Managing Agricultural Greenhouse Gases: Coordinated Agricultural Research through GRACEnet to Address our Changing Climate

Plates

Section 1

Agricultural Research for a Carbon-Constrained World

Chapter 1 Agriculture and Climate Change

Chapter 2 GRACEnet

Chapter 1

Agriculture and Climate Change: Mitigation Opportunities and Adaptation Imperatives

Mark A. Liebig¹, Alan J. Franzluebbers² and Ronald F. Follett³

¹USDA-ARS, Northern Great Plains Research Laboratory, Mandan, ND

²USDA-ARS, J. Phil Campbell Sr., Natural Resource Conservation Center, Watkinsville, GA

³USDA-ARS, Soil Plant Nutrient Research Unit, Ft. Collins, CO

Chapter Outline

Introduction

Mitigating and Adapting To Climate Change

Mitigation

Enhance Soil C Sequestration

Improve N-use Efficiency

Increase Ruminant Digestion Efficiency

Capture GHG Emissions from Manure and Other Wastes

Reduce Fuel Consumption

Adaptation

Increase Crop Diversity

Implement Efficient Irrigation Methods

Adopt Integrated Pest Management (IPM)

Improve Soil Management

Co-Benefits

Summary

NB: The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service is an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer and all agency services are available without discrimination.

Abbreviations: C, carbon; CO2, carbon dioxide; CO2e, carbon dioxide equivalent; GWP, global warming potential; GRACEnet, Greenhouse gas Reduction through Agricultural Carbon Enhancement Network; GHG, greenhouse gas; IPCC, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Ch4, methane; N, nitrogen; N2O, nitrous oxide.

Introduction

Carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) are critically important elements for sustaining life on earth. The balance of photosynthesis and respiration, along with methanotrophy and methanogenesis, regulate the presence of C among the atmosphere, biomass, and soil. Nitrogen, as an integral part of nucleotides and proteins, often limits net primary production (Schlesinger, 1997). Accordingly, C and N—and the key metabolic processes that regulate their transfer between compartments in the biosphere—affect the production of food, feed, fiber, and fuel needed for our daily lives.

Carbon and N also play important roles in regulating environmental quality. Reactive forms of both elements—when present in excess of biological requirements—can adversely impact environmental quality across a range of spatial scales (Vitousek et al., 1997; Janzen, 2005). Balancing concurrent needs of food security and a healthy environment is a crucial challenge given projections for human population growth (Godfrey et al., 2010). As such, documenting C and N dynamics within the biosphere will be essential to assess our relative success in achieving these concurrent goals.

Agricultural production contributes to C and N dynamics through the flux of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4,), and nitrous oxide (N2O), which represent the three greenhouse gases (GHG) principally associated with agricultural activities (Paustian et al., 2006). These three GHGs differ considerably in their atmospheric concentration, residence time in the atmosphere, global warming potential, and radiative forcing (Table 1.1). Carbon dioxide, the most abundant of the three GHGs, is fixed by plants and a portion of it is respired back to the atmosphere. Destruction of plant material through harvesting, natural decay, or burning also contributes to CO2 emissions through microbial respiration and/or direct combustion. Agricultural-induced fluxes of CH4 include emissions from ruminant livestock, flooded rice paddies, wetlands, livestock manure, and burned biomass, and, conversely, uptake by methanotrophic bacteria in soil under aerobic conditions. Fluxes of N2O from agriculture are typically unidirectional through processes of nitrification or denitrification, with emissions most prevalent from cultivated soils, livestock manure, and biomass burning (Schlesinger, 1997; Greenhouse Gas Working Group, 2010; Climate Change Position Statement Working Group, 2011).

