Mitigation potential and costs for global agricultural greenhouse gas emissions

Authors: BEACH, ROBERT - FOOD AN AG POLICY RES PRO; DEANGGELO, BENJAMIN - US EPA, WASH, DC; ROSE, STEVEN - US EPA, WASH, DC; LI, CHANSHENG - U OF NEW HAMPSHIRE; SALAS, WILLIAM - APP GEOSOLUTIONS; Del Grosso, Stephen - Steve

Submitted to: American Journal of Agricultural Economics
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 8/16/2006
Publication Date: 3/24/2008
Citation: Beach, R., Deanggelo, B., Rose, S., Li, C., Salas, W., Del Grosso, S.J. 2008. Mitigation potential and costs for global agricultural greenhouse gas emissions. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 38: 109-115..

Interpretive Summary: 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. The primary GHG’s associated with agriculture are methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O). 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.

Technical Abstract: 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.