Search

Abstract: This paper quantifies the efficiency of emission control measures in agriculture at landscape scale on the N deposition and critical N load exceedances in Natura 2000 sites. The model INITIATOR2 was run with spatially explicit farm data to predict atmospheric emissions of ammonia. These emissions were input of an atmospheric transport model to assess the N deposition in the Natura 2000 sites. Using the Dutch province of Overijssel as a case study, calculations for the year 2006 show that only 35% of the N deposition in the Natura 2000 sites were caused by agricultural NH3 emissions within the province. Comparatively most cost-efficient measures were low-emission application, followed by measures to reduce the protein content in feed. Relocating farms out of the Natura 2000 sites was very cost inefficient. Since critical N depositions of the Natura 2000 sites in Overijssel are largely exceeded in more than 90% of the area, the evaluated abatement measures were, however, not effective to reduce the area exceeding critical loads when only applied within the province Overijssel. Reductions of N deposition to a level below critical loads can only be achieved with the support of national and international emission reductions. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Highlights: [•] The concept of planetary boundaries has caused both scientific interest and criticism. [•] For nitrogen (N), returning to Holocene levels of new-N fixation is not desirable as it neglects the needed N fixation to feed the world population. [•] We suggest a holistic approach to assess a planetary N boundary accounting for environmental impacts and needed N fixation. [•] The approach includes identification of critical limits for multiple N indicators and back calculation of related N boundaries. [•] The previously suggested planetary N boundary is too low in view of needed N fixation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nitrous oxide (N2O) direct soil emissions from agriculture are often estimated using the default IPCC emission factor (EF) of 1%. However, a large variation in EFs exists due to differences in environment, crops and management. We developed an approach to determine N2O EFs that depend on N-input sources and environmental factors. The starting point of the method was a monitoring study in which an EF of 1% was found. The conditions of this experiment were set as the reference from which the effects of 16 sources of N input, three soil types, two land-use types and annual precipitation on the N2O EF were estimated. The derived EF inference scheme performed on average better than the default IPCC EF. The use of differentiated EFs, including different regional conditions, allows accounting for the effects of more mitigation measures and offers European countries a possibility to use a Tier 2 approach. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This paper summarizes current knowledge on the impacts of changes of nitrogen (Nr) use in agriculture on the global warming potential (GWP) by its impact on carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O) and methane (CH4) emissions from agricultural and terrestrial nonagricultural systems and from aquatic and marine ecosystems. Ranges in ‘N induced exchange factors’, giving responses of CO2–C, N2O–N and CH4–C exchange per kg N input, are presented for all ecosystems. Using these factors, a quantification is made of CO2, N2O and CH4 exchange (emissions or uptake) induced by the use of Nr in agriculture at European scale for the year 2000. This includes: (i) direct impacts in the agricultural systems due to Nr inputs by fertilizer and manure and NH3 deposition and (ii) indirect impacts due to Nr leaching and NH3 deposition caused by agriculture on terrestrial, aquatic and marine ecosystems. Results show that the increase in GWP caused by elevated N2O emission due to Nr use in agriculture is completely counteracted by elevated carbon sequestration in nonagricultural systems. Nr effects on biodiversity, eutrophication and human health, however, need to be considered when considering the overall impacts of Nr use in agriculture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Harvesting forest residues may reduce soil fertility due to increased nutrient removal. • Harvest removal is compared with deposition and weathering inputs minus leaching. • Forest harvesting guidelines are developed based on balances of major nutrients. • These guidelines refer to major tree species, soil types and regions in the Netherlands. • Whole tree harvesting enhances the risk of phosphorus and potassium depletion in sandy soils. The substitution of biomass for fossil fuels in energy consumption is a measure to decrease the emissions of greenhouse gases and thereby mitigate global warming. During recent years, this has led to an increasing interest to use tree harvest residues as feedstock for bioenergy. An important concern related to the removal of harvesting residues is, however, the potential adverse effects on soil fertility caused by increased nutrient removal, relative to conventional stem-only harvesting. In the Netherlands this is a major concern, since most forests are located on poor sandy soils. To develop forest harvesting guidelines, we applied a mass balance approach comparing nutrient inputs by deposition and weathering with nutrient outputs by harvesting and leaching for various timber harvesting scenarios, including both stem-only harvesting and additional removal of tree tops and branches. A distinction was made in seven major tree species, six soil types (three sandy soils, loam, clay and peat soils) and nine regions, with clear variations in atmospheric deposition of phosphorus (P), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg) and potassium (K). For each region-tree-soil combination we calculated the maximum amounts that can be harvested such that the output of the nutrients Ca, Mg, K and P is balanced with the inputs. Results showed that at current harvesting rates, a negative balance of Ca, Mg, K or P is hardly calculated for the richer loamy to clayey soil types, while depletion can occur for the poorer sandy soils, particularly of P and K. Results are used to derive forest biomass harvesting guidelines, taking the uncertainties in the mass balance approach into account. The role of mitigating management approaches is also discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]