prof. richard eckard

Click to edit Master title style

Click to edit Master subtitle style

The Primary Industries Climate Challenges Centre (PICCC) is a joint venture between the University of Melbourne and the Victorian Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources

Richard EckardThe University of Melbourne

• GGAA Conference• PICCC • The Emissions Reduction Fund• Emissions intensity • Climate Change Cookbook

Contents




6th InternationalGreenhouse Gas and Animal

Agriculture Conference (GGAA2016)

• 300 abstracts from 44 countries– Australia 58, New Zealand 33– Brazil 26, USA 24– India 18, Ireland 18, Africa 18, China 14

• >100 full papers

GGAA Conference outline

• T1. Global perspectives and policy– Balancing food security and GHG mitigation– International initiatives in support of agricultural GHG mitigation

• T2. Improvements in measurement • T3. Advances in understanding biology and biochemistry


• T4. New advances in mitigation of emissions from ruminant livestock

• T5. Mitigation from excreta and manure management

• T6. Mitigation in practice• T7. Whole farm systems modeling of mitigation options

• T8. Advances in process level modeling• T9. Adaptation and mitigation


• Pre conference workshops– Training in methane methods

• Mid‐conference tour – Ellinbank– Chambers– SF6 method– Greenfeed system– Lasers– Nitrous oxide chambers

Pre & mid‐conference




The Primary Industries Climate Challenges Centre

• Research– Adaptation

• Winter chilling for fruit trees• AGFACE• Heat stress

– Methane, nitrous oxide, soil carbon– Whole farm systems analysis

• ERF and adaptation options• Grazing systems in future climates

• Education– Graduate Certificate in Climate Change – E&O National Carbon Farming Training– Post graduate students & scholarships

PICCC

• 25 mitigation modelling studies– Systems

• Northern beef system• Prime lamb and wool• Dairy

– Carbon neutral systems– Soil carbon – Alternative forages and legumes– Early joining, early finishing, fertility, longevity – Diet supplements (oils, nitrates)– Nitrogen fertiliser and inhibitors– Environmental plantings

• Summaries on the PICCC web site

PICCC Modelling studies

• Enteric methane– 3‐nitrooxypropanol (NOP)

• 30% less methane • 168 g/d LWG

• Soil carbon modelling (low & high SOC)– Birchip

• 280 to 770 kg DM/ha from PAWHC• $26 ‐ $95/ha/y

– Hamilton• 560 to 900 kg DM/ha from N mineralisation • $85 to $105/ha/y

New research from PICCC

• Soil carbon– zero tillage and stubble retention increased SOC

• In some cases but not others– Bare fallow in rotations reduced SOC

• Compared to continuous cropping– Rotation with pulse crop, medic or lucerne increased SOC

• In some cases but not others– Nitrogen and water had the biggest effect– Combinations had the biggest effect

• Stubble retention + zero tillage + legume N input + elimination of fallow, plus rainfall

New research from PICCC

Robertson et al. 2015

• CH4 (g/d) = 20.7 x DMI (kg/d) – 10 Mt CO2‐e less methane– 21% reduction

• 2006 IPCC Guidelines for NGGIs– EF for methane from 21 to 25 GWP– Increases livestock methane by 19%

• Removed N2O from legume N2 fixation• Indirect N2O from ammonia

– Same EF as the system it came from

Changes to Inventory

Charmley et al. 2015

Proposed Emission Factors (% applied N)

Production System Emission Factor(a)

(Gg N2O‐N/ Gg N or %)

Irrigated pasture 0.004 (0.4%)

Irrigated crop 0.0085 (0.85%)

Non‐irrigated pasture 0.002 (0.2%)

Non‐irrigated crop 0.002 (0.2%)

Sugar cane 0.0199 (1.99%)

Cotton 0.0055 (0.55%)

Horticulture 0.0085 (0.85%)




The Emissions Reduction Fund‐ what does this mean for farmers?


• ERF has three elements:– Crediting emissions reductions

• Develop a project against a method(s)

– Purchasing emissions reductions• The reverse auction process• ERF $2.55 billion over 5 years

– Safeguarding emissions reductions• Making sure other entities don’t increase emissions

The Emission Reduction Fund

ERF legislatedSafeguard

rules developed

Safeguard mechanism consultation

First ERF auction

Commence review of

ERF

Safeguard mechanism commences

December 2014

15‐16 April 2015

Jan‐Oct 2015 End 2015 July 2016

• Safeguard required– Emitters over 100,000 t CO2e/y– Baseline from NGERS– Cap set at maximum 2009/10 to 2013/14– Multi‐year averaging allowed

