions in agricultural systems

13. Existing mitigation options in agriculture
Nutrient management
N-fixing crops / legumes
No-tillage
Improved feed and manure
management
Avoid
land conversion
Water management
Improved seeds
GHG reductions
Cover crops
Agroforestry
Grazing optimization
Silvopastoral
Enhancing C sequestration
Land restoration
Residue
management
LIVESTOCK
PADDY RICE
CROPS
LAND USE CHANGE
Food loss
Energy

14. Zero agricultural land expansion
• In 2050, land use change due to agriculture will generate 6 GtCO2/yr
• Only a few commodities responsible for most deforestation: palm oil, beef, soy, pulp,
rubber, cocoa and coffee
• 80% of global forest loss is expected to take place in 11 deforestation fronts (2030
projection). South America is a hot spot.
The 11 deforestation fronts,
with projected losses, 2010–
2030. Source: WWF Living
Forests Report (2015).
WHERE is action
needed ?

15. • Livestock intensification
reduces emissions intensity up
to 20X for beef, 300X for dairy
• Improve digestibility of feed
• Reduce numbers of animals
0.00
50.00
100.00
150.00
200.00
250.00
300.00
350.00
400.00
450.00
7.50 8.50 9.50 10.50 11.50
methane
-
kg
CO2
/
kg
protein
produced
metabolisable energy (MJ/kg DM)
developed
developing
BRICS
Pastoralist farmers in
Chad
Herrero et al. 2013, PNAS
Livestock intensification
US, EU
intensive
cattle
production
• Issues: absolute emissions
increase, cost of improved
feed, cultural barriers,
emissions from land use
change and feed production,
other environmental impacts
• Resource: Tackling Climate Change
through Livestock
www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3437e/i3437e00.htm

16. Efficient use of nitrogen fertilizer
• Increasing NUE from 19 to 75%, decreases
emissions intensity by 56% (12.7 to 7.1 g
N2O-N/kg N uptake)
• Increase efficiency of N fertilizer uptake by
plants, e.g. timing, rates, deep placement,
microdosing
• Issues: most smallholder farmers only use
small amounts of N, so absolute emissions
will increase.
• Resource: Site-specific nutrient management
https://ccafs.cgiar.org/publications/site-specific-nutrient-management-
implementation-guidance-policymakers-and-investors#.W7ZgSC-ZPEY

17. Agroforestry
• Global review shows maximum carbon increases in
-Plant biomass in improved fallows: 11 tC/ha/yr
-Soil C in silvopastoral systems: 4 tC/ha/yr
• Issues: finite, reversible, can conflict with crops,
classification as forestry or agriculture,
trees on farms often not counted due to scale
Feliciano et al. 2018 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.11.032

18. Soil carbon sequestration
• Agriculture is the major driver of soil carbon loss
• But soil C can be managed: e.g. reduced burning, legume
intercropping, agroforestry, compost, manure, deep-rooted plants.
• Issues: finite, reversible, ambitious potentials, competition for
biomass inputs, insufficient other nutrients, MRV costs and
detectable changes only after ~20 years.

19. Degraded pastures in Brazil: ~100 Million ha in
Brazil (size of France + Germany)
(Lapig)

20. Degraded pastures may lose over 50% of their
original soil carbon levels in the Brazilian Cerrado
(Costa Junior, 2020)
• ~100 tC ha-1 no primeiro metro de solo, sendo que cerca de 55%
(0-30 cm)
• Degradação pode reduzir cerca de 60% (0-30 cm)

21. Native vegetation
Degraded pasture
Recovered pasture
Nominal pasture
Improved pasture
Oliveira (2018)
Soil carbon sequestration potential by recovering
degraded pastures in Brazil
> 60 tCO2e/ha
> 50 tCO2e / ha
Oliveira et al., 2018

22. Brazil is one of the top 10 in soil carbon
sequestration potential
(Wiese et al., 2020)

23. Reduce food loss and waste in supply
chains
• Issues: Reduces emissions
intensity, but not necessarily
total emissions; lack of
available data
• The food supply chain contributes ~13.7 Gt CO2e/yr, and 15–45% of food is
lost or wasted (2.1 to 6.2 GtCO2e/yr)
Matzembacher et al., 2020

24. Natural climate solutions can significantly
contribute to stabilizing warming <2°C
Griscom et al., 2017; Bossio et al., 2020
• NCS can provide 37%
of cost-effective
mitigation
• One-third can be
delivered at or below 10
USD tCO2
-1
• 25% is related to Soil C
Sequestration

25. Best agronomic practices have a major role in
mitigating/removing GHG (e.g., nutrient management)
~11.3 GtCO2e y−1
(~100 USD MgCO2e−1 y−1)
~3.5 GtCO2e y−1
(<10 USD MgCO2e−1y −1)
Griscom et al., 2017

