Potential of land-based climate change mitigation strategies on abandoned cropland

Natural revegetation, afforestation, and lignocellulosic crops for bioenergy, possibly coupled with a developing technology like carbon capture and storage, are the most common land-based climate change mitigation options. However, they can compete for land and threaten food security or nature conse...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Gvein, Maren Haug, Hu, Xiangping, Næss, Jan Sandstad, Barbosa Watanabe, Marcos Djun, Cavalett, Otavio, Malbranque, Maxime, Kindermann, Georg, Cherubini, Francesco
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title
container_volume
creator Gvein, Maren Haug
Hu, Xiangping
Næss, Jan Sandstad
Barbosa Watanabe, Marcos Djun
Cavalett, Otavio
Malbranque, Maxime
Kindermann, Georg
Cherubini, Francesco
description Natural revegetation, afforestation, and lignocellulosic crops for bioenergy, possibly coupled with a developing technology like carbon capture and storage, are the most common land-based climate change mitigation options. However, they can compete for land and threaten food security or nature conservation. Using abandoned cropland for their deployment can minimize these risks, but associated potentials are unclear. Here, we compare alternative land-based mitigation options by integrating historical and future (up to 2050) abandoned cropland with site-specific biomass yields and life-cycle emissions. Considering natural revegetation in biodiversity priority areas and different measures in the remaining land can achieve a mitigation potential of 0.8–4.0 GtCO2-equivalents yr−1 (2–11% of 2021 global CO2 emissions). Afforestation generally provides larger climate benefits than bioenergy, but bioenergy with carbon capture and storage delivers the highest mitigation in most locations. Overall, these results offer refined estimates of mitigation potentials from abandoned cropland and highlight opportunities for context-specific mitigation measures.
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>cristin_3HK</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_cristin_nora_11250_3098979</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>11250_3098979</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-cristin_nora_11250_30989793</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNjEEKwjAQRbNxIeodxgMUWoto1qK4FHEfpmkaB9IZSeb-mIIHcPX5_Pf-2jwfooGVMIFMkJDHZsASRvCJZtQA_o0cA8ykFFFJGIrmOkQKBWrDoTrCi5HlsxxszWrCVMLulxuzv11fl3vjMxUldiwZXdcdjq3rW3u2J9v_w3wBFhM38A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Potential of land-based climate change mitigation strategies on abandoned cropland</title><source>NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives</source><creator>Gvein, Maren Haug ; Hu, Xiangping ; Næss, Jan Sandstad ; Barbosa Watanabe, Marcos Djun ; Cavalett, Otavio ; Malbranque, Maxime ; Kindermann, Georg ; Cherubini, Francesco</creator><creatorcontrib>Gvein, Maren Haug ; Hu, Xiangping ; Næss, Jan Sandstad ; Barbosa Watanabe, Marcos Djun ; Cavalett, Otavio ; Malbranque, Maxime ; Kindermann, Georg ; Cherubini, Francesco</creatorcontrib><description>Natural revegetation, afforestation, and lignocellulosic crops for bioenergy, possibly coupled with a developing technology like carbon capture and storage, are the most common land-based climate change mitigation options. However, they can compete for land and threaten food security or nature conservation. Using abandoned cropland for their deployment can minimize these risks, but associated potentials are unclear. Here, we compare alternative land-based mitigation options by integrating historical and future (up to 2050) abandoned cropland with site-specific biomass yields and life-cycle emissions. Considering natural revegetation in biodiversity priority areas and different measures in the remaining land can achieve a mitigation potential of 0.8–4.0 GtCO2-equivalents yr−1 (2–11% of 2021 global CO2 emissions). Afforestation generally provides larger climate benefits than bioenergy, but bioenergy with carbon capture and storage delivers the highest mitigation in most locations. Overall, these results offer refined estimates of mitigation potentials from abandoned cropland and highlight opportunities for context-specific mitigation measures.</description><language>eng</language><publisher>Nature</publisher><creationdate>2023</creationdate><rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,776,881,26544</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/3098979$$EView_record_in_NORA$$FView_record_in_$$GNORA$$Hfree_for_read</linktorsrc></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gvein, Maren Haug</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hu, Xiangping</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Næss, Jan Sandstad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barbosa Watanabe, Marcos Djun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cavalett, Otavio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Malbranque, Maxime</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kindermann, Georg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cherubini, Francesco</creatorcontrib><title>Potential of land-based climate change mitigation strategies on