Limited potential of no-till agriculture for climate change mitigation

Powlson, D. S.; Stirling, Clare M.; Jat, M.L.; Gérard, Bruno; Palm, Cheryl; Sánchez, Pedro A.; Cassman, Kenneth G.

doi:10.1038/nclimate2292

Cited by 655 publications

(422 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

386

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…biologically (that is, by fertilizing nutrient-limited areas 23,24 ) or chemically (that is, by enhancing alkalinity 25 ); (6) altered agricultural practices, such as increased carbon storage in soils [26][27][28] ; and (7) converting biomass to recalcitrant biochar, for use as a soil amendment 29 . In this Review, we focus on BECCS, DAC, EW and AR, because there are large uncertainties with ocean-based strategies (for example, ocean iron fertilization 30 ), and other land-based approaches (for example, soil carbon and biochar storage) have been evaluated elsewhere [31][32][33] .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Biophysical and economic limits to negative CO2 emissions

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE | ADVANCE ONLINE PUBLICATION | www.nature.com/natureclimatechange 1 D espite two decades of effort to curb emissions of CO 2 and other greenhouse gases (GHGs), emissions grew faster during the 2000s than in the 1990s 1 , and by 2010 had reached ~50 Gt CO 2 equivalent (CO 2 eq) yr −1 (refs 2,3). The continuing rise in emissions is a growing challenge for meeting the international goal of limiting warming to less than 2 °C relative to the pre-industrial era, particularly without stringent climate policies to decrease emissions in the near future 2-4 . As negative emissions technologies (NETs) seem ever more necessary 3,[5][6][7][8][9][10] To have a >50% chance of limiting warming below 2 °C, most recent scenarios from integrated assessment models (IAMs) require large-scale deployment of negative emissions technologies (NETs). These are technologies that result in the net removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. We quantify potential global impacts of the different NETs on various factors (such as land, greenhouse gas emissions, water, albedo, nutrients and energy) to determine the biophysical limits to, and economic costs of, their widespread application. Resource implications vary between technologies and need to be satisfactorily addressed if NETs are to have a significant role in achieving climate goals.options, to be able to decide which pathways are most desirable for dealing with climate change.There are distinct classes of NETs, such as: (1) bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) 11,12 ; (2) direct air capture of CO 2 from ambient air by engineered chemical reactions (DAC) 13,14 ; (3) enhanced weathering of minerals (EW) 15 , where natural weathering to remove CO 2 from the atmosphere is accelerated and the products stored in soils, or buried in land or deep ocean [16][17][18][19] ; (4) afforestation and reforestation (AR) to fix atmospheric carbon in biomass and soils [20][21][22] ; (5) manipulation of carbon uptake by the ocean, either

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Biophysical and economic limits to negative CO2 emissions

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As noted earlier, there have been a growing number of authors in recent years who have pointed out limitations to assigning NT as a universal panacea to mitigate climate change through the removal of atmospheric CO 2 into long-term storage in the soil (Gregorich et al 2007;Blanco-Canqui and Lal 2008;Hammons 2009;Powlson et al 2014;VandenBygaart 2016). Four reasons include (1) the stratification of SOC in the profile of NT soils and its concentration at the surface to 20 cm (8 in) relative to PT soils (Powlson et al 2014), with the implication that SOC is merely redistributed, rather than accumulated, over time; (2) climatic limitations, such as the cool, moist region of eastern Canada (Gregorich et al 2007); (3) the definition of "no-till" itself, which can include occasional tillage (VandenBygaart 2016); and (4) a high spatial variability at the farm scale (Blanco-Canqui and Lal 2008).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four reasons include (1) the stratification of SOC in the profile of NT soils and its concentration at the surface to 20 cm (8 in) relative to PT soils (Powlson et al 2014), with the implication that SOC is merely redistributed, rather than accumulated, over time; (2) climatic limitations, such as the cool, moist region of eastern Canada (Gregorich et al 2007); (3) the definition of "no-till" itself, which can include occasional tillage (VandenBygaart 2016); and (4) a high spatial variability at the farm scale (Blanco-Canqui and Lal 2008). These concerns are specifically addressed in this study as follows: (1) there is evidence of SOC stratification under NT at both sites in this study, but total SOC content in the full topsoil layer did increase over time in some situations; (2) the research sites are in a temperate-zone climate, which indicates good potential for SOC sequestration (Lal 2004b); (3) the NT sites in this study were never tilled from initiation; and (4) while spatial variability remains a concern, the temporal scale provides a means to prove the differences between treatments over time.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is a large body of evidence in the literature that NT management results in an increase in surface (0 to 20 cm [0 to 8 in]) SOC under many soil types and climatic conditions, though the effectiveness of NT management over PT to sequester C has been hotly debated (Gregorich et al 2007;Blanco-Canqui and Lal 2008;Hammons 2009;Powlson et al 2014;VandenBygaart 2016). The concerns have been addressed in part by two meta-analyses comparing PT to NT, where NT was found to sequester significantly more C than PT to 30 cm (12 in) (Angers and Eriksen-Hamel 2008) and to 160 cm (63 in) (Mangalassery et al 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modeling soil organic carbon in corn ( Zea mays L.)-based systems in Ohio under climate change

