Search

The increase in atmospheric methane (CH 4 ) level directly contributes to approximately one-fifth of global mean temperature rise since preindustrial era, only next to CO 2 . Global anthropogenic CH 4 emissions has augmented by nearly three-fifths during the past five decades; due to climate change, natural CH 4 emissions are plausibly projected to increase in the foreseeable future. Thereby, examining and projecting long-term natural and anthropogenic CH 4 emissions and sinks are imperative. According to peer-reviewed literatures as information sources for this compendium, we recapitulate natural and anthropogenic CH 4 emissions, summarize available abatement approaches and their mitigation potentials, and investigate and encapsulate economic costs and social benefits of reductions. We list current challenges in realizing CH 4 emissions reductions and suggest possible technical pathways for future mitigation., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Natura 2000 areas are designated according to the EU's Birds and Habitats Directives in order to protect particular habitats and species. A variety of these habitats and species are particularly sensitive to deposition of nitrogen caused by ammonia emissions. Livestock farming is the primary source of this pollution. The purpose of this paper is to compare the costs of reaching the ammonia emission targets for different livestock farms near Natura 2000 sites in the Netherlands, Germany (Schleswig-Holstein), and Denmark. These countries have some of the highest NH 3 deposition rates in Europe, and Germany in particular will have to implement new measures to reach the NEC requirements for 2030. This will also benefit nature sites in Denmark as a large share of the ammonia emissions is dispersed over long distances. The general regulation includes implementation of BAT technologies and emission ceilings. The analysis looks at regulatory aspects, the emission requirements and the cost of implementing the technologies to reduce emissions further. The selected case farms are a finisher farm and a dairy farm, and the distance to a Natura 2000 site is 400 and 2000 m. In all three countries, relatively few livestock farms are situated near or inside Natura 2000 areas. The regulatory approach is very different in the three countries and key issues are: additional deposition from projects, neighbouring livestock farms (cumulation), the inclusion of background deposition and the use of the critical loads concept. The Dutch PAS system is interesting as projected reductions in emissions are distributed as additional "room for development" today. The costs for the case farm with finishers in Schleswig-Holstein are the highest as the Filter Decree requires the use of air scrubbers. The findings suggest that farms 400 m from a Natura 2000 site in the Netherlands face lower and less costly constraints than in the other countries, whereas the opposite is the case for farms 2000 m from Natura 2000 sites. The requirements near Natura 2000, where strict requirements apply, are so high that farms will expand at a different site instead. • The regulatory approach used in the three countries is very different. • The costs for farms wanting to expand near Natura 2000 sites are high in all three regions. • The additional annual costs for farms expanding near Natura 2000 sites are between €0 and €32,000 per farm per year depending on region and distance. • When farms want to expand far from Natura 2000 sites the costs are highest in the Netherlands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As an important supplementary mechanism to the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), the Chinese Certified Emission Reduction (CCER) scheme is of profound significance for achieving low-cost emission reduction and renewable energy goal. However, limited literature discusses the role of the CCER scheme. To explore to what extent will the CCER scheme save cost for China's carbon trading system, this paper establishes a two-level decision sub-game led by the national government and compares the cost-saving effect before and after introducing the CCER scheme. The empirical results from China confirm the cost-saving effect of the CCER scheme while achieving the homogeneity and equivalence of carbon emission quotas and CCER quotas are the prerequisite for the minimum national aggregate costs. The equilibrium CCER trading price is linked to three factors, including the offset rate of CCER quotas, the total carbon emission quotas and the reciprocal of the declaration cost coefficient. Depending on the actual situation in China, the ceiling offset rate of CCER quotas should not exceed 6%. Even so, the national government still needs to clarify the potential provinces and direction of CCER projects to ensure that the actual offset rate could be as close as possible to the optimal value. These findings can provide guidance for policy makers in the design of the national carbon trading system. • A two-level decision sub-game led by the central government is established. • The cost-saving effect of the CCER scheme is confirmed. • The optimal and ceiling offset rate of CCER quotas is obtained. • The development potential and direction of CCER projects are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study proposes the use of marginal abatement cost curves to calculate environmental damages of agricultural systems in China's Loess Plateau. Total system costs and revenues, management characteristics and pollution attributes are imputed into a directional output distance function, which is then used to determine shadow prices and abatement cost curves for soil and nitrogen loss. Marginal abatement costs curves are an effective way to compare economic and conservation tradeoffs when field-specific data are scarce. The results show that sustainable agricultural practices can balance soil conservation and agricultural production; land need not be retired, as is current policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]