IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0247887.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Offsetting unabated agricultural emissions with CO2 removal to achieve ambitious climate targets

Author

Listed:
  • Nicoletta Brazzola
  • Jan Wohland
  • Anthony Patt

Abstract

The Representative Concentration Pathway 2.6 (RCP2.6), which is broadly compatible with the Paris Agreement’s temperature goal by 1.5–2°C, contains substantial reductions in agricultural non-CO2 emissions besides the deployment of Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR). Failing to mitigate agricultural methane and nitrous oxide emissions could contribute to an overshoot of the RCP2.6 warming by about 0.4°C. We explore using additional CDR to offset alternative agricultural non-CO2 emission pathways in which emissions either remain constant or rise. We assess the effects on the climate of calculating CDR rates to offset agricultural emission under two different approaches: relying on the 100-year global warming potential conversion metric (GWP100) and maintaining effective radiative forcing levels at exactly those of RCP2.6. Using a reduced-complexity climate model, we find that the conversion metric leads to a systematic underestimation of needed CDR, reaching only around 50% of the temperature mitigation needed to remain on the RCP2.6 track. This is mostly because the metric underestimates, in the near term, forcing from short-lived climate pollutants such as methane. We test whether alternative conversion metrics, the GWP20 and GWP*, are more suitable for offsetting purposes, and found that they both lead to an overestimation of the CDR requirements. Under alternative agricultural emissions pathways, holding to RCP2.6 total radiative forcing requires up to twice the amount of CDR that is already included in the RCP2.6. We examine the costs of this additional CDR, and the effects of internalizing these in several agricultural commodities. Assuming an average CDR cost by $150/tCO2, we find increases in prices of up to 41% for beef, 14% for rice, and 40% for milk in the United States relative to current retail prices. These figures are significantly higher (for beef and rice) under a global scenario, potentially threatening food security and welfare. Although the policy delivers a mechanism to finance the early deployment of CDR, using CDR to offset remaining high emissions may well hit other non-financial constraints and can thus only support, and not substitute, emission reductions.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicoletta Brazzola & Jan Wohland & Anthony Patt, 2021. "Offsetting unabated agricultural emissions with CO2 removal to achieve ambitious climate targets," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-19, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0247887
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247887
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0247887
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0247887&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0247887?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joeri Rogelj & Piers M. Forster & Elmar Kriegler & Christopher J. Smith & Roland Séférian, 2019. "Estimating and tracking the remaining carbon budget for stringent climate targets," Nature, Nature, vol. 571(7765), pages 335-342, July.
    2. Mario Herrero & Benjamin Henderson & Petr Havlík & Philip K. Thornton & Richard T. Conant & Pete Smith & Stefan Wirsenius & Alexander N. Hristov & Pierre Gerber & Margaret Gill & Klaus Butterbach-Bahl, 2016. "Greenhouse gas mitigation potentials in the livestock sector," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(5), pages 452-461, May.
    3. Edjabou, Louise Dyhr & Smed, Sinne, 2013. "The effect of using consumption taxes on foods to promote climate friendly diets – The case of Denmark," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 84-96.
    4. Lomax, Guy & Workman, Mark & Lenton, Timothy & Shah, Nilay, 2015. "Reframing the policy approach to greenhouse gas removal technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 125-136.
    5. Detlef Vuuren & Elke Stehfest & Michel Elzen & Tom Kram & Jasper Vliet & Sebastiaan Deetman & Morna Isaac & Kees Klein Goldewijk & Andries Hof & Angelica Mendoza Beltran & Rineke Oostenrijk & Bas Ruij, 2011. "RCP2.6: exploring the possibility to keep global mean temperature increase below 2°C," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 95-116, November.
    6. Bojana Bajželj & Keith S. Richards & Julian M. Allwood & Pete Smith & John S. Dennis & Elizabeth Curmi & Christopher A. Gilligan, 2014. "Importance of food-demand management for climate mitigation," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(10), pages 924-929, October.
    7. S. A. Montzka & E. J. Dlugokencky & J. H. Butler, 2011. "Non-CO2 greenhouse gases and climate change," Nature, Nature, vol. 476(7358), pages 43-50, August.
    8. Karakurt, Izzet & Aydin, Gokhan & Aydiner, Kerim, 2012. "Sources and mitigation of methane emissions by sectors: A critical review," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 40-48.
    9. Stefan Wirsenius & Fredrik Hedenus & Kristina Mohlin, 2011. "Greenhouse gas taxes on animal food products: rationale, tax scheme and climate mitigation effects," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 108(1), pages 159-184, September.