Maas¹,

Lal²,

Coleman³

et al. 2017

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For example, in the model by Brandão and Milà i Canals (2013), it is assumed that reduced till and no-till increase SOC stocks in cropland by 8 and 15 %, respectively, compared to full tillage. However, new research suggests that the increase in SOC in the top soil from reduced till is merely a redistribution of the carbon in the soil profile (Powlson et al 2014). This implies that biomelevel CFs for SOC may exaggerate the benefits of the assessed land uses.…”

Section: Indicator Evaluation and Uncertaintiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges in developing regionalized characterization factors in land use impact assessment: impacts on ecosystem services in case studies of animal protein production in Sweden

Nordborg

Sasu-Boakye

Cederberg

et al. 2016

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative has recently developed a guideline framework for land use impact assessment. This article evaluates the feasibility and highlights the challenges of applying a set of methods that adhere to this framework, and identifies the strengths and weaknesses of the indicators used in these methods, for the purpose of supporting further methodological development. Methods The methods were tested in two case studies of animal protein production in Sweden: dairy milk and pork. The reference situations were defined as the potential natural vegetation. County-level characterization factors (CFs) were calculated and occupation impacts were assessed for five ecosystem services, using six ecosystem service indicators: carbon flow change, groundwater recharge, mechanical filtration capacity, physicochemical filtration capacity, soil loss, and soil organic carbon, at two geographic scales: county and biome. Strengths and weaknesses of the ecosystem service indicators were identified using an evaluation framework for selected quality characteristics: representativeness, reliability, feasibility, and transparency. Results and discussion Occupation impacts at the two geographic scales, and for the two production cases, differ both in absolute numbers, and-for mechanical and physicochemical filtration capacity-in the ranking of cases. Results at both geographic scales indicate positive effects-or lower negative impacts-in protein production from dairy milk compared to pork, due to grass production on dairy farms, and lower use of land per unit protein. However, some of the observed benefits may be exaggerated due to challenges in adequately representing the reference situations. Most indicators were assigned medium or high degrees of representativeness, feasibility, and transparency, but several were assigned low degrees of reliability, due to the weak scientific basis upon which they were selected, low degrees of accuracy, and insufficient information on how they should be assessed. Conclusions Occupation impact results should be interpreted with caution due to challenges in applying the methods and use of indicators with identified weaknesses. The most challenging part of developing regionalized CFs was finding suitable land areas from which to derive representative data to parameterize the reference situations. More research is needed to provide adequate support to life cycle assessment practitioners who wish to calculate regionalized CFs and to address the identified weaknesses.

show abstract

Limited potential of no-till agriculture for climate change mitigation

Cited by 655 publications

References 60 publications

Biophysical and economic limits to negative CO2 emissions

Biophysical and economic limits to negative CO2 emissions

Modeling soil organic carbon in corn ( Zea mays L.)-based systems in Ohio under climate change

Challenges in developing regionalized characterization factors in land use impact assessment: impacts on ecosystem services in case studies of animal protein production in Sweden

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About