abandoned cropland</title><description>Natural revegetation, afforestation, and lignocellulosic crops for bioenergy, possibly coupled with a developing technology like carbon capture and storage, are the most common land-based climate change mitigation options. However, they can compete for land and threaten food security or nature conservation. Using abandoned cropland for their deployment can minimize these risks, but associated potentials are unclear. Here, we compare alternative land-based mitigation options by integrating historical and future (up to 2050) abandoned cropland with site-specific biomass yields and life-cycle emissions. Considering natural revegetation in biodiversity priority areas and different measures in the remaining land can achieve a mitigation potential of 0.8–4.0 GtCO2-equivalents yr−1 (2–11% of 2021 global CO2 emissions). Afforestation generally provides larger climate benefits than bioenergy, but bioenergy with carbon capture and storage delivers the highest mitigation in most locations. Overall, these results offer refined estimates of mitigation potentials from abandoned cropland and highlight opportunities for context-specific mitigation measures.</description><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>3HK</sourceid><recordid>eNqNjEEKwjAQRbNxIeodxgMUWoto1qK4FHEfpmkaB9IZSeb-mIIHcPX5_Pf-2jwfooGVMIFMkJDHZsASRvCJZtQA_o0cA8ykFFFJGIrmOkQKBWrDoTrCi5HlsxxszWrCVMLulxuzv11fl3vjMxUldiwZXdcdjq3rW3u2J9v_w3wBFhM38A</recordid><startdate>2023</startdate><enddate>2023</enddate><creator>Gvein, Maren Haug</creator><creator>Hu, Xiangping</creator><creator>Næss, Jan Sandstad</creator><creator>Barbosa Watanabe, Marcos Djun</creator><creator>Cavalett, Otavio</creator><creator>Malbranque, Maxime</creator><creator>Kindermann, Georg</creator><creator>Cherubini, Francesco</creator><general>Nature</general><scope>3HK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2023</creationdate><title>Potential of land-based climate change mitigation strategies on abandoned cropland</title><author>Gvein, Maren Haug ; Hu, Xiangping ; Næss, Jan Sandstad ; Barbosa Watanabe, Marcos Djun ; Cavalett, Otavio ; Malbranque, Maxime ; Kindermann, Georg ; Cherubini, Francesco</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-cristin_nora_11250_30989793</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gvein, Maren Haug</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hu, Xiangping</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Næss, Jan Sandstad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barbosa Watanabe, Marcos Djun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cavalett, Otavio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Malbranque, Maxime</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kindermann, Georg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cherubini, Francesco</creatorcontrib><collection>NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gvein, Maren Haug</au><au>Hu, Xiangping</au><au>Næss, Jan Sandstad</au><au>Barbosa Watanabe, Marcos Djun</au><au>Cavalett, Otavio</au><au>Malbranque, Maxime</au><au>Kindermann, Georg</au><au>Cherubini, Francesco</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Potential of land-based climate change mitigation strategies on abandoned cropland</atitle><date>2023</date><risdate>2023</risdate><abstract>Natural revegetation, afforestation, and lignocellulosic crops for bioenergy, possibly coupled with a developing technology like carbon capture and storage, are the most common land-based climate change mitigation options. However, they can compete for land and threaten food security or nature conservation. Using abandoned cropland for their deployment can minimize these risks, but associated potentials are unclear. Here, we compare alternative land-based mitigation options by integrating historical and future (up to 2050) abandoned cropland with site-specific biomass yields and life-cycle emissions. Considering natural revegetation in biodiversity priority areas and different measures in the remaining land can achieve a mitigation potential of 0.8–4.0 GtCO2-equivalents yr−1 (2–11% of 2021 global CO2 emissions). Afforestation generally provides larger climate benefits than bioenergy, but bioenergy with carbon capture and storage delivers the highest mitigation in most locations. Overall, these results offer refined estimates of mitigation potentials from abandoned cropland and highlight opportunities for context-specific mitigation measures.</abstract><pub>Nature</pub><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier
ispartof
issn
language eng
recordid cdi_cristin_nora_11250_3098979
source NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives
title Potential of land-based climate change mitigation strategies on abandoned cropland
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T19%3A10%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-cristin_3HK&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Potential%20of%20land-based%20climate%20change%20mitigation%20strategies%20on%20abandoned%20cropland&rft.au=Gvein,%20Maren%20Haug&rft.date=2023&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Ccristin_3HK%3E11250_3098979%3C/cristin_3HK%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true