26. Mitigation practices
How do mitigation practices affect resilience?
Reduce climate
risk
Improve yields
and yield
variability
Improve general
adaptive
capacity (assets
and policies)
Improve coping
strategies
Adaptation actions
Reduce
vulnerability
to climate
change
Economic efficiency and
productivity measures fertilizer
efficiency, water saving in
flooded rice, energy efficiency,
herd size/composition, food loss
and waste, more productive
breeds and varieties
Ecosystem provisioning and
regulation services:
Agroforestry, A/R, avoided
conversion, grassland, peat. soil
C, biochar, reduced burning
Energy substitution: biogas,
bioenergy
Impacts of mitigation
Reduce net
emissions
Buffer climate risk:
microclimate, water
availability
Increase
productivity, returns,
savings
Improve enabling
conditions: technical
assistance, farmer
organization, rural
credit, policy support
Improve natural
assets

27. Mckinsey, 2020
Agriculture abatement cost curve

28. Agriculture abatement cost curve
Mckinsey, 2020

29. (Carbon balance)
Value (+) = emissions
Value (-) = removal
Activity data x
Factor (emission) =
Factor (removal) =
Emission
Removal
(sequestration)
+
=
Net GHG emissions
Level or extent of practices
GHG
emissions/removals
per unit of activity data
(CO2; CH4; N2O)
Measuring GHG emissions and soil C

30. Three key metrics for emissions
• CO2e per ha
• CO2e per kg
- “Emissions Intensity”
- “Yield-scaled emissions”
Used for adding up or comparing emissions
for a given area of land
Used to show the GHG efficiency of a food
product or supply chain.
Also called:
• CO2e per product (LCA)
Used for adding up or comparing emissions
for a given area of value-chain
-
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Global East Asia
and
Southeast
Asia
Eastern
Europe
Latin America
and the
Caribbean
Near East
and North
Africa
North
America
Oceania Russian
Federation
South Asia Sub-Saharan
Africa
Western
Europe
On-farm (enteric + manure+direct energy)) Off-farm (feed + energy) Other
tCO2e / t of beef produced (CW)
Measuring GHG emissions and soil C

31. Emissions v. mitigation
• Mitigation is a reduction
• Reductions (abatement) can be measured relative to a base year or projection in the
future
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Baseline
Actual
emissions
GHG emissions (t CO2e)

32. Some practical resources for low
emissions agriculture
FAO-STAT emissions data: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data
MRV platform for agriculture: https://www.agmrv.org
IPCC Emission Factor Database: https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/EFDB/main.php
NDC database https://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/73255
Financing the Transformation of Food Systems under a Changing Climate
https://ccafs.cgiar.org/publications/financing-transformation-food-systems-under-
changing-climate#.XjIp7S3MzEY
Examples of CSA business cases https://ccafs.cgiar.org/fr/invest#.XjJPDC3MzEY
CCAC Kiosks: Manure management: http://www.manurekiosk.org,
Paddy rice https://ghgmitigation.irri.org

33. Case study 1: Pasture restoration in the Brazilian
Amazon
Imaflora, 2020

34. Piatto, M. & CostaJr et al., 2020
Net changes in GHG sources and sinks (tCO2e/ha)
Case study 1: Pasture restoration in the Brazilian
Amazon

35. 19.0 19.8
51.3
46.4
38.9
Brazil - Intensified
(5 AU/ha/y)
Brazil - Intensified
(3.5 AU/ha/y)
Brazil - Degraded Latin America and
the Caribbean
(average)
Global (average)
On-farm GHG emissions
(tCO2e / t beef produced - carcass)
Brazil - Intensified (5 AU/ha/y) Brazil - Intensified (3.5 AU/ha/y)
Brazil - Degraded Latin America and the Caribbean (average)
Global (average)
(CostaJr, 2021; Gleam FAO; 2017)
~ 30 kg CO2e / kg carne
Case study 1: Pasture restoration in the Brazilian
Amazon
63 kg carcass/ha/y
755 kg carcass/ha/y
1079 kg

36. INOCAS; BID, 2020
Case study 2: Agroforestry systems
implementation in the Brazilian Cerrado

37. INOCAS; BID, 2020
Case study 2: Agroforestry systems
implementation in the Brazilian Cerrado

38. Agroforestry combinations
(40% of the total area)
~3.0
animal/ha
Corn
(mostly)
~3.0
animal/ha
Corn
(mostly)
~1.0
animal/ha
Not viable
(55% of the total area) (5% of the total area)
400
palms/ha
312.5
palms/ha
192.3
palms/ha
INOCAS; BID, 2020
Case study 2: Agroforestry systems
implementation in the Brazilian Cerrado

39. Agroforestry systems reduce net GHG emissions by 10 times compared to
the baseline
INOCAS; BID, 2020
*Negative values represent emission reduction
Case study 2: Agroforestry systems
implementation in the Brazilian Cerrado

40. Final remarks
Actions to meet climate targets
1. Protect forest lands, recover degraded areas and promote best
agronomic practices for SOC conservation;
2. Improve understanding of services/products mitigation potential;
3. Demonstrate benefits that balance crop productivity, emission
reduction, carbon sequestration and SDG impacts;
4. Generate long-term data information (set up a robust MRV system);
5. Create platforms for sharing knowledge and practices among
farmers (locally-globally);
6. Support incentives to farmers, public-private investment (de-risking,
match making) and viable carbon-markets.

41. Thank you
Ciniro Costa Jr
c.costajr@cgiar.org