• To start 1 July 2016– Rules and guidelines by October 2015

• The secondary market– Surrender ACCUs above the cap– Needs a declining cap

• Could then become a market mechanism

ERF and safeguard mechanism

1st ERF Auction

• Call for reverse auctions 4 times/y• 1st auction ‐ 15th and 16th April 2015

– 258 registered projects eligible to participate – 73% were legacy CFI projects

• 107 Carbon Abatement Contracts– Covering 144 projects & 43 contractors

• Largest 3.5 Mt CO2e • Smallest 12,000 t CO2e

– Total of 47Mt CO2e contracted– Total spend $660M

• 26% of the budget• Average price /t CO2e = $13.95

– Spent 26% of the budget– Meets 15% of the (5%) 236Mt target by 2020

1st ERF Auction summary

1st ERF Auction summary

Volume Contract period Final datet CO2e Years

506,858 3 2018220,000 5 2020

18,854,064 7 202227,752,218 10 2025

• Existing target ‐ 5% below 2000 in 2020• New target ‐ 26 to 28% below 2005 in 2030• Climate change Authority states 40 – 60% is needed

1st ERF Auction summaryVolume Category

t CO2e %

29,250,476 61.8 Forest sequestration

16,860,526 35.6 Landfill

202,000 0.4 Piggery

485,000 1.0 Savannah burning

535,138 1.1 Soil carbon

1st ERF Auction summaryProject Type ACCUs contracted Contracts AwardedAvoided deforestation 22,755,142 * 48

Waste & landfills 16,654,023 30

Soil carbon 3,825,000 * 2

Forest regeneration 3,205,472 * 21

Savanna burning 485,000 * 2

Piggery manure 251,000 * 3

Transport 157,503 1

TOTAL 47,333,140 107

* Potentially ~50% ERF Auction 1 value to livestock producers: $330M

• 2nd auction ‐ 4th and 5th November 2015– 543 Eligible offset projects – 399 registered to participate

• 129 Carbon Abatement Contracts – 131 projects & 77 contractors

• Largest 2.5 MtCO2e• Smallest 15,333 t CO2e

• Total of 45 Mt CO2e contracted– 70% in the land‐use sector

• Total spend $557 million– Average price $12.25 ($11‐13 safe bid range) – 53% of total budget spent

2nd ERF Auction summary

• Predicted – Total ERF may meet 45 ‐ 50% of the 236 Mt CO2e 5% by 2020 target

• Many contracts deliver after 2020• Avoided deforestation does not reduce emissions • No bids from major energy and resource sectors

– 2030 target of ‐26 to ‐28% below 2005 levels? – Not enough to curb net emissions growth

• Unless the Safeguard mechanism includes a declining baseline

Summary of Auctions

Status of ERF projects and ACCUsas at 04/08/2015

Methods Projects ACCUsAgricultureMethane from piggeries 8 101,212Dairy anaerobic ponds 0 0Feeding dietary oils in dairy 0 0Feeding nitrates to beef cattle 0 0Soil carbon in grazing 6 0Savanna burning 40 1,436,299VegetationAvoided Deforestation 10 142,836Regeneration of Native Forest 55 334,088Managed Regrowth 12 337,939Permanent Mallee Plantings 2 22,573Reforestation and Afforestation 17 589,080Environmental or Mallee Plantings 24 65,921Avoided Deforestation 42 4,676,977Permanent Environmental Plantings 39 430Landfill and industrialAlternative Waste Treatment 11 429,976Diversion of Legacy Waste 1 12,761Landfill gas 58 5,731,820Designated Verified Carbon Standard Projects 2 0Land and Sea Transport 2 0Landfill Gas from Legacy Waste 24 1,778,266Coal Mine Waste Gas 2 0Industrial Electricity and Fuel Efficiency 2 0

Sector MethodsAgriculture • Methane from piggeries

• Methane from dairy manure• Fertiliser efficiency in cotton *• Feeding nitrate to beef cattle *• Feeing dietary oils to dairy cattle • Soil carbon in grazing systems • Soil carbon using default values *• Beef herd method *

Vegetation management

• Avoided clearing of native regrowth • Avoided Deforestation• Designated Verified Carbon Standard projects• Regeneration of a permanent native forest• Measurement of new farm forestry• Native forest from managed regrowth• Reforestation and Afforestation• Reforestation by Environmental or Mallee Plantings• Savanna fire management

Approved ERF Methods

Sector Methods

Energy efficiency • Aggregated small energy users• Commercial and public lighting• Commercial building energy efficiency• Industrial Electricity and Fuel Efficiency• Refrigeration and Ventilation Fans

Mining • Coal mine waste gas• Oil and gas fugitives

Transport • Aviation• Land and sea transport

Waste and wastewater • Alternative waste treatment• Landfill gas• Wastewater treatment

Facilities • Facilities

Approved ERF Methods

Project development costsInitial Registration $10,000 per projectMonitoring/Sampling $3,500 per project/per yearReporting $5,000 per project/per report

