GHG Emissions and Mitigation Potentials in Agriculture Tomoko - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

GHG Emissions and Mitigation Potentials in Agriculture Tomoko HASEGAWA Graduate school of Engineering, Kyoto University 15,16 February,2009, 11th AIM International Workshop National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan

Contribution Ratio to Global Warming • Agriculture accounts for ... – 14% of total GHG emission. – 50% of total CH 4 emission and 60% of N 2 O emission in 2005 (IPCC, 2007). F-gases Agriculture residential al 1% and N 2 O commercial agriculture 8% 8% 14% CH 4 transport 14% 13% deforestatio CO 2 fossil CO 2 n 17% energy fuel use (deforestatio supply 57% n, etc) industry 26% waste and 17% 19% wastewater CO 2 (other) 3% 2.8% contribution ratio by Sector contribution ratio by Gas

ス ラ イ ド 2 ｈ 3 単位を ， M t C O 2 e q に ！ 長谷川 知子, 2 0 0 8 /0 1 /2 7

Objectives (1) To estimate and evaluate global GHG emissions and reduction potentials in Agriculture (2) To specify effective technologies, regions and emission sources with high reduction potentials To evaluate GHG emissions and reduction potentials, we need to integrate the relating events such as … changing climate economic food needs change development production population agricultural efficiency growth production technical GHG innovation GHG reduction emission technology

Methodology • Model is used for estimation. World regions Future population Future economic Exogenous scenario scenario variables Agriculture Trade Model Top-down Production of agricultural commodities GHG emissions Enduse Model Reduction Potentials determines combination and stocks of GHG reduction technologies Bottom-up

Agricultural Trade Model (ATM) • Structure: Partial equilibrium model 1200 functions and equations • Input: Population and GDP • Output: Production of agricultural commodities • Calibration term: 1971 - 2003 • Estimation term: 2004 - 2030 • Region: 23 world regions

Structure World price 23 world regions Shipping cost Tax and tariff Producer subsidy Consumer subsidy Intermediate price Population GDP Consumer price Stocks Producer price Domestic Market P Consumption Production Q 0 Net trade P Endogenous Exogenous Q 0 variable variable World Market

Structure World price 23 world regions Shipping cost Tax and tariff Producer subsidy Consumer subsidy Intermediate price Population GDP Consumer price Stocks Producer price Domestic Market P Consumption Production Q 0 23 world regions World price is decided Net trade are connected in order to take balance through world market. in the world. P Endogenous Exogenous Q 0 variable variable World Market

Structure 23 world regions World price Shipping cost Tax and tariff Producer subsidy Consumer subsidy Intermediate price Population GDP Consumer price Stocks Producer price Domestic Market Policies, tax and tariff are Consumer price and P given exogenously. producer price are Consumption Production Q 0 related to world price. Net trade P Endogenous Exogenous Q 0 variable variable World Market

Structure World price 23 world regions Shipping cost Tax and tariff Producer subsidy Consumer subsidy Intermediate price Population GDP Consumer price Stocks Producer price P Consumption Production Q 0 Consumption Production function function Net trade P Endogenous Exogenous Q 0 variable variable World Market

Functions: Production and Consumption • Production function � Production f Production ( , Producer Price ) � i r t , , i r t , , 1 j r t , , • Consumption (Con.) function Food Con . i r t , , � f Consumer price ( , GDPcap , Population ) i r t , , r t , r t , Feed Con . i r t , , � f Consumer price ( , Livestock production ) i r t , , i r t , , • Import and export are also decided by prices.

Structure World price 23 world regions Shipping cost Tax and tariff Producer subsidy Consumer subsidy Intermediate price Population GDP Consumer price Stocks Producer price Domestic Market P Consumption Production Q 0 Production, consumption Net trade and trade are calculated to take balance in one region. P Endogenous Exogenous Q 0 variable variable World Market

Balance Equations • Domestic balance equation � Production Import i r t , , i r t , , � ฀ � � Consumption Export Stock , , , , , , i r t i r t i r t • World balance equation � � � Export Import i r t , , i r t , , r r

Methodology • Model is used for estimation. world regions Future population Future economic Exogenous scenario scenario variables Agriculture Trade Model Top-down Production of agricultural commodities GHG emissions Enduse Model Reduction Potentials decides combination and stocks of GHG reduction technologies Bottom-up

