According to a HU Study, the production and consumption of agricultural products have a greater relevance for climate change and climate protection than previously assumed
How we deal with the earth’s land is of central importance for climate protection. More and more grasslands and forests are being converted into land for cultivation and pasture worldwide, whereby valuable carbon stores are being lost. The intensive use of fossil fuels, irrigation, fertilizers and pesticides presents additional factors. This makes agriculture responsible for about one-quarter of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. If, in accordance with the Paris Climate Agreement, global warming is to be limited to maximum 1.5°C, then not only must emissions be substantially reduced. In addition, ambitious strategies for climate protection rely on the targeted use of land for increased capture and storage of carbon, for instance through large-scale reforestation or the production of bioenergy. However, global food needs are expected to more than double by 2050. The competition for fertile land thus continues to increase.
This dilemma is addressed by a new study of the Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (HU) which now has been published in the magazine Nature. It examines the fundamental question of what changes in land use contribute to climate protection, by meeting global food needs and counteracting greenhouse gas emissions.
The study shows that previous methods often strongly underestimate the negative impact of land use and eating habits on climate change. According to Tim Beringer, one of the authors of the study and currently a visiting scholar at the Integrative Research Institute on Transformations of Human-Environment Systems (IRI THESys) at the HU, “a fundamental problem is that many of the calculations neglect the fact that land that is used for agriculture would also have a great potential for carbon sequestration, if it was not used for food production”. Beringer argues that such potential carbon stores should be taken into account in scientific models in the future – namely, as missed improvements in the climate balance. Hence, together with colleagues, he has developed a new approach that explicitly takes into account the hidden “carbon costs” of land use: the so-called “Carbon Benefit Index”.
The “Carbon Benefit Index” identifies how local changes in crops, yield levels and production processes affect global greenhouse gas emissions and the sequestration of carbon in plants and soil around the world. “Whether, for example, rapeseed is cultivated instead of wheat, how much yield is provided by the cultivated varieties, and whether the land is intensively or extensively cultivated makes a huge difference,” Beringer explains. With the help of their innovative approach, the authors can, among other things, show that our eating habits are connected to much more greenhouse gas emissions than previously assumed. According to their findings, the food consumption of people in Europe contributes as much to global warming as the total remaining energy consumption and all other goods taken together. “Our diet is very heavy on meat and therefore requires a lot of fertile land for livestock farming and feed production,” the researcher notes. These emissions could be reduced by up to 70% through a reduced consumption of beef and dairy products.
Traditional analyses typically attribute only a small share of overall emissions to diet and thus also underestimate the potential of changed eating habits for climate protection. “Our approach makes it possible to determine both, the climate efficiency of the production and that of the consumption of agricultural goods,” Beringer says. For effective climate protection requires changes on both sides: i.e. reduced consumption of products that are connected to high greenhouse gas emissions along with more efficient use of arable land and pasture.
The article is titled “Assessing efficiency of changes in land use for mitigating climate change” and was published in the 13 December 2018 edition of the magazine Nature.
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
Criteria of this press release:
Biology, Environment / ecology, Geosciences
You can combine search terms with and, or and/or not, e.g. Philo not logy.
You can use brackets to separate combinations from each other, e.g. (Philo not logy) or (Psycho and logy).
Coherent groups of words will be located as complete phrases if you put them into quotation marks, e.g. “Federal Republic of Germany”.
You can also use the advanced search without entering search terms. It will then follow the criteria you have selected (e.g. country or subject area).
If you have not selected any criteria in a given category, the entire category will be searched (e.g. all subject areas or all countries).