scholarly journals Closing the loop on organic waste management: biochar for agricultural land application and climate change mitigation

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 479-480 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodrigo Navia ◽  
David E Crowley
Forests ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 922 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rafaella C. Mayrinck ◽  
Colin P. Laroque ◽  
Beyhan Y. Amichev ◽  
Ken Van Rees

Shelterbelts have been planted around the world for many reasons. Recently, due to increasing awareness of climate change risks, shelterbelt agroforestry systems have received special attention because of the environmental services they provide, including their greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation potential. This paper aims to discuss shelterbelt history in Canada, and the environmental benefits they provide, focusing on carbon sequestration potential, above- and below-ground. Shelterbelt establishment in Canada dates back to more than a century ago, when their main use was protecting the soil, farm infrastructure and livestock from the elements. As minimal-and no-till systems have become more prevalent among agricultural producers, soil has been less exposed and less vulnerable to wind erosion, so the practice of planting and maintaining shelterbelts has declined in recent decades. In addition, as farm equipment has grown in size to meet the demands of larger landowners, shelterbelts are being removed to increase efficiency and machine maneuverability in the field. This trend of shelterbelt removal prevents shelterbelt’s climate change mitigation potential to be fully achieved. For example, in the last century, shelterbelts have sequestered 4.85 Tg C in Saskatchewan. To increase our understanding of carbon sequestration by shelterbelts, in 2013, the Government of Canada launched the Agricultural Greenhouse Gases Program (AGGP). In five years, 27 million dollars were spent supporting technologies and practices to mitigate GHG release on agricultural land, including understanding shelterbelt carbon sequestration and to encourage planting on farms. All these topics are further explained in this paper as an attempt to inform and promote shelterbelts as a climate change mitigation tool on agricultural lands.


2019 ◽  
pp. 29-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ewa Kochańska

The article discusses selected problems related to environmental protection in the context of climate change in the Ceará region of North-Eastern Brazil. The authors analyse the lack of water and negative impact of climate change on fish processing in the region. Also, the opportunity to use fish waste to increase profitability of the local fish processing SMEs thanks to implementation of climate-friendly technologies such as the production of fertilisers and energy for their own needs is discussed.


2018 ◽  
Vol 80 ◽  
pp. 95-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carsten Paul ◽  
Réamonn Fealy ◽  
Owen Fenton ◽  
Gary Lanigan ◽  
Lilian O’Sullivan ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Heba Elbasiouny ◽  
Bodor A. Elbanna ◽  
Esraa Al-Najoli ◽  
Amal Alsherief ◽  
Shimaa Negm ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gun Mardiatmoko

The impacts of climate change are changes in rainfall patterns, sea level rise and extreme weather or extreme meteorological events. This impact will further provide dangers that threaten the sustainability of human life. The main causes of climate change are deforestation and forest degradation and the growth rate of industry and transportation modes that are not environmentally friendly. Therefore, Indonesia is participating in the Paris Agreement and implementing the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation program, role of conservation, sustainable management of forest and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries (REDD+). In an effort to increase the prosperity of the State, many forests have been transferred to other uses such as the development of oil palm plantations, agricultural land and urban expansion etc. In fact, many agricultural lands have changed their function into settlements. If this happens, the forest area will continue to decrease again because after the agricultural land has turned into residential land, the forest land is converted again for agricultural expansion, this happens continuously. When viewed from the CO2 flux, there will also be changes in the basic CO2 flux from forest land, plantation land, agriculture and urban areas. The problem of deforestation and forest degradation is inseparable from the large number of forest conversion functions into oil palm plantations, expansion of agricultural areas and other uses such as urban development and infrastructure. Opportunities for climate change mitigation and adaptation include the implementation of the REDD+ program, financing of climate change mitigation and availability of climate information. The challenges faced include the lack of synergy in the policy framework and implementation of climate change control, recognition of indigenous peoples’ rights and uncertainty in the implementation of the REDD+ program.


2011 ◽  
Vol 347-353 ◽  
pp. 2630-2634 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chih Chun Kung

In the report 2001 by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) projects that climate could warm by as much as 10º F over the next 100 years and we already observed a warming of about 1º F since 1900. Therefore, how to mitigate the greenhouse gas effect is a very important issue since it affects everyone alive and not born. This paper mainly discusses the impacts of greenhouse gas emission that affects people the most. This paper mainly discusses the following questions: 1) what factors lead to the greenhouse gas effect? 2) How can pyrolysis become a potential source to mitigate the greenhouse gas effect and what are the choices we may have? Pyrolysis, as another bioenergy alternative, helps climate change mitigation while it also produces biochar that fixes carbon as a more stable form that has additional value when applied in agricultural land. GHGs come from the use of fossil fuel (CO2), nitrogen fertilizer application (N2O), and livestock enteric fermentation (NH4) and we need to find some strategies to reduce the emissions of GHGs such as crop fertilization alteration, crop tillage alteration, livestock management, manure management and biofuel production. Since CO2 play the most important role in the GHG effects, the goal of this paper is to find the alternative energy to help mitigate the GHG effects by reducing the amount of CO2 emissions. The forest can be a candidate because it has the function of carbon sink and is able to produce energy biomass. Forests really do a good job that reduce the amount of CO2 in the air, however, since the carbon value and interest rate will affect the optimal rotation length, it becomes uncertain whether or not the forest will be able to provide a stable input for energy production.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 357-376
Author(s):  
Sam S. Rabin ◽  
Peter Alexander ◽  
Roslyn Henry ◽  
Peter Anthoni ◽  
Thomas A. M. Pugh ◽  
...  

Abstract. A future of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations, changing climate, growing human populations, and shifting socioeconomic conditions means that the global agricultural system will need to adapt in order to feed the world. These changes will affect not only agricultural land but terrestrial ecosystems in general. Here, we use the coupled land use and vegetation model LandSyMM (Land System Modular Model) to quantify future land use change (LUC) and resulting impacts on ecosystem service indicators relating to carbon sequestration, runoff, biodiversity, and nitrogen pollution. We additionally hold certain variables, such as climate or land use, constant to assess the relative contribution of different drivers to the projected impacts. Some ecosystem services depend critically on land use and management: for example, carbon storage, the gain in which is more than 2.5 times higher in a low-LUC scenario (Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 4 and Representative Concentration Pathway 6.0; SSP4-60) than a high-LUC one with the same carbon dioxide and climate trajectory (SSP3-60). Other trends are mostly dominated by the direct effects of climate change and carbon dioxide increase. For example, in those two scenarios, extreme high monthly runoff increases across 54 % and 53 % of land, respectively, with a mean increase of 23 % in both. Scenarios in which climate change mitigation is more difficult (SSPs 3 and 5) have the strongest impacts on ecosystem service indicators, such as a loss of 13 %–19 % of land in biodiversity hotspots and a 28 % increase in nitrogen pollution. Evaluating a suite of ecosystem service indicators across scenarios enables the identification of tradeoffs and co-benefits associated with different climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies and socioeconomic developments.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document