CH4 and N2O emissions abatement in agriculture

1
CH4 and N2O emissions abatement in agriculture

• A.Fallot and D.Deybe
• Cirad-amis Ecopol
• Workpackage 2 b.

2
Objectives of the work-package

• Inventory of costs of land-use related greenhouse
  gas (GHG) emission reductions
• This implies
• inventory of agricultural practices to reduce
  emissions, by GHG and activity category
• development of continuous marginal abatement
  costs (MAC) curves
• comparison of MAC curves and analysis of
  potential and least costs strategies

3
As a first step,

• Definition of preliminary databases and
  specifications for land-use and agricultural GHG
  emissions according to various agricultural
  practices.
• ? two intertwined issues
• data collection
• methodology development

4
CIRAD's task is to cover the four following GHG
sources

• enteric fermentation (CH4) depending on the
  animal feed, feeding situation, and other
  livestock management practices
• manure management (CH4 and N2O) depending on
  livestock management and possible biogas
  production
• fertiliser use (N2O), depending on fertilisation
  patterns
• rice cultivation (CH4) depending on water
  management including drainage techniques.

5
The order of magnitude of each source differsas
well as their share within each region in the
world
6
(No Transcript)
7
(No Transcript)
8
CH4 and N2O control strategies imply modification
through

• Technical progress
• Land-use changes
• both, either by intensifying or extensifying
  production

9
Case study dairy production in OECD Europe

• Higher productivity leads to lower CH4 emissions
  for a given output
• Increased productivity is both an observable
  trend and an IMAGE scenario
• Our reference simulations have to be consistent
  with IMAGE data
• Abatement strategies considered have to go beyond
  the reference productivity increase

10
Thus the following techniques were explicitly
considered
11
For each technique, the following parameters had
to be identified

• Digestibility
• Net energy per unit of production
• Productivity
• CH4 conversion
• Costs (feed, other variable costs per animal,
  investment and transmission/extension)

12
Exogenous data is (for 2010)

• Livestock size (IMAGE)
• Global requirements per feed category (IMAGE)
• Average productivity/livestock (IMAGE)
• Discount rate (IMAGE)
• Prices (actual)

13
The variable defining abatement options

• The relative importance of each technique at the
  projection year (2010)

14
For the sake of comparison

• An extensification option was also analysed

15
Combination of techniques
16
Results
17
How to build a curve ?
Maximum abatement but is it acceptable by farmers?
Sub-optimal options but possibly more acceptable
18
Issues still to be solved

• On the methodology
• construction of continuous marginal abatment
  costs curves with few observations and non
  systematic changes
• On the data
• connection of the different studies on GHG
  emission sources
• integrated vision consistent within IMAGE if one
  activity is intensified, how do the others evolve?