Search

Agricultural emissions account for 53% of 2010 global non-CO2emissions and are projected to increase substantially over the next 20 years, especially in Asia, Latin America and Africa. While agriculture is a substantial source of emissions, it is also generally considered to be a potential source of cost-effective non-CO2GHG abatement. Previous “bottom-up” analyses provided marginal abatement cost (MAC) curves for use in modeling these options within economy-wide and global mitigation analyses. In this paper, we utilize updated economic and biophysical data and models developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to investigate regional mitigation potential for major sources of agricultural GHG emissions. In addition, we explore mitigation potential available at costs at or below the estimated benefits of mitigation, as represented by the social cost of carbon. Key enhancements over previous regional assessments include incorporation of additional mitigation options, updated baseline emissions projections, greater spatial disaggregation, and development of MAC curves through 2030. For croplands and rice cultivation, biophysical, process-based models (DAYCENT and DNDC) are used to simulate yields and net GHG emissions under baseline and mitigation scenarios while the livestock sector is modeled by applying key mitigation options to baselines compiled by EPA. MAC curves are generated accounting for net GHG reductions, yield effects, livestock productivity effects, commodity prices, labor requirements, and capital costs where appropriate. MAC curves are developed at the regional level and reveal large potential for non-CO2GHG mitigation at low carbon prices, especially in Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Greenhouse gases (GHGs) other than carbon dioxide (CO2) play an important role in the effort to understand and address global climate change. Approximately 25% of Global warming potential-weighted GHG emissions in the year 2005 comprise the non-CO2GHGs. The report,Global Mitigation of Non-CO2Greenhouse Gases: 2010–2030provides a comprehensive global analysis and resulting data-set of marginal abatement cost curves that illustrate the abatement potential of non-CO2GHGs by sector and by region. The basic methodology – a bottom-up, engineering cost approach – builds on the baseline non-CO2emissions projections published by EPA, applying abatement options to the emissions baseline in each sector. The results of the analysis are MAC curves that reflect aggregated breakeven prices for implementing abatement options in a given sector and region. Among the key findings of the report is that significant, cost-effective abatement exists from non-CO2sources with abatement options that are available today. Without a price signal (i.e. at $0/tCO2e), the global abatement potential is greater than 1800 million metric tons of CO2equivalent. Globally, the energy and agriculture sectors have the greatest potential for abatement. Among the non-CO2GHGs, methane has the largest abatement potential. Despite the potential for project level cost savings and environmental benefits, barriers to mitigating non-CO2emissions continue to exist. This paper will provide an overview of the methods and key findings of the report. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Agricultural activities are a substantial contributor to global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, accounting for about 58% of the world's anthropogenic non-carbon dioxide GHG emissions and 14% of all anthropogenic GHG emissions, and agriculture is often viewed as a potential source of relatively low-cost emissions reductions. We estimate the costs of GHG mitigation for 36 world agricultural regions for the 2000–2020 period, taking into account net GHG reductions, yield effects, livestock productivity effects, commodity prices, labor requirements, and capital costs where appropriate. For croplands and rice cultivation, we use biophysical, process-based models (DAYCENT and DNDC) to capture the net GHG and yield effects of baseline and mitigation scenarios for different world regions. For the livestock sector, we use information from the literature on key mitigation options and apply the mitigation options to emission baselines compiled by EPA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]