Cost of participation

Audit CostsMethodology Initial audit fee On‐going audit fee Site visit feeCattle projects $13,250 $9,000 $1,000Savanna & sequestration $11,250 $9,000 $1,000

Total Carbon ExpensesMethodology Cost YearsCattle projects $100,000 7 yearsAvoided clearing / managed regrowth

$150,000 25 years

Savanna fire management $200,000 25 years

Source: Phil Cohn, RAMP Carbon




Emission Intensity


World population

• 7.3 B in 2012• 9.1 B by 2050

– Mid scenario

• 10B to 14 B by 2100– Developing world ~ 54%– Developed world ~ 7%

United Nations (2004); U.S. Census Bureau (2010); UN (2008)

World population

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/worldbalance/eart‐01.html

Largest % increase by 2050

Largest population by 2050

FAO 2009

Food production potentialDemand for Productivity Growth vs available land

Changing food demand

• An extra 3.1B people by 2030• Demanding higher value food

The Rising Global Middle Class

Changing food demand

FAO 2009

Agricultural emissions

• Global Ag emissions:– 5.2 Gt CO2e/yr in 1990– 6.1 Gt CO2e/yr in 2005– 17% increase

• Projected ~60% increase by 2030 (AR4)

Smith et al (2007); US‐EPA (2006)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

billi

on to

nnes

of C

O2

eq

1990 2005 2030

GHG from Food• People = Food = Protein = N Input = Emissions

Eckard 2009

5

5.5

6

6.5

7

7.5

8

8.5

9

9.5

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Wor

ld P

opul

atio

n (B

illio

ns) a

nd G

tCO

2e

World Population Agricultural emissions BAU With Abatement

• Net reductions in emissions – Important for the planet– Align with less intensive, more resilient systems– May not align with

• Meeting food production targets • Productivity gains and profitability in Ag

• Emissions intensity – Aligns better with

• Sustainability reporting ‐ Carbon footprint • Increasing productivity, profit and food targets

– BUT – total emissions may rise

Mitigation vs Adaption

• The world middle class will increase by 3B by 2050

• To capture the opportunity for Australian food exports we will need to: – Adapt our systems to a changing climate – Develop Climate Friendly and Climate Ready farming systems

– Produce food with a lower footprint– Move from Volume to Value focus?

The Way Forward in Australia




Appetite For Change Climate Change impacts on Agriculture


Earth Hour Cooks book and Impacts Summary

• Summary of likely impacts of CC on – +50 commodities– Almonds to Zucchini

• Cookbook– How farmers are affected– How your dinner plate will be affected

www.piccc.org.au

• Tropical crops & pastures– Tolerant of higher temperatures– Extremes can affect

• Reproduction, flowering, seeding, sunburn

Temperature effects

• Temperature fruits & nuts– Winter chilling requirements

• Cumulative number of hours below 70C each winter

– Sensitive to high temperatures– May grow more in winter/spring

Temperature effects

• Temperate crops & pastures– Sensitive to high temperatures

• Narrow range of ideal temperatures • Bolting, reproduction, quality, sunburn

– Changes in timing of frosts– May grow more in winter/spring

Temperature effects

• Animals– Heat stress ‐ drinking water – shade – Diet quality

Temperature effects

Maturation dates advancing about eight days per decade

Webb et al. 2012Day of the Year

Grape

sugar con

centratio

n

• Plant life – CO2 fertilising effect

• Boosting growth by as much as a 13 to 30%– Temperate plants (e.g. wheat) more than tropical (e.g. corn)

• But only where there are no other limitations – Water, nutrients, temperature

– Improved water efficiency • Close the stomata on the leave to reduce CO2 intake • Means less water loss

– Plant composition• Lower nitrogen (protein) & higher sugars

• Marine life– Acidity (carbonic acid) reduces calcification (CaCO3)– Larvae sensitive to pH

Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide

• Summer rainfall regions– Crops & pastures are reliant on summer rainfall

• Highly variable, but no clear trend

– Increased extreme rain events

• Winter rainfall regions – Crops & pastures are reliant on winter rainfall

• Becoming less & more variable• Distribution is more important than total

– e.g. timing of the Autumn Break is critical

• Change seasonality of growth

Rainfall effects

• Animals– Breed, type, species– Drinking water, mist‐sprays– Shade/ shelter

• Crops– Breeding, cultivars, crop– Time of planting, harvesting, grazing, pruning – Changing location (move south/ coastwards)– Shade cloth, irrigation

• Systems– More (bio) diversity – Increased risk management

Adaptations

• Kangaroos– Adjust reproduction to seasonal conditions

• Lemons – Warmer, sunny climates with mild winters

• Maize over wheat & barley– In temperate regions

• Olives– Hot and dry conditions

• Sweet potatoes– Hot conditions, tolerates drought, adaptive

Some standouts




www.piccc.org.au

prof. richard eckard

Science