Agriculture, Livestock Remain Major GHG Sources
Global greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector totaled 4.69 billion tons of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2010, the most recent year for which data are available — an increase of 13 percent over 1990 emissions, according to Worldwatch Institute.
Growth in agricultural production between 1990 and 2010 outpaced growth in emissions by a factor of 1.6, demonstrating increased energy efficiency in the agriculture sector.
The three most common gases emitted in agriculture are nitrous oxide, CO2 and methane. Methane accounts for around 50 percent of total agricultural emissions, the report says. Enteric fermentation — the digestion of organic materials by livestock — is the largest source of methane emissions and of agricultural emissions overall.
Nitrous oxide is a by-product generated by the microbial breakdown of nitrogen in soils and manures. It’s responsible for around 36 percent of agricultural GHG emissions.
The largest source of CO2 emissions within agriculture is the drainage and cultivation of organic soils: soils in wetlands, peatlands, bogs, or fens with high organic material. When these areas are drained for cultivation, organic matter within the soil decomposes at a rapid rate, releasing CO2. This process accounts for around 14 percent of total agricultural greenhouse gas emissions.
Emissions from enteric fermentation rose by 7.6 percent worldwide between 1990 and 2010, but regional variation was high. At 51.4 percent and 28.1 percent, respectively, Africa and Asia saw their emissions increase, while emissions in Europe and Oceania fell by 48.1 percent and 16.1 percent. Europe’s significant reduction in emissions parallels the decline in its beef production between 1990 and 2010, but it may also reflect increased use of grains and oils in cattle feed instead of grasses.
According to Laura Reynolds, Worldwatch food and agriculture researcher and the study’s author, adding oils or oilseeds to feed can help with digestion and reduce methane emissions. She cautions, however, that a shift from to a grain- and oilseeds-based diet often accompanies a shift from pastures to concentrated feedlots, which has negative environmental consequences such as water pollution and high fossil fuel consumption.
The report says that while reducing livestock populations is one way to reduce global emissions from agriculture, farmers have other opportunities for mitigation, many of which offer environmental and economic co-benefits. For example, growing trees and woody perennials on land can sequester carbon while simultaneously helping to restore soils, reduce water contamination and provide beneficial wildlife habitat. Reducing soil tillage can rebuild soils while lowering GHG emissions.
Practices such as cap-and-trade programs — that allow farmers to monetize certain sequestration practices and sell them — can result in increased income for farmers. As another example, the report points to the US Conservation Reserve Program, which pays farmers to set aside some of their land for long-term restoration.
Cattle ranching and coal-powered energy are the two most environmentally expensive industries — and cost the economy more in environmental damage than they generate in revenue, according to a UN-backed report published last month.
Energy Manager News
- Flint Water Crisis Uncovers Ignoble Decisions and Neglect of Existing Enviro Regs
- Battery Storage Giving Businesses a Break
- WGL Extends Energy Management Platform
- Fort Hood Pushing Renewables
- Tire Store Going Solar in Billings
- Pardeeville Hikes Homeowner Costs, Offers Large Customers TOD Rates
- Mohegan Sun Pocono Casino Doesn’t Consider Cogeneration a Gamble
- Clean Power Plan: Obama’s Team Confident About Pitch to Supreme Court