Identifying cost-competitive greenhouse gas mitigation potential of French agriculture

Abstract

The agriculture, forestry and other land use sector are responsible for 24% (10–12 Pg CO2e per year) of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions worldwide, with concomitant opportunities for mitigation. A scientific panel used deliberative methods to identify ten technical measures comprising 26 sub-measures to reduce GHG emissions from agriculture in France. Their abatement potential and cost are compared. The proposed measures concern nitrogen (N) management, management practices that increase carbon stocks in soils and biomass, livestock diets, and energy production and consumption on farms. Results show that the total abatement potential can be divided into three parts. One third of the cumulated abatement potential corresponds to sub-measures that can be implemented at a negative technical cost. These sub-measures focus on increased efficiency in input use including N fertilisers, animal feed and energy. The second third are sub-measures with moderate cost (<€25 per metric Mg of avoided CO2e). These sub-measures require specific investments or changes to cropping systems, but additional costs or lower incomes are partially compensated for by a reduction in other costs or by the production of other marketable products. The remaining third are high-cost sub-measures (>€25 per metric Mg of avoided CO2e). These require investment with no direct financial return, the purchase of particular inputs, dedicated labour time or involve production losses. Assuming additivity, the cumulated abatement is 32.3 Tg CO2e per year in 2030, but only 10 Tg (i.e. 10% of current agricultural emissions) when calculated under current inventory rules. This study confirms that a significant abatement potential exists in the agricultural sector, with two thirds of this potential at low or even negative cost. This is likely to be an underestimated as it is based on a status quo of the current agricultural system. Results also emphasise the need to upgrade inventory rules so that efforts to reduce emissions can be accounted for

Spatial-Temporal Characteristics of the Driving Factors of Agricultural Carbon Emissions: Empirical Evidence from Fujian, China

“…The study area covers Fujian on the southeast coast of China. As an important estuary for the Min River and also an important window for China's contacts with the world, Fujian encompasses a total land area of approximately 124,000 km 2 and a total maritime area of approximately 136,000 km 2 However, the rapid development of agriculture is at the expense of the environment. That is, at present, the agricultural development in Fujian is a typical chemical agriculture type, which relies heavily on high-carbon means of production such as chemical fertilizers and pesticides, which seriously affects the sustainable development of agriculture in the future.…”

“…The main reason for this is that although the agricultural sector provides food for all mankind, it also needs a large number of inputs of agricultural machinery and equipment, fertilizers, pesticides, agricultural film, and other means of production, which may ultimately lead to high carbon dioxide emissions. In addition, according to the statistics, the agriculture, forestry, and other land use sectors are responsible for about 24% of anthropogenic carbon emissions worldwide and have become the second largest source of global greenhouse gas emissions, and the emissions are also increasing at a fast speed of approximately 1% per annum [1,2]. Therefore, under the background of increasingly severe global warming, carbon emission reduction in the agricultural sector is an indispensable link to improve the capability of agriculture to cope with climate change and also an inevitable choice to achieve economic growth, ecological environmental development, and sustainable agricultural development.…”

Intégrer les changements d’échelle pour améliorer l’efficience des productions animales et réduire les rejets

“…On peut notamment agir par l'ajout de lipides ou par l'augmentation d'amidon en remplacement des fibres alimentaires dans la ration pour réduire les émissions de méthane. Ces stratégies sont cependant susceptibles d'effets associés non négligeables, certains positifs comme l'enrichissement du lait en acides gras insaturés, d'autres négatifs comme les émissions de GES induites par la production de ces aliments et par les coûts associés qui peuvent réduire leur pertinence par rapport à d'autres mesures (Pellerin et al, 2017).…”

“…En dehors du pâturage qui est une solution économique pour limiter les émissions de méthane, les solutions techniques pour réduire ces émissions existent, mais sont souvent couteuses. Si les méthaniseurs ou les torchères permettent de réduire les émissions de GES des systèmes lisiers, leur coût reste élevé par tonne de CO 2 eq évité (Pellerin et al, 2017).…”

Study of the Spatio-Temporal Differentiation of Factors Influencing Carbon Emission of the Planting Industry in Arid and Vulnerable Areas in Northwest China

“…Our findings would provide theoretical guidance in support of reducing agricultural carbon emissions and promoting sustainable development of low-carbon agriculture. Compared with the existing research [12][13][14][15][16][17], the innovation of this study lies mainly in three key aspects:…”