Engineering topics

Doelman, Jonathan C.

Publications and source records attributed to Doelman, Jonathan C..

4 records

DOE OSTI2020

Harmonization of global land use change and management for the period 850–2100 (LUH2) for CMIP6

Abstract. Human land use activities have resulted in large changes to the biogeochemical and biophysical properties of the Earth's surface, with consequences for climate and other ecosystem services. In the future, land use activities are likely to expand and/or intensify further to meet growing demands for food, fiber, and energy. As part of the World Climate Research Program Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), the international community has developed the next generation of advanced Earth system models (ESMs) to estimate the combined effects of human activities (e.g., land use and fossil fuel emissions) on the carbon–climate system. A new set of historical data based on the History of the Global Environment database (HYDE), and multiple alternative scenarios of the future (2015–2100) from Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) teams, is required as input for these models. With most ESM simulations for CMIP6 now completed, it is important to document the land use patterns used by those simulations. Here we present results from the Land-Use Harmonization 2 (LUH2) project, which smoothly connects updated historical reconstructions of land use with eight new future projections in the format required for ESMs. The harmonization strategy estimates the fractional land use patterns, underlying land use transitions, key agricultural management information, and resulting secondary lands annually, while minimizing the differences between the end of the historical reconstruction and IAM initial conditions and preserving changes depicted by the IAMs in the future. The new approach builds on a similar effort from CMIP5 and is now provided at higher resolution (0.25∘×0.25∘) over a longer time domain (850–2100, with extensions to 2300) with more detail (including multiple crop and pasture types and associated management practices) using more input datasets (including Landsat remote sensing data) and updated algorithms (wood harvest and shifting cultivation); it is assessed via a new diagnostic package. The new LUH2 products contain > 50 times the information content of the datasets used in CMIP5 and are designed to enable new and improved estimates of the combined effects of land use on the global carbon–climate system.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Are scenario projections overly optimistic about future yield progress?

Historical increases in agricultural production were achieved predominantly by large increases in agricultural productivity. Intensification of crop and livestock production also plays a key role in future projections of agricultural land use. Here, we assess and discuss projections of crop yields by global agricultural land-use and integrated assessment models. To evaluate these crop yield projections, we compare them to empirical data on attainable yields by employing a linear and plateauing continuation of observed attainable yield trends. While keeping in mind the uncertainties of attainable yields projections and future climate change impacts, we find that, on average for all cereals on the global level, global projected yields by 2050 remain below the attainable yields. Additionally, this is also true for future pathways with high technological progress and mitigation efforts, indicating that projected yield increases are not overly optimistic, even under systemic transformations. Furthermore, on a regional scale, we find that for developing regions, specifically for sub-Saharan Africa, projected yields stay well below attainable yields, indicating that the large yield gaps which could be closed through improved crop management, may also persist in the future. In OECD countries, in contrast, current yields are already close to attainable yields, and the projections approach or, for some models, even exceed attainable yields by 2050. This observation parallels research suggesting that future progress in attainable yields in developed regions will mainly have to be achieved through new crop varieties or genetic improvements. The models included in this study vary widely in their implementation of yield progress, which are often split into endogenous (crop management) improvements and exogenous (technological) trends. More detail and transparency are needed in these important elements of global yields and land use projections, and this paper discusses possibilities of better aligning agronomic understanding of yield gaps and yield potentials with modelling approaches.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Global rules for translating land-use change (LUH2) to land-cover change for CMIP6 using GLM2

Anthropogenic land-use and land-cover change activities play a critical role in Earth system dynamics through significant alterations to biogeophysical and biogeochemical properties at local to global scales. To quantify the magnitude of these impacts, climate models need consistent land-cover change time series at a global scale, based on land-use information from observations or dedicated land-use change models. However, a specific land-use change cannot be unambiguously mapped to a specific land-cover change. Here, nine translation rules are evaluated based on assumptions about the way land-use change could potentially impact land cover. Utilizing the Global Land-use Model 2 (GLM2), the model underlying the latest Land-Use Harmonization dataset (LUH2), the land-cover dynamics resulting from land-use change were simulated based on multiple alternative translation rules from 850 to 2015 globally. For each rule, the resulting forest cover, carbon density and carbon emissions were compared with independent estimates from remote sensing observations, U.N. Food and Agricultural Organization reports, and other studies. The translation rule previously suggested by the authors of the HYDE 3.2 dataset, that underlies LUH2, is consistent with the results of our examinations at global, country and grid scales. This rule recommends that for CMIP6 simulations, models should (1) completely clear vegetation in land-use changes from primary and secondary land (including both forested and non-forested) to cropland, urban land and managed pasture; (2) completely clear vegetation in land-use changes from primary forest and/or secondary forest to rangeland; (3) keep vegetation inland-use changes from primary non-forest and/or secondary non-forest to rangeland. Our analysis shows that this rule is one of three (out of nine)rules that produce comparable estimates of forest cover, vegetation carbon and emissions to independent estimates and also mitigate the anomalously high carbon emissions from land-use change observed in previous studies in the 1950s. According to the three translation rules, contemporary global forest area is estimated to be 37.42×106 km2, within the range derived from remote sensing products. Likewise, the estimated carbon stock is in close agreement with reference biomass datasets, particularly over regions with more than 50 % forest cover

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2018

Land-Use Emissions Play a Critical Role in Land Based Mitigation for Paris Climate Targets

Scenarios that limit global warming to below 2 degrees Centigrade by 2100 assume significant land-use change to support large-scale carbon dioxide (CO2) removal from the atmosphere by afforestation/reforestation, avoided deforestation, and Biomass Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS). The more ambitious mitigation scenarios require even greater land area for mitigation and/or earlier adoption of CO2 removal strategies. Here we show that additional land-use change to meet a 1.5 degrees Centigrade climate change target could result in net losses of carbon from the land. The effectiveness of BECCS strongly depends on several assumptions related to the choice of biomass, the fate of initial above ground biomass, and the fossil-fuel emissions offset in the energy system. Depending on these factors, carbon removed from the atmosphere through BECCS could easily be offset by losses due to land-use change. If BECCS involves replacing high-carbon content ecosystems with crops, then forest-based mitigation could be more efficient for atmospheric CO2 removal than BECCS.

Harper, Anna B.↗