TABLE 1.1. Attributes of atmospheric CO 2 , CH 4 , and N 2 O ( IPCC, 2007 ; NOAA, 2011 )

Agricultural contributions to total GHG emissions in the U.S. are relatively small, accounting for approximately 6.3% of total emissions in 2009, or 419 of 6633 Tg CO2e yr−1 (U.S.-EPA, 2011). Of the three agricultural GHGs, emissions of CH4 and N2O are dominant, and considered in the U.S.-EPA Agriculture report exclusive of CO2 emissions and removals. Methane emissions from enteric fermentation and manure management account for 96% of the total CH4 emissions from agriculture (189 Tg CO2e yr−1), and are the second and fifth largest anthropogenic sources of CH4 emissions in the U.S., respectively. Nitrous oxide emissions from soil management practices make up 92% of agricultural N2O emissions (205 Tg CO2e yr−1), and are by far the largest source of anthropogenic N2O emissions in the U.S., accounting for 69% of the total. Emissions of CO2 from agriculture are largely constrained to fossil fuel combustion, land conversion to cropland, lime application, and urea fertilization (Σ = 83.1 Tg CO2 yr−1). However, agricultural practices in the U.S. sequester approximately 49.3 Tg CO2 yr−1 through conversion of cropland to grassland, increased use of conservation tillage and continuous cropping, and improved management of organic fertilizers (U.S.-EPA, 2011).

Atmospheric concentrations of GHGs have increased significantly since the mid-1700s (Figure 1.1). This increase has been driven mainly by fossil fuel combustion and land-use change resulting from human activities. The capacity of GHGs to trap outgoing long-wave radiation and emit it back to the earth’s surface as heat has contributed to global-scale climate change (Paustian et al., 2006). Direct effects of climate change are significant and long-lasting, and include an increase in global average surface temperature, altered precipitation patterns, reduced snow cover, increased sea level rise, and ocean acidification (IPCC, 2007). These projected changes will have broad effects on agriculture (Follett, 2012). Shifts in vegetation zones, increased potential for droughts and floods, elevated rates of soil erosion, and increased photosynthetic rates (from higher CO2 concentration) represent potential outcomes affecting agriculture, as well as how agriculture affects the broader environment (Climate Change Position Statement Working Group, 2011; Janzen et al., 2011). Moreover, positive feedbacks from climate change—such as accelerated soil organic matter decomposition and release of CH4 from northern soils—could exacerbate such effects.

FIGURE 1.1 Concentrations of atmospheric CO 2 , CH 4 , and N 2 O during the previous two millennia.

(after IPCC, 2007)

Challenges to agriculture associated with climate change are not short term. Momentum in human population growth through the mid-21st century will almost surely result in increased rates of GHG emissions, particularly from the energy sector (IPCC, 2007). Furthermore, even if GHG emissions were to stabilize or decrease, consequences from global climate change would continue well into the next century due to momentum from climate processes and feedbacks (IPCC, 2007; Armour and Roe, 2011). This reality has led to an increased awareness that agriculture has a crucial role to play in responding to climate change, both in mitigating its causes and adapting to its impacts (Climate Change Position Statement Working Group, 2011).

Mitigating and Adapting To Climate Change

Recent reviews have provided extensive lists documenting how agricultural practices can mitigate and/or adapt to climate change (CAST, 2011; Eagle et al., 2010; Greenhouse Gas Working Group, 2010; Delgado et al., 2011; Lal et al., 2011; Climate Change Position Statement Working Group, 2011). Broadly, suggested GHG mitigation practices either contribute to soil organic C (SOC) accrual, reduce CH4 and/or N2O emissions, or reduce fuel consumption. Adaptation responses to climate change address agroecosystem adjustments to alterations in environmental conditions (Climate Change Position Statement Working Group, 2011). Such responses extend beyond regulating GHG fluxes through management, to address broader themes related to reducing negative impacts on agroecosystems while taking advantage of potential benefits associated with climate change.

Mitigation

The ASA-CSSA-SSSA Greenhouse Gas Working Group provided five broad strategies for mitigating agricultural GHG emissions (Greenhouse Gas Working Group, 2010):

1. Enhance soil C sequestration;

2. Improve N-use efficiency;

3. Increase ruminant digestion efficiency;

4. Capture GHG emissions from manure and other wastes; and

5. Reduce fuel consumption.

These five strategies are well established to either remove GHGs from the atmosphere (1) or reduce GHG emissions from known sources (2, 3, 4, 5). Because each mitigation strategy has been thoroughly addressed in previous reviews, only a synopsis of each is provided here.

