Advertisement

The Power of Green

Carbon dioxide is produced both by fossil fuel burning and by deforestation and other land-use changes. Limiting both sources of CO2 is necessary if we are to curb global warming. Wise et al. (p. 1183) use an integrated assessment model to explore the consequences of limiting atmospheric CO2 concentrations at levels between 450 and 550 parts per million through a combination of fossil-fuel emissions reductions and land-use modification. Land-use modification strategies reduce the cost of limiting atmospheric CO2 concentrations, but can make crop prices rise and transform human diets, for example, when people consume less beef and other carbon-intensive protein sources. The rate at which crop productivity is improved has a strong influence on emissions from land-use change. Thus, the technology used for growing crops is potentially as important for limiting atmospheric CO2 as are approaches like CO2 capture and storage.

Abstract

Limiting atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations to low levels requires strategies to manage anthropogenic carbon emissions from terrestrial systems as well as fossil fuel and industrial sources. We explore the implications of fully integrating terrestrial systems and the energy system into a comprehensive mitigation regime that limits atmospheric CO2 concentrations. We find that this comprehensive approach lowers the cost of meeting environmental goals but also carries with it profound implications for agriculture: Unmanaged ecosystems and forests expand, and food crop and livestock prices rise. Finally, we find that future improvement in food crop productivity directly affects land-use change emissions, making the technology for growing crops potentially important for limiting atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Supplementary Material

File (wise_som.pdf)

References and Notes

1
J. A. Edmonds et al., in Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, J. Gale, Y. Kaya, Eds. (Pergamon, Amsterdam, 2003), pp. 1427–1432.
2
Fargione J., et al., Science 319, 1235 (2008).
3
Searchinger T., et al., Science 319, 1238 (2008).
4
Schmer M. R., et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 105, 464 (2008).
5
Gillingham K. T., Smith S. J., Sands R. D., Mitig. Adapt. Strategies Glob. Change 13, 675 (2008).
6
Crutzen P. J., Mosier A. R., Smith K. A., Winiwarter W., Atmos. Chem. Phys. 8, 389 (2008).
7
A. Gurgel, J. M. Reilly, S. Paltsev, J. Agric. Food Ind. Org. 5 (no. 2), article 9 (2007); www.bepress.com/jafio/vol5/iss2.
8
L. Clarke et al., CCSP Synthesis and Assessment Product 2.1, Part A: Scenarios of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Atmospheric Concentrations (U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 2007).
9
IPCC, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, S. Solomon et al., Eds. (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2007), fig. 7.3, chap. 7, p. 515.
10
About 800 Pg C can be emitted if the atmospheric CO2 concentrations are held below 550 ppm.
11
IPCC, Climate Change 2007: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, B. Metz, O. R. Davidson, P. R. Bosch, R. Dave, L. A. Meyer, Eds. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007), chap. 3.
12
S. Rose et al., Land in Climate Stabilization Modeling: Initial Observations, Stanford Energy Modeling Forum, EMF21, Land Modeling Subgroup; www.stanford.edu/group/EMF/projects/EMF21/EMF21FinalReport.pdf (2008).
13
Tavoni M., Sohngen B., Bosetti V., Energy Policy 35, 5346 (2007).
14
Rokityanskiy D., et al., Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 74, 1057 (2007).
15
M. Wise et al., The Implications of Limiting CO2 Concentrations for Agriculture, Land-use Change Emissions, and Bioenergy (Tech. Rep. PNNL-18341; available at www.pnl.gov/gtsp/publications/2009/200902_co2_landuse.pdf) (2009).
16
Materials and methods are available as supporting material on Science Online.
17
S. H. Kim, J. A. Edmonds, J. Lurz, S. J. Smith, M. A. Wise, The Energy Journal, Special Issue: Hybrid Modeling of Energy-Environment Policies: Reconciling Bottom-up and Top-down, Special Issue No. 2, 63 (2006).
18
L. Clarke et al., Model Documentation for the MiniCAM Climate Change Science Program Stabilization Scenarios: CCSP Product 2.1a (PNNL Tech. Rep. PNNL-16735, 2007).
19
A. Brenkert, S. Smith, H. Kim, H. Pitcher, Model Documentation for the MiniCAM. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL Tech. Rep. PNNL-14337, 2003).
20
J. Edmonds, J. Reilly, Global Energy: Assessing the Future (Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 1985).
21
J. Bruinsma, World Agriculture: Towards 2015/2030; An FAO Perspective (available at www.fao.org/docrep/005/y4252e/y4252e00.HTM) (2003).
22
Sands R. D., Leimbach M., Clim. Change 56, 185 (2003).
23
The carbon tax serves in the model as a means to place an economic value on carbon. The same mitigation actions could be achieved through a variety of policy mechanisms, including cap-and-trade approaches. The carbon tax approach is used here because of its simplicity and explanatory value, but the results would hold under different approaches that place a value, implicit or explicit, on carbon.
24
Our analysis finds that bioenergy derived from biological waste streams (e.g., agriculture and forestry residues) is potentially of comparable magnitude to purpose-grown bioenergy production in the UCT policy regimes.
25
Negative net annual global FFI carbon emissions observed in Fig. 1 for the 450-ppm atmospheric CO2 concentration limit are the result of employing bioenergy for power production in conjunction with CCS.
26
Pacala S., Socolow R., Science 305, 968 (2004).
27
Hoffert M. I., et al., Science 298, 981 (2002).
28
Lucas P. L., van Vuuren D. P., Olivier J. G. J., den Elzen M. G. J., Environ. Sci. Policy 10, 85 (2007).