Enduse Model • Structure: Dynamic model • Input: Agricultural production • Outputs: GHG emissions and Reduction potentials • Calculates combination and stocks of GHG reduction technologies in order to minimize total reduction cost. 23 world regions Production GHG emissions/ Croplands Livestock animals Reduction potentials Technology 1 Technology 4 Technology 2 Technology 5 Reduction Cost Technology 3 Technology 6 → Minimum Technology Database

Technology Stock Change A number of technology (tech. ) is changed by 1) exchange and 2) introduction. Stock ( T )= Stock( T-1 ) – ① exchanged tech.( T ) + ② Introduced tech.( T ) The number of livestock animal, or The area of croplands Tech2 Technology stocks ② Introduced Technology ① Exchange Technology change is calculated in order to ･ ･ ･ ･ Tech1 minimize total Tech1 reduction cost. 2000 ･ ･ ･ T-1 T ･ ･ ･ 2030 [year]

Application

Objective • 23 world regions • 2000-2030 • Population: medium estimates of UN(2006) • GDP: Akashi (2009) Emission Sources Gases Enteric fermentation CH 4 Manure management CH 4, N 2 O Cropland and Soils N 2 O Rice paddy CH 4, N 2 O

Baseline Emission in 2000-2030 • World GHG emission will increase by 1.4 times by 2030. • In 2030,emissions from croplands and livestock enteric fermentation account for 40% and 30% of it respectively. ｈ 2 • Emission from livestocks will increase at high growth rate. • Emission from rice paddy will decrease. 3959MtCO 2 eq 5591MtCO 2 eq 6000 CH 4 +N 2 O Emission 1.4 times Cropland and Soils N2O 5000 [MtCO 2 eq] Rice paddy CH4 40% 4000 Manure management N2O 3000 Manure management CH4 2000 Enteric fermentation CH4 1000 30% 0 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

ス ラ イ ド 1 8 ｈ 2 C : ¥G A M S ¥E m i s s i o n M o d e l v o l 2 ¥o u t p u t ¥R e d u c i o n P o t e n t i a l 長谷川 知子, 2 0 0 8 /0 8 /1 4

GHG Emission in 2000, 2030 • GHG Emission of this study is middle of other estimates. • Cropland and Soils and Enteric Fermentations occupy high contribution ratio. in 2000 in 2030 8000 2 eq] . 6000 Rice paddy CH4 GHG Emission[MtCO Cropland and Soils N2O 4000 Manure management N2O Manure management CH4 2000 Enteric fermentation CH4 0 This study This study USEPA A FAO USEPA A FAO B C B C IMAGE2.1 IMAGE2.1

Which is Effective Source? In 2030 Reduction Potential by Source • In 2030, total max. reduction potential is 1403 Mt CO 2 eq. • Technologies for rice paddy is good. • Technologies for enteric fermentation is not good. Reduction Potentials [MtCO 2 eq] Marginal Abatement Cost [US$/tCO 2 eq] Emission sources <0 <20 <50 <100 >100 Enteric fermentation CH 4 0 0 3 41 255 0 3 41 255 Manure management CH 4 0 95 98 110 345 Manure management N 2 O 0 56 57 62 205 Rice paddy CH 4 0 367 381 381 381 367 381 381 381 Cropland and Soils N 2 O 148 198 198 198 217 Total 148 716 737 793 1403 35% of total GHG emission from agriculture in 2000.

Where is Effective Region? In 2030 Reduction Potential by region • Reduction Potential in China, India and USA is large. • Measurements in there regions take comparative low costs. Marginal other developing reduction cost transition countries [US$/tCO 2 eq] India China <0 other developed 0-20 USA 20-50 EU15 50-100 Japan >100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 GHG reduction potentials [MtCO 2 eq]

What is Effective Technology ? Sub-optimal fertilizer application Marginal Abatement Cost Reduce fertilization to 90% Reduce fertilization to 80% [US$/tCO 2 eq] Reduce fertilization to 70% <0 Split fertilization <20 Convert fertilizational tillage to no-till <50 Nitrogen inhibitor Not good Optimize distribution geometry <100 Fertilizer Free Zone >100 Spreader maintenance Alternative flooding/Drainage Direct Wet Seeding Rice Straw Compost Addition of Phosphogypsum Upland rice Shallow flooding Off-season straw Midseason drainage Ammonium sulfate Good but expensive Propionate precursors Pribiotics Slowing down anaerobic decomposition The highest Daily spread of manure economic efficiency Covered lagoon Anaerobic Digestion -Farmscale plant Anaerobic Digestion -Centralised plant 0 20 40 60 80 100 Average annual reduction potentials [MtCO 2 eq/yr]