Enhance Soil C Sequestration

Enhancement of soil C sequestration can be achieved by maintaining plant residues on the soil surface, minimizing soil disturbance and erosion, adopting complex cropping systems that provide continuous ground cover, and applying C-rich substrates to soil (Lal and Follett, 2009). The magnitude and rate of soil C sequestration is dependent on various edaphic and climatic factors that directly affect biomass productivity and C retention in soil (Brady and Weil, 1999). In some instances, management practices have had variable effects on soil C dynamics and CH4 and N2O flux, resulting in either enhancing (e.g. increased soil C, decreased N2O emission) or negating (e.g. increased soil C, increased N2O emission) net GHG emissions. Such variable responses emphasize the importance of inclusive GHG assessments to ascertain GHG tradeoffs associated with management (Eagle et al., 2010).

Improve N-use Efficiency

Improving N-use efficiency involves the implementation of management practices that make N available in the amount needed at the correct time to meet plant demand (Lal et al., 2011). When successful, such practices result in less reactive N available for potential conversion to N2O. Numerous management practices are available to improve N-use efficiency, including use of legumes, cover crops, filter strips, and nitrification inhibitors, application of variable-rate technology, and judicious use of soil tests to estimate soil N available for plant uptake (Greenhouse Gas Working Group, 2010).

Increase Ruminant Digestion Efficiency

Methane emissions from ruminant livestock depend on many factors, most notably livestock type, diet quality, and feed intake (Westberg et al., 2001). Strategies to reduce CH4 emissions from livestock include improved feeding practices (e.g. enhancing pasture quality), use of dietary amendments (e.g. edible oils, ionophores, organic acids), and improved genetics (Kebreab et al., 2006). However, the effectiveness of these strategies is often influenced by environmental conditions, soil and plant interactions, animal behavior, and level of management expertise (Murray et al., 2007).

Capture GHG Emissions from Manure and Other Wastes

Livestock manure can be a significant source of CH4 and N2O (U.S.-EPA, 2011). Capturing biogas (CH4, CO2) from manure through anaerobic digestion increases production efficiencies by utilizing CH4 as fuel for generating on-site electricity and heat energy (Kebreab et al., 2006). Moreover, residual solid material (sludge) following digestion may be used as fertilizer, thereby supplementing plant nutrient requirements. Additional strategies to reduce GHG fluxes from manure include composting, covering stored manure, altering diet composition, adoption of novel application methods, and using nitrification inhibitors (Külling et al., 2001; Schoenau et al., 2010).

Reduce Fuel Consumption

Reduction in fuel consumption directly contributes to lower CO2 emissions. In this regard, agricultural practices that reduce the number of field passes by farm machinery, such as conservation tillage, lower fuel consumption (West and Marland, 2002). Agricultural practices that reduce applications of synthetic fertilizer and pesticides can reduce upstream CO2 emissions associated with their manufacture (Hoeppner et al., 2006). Additionally, implementation of efficient irrigation practices (e.g. drip irrigation) and maximizing in-field grain drying prior to harvest serves to increase energy-use efficiency, thereby avoiding CO2 emissions (Greenhouse Gas Working Group, 2010).

Adaptation

Significant concerns exist regarding the capacity of agroecosystems to provide food, feed, fiber, and fuel, and maintain ecosystem services under anticipated conditions of global climate change. Development and adoption of adaptation strategies will be essential to minimize negative biophysical and socioeconomic consequences, particularly as demand for agricultural products and competition for natural resources increases with a larger human population (Tilman et al., 2011). While research on this topic is in its infancy, select management strategies have been proposed to adapt to global climate change (Climate Change Position Statement Working Group, 2011):

1. Increase crop diversity;

2. Implement efficient irrigation methods;

3. Adopt integrated pest management; and

4. Improve soil management.

Each strategy directly or indirectly addresses adaptation to climate change by responding to changes in long-term temperature and precipitation conditions, annual weather variation, and challenges associated with invasive pests and/or diseases (Follett, 2012). Moreover, the strategies serve to increase production efficiencies while simultaneously improving environmental quality.

