Cargando…
Characterising the biophysical, economic and social impacts of soil carbon sequestration as a greenhouse gas removal technology
To limit warming to well below 2°C, most scenario projections rely on greenhouse gas removal technologies (GGRTs); one such GGRT uses soil carbon sequestration (SCS) in agricultural land. In addition to their role in mitigating climate change, SCS practices play a role in delivering agroecosystem re...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7079085/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31532049 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14844 |
_version_ | 1783507756744966144 |
---|---|
author | Sykes, Alasdair J. Macleod, Michael Eory, Vera Rees, Robert M. Payen, Florian Myrgiotis, Vasilis Williams, Mathew Sohi, Saran Hillier, Jon Moran, Dominic Manning, David A. C. Goglio, Pietro Seghetta, Michele Williams, Adrian Harris, Jim Dondini, Marta Walton, Jack House, Joanna Smith, Pete |
author_facet | Sykes, Alasdair J. Macleod, Michael Eory, Vera Rees, Robert M. Payen, Florian Myrgiotis, Vasilis Williams, Mathew Sohi, Saran Hillier, Jon Moran, Dominic Manning, David A. C. Goglio, Pietro Seghetta, Michele Williams, Adrian Harris, Jim Dondini, Marta Walton, Jack House, Joanna Smith, Pete |
author_sort | Sykes, Alasdair J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | To limit warming to well below 2°C, most scenario projections rely on greenhouse gas removal technologies (GGRTs); one such GGRT uses soil carbon sequestration (SCS) in agricultural land. In addition to their role in mitigating climate change, SCS practices play a role in delivering agroecosystem resilience, climate change adaptability and food security. Environmental heterogeneity and differences in agricultural practices challenge the practical implementation of SCS, and our analysis addresses the associated knowledge gap. Previous assessments have focused on global potentials, but there is a need among policymakers to operationalise SCS. Here, we assess a range of practices already proposed to deliver SCS, and distil these into a subset of specific measures. We provide a multidisciplinary summary of the barriers and potential incentives towards practical implementation of these measures. First, we identify specific practices with potential for both a positive impact on SCS at farm level and an uptake rate compatible with global impact. These focus on: (a) optimising crop primary productivity (e.g. nutrient optimisation, pH management, irrigation); (b) reducing soil disturbance and managing soil physical properties (e.g. improved rotations, minimum till); (c) minimising deliberate removal of C or lateral transport via erosion processes (e.g. support measures, bare fallow reduction); (d) addition of C produced outside the system (e.g. organic manure amendments, biochar addition); (e) provision of additional C inputs within the cropping system (e.g. agroforestry, cover cropping). We then consider economic and non‐cost barriers and incentives for land managers implementing these measures, along with the potential externalised impacts of implementation. This offers a framework and reference point for holistic assessment of the impacts of SCS. Finally, we summarise and discuss the ability of extant scientific approaches to quantify the technical potential and externalities of SCS measures, and the barriers and incentives to their implementation in global agricultural systems. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7079085 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70790852020-03-19 Characterising the biophysical, economic and social impacts of soil carbon sequestration as a greenhouse gas removal technology Sykes, Alasdair J. Macleod, Michael Eory, Vera Rees, Robert M. Payen, Florian Myrgiotis, Vasilis Williams, Mathew Sohi, Saran Hillier, Jon Moran, Dominic Manning, David A. C. Goglio, Pietro Seghetta, Michele Williams, Adrian Harris, Jim Dondini, Marta Walton, Jack House, Joanna Smith, Pete Glob Chang Biol Research Reviews To limit warming to well below 2°C, most scenario projections rely on greenhouse gas removal technologies (GGRTs); one such GGRT uses soil carbon sequestration (SCS) in agricultural land. In addition to their role in mitigating climate change, SCS practices play a role in delivering agroecosystem resilience, climate change adaptability and food security. Environmental heterogeneity and differences in agricultural practices challenge the practical implementation of SCS, and our analysis addresses the associated knowledge gap. Previous assessments have focused on global potentials, but there is a need among policymakers to operationalise SCS. Here, we assess a range of practices already proposed to deliver SCS, and distil these into a subset of specific measures. We provide a multidisciplinary summary of the barriers and potential incentives towards practical implementation of these measures. First, we identify specific practices with potential for both a positive impact on SCS at farm level and an uptake rate compatible with global impact. These focus on: (a) optimising crop primary productivity (e.g. nutrient optimisation, pH management, irrigation); (b) reducing soil disturbance and managing soil physical properties (e.g. improved rotations, minimum till); (c) minimising deliberate removal of C or lateral transport via erosion processes (e.g. support measures, bare fallow reduction); (d) addition of C produced outside the system (e.g. organic manure amendments, biochar addition); (e) provision of additional C inputs within the cropping system (e.g. agroforestry, cover cropping). We then consider economic and non‐cost barriers and incentives for land managers implementing these measures, along with the potential externalised impacts of implementation. This offers a framework and reference point for holistic assessment of the impacts of SCS. Finally, we summarise and discuss the ability of extant scientific approaches to quantify the technical potential and externalities of SCS measures, and the barriers and incentives to their implementation in global agricultural systems. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-10-26 2020-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7079085/ /pubmed/31532049 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14844 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Global Change Biology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Reviews Sykes, Alasdair J. Macleod, Michael Eory, Vera Rees, Robert M. Payen, Florian Myrgiotis, Vasilis Williams, Mathew Sohi, Saran Hillier, Jon Moran, Dominic Manning, David A. C. Goglio, Pietro Seghetta, Michele Williams, Adrian Harris, Jim Dondini, Marta Walton, Jack House, Joanna Smith, Pete Characterising the biophysical, economic and social impacts of soil carbon sequestration as a greenhouse gas removal technology |
title | Characterising the biophysical, economic and social impacts of soil carbon sequestration as a greenhouse gas removal technology |
title_full | Characterising the biophysical, economic and social impacts of soil carbon sequestration as a greenhouse gas removal technology |
title_fullStr | Characterising the biophysical, economic and social impacts of soil carbon sequestration as a greenhouse gas removal technology |
title_full_unstemmed | Characterising the biophysical, economic and social impacts of soil carbon sequestration as a greenhouse gas removal technology |
title_short | Characterising the biophysical, economic and social impacts of soil carbon sequestration as a greenhouse gas removal technology |
title_sort | characterising the biophysical, economic and social impacts of soil carbon sequestration as a greenhouse gas removal technology |
topic | Research Reviews |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7079085/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31532049 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14844 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sykesalasdairj characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT macleodmichael characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT eoryvera characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT reesrobertm characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT payenflorian characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT myrgiotisvasilis characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT williamsmathew characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT sohisaran characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT hillierjon characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT morandominic characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT manningdavidac characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT gogliopietro characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT seghettamichele characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT williamsadrian characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT harrisjim characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT dondinimarta characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT waltonjack characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT housejoanna characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology AT smithpete characterisingthebiophysicaleconomicandsocialimpactsofsoilcarbonsequestrationasagreenhousegasremovaltechnology |