    10. Myles R. Allen & Jan S. Fuglestvedt & Keith P. Shine & Andy Reisinger & Raymond T. Pierrehumbert & Piers M. Forster, 2016. "New use of global warming potentials to compare cumulative and short-lived climate pollutants," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(8), pages 773-776, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Säll, Sarah & Gren, Ing-Marie, 2015. "Effects of an environmental tax on meat and dairy consumption in Sweden," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 41-53.
    2. Gren, Ing-Marie & Höglind, Lisa & Jansson, Torbjörn, 2021. "Refunding of a climate tax on food consumption in Sweden," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    3. Yang Ou & Christopher Roney & Jameel Alsalam & Katherine Calvin & Jared Creason & Jae Edmonds & Allen A. Fawcett & Page Kyle & Kanishka Narayan & Patrick O’Rourke & Pralit Patel & Shaun Ragnauth & Ste, 2021. "Deep mitigation of CO2 and non-CO2 greenhouse gases toward 1.5 °C and 2 °C futures," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-9, December.
    4. Bowles, Nicholas & Alexander, Samuel & Hadjikakou, Michalis, 2019. "The livestock sector and planetary boundaries: A ‘limits to growth’ perspective with dietary implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 128-136.
    5. Torbjörn Jansson & Sarah Säll, 2018. "Environmental Consumption Taxes On Animal Food Products To Mitigate Greenhouse Gas Emissions From The European Union," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(04), pages 1-16, November.
    6. Caillavet, France & Fadhuile, Adélaïde & Nichèle, Véronique, 2019. "Assessing the distributional effects of carbon taxes on food: Inequalities and nutritional insights in France," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 20-31.
    7. David Bryngelsson & Fredrik Hedenus & Daniel J. A. Johansson & Christian Azar & Stefan Wirsenius, 2017. "How Do Dietary Choices Influence the Energy-System Cost of Stabilizing the Climate?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, February.
    8. Helen Harwatt & Joan Sabaté & Gidon Eshel & Sam Soret & William Ripple, 2017. "Substituting beans for beef as a contribution toward US climate change targets," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 143(1), pages 261-270, July.
    9. Bazoche, Pascale & Guinet, Nicolas & Poret, Sylvaine & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2021. "Does the provision of information increase the substitution of animal proteins with plant-based proteins? An experimental investigation into consumer choices," Working Papers 313663, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    10. Bazoche, Pascale & Guinet, Nicolas & Poret, Sylvaine & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2023. "Does the provision of information increase the substitution of animal proteins with plant-based proteins? An experimental investigation into consumer choices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    11. Joanna Domagała, 2021. "Economic and Environmental Aspects of Agriculture in the EU Countries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-23, November.
    12. Mario Herrero & Benjamin Henderson & Petr Havlík & Philip K. Thornton & Richard T. Conant & Pete Smith & Stefan Wirsenius & Alexander N. Hristov & Pierre Gerber & Margaret Gill & Klaus Butterbach-Bahl, 2016. "Greenhouse gas mitigation potentials in the livestock sector," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(5), pages 452-461, May.
    13. Antonia Weishaupt & Felix Ekardt & Beatrice Garske & Jessica Stubenrauch & Jutta Wieding, 2020. "Land Use, Livestock, Quantity Governance, and Economic Instruments—Sustainability Beyond Big Livestock Herds and Fossil Fuels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-27, March.
    14. Christine Cleghorn & Ingrid Mulder & Alex Macmillan & Anja Mizdrak & Jonathan Drew & Nhung Nghiem & Tony Blakely & Cliona Ni Mhurchu, 2022. "Can a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Tax on Food also Be Healthy and Equitable? A Systemised Review and Modelling Study from Aotearoa New Zealand," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-15, April.
    15. Dogbe, Wisdom & Gil, Jose Maria, 2017. "Distributional Impacts of Green Taxes on Food Consumption in Catalonia," 2017 International Congress, August 28-September 1, 2017, Parma, Italy 261416, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Säll, Sarah, 2018. "Environmental food taxes and inequalities: Simulation of a meat tax in Sweden," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 147-153.
    17. Liu, Min & Xu, Wenli & Zhang, Hangyu & Chen, Huang & Bie, Qiang & Han, Guodong & Yu, Xiaohua, 2022. "Livestock production, greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution, and grassland conservation: Quasi-natural experimental evidence," MPRA Paper 115704, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Yue Wang & Imke J. M. Boer & U. Martin Persson & Raimon Ripoll-Bosch & Christel Cederberg & Pierre J. Gerber & Pete Smith & Corina E. Middelaar, 2023. "Risk to rely on soil carbon sequestration to offset global ruminant emissions," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-9, December.
    19. Arrieta, E.M. & González, A.D., 2018. "Impact of current, National Dietary Guidelines and alternative diets on greenhouse gas emissions in Argentina," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 58-66.
    20. Schmidt, Alena & Necpalova, Magdalena & Mack, Gabriele & Möhring, Anke & Six, Johan, 2021. "A food tax only minimally reduces the N surplus of Swiss agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0247887. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.