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 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.

Life Cycle Assessment of Seaweed Cultivation Systems.

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a holistic methodology that identifies the impacts of a production system on the environment. The results of an LCA are used to identify which processes can be improved to minimize impacts and optimize production.LCA is composed of four phases: (1) goal and scope definition, (2) life cycle inventory analysis, (3) life cycle impact assessment, and (4) interpretation.The goal and scope define the purpose of the analysis; describe the system and its function, establish a functional unit to collect data and present results, set the system boundaries, and explain the assumptions made and data quality requirements. Life cycle inventory analysis is the collection, processing and organization of data. Life cycle impact assessment associates the results from the inventory phase to one or multiple impacts on environment or human health. The interpretation evaluates the outcome of each phase of the analysis. In this phase the practitioner decides whether it is necessary to amend other phases, e.g., collection of more data or adjustments of goal of the analysis. In the interpretation, the practitioner draws conclusions, exposes the limitations, and provides recommendations to the readers.The quality of LCA of seaweed production and conversion is based on data availability and detail level. Performing an LCA at the initial stage of seaweed production in Europe is an advantage: the recommended design improvements can be implemented without significant economic investments. The quality of LCA will keep improving with the increase of scientific publications, data sharing, and public reports.

Modelling the potential for soil carbon sequestration using biochar from sugarcane residues in Brazil.

Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) cultivation leaves behind around 20 t ha-1 of biomass residue after harvest and processing. We investigated the potential for sequestering carbon (C) in soil with these residues by partially converting them into biochar (recalcitrant carbon-rich material). First, we modified the RothC model to allow changes in soil C arising from additions of sugarcane-derived biochar. Second, we evaluated the modified model against published field data, and found satisfactory agreement between observed and predicted soil C accumulation. Third, we used the model to explore the potential for soil C sequestration with sugarcane biochar in São Paulo State, Brazil. The results show a potential increase in soil C stocks by 2.35 ± 0.4 t C ha-1 year-1 in sugarcane fields across the State at application rates of 4.2 t biochar ha-1 year-1. Scaling to the total sugarcane area of the State, this would be 50 Mt of CO2 equivalent year-1, which is 31% of the CO2 equivalent emissions attributed to the State in 2016. Future research should (a) further validate the model with field experiments; (b) make a full life cycle assessment of the potential for greenhouse gas mitigation, including additional effects of biochar applications on greenhouse gas balances.

Impact of management strategies on the global warming potential at the cropping system level.

Estimating the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from agricultural systems is important in order to assess the impact of agriculture on climate change. In this study experimental data supplemented with results from a biophysical model (DNDC) were combined with life cycle assessment (LCA) to investigate the impact of management strategies on global warming potential of long-term cropping systems at two locations (Breton and Ellerslie) in Alberta, Canada. The aim was to estimate the difference in global warming potential (GWP) of cropping systems due to N fertilizer reduction and residue removal. Reducing the nitrogen fertilizer rate from 75 to 50 kg N ha(-1) decreased on average the emissions of N2O by 39%, NO by 59% and ammonia volatilisation by 57%. No clear trend for soil CO2 emissions was determined among cropping systems. When evaluated on a per hectare basis, cropping systems with residue removal required 6% more energy and had a little change in GWP. Conversely, when evaluated on the basis of gigajoules of harvestable biomass, residue removal resulted in 28% less energy requirement and 33% lower GWP. Reducing nitrogen fertilizer rate resulted in 18% less GWP on average for both functional units at Breton and 39% less GWP at Ellerslie. Nitrous oxide emissions contributed on average 67% to the overall GWP per ha. This study demonstrated that small changes in N fertilizer have a minimal impact on the productivity of the cropping systems but can still have a substantial environmental impact.