(0)eLetters

eLetters is a forum for ongoing peer review. eLetters are not edited, proofread, or indexed, but they are screened. eLetters should provide substantive and scholarly commentary on the article. Embedded figures cannot be submitted, and we discourage the use of figures within eLetters in general. If a figure is essential, please include a link to the figure within the text of the eLetter. Please read our Terms of Service before submitting an eLetter.

Log In to Submit a Response

No eLetters have been published for this article yet.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Science
Volume 324 | Issue 5931
29 May 2009

Submission history

Received: 13 November 2008
Accepted: 23 March 2009
Published in print: 29 May 2009

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science and to the Electric Power Research Institute for financial support for the research the results of which are reported here. The authors also thank E. Malone for helpful comments on an earlier draft. Of course, the opinions expressed here are the authors’ alone.

Authors

Affiliations

Marshall Wise
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Joint Global Change Research Institute at the University of Maryland–College Park, 5825 University Research Court, Suite 3500, College Park, MD 20740, USA.
Katherine Calvin
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Joint Global Change Research Institute at the University of Maryland–College Park, 5825 University Research Court, Suite 3500, College Park, MD 20740, USA.
Allison Thomson
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Joint Global Change Research Institute at the University of Maryland–College Park, 5825 University Research Court, Suite 3500, College Park, MD 20740, USA.
Leon Clarke
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Joint Global Change Research Institute at the University of Maryland–College Park, 5825 University Research Court, Suite 3500, College Park, MD 20740, USA.
Benjamin Bond-Lamberty
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Joint Global Change Research Institute at the University of Maryland–College Park, 5825 University Research Court, Suite 3500, College Park, MD 20740, USA.
Ronald Sands*
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Joint Global Change Research Institute at the University of Maryland–College Park, 5825 University Research Court, Suite 3500, College Park, MD 20740, USA.
Steven J. Smith
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Joint Global Change Research Institute at the University of Maryland–College Park, 5825 University Research Court, Suite 3500, College Park, MD 20740, USA.
Anthony Janetos
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Joint Global Change Research Institute at the University of Maryland–College Park, 5825 University Research Court, Suite 3500, College Park, MD 20740, USA.
James Edmonds [email protected]
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Joint Global Change Research Institute at the University of Maryland–College Park, 5825 University Research Court, Suite 3500, College Park, MD 20740, USA.

Notes

*
Present address: Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1800 M Street NW, Washington, DC 20036, USA.
To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: [email protected]

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Article Usage

Altmetrics

Citations

Cite as

Export citation

Select the format you want to export the citation of this publication.

Cited by

  1. Carbon Accounting a Tricky Business, Science, 327, 5964, (411-412), (2021)./doi/10.1126/science.327.5964.411
    Abstract
  2. Aerosol Indirect Effect on Biogeochemical Cycles and Climate, Science, 334, 6057, (794-796), (2021)./doi/10.1126/science.1207374
    Abstract
  3. Scenarios for Global Biodiversity in the 21st Century, Science, 330, 6010, (1496-1501), (2021)./doi/10.1126/science.1196624
    Abstract
  4. Indirect Emissions from Biofuels: How Important?, Science, 326, 5958, (1397-1399), (2021)./doi/10.1126/science.1180251
    Abstract
  5. Fixing a Critical Climate Accounting Error, Science, 326, 5952, (527-528), (2021)./doi/10.1126/science.1178797
    Abstract
  6. Beneficial Biofuels—The Food, Energy, and Environment Trilemma, Science, 325, 5938, (270-271), (2021)./doi/10.1126/science.1177970
    Abstract
Loading...

View Options

Check Access

Log in to view the full text

AAAS ID LOGIN

AAAS login provides access to Science for AAAS Members, and access to other journals in the Science family to users who have purchased individual subscriptions.

Log in via OpenAthens.
Log in via Shibboleth.

More options

Register for free to read this article

As a service to the community, this article is available for free. Login or register for free to read this article.

Purchase this issue in print

Buy a single issue of Science for just $15 USD.

View options

PDF format

Download this article as a PDF file

Download PDF

Full Text

FULL TEXT

Media

Figures

Multimedia

Tables

Share

Share

Share article link

Share on social media