| 1. |
- Ahlberg, Erik, et al.
(författare)
-
"Vi klimatforskare stödjer Greta och skolungdomarna"
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Dagens nyheter (DN debatt). - 1101-2447.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (populärvet., debatt m.m.)abstract
- DN DEBATT 15/3. Sedan industrialiseringens början har vi använt omkring fyra femtedelar av den mängd fossilt kol som får förbrännas för att vi ska klara Parisavtalet. Vi har bara en femtedel kvar och det är bråttom att kraftigt reducera utsläppen. Det har Greta Thunberg och de strejkande ungdomarna förstått. Därför stödjer vi deras krav, skriver 270 klimatforskare.
|
|
| 2. |
- Kasimir, Åsa, 1956, et al.
(författare)
-
Land use of drained peatlands : Greenhouse gas fluxes, plant production, and economics
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Global Change Biology. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 1354-1013 .- 1365-2486. ; 24:8, s. 3302-3316
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Drained peatlands are hotspots for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which could be mitigated by rewetting and land use change. We performed an ecological/economic analysis of rewetting drained fertile peatlands in a hemiboreal climate using different land use strategies over 80 years. Vegetation, soil processes, and total GHG emissions were modeled using the CoupModel for four scenarios: (1) business as usual—Norway spruce with average soil water table of −40 cm; (2) willow with groundwater at −20 cm; (3) reed canary grass with groundwater at −10 cm; and (4) a fully rewetted peatland. The predictions were based on previous model calibrations with several high-resolution datasets consisting of water, heat, carbon, and nitrogen cycling. Spruce growth was calibrated by tree-ring data that extended the time period covered. The GHG balance of four scenarios, including vegetation and soil, were 4.7, 7.1, 9.1, and 6.2 Mg CO2eq ha−1 year−1, respectively. The total soil emissions (including litter and peat respiration CO2 + N2O + CH4) were 33.1, 19.3, 15.3, and 11.0 Mg CO2eq ha−1 year−1, respectively, of which the peat loss contributed 35%, 24%, and 7% of the soil emissions for the three drained scenarios, respectively. No peat was lost for the wet peatland. It was also found that draining increases vegetation growth, but not as drastically as peat respiration does. The cost–benefit analysis (CBA) is sensitive to time frame, discount rate, and carbon price. Our results indicate that the net benefit was greater with a somewhat higher soil water table and when the peatland was vegetated with willow and reed canary grass (Scenarios 2 and 3). We conclude that saving peat and avoiding methane release using fairly wet conditions can significantly reduce GHG emissions, and that this strategy should be considered for land use planning and policy-making.
|
|
| 3. |
- Klemedtsson, Åsa Kasimir, 1956, et al.
(författare)
-
Climate mitigation scenarios of drained peat soils
- 2014
-
Ingår i: European Geosciences Union General Assembly 2014 Vienna, Austria, 27 April – 02 May 2014.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The national inventory reports (NIR) submitted to the UNFCCC show Sweden – which as many other countries has wetlands where parts have been drained for agriculture and forestry purposes, – to annually emit 12 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalents, which is more GHG’es than industrial energy use release in Sweden. Similar conditions can be found in other northern countries, having cool and wet conditions, naturally promoting peat accumulation, and where land use management over the last centuries have promoted draining activities. These drained peatland, though covering only 2% of the land area, have emissions corresponding to 20% of the total reported NIR emissions. This substantial emission contribution, however, is hidden within the Land Use Land Use Change and Forestry sector (LULUCF) where the forest Carbon uptake is even larger, which causes the peat soil emissions become invisible. The only drained soil emission accounted in the Swedish Kyoto reporting is the N2O emission from agricultural drained organic soils of the size 0.5 million tonnes CO2e yr-1. This lack of visibility has made incentives for land use change and management neither implemented nor suggested, however with large potential. Rewetting has the potential to decrease soil mineralization, why CO2 and N2O emissions are mitigated. However if the soil becomes very wet CH4 emission will increase together with hampered plant growth. By ecological modeling, using the CoupModel the climate change mitigation potential have been estimated for four different land use scenarios; 1, Drained peat soil with Spruce (business as usual scenario), 2, raised ground water level to 20 cm depth and Willow plantation, 3, raised ground water level to 10 cm depth and Reed Canary Grass, and 4, rewetting to an average water level in the soil surface with recolonizing wetland plants and mosses. We calculate the volume of biomass production per year, peat decomposition, N2O emission together with nitrate and DOC/POC leakage. Based on the modelling results a cost benefit analysis is performed (economics), guiding to the design of environmental policies needed for land use change to come true.
|
|