Increase Crop Diversity

Increasing the number of crops in rotation as well as broadening the tolerance of crops to drought, heat, and nutrient stresses through improved crop varieties can moderate weather-related effects associated with climate change (Climate Change Position Statement Working Group, 2011). Moreover, adoption of annual crop sequencing approaches that optimize production, economic, and resource conservation goals can serve to increase management adaptability in the context of climate-induced change (Hanson et al., 2007). Such cropping systems, which are inherently dynamic in space and time, allow sequencing of crops in a manner to take advantage of available water and nutrients while disrupting weed and disease cycles (Tanaka et al., 2002). Accordingly, dynamic cropping systems can decrease requirements for off-farm inputs (e.g. fertilizer and pesticides) as compared with fixed-sequence and monoculture cropping systems (Tanaka et al., 2005).

Implement Efficient Irrigation Methods

Efficient utilization of water for crop growth will be essential in adapting to global climate change. Irrigated agriculture is of particular concern, given its significant production potential and high economic value relative to rainfed production systems, coupled with its vulnerability to depleted water supplies (Hatfield et al., 2011). Adoption of irrigation technology capable of delivering water to crops in space and time in precise doses with minimal loss will increase water- and nutrient-use efficiency (Delgado et al., 2011). Additional strategies for efficient water use include adoption of conservation practices that increase water storage and decrease evaporative demand (Follett, 2012).

Adopt Integrated Pest Management (IPM)

Climate change has significant potential to increase the complexity of pest and disease management. Anticipated effects of climate change include increased populations, shorter life cycles, range expansion, increased herbivory, and new crop hosts (Chakraborty et al., 2000; Bale et al., 2002). Implementation and/or modification of current IPM strategies will be necessary to address these challenges, and will require the development of new methodologies to adapt IPM to different climatic conditions (Climate Change Position Statement Working Group, 2011).

Improve Soil Management

Soil management practices that conserve water, minimize erosion, and improve soil function will contribute to increased agroecosystem resilience under anticipated climate change. Generally, management strategies that increase C input to soil, reduce decay rates of soil organic matter, and improve N-use efficiency will contribute positively to these improvements in production efficiency (Eagle et al., 2010; Delgado et al., 2011; Lal et al., 2011; Follett, 2012).

Co-Benefits

Numerous management practices that mitigate GHG emissions or that can be used to adapt to global climate change also enhance agroecosystem function, and accordingly contribute to the achievement of production and environmental goals (Lal and Follett, 2009; Delgado et al., 2011; Lal et al., 2011). Such co-benefits have been strongly associated with practices that enhance soil C sequestration (Janzen, 2005). Accrual of SOC in agricultural lands has been associated with improvements in soil physical, chemical, and biological properties, which affect key soil functions, such as nutrient cycling, filtering and buffering capacity, and regulation of hydrological attributes (Andrews et al., 2004; Franzluebbers, 2010). While precise relationships are difficult to quantify, improvements in soil attributes and related functions have positive effects on agronomic yield and environmental quality (Bauer and Black, 1994; Diaz-Zorita et al., 1999; Wienhold et al., 2006; Lal and Follett, 2009). Such associations have led others to assert that the greatest value from C sequestration may relate more to improvements in soil functions, on-site productivity, and off-site environmental benefits than a reduction in GHG emissions (Duxbury, 1994).

In many respects, mitigation and adaptation strategies focus on conserving C and N within agroecosystems, thereby improving production efficiencies. Carbon and N retained in agroecosystems—and not lost through GHG emissions—increases the likelihood of more efficient use of nutrients, water, energy, and labor, which can result in lower input costs for producers (Delgado et al., 2011). Moreover, management strategies that directly reduce demands for fossil energy and irrigation water translate to critically important economic co-benefits, particularly as these resources become more limiting, and hence more expensive (National Intelligence Council, 2008).

In addition to economic co-benefits associated with improved production efficiencies, select management practices may generate supplemental income for producers through payments from emission trading programs. Such programs, similar to those previously administered by the National Farmers Union (NFU) and Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), have provided a framework for GHG emitting entities (e.g. power generation companies) to offset their emissions by purchasing credits from entities known to achieve net GHG uptake (Reicosky et al., 2012). When active (2006–2010), the NFU/CCX program provided more than $7 million in offset payments to U.S. farmers and ranchers employing conservation practices known to sequester atmospheric CO2 (Dale Enerson, personal communication, 2011). While the future of such programs in the U.S. is unknown at this time, they have the potential to provide valuable economic co-benefits for producers coping with agronomic impacts from climate