Implications of retaining woody regrowth for carbon sequestration for an extensive grazing beef business: a bio-economic modelling case study

Whish, Giselle; Pahl, Lester; Bray, Steven

doi:10.1071/rj15095

Cited by 6 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Discounted cash flow analysis and bio-economic modelling to determine the net economic benefits over time and payback periods may be appropriate (e.g. Broad et al 2016;Gowen and Bray 2016;Whish et al 2016). Bio-economic modelling can integrate management practices, livestock, pasture dynamics, tree biomass and soil carbon at the whole property scale and over longer time frames than can be realistically trialled on-farm in a short-term project (e.g.…”

Section: Step 3 Identification Of Optionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bio-economic modelling can integrate management practices, livestock, pasture dynamics, tree biomass and soil carbon at the whole property scale and over longer time frames than can be realistically trialled on-farm in a short-term project (e.g. Donaghy et al 2010a;Phelps et al 2014;Whish et al 2016).…”

Section: Step 3 Identification Of Optionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other methodologies are likely to be developed in the future. The Climate Clever Beef initiative has found that potential sequestration opportunities need to be evaluated in the whole-farm context with consideration of project risk, project costs, livestock productivity trade-offs and long-term business goals (Gowen and Bray 2016;Whish et al 2016).…”

Section: Increasing Carbon Stocks In Soil and Vegetationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Woody and herbaceous vegetation carbon stocks are limited by soil fertility, fire regime (Cowley et al 2014) and water availability, especially during drought periods (Fensham et al 2009;Allen et al 2010). Although management activities that lead to improved land condition would be expected to increase long-term average carbon stocks in soil and herbaceous vegetation Bray et al 2014a;Whish et al 2016), the results from recent soil organic carbon studies using SCaRP-consistent methodology (National Soil Carbon Research Program, Sanderman et al 2011) have shown negligible, inconsistent and contradictory responses to management activities and land condition indicators across different soil types (Bray et al 2010(Bray et al , 2016Pringle et al 2011;Allen et al 2013Allen et al , 2014Pringle et al 2014;Walsh and Shotton 2015). This uncertainty creates a high risk for any soil carbon sequestration project for any particular site, paddock or region.…”

Section: Increasing Carbon Stocks In Soil and Vegetationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…* Conversion of cropping land to pasture (Conant et al 2001;Guo and Gifford 2002). * Woody regrowth retention to increase carbon in woody vegetation and potentially soil (Bray and Golden 2009;Dwyer et al 2009;Donaghy et al 2010a;Gowen and Bray 2016;Whish et al 2016). * Woodland thickening as a result of reducing the incidence and extent of late dry season fires in the northern savannas (Crowley et al 2009;Cowley et al 2014).…”

Section: Increasing Carbon Stocks In Soil and Vegetationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Climate Clever Beef: options to improve business performance and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in northern Australia

Bray¹,

Walsh²,

Phelps³

et al. 2016

Rangel. J.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Rangeland Journal – Climate Clever Beef special issue examines options for the beef industry in northern Australia to contribute to the reduction in global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to engage in the carbon economy. Relative to its gross value (A$5 billion), the northern beef industry is responsible for a sizable proportion of national reportable GHG emissions (8–10%) through enteric methane, savanna burning, vegetation clearing and land degradation. The industry occupies large areas of land and has the potential to impact the carbon cycle by sequestering carbon or reducing carbon loss. Furthermore, much of the industry is currently not achieving its productivity potential, which suggests that there are opportunities to improve the emissions intensity of beef production. Improving the industry’s GHG emissions performance is important for its environmental reputation and may benefit individual businesses through improved production efficiency and revenue from the carbon economy. The Climate Clever Beef initiative collaborated with beef businesses in six regions across northern Australia to better understand the links between GHG emissions and carbon stocks, land condition, herd productivity and profitability. The current performance of businesses was measured and alternate management options were identified and evaluated. Opportunities to participate in the carbon economy through the Australian Government’s Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) were also assessed. The initiative achieved significant producer engagement and collaboration resulting in practice change by 78 people from 35 businesses, managing more than 1 272 000 ha and 132 000 cattle. Carbon farming opportunities were identified that could improve both business performance and emissions intensity. However, these opportunities were not without significant risks, trade-offs and limitations particularly in relation to business scale, and uncertainty in carbon price and the response of soil and vegetation carbon sequestration to management. This paper discusses opportunities for reducing emissions, improving emission intensity and carbon sequestration, and outlines the approach taken to achieve beef business engagement and practice change. The paper concludes with some considerations for policy makers.

show abstract

Section: Step 3 Identification Of Optionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Step 3 Identification Of Optionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Increasing Carbon Stocks In Soil and Vegetationmentioning

confidence: 99%