Multi-gas and multi-source comparisons of six land use emission datasets and AFOLU estimates in the Fifth Assessment Report, for the tropics for 2000–2005
The Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector contributes with ca. 20–25 % of global anthropogenic emissions (2010), making it a key component of any climate change mitigation strategy. AFOLU estimates, however, remain highly uncertain, jeopardizing the mitigation effectiveness of this...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Copernicus Publications
2016-10-01
|
Series: | Biogeosciences |
Online Access: | http://www.biogeosciences.net/13/5799/2016/bg-13-5799-2016.pdf |
Summary: | The Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector contributes with
ca. 20–25 % of global anthropogenic emissions (2010), making it a key
component of any climate change mitigation strategy. AFOLU estimates,
however, remain highly uncertain, jeopardizing the mitigation effectiveness
of this sector. Comparisons of global AFOLU emissions have shown divergences
of up to 25 %, urging for improved understanding of the reasons behind
these differences. Here we compare a variety of AFOLU emission datasets and
estimates given in the Fifth Assessment Report for the tropics (2000–2005)
to identify plausible explanations for the differences in (i) aggregated
gross AFOLU emissions, and (ii) disaggregated emissions by sources and gases
(CO<sub>2</sub>, CH<sub>4</sub>, N<sub>2</sub>O). We also aim to (iii) identify countries with
low agreement among AFOLU datasets to navigate research efforts. The datasets
are FAOSTAT (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Statistics Division), EDGAR (Emissions Database
for Global Atmospheric Research), the newly developed AFOLU
“Hotspots”, “Houghton”, “Baccini”, and EPA (US Environmental Protection
Agency) datasets. Aggregated gross emissions were similar for all databases for
the AFOLU sector: 8.2 (5.5–12.2), 8.4, and 8.0 Pg CO<sub>2</sub> eq. yr<sup>−1</sup> (for
Hotspots, FAOSTAT, and EDGAR respectively), forests reached 6.0 (3.8–10),
5.9, 5.9, and 5.4 Pg CO<sub>2</sub> eq. yr<sup>−1</sup> (Hotspots, FAOSTAT, EDGAR, and
Houghton), and agricultural sectors were with 1.9 (1.5–2.5), 2.5, 2.1, and
2.0 Pg CO<sub>2</sub> eq. yr<sup>−1</sup> (Hotspots, FAOSTAT, EDGAR, and EPA).
However, this agreement was lost when disaggregating the emissions by sources, continents,
and gases, particularly for the forest sector, with fire leading the
differences. Agricultural emissions were more homogeneous, especially from
livestock, while those from croplands were the most diverse. CO<sub>2</sub> showed
the largest differences among the datasets. Cropland soils and enteric
fermentation led to the smaller N<sub>2</sub>O and CH<sub>4</sub> differences.
Disagreements are explained by differences in conceptual frameworks
(carbon-only vs. multi-gas assessments, definitions, land use vs. land cover,
etc.), in methods (tiers, scales, compliance with Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) guidelines, legacies, etc.) and in assumptions (carbon
neutrality of certain emissions, instantaneous emissions release, etc.) which
call for more complete and transparent documentation for all the available
datasets. An enhanced dialogue between the carbon (CO<sub>2</sub>) and the AFOLU
(multi-gas) communities is needed to reduce discrepancies of land use
estimates. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1726-4170 1726-4189 |