| Home | [21–30] << 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 >> [41–50] |
|
Özkan, á¹¢., Bonesmo, H., Østerås, O., & Harstad, O. M. (2014). Effect of Increased Somatic Cell Count and Replacement Rate on Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Norwegian Dairy Herds (Vol. 3).
Abstract: Dairy sector contributes around 4% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, of which 2/3 and 1/3 are attributed to milk and meat production, respectively. The main GHGs released from dairy farms are methane, nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide. The increased trend in emissions has stimulated research evaluating alternative mitigation options. Much of the work to date has focused on animal breeding, dietary factors and rumen manipulation. There have been little studies assessing the impact of secondary factors such as animal health on emissions at farm level. Production losses associated with udder health are significant. Somatic cell count (SCC) is an indicator on udder health. In Norway, around 45, 60 and 70% of cows in a dairy herd at first, second and third lactation are expected to have SCC of 50,000 cells/ml and above. Another indirect factor is replacement rate. Increasing the replacement rate due to health disorders, infertility and reduced milk yield is likely to increase the total farm emissions if the milking heifer replacements are kept in the herd.In this study, the impact of elevated SCC (200,000 cells/ml and above) and replacement rate on farm GHG emissions was evaluated. HolosNor, a farm scale model adapting IPCC methodology was used to estimate net farm GHG emissions. Preliminary results indicate an increasing trend in emissions (per kg milk and meat) as the SCC increases. Results suggest that animal health should be considered as an indirect mitigation strategy; however, further studies are required to enable comparisons of different farming systems. No Label
|
|
Del Prado, A., Van den Pol-van Dasselaar, A., Chadwick, D., Misselbrook, T., Sandars, D., Audsley, E., et al. (2015). Synergies between mitigation and adaptation to Climate Change in grassland-based farming systems (Vol. 6).
Abstract: Climate change mitigation and adaptation have generally been considered in separate settings for both scientific and policy viewpoints. Recently, it has been stressed (e.g. by the latest IPCC reports) the importance to consider both mitigation and adaptation from land management together. To date, although there is already large amount of studies considering climate mitigation and adaptation in relation to grassland-based systems, there are no studies that analyse the potential synergies and tradeoffs for the main climate change mitigation and adaptation measures within the current European Policy context. This paper reviews which mitigation and adaptation measures interact with each other and how, and it explores the potential limitations and strengths of the different policy instruments that may have an effect in European grassland-based livestock systems. No Label
|
|
Reidsma, P., Wolf, J., Kanellopoulos, A., Schaap, B. F., Mandryk, M., Verhagen, J., et al. (2015). Climate change impact and adaptation research requires integrated assessment and farming systems analysis: a case study in the Netherlands (Vol. 6).
Abstract: Rather than on crop modelling only, climate change impact assessments in agriculture need to be based on integrated assessment and farming systems analysis, and account for adaptation at different levels. With a case study for Flevoland, the Netherlands, we illustrate that 1) crop models cannot account for all relevant climate change impacts and adaptation options, and 2) changes in technology, policy and prices have had and are likely to have larger impacts on farms than climate change. While crop modelling indicates positive impacts of climate change on yields of major crops in 2050, a semi-quantitative and participatory method assessing impacts of extreme events shows that there are nevertheless several climate risks. A range of adaptation measures are, however, available to reduce possible negative effects at crop level. In addition, at farm level farmers can change cropping patterns, and adjust inputs and outputs. Also farm structural change will influence impacts and adaptation. While the 5th IPCC report is more negative regarding impacts of climate change on agriculture compared to the previous report, also for temperate regions, our results show that when putting climate change in context of other drivers, and when explicitly accounting for adaptation at crop and farm level, impacts may be less negative in some regions and opportunities are revealed. These results refer to a temperate region, but an integrated assessment may also change perspectives on climate change for other parts of the world. No Label
|
|
Ewert, F., & al, E. (2015). Uncertainties in Scaling-Up Crop Models for Large-Area Climate Change Impact Assessments (Vol. 6).
Abstract: Problems related to food security and sustainable development are complex (Ericksenet al., 2009) and require consideration of biophysical, economic, political, and social factors, as well as their interactions, at the level of farms, regions, nations, and globally. While the solution to such societal problems may be largely political, there is a growing recognition of the need for science to provide sound information to decision-makers (Meinke et al., 2009). Achieving this, particularly in light of largely uncertain future climate and socio-economic changes, will necessitate integrated assessment approaches and appropriate integrated assessment modeling (IAM) tools to perform them. Recent (Ewertet al., 2009; van Ittersumet al., 2008) and ongoing (Rosenzweiget al., 2013) studies have tried to advance the integrated use of biophysical and economic models to represent better the complex interactions in agricultural systems that largely determine food supply and sustainable resource use. Nonetheless, the challenges for model integration across disciplines are substantial and range from methodological and technical details to an often still-weak conceptual basis on which to ground model integration (Ewertet al., 2009; Janssenet al., 2011). New generations of integrated assessment models based on well-understood, general relationships that are applicable to different agricultural systems across the world are still to be developed. Initial efforts are underway towards this advancement (Nelsonet al., 2014; Rosenzweiget al., 2013). Together with economic and climate models, crop models constitute an essential model group in IAM for large-area cropping systems climate change impact assessments. However, in addition to challenges associated with model integration, inadequate representation of many crops and crop management systems, as well as a lack of data for model initialization and calibration, limit the integration of crop models with climate and economic models (Ewertet al., 2014). A particular obstacle is the mismatch between the temporal and spatial scale of input/output variables required and delivered by the various models in the IAM model chain. Crop models are typically developed, tested, and calibrated for field-scale application (Booteet al., 2013; see also Part 1, Chapter 4 in this volume) and short time-series limited to one or few seasons. Although crop models are increasingly used for larger areas and longer time-periods (Bondeauet al., 2007; Deryng et al., 2011; Elliottet al., 2014) rigorous evaluation of such applications is pending. Among the different sources of uncertainty related to climate and soil data, model parameters, and structure, the uncertainty from methods used to scale-up crop models has received little attention, though recent evaluations indicate that upscaling of crop models for climate change impact assessment and the resulting errors and uncertainties deserve attention in order to advance crop modeling for climate change assessment (Ewertet al., 2014; R¨ otteret al., 2011). This reality is now reflected in the scientific agendas of new international research projects and programs such as the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP; Rosenzweiget al., 2013) and MACSUR (MACSUR, 2014). In this chapter, progress in evaluation of scaling methods with their related uncertainties is reviewed. Specific emphasis is on examining the results of systematic studies recently established in AgMIP and MACSUR. Main features of the respective simulation studies are presented together with preliminary results. Insights from these studies are summarized and conclusions for further work are drawn. No Label
|
|
Janssen, S. (2015). Inventory of data and data sharing mechanism for model linking and scaling exercises (Vol. 6).
Abstract: This deliverable lays out the work as done as part of MACSUR CropM on ‘Inventory of data and data sharing mechanism for model linking and scaling exercises’. In summary not much work was done, as it was found that there was not real demand for the activity in this task. The task in itself was servicing the other work as part of MACSUR, and as the service was not in demand, it was decided to take a low profile and wait for specific requests by partners for data in relation to model linking and upscaling. No Label
|