1. bookVolumen 26 (2022): Edición 1 (January 2022)
Detalles de la revista
License
Formato
Revista
eISSN
2255-8837
Primera edición
26 Mar 2010
Calendario de la edición
2 veces al año
Idiomas
Inglés
access type Acceso abierto

Towards Climate Neutrality via Sustainable Agriculture in Soil Management

Publicado en línea: 08 Aug 2022
Volumen & Edición: Volumen 26 (2022) - Edición 1 (January 2022)
Páginas: 535 - 547
Detalles de la revista
License
Formato
Revista
eISSN
2255-8837
Primera edición
26 Mar 2010
Calendario de la edición
2 veces al año
Idiomas
Inglés
Abstract

The European Green Deal sets an ambitious target for Europe to reach climate neutrality by 2050. This commitment will be a challenge, particularly in the context of agriculture, as the sector is responsible for sustainable development and food security. However, one of the primary sources of GHG emissions from the agricultural sector is the treatment of soils using nitrogen fertilizers for crops, especially grain crops. This paper aims to assess the GHG mitigation perspective for soil management in the Baltic States and, in particular, to analyse the grain sector in light of sustainable agriculture and towards climate neutrality. To achieve the aim of the study, the analysis was performed in two parts. Firstly, historical and projected GHG emissions of the Baltic States and mitigation measures on agricultural soil management, including cereal growing were analysed as these emissions show a growing tendency. Thus, the study analyses GHG emission trends, including possible mitigation measures for soil management in the Baltic States. The results indicated that for GHG reduction from agricultural soils, some cost-effective measures could be considered for the future, such as the zero-emissions on-farm machinery and equipment, low or no-tillage, or N-inhibitors on pasture. Secondly, as the GHG emissions from cereals increase, potential alternatives to the use of grain production have been explored to assess the highest possible added value from the product use, thus also contributing to GHG reduction. In this regard, according to scientific literature, a survey was created in the form of a questionnaire based on 32 alternatives, 4 large product groups, and 4 criteria for cereal and straw processing. The respondents were requested to provide an assessment of alternatives, and consequently, a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) was performed using the TOPSIS method. The results reveal the best alternatives from each of the product groups consequently is flour from food products, minerals from a pharmaceutical, biogas from a form of transport and reusable tableware from straw-based products, as a possible cost-effective mitigation measure for soil management from the perspective of the development of sustainable agriculture sector and the transition towards climate neutrality

Keywords

[1] Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the European council, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions, The European Green Deal. COM/2019/640 final. Brussels: EC, 2019. Search in Google Scholar

[2] Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the European council, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions, A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system. COM/2020/381 final. Brussels: EC, 2020. Search in Google Scholar

[3] COM (2020) 80 final, Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the framework for achieving climate neutrality and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 (European Climate Law). Brussels: EC, 2020. Search in Google Scholar

[4] COM (2020) 98 final, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, A new Circular Economy Action Plan. Brussels: EC, 2020. Search in Google Scholar

[5] Buzkova R. Own Resources in the Light of European Council Conclusions on the MFF and Next Generation EU. Financial Law Review 2020:20(4):22–34. https://doi.org/10.4467/22996834FLR.20.018.13090 Search in Google Scholar

[6] Proposal for a Regulation amending Regulation (EU) 2018/842 on binding annual greenhouse gas emission reductions by Member States from 2021 to 2030 contributing to climate action to meet commitments under the Paris Agreement. Brussels: EC, 2021. Search in Google Scholar

[7] Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Regulations (EU) 2018/841 as regards the scope, simplifying the compliance rules, setting out the targets of the Member States for 2030 and committing to the collective achievement of climate neutrality by 2035 in the land use, forestry and agriculture sector, and (EU) 2018/1999 as regards improvement in monitoring, reporting, tracking of progress and review. Brussels: EC, 2021. Search in Google Scholar

[8] COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT. Analysis of links between CAP Reform and Green Deal. Brussels: EC, 2020. Search in Google Scholar

[9] Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC. Official Journal of the European Union 2009:L 140/16. Search in Google Scholar

[10] Directive (EU) 2018/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 amending Directive 2012/27/EU on energy efficiency. Official Journal of the European Union 2018:L 328/210. Search in Google Scholar

[11] European Commission. EU Agriculture in Numbers: Performance on the nine specific objectives of the CAP. Brussels, 2020. Search in Google Scholar

[12] Eurostat/Eurostat database [Online]. [Accessed 15 March 2022]. Available: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database Search in Google Scholar

[13] United Nations Climate Change. Estonia Fourth Biennial Report under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Charlotte: UNCC, 2019. Search in Google Scholar

[14] United Nations Climate Change. Latvian Fourth Biennial Report under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Charlotte: UNCC, 2019. Search in Google Scholar

[15] United Nations Climate Change. Lithuania Fourth Biennial Report under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Charlotte: UNCC, 2020. Search in Google Scholar

[16] United Nations Climate Change. FCCC/TRR.4/EST. Report on the technical review of the fourth biennial report of Estonia. Charlotte: UNCC, 2020. Search in Google Scholar

[17] United Nations Climate Change. FCCC/TRR.4/LVA. Report on the technical review of the fourth biennial report of Latvia. Charlotte: UNCC, 2020. Search in Google Scholar

[18] United Nations Climate Change. FCCC/TRR.4/LTU. Report on the technical review of the fourth biennial report of Lithuania. Charlotte: UNCC, 2020. Search in Google Scholar

[19] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. FAO database [Online]. [Accessed 15 March 2022]. Available: https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home Search in Google Scholar

[20] Gaurav N., et al. Utilisation of bioresources for sustainable biofuels: A Review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2017:73:205–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.070 Search in Google Scholar

[21] Brazdausks P., et al. Evaluation of cellulose content in hemp shives after salt catalyzed hydrolysis. Energy Procedia 2017:128:297–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.08.316 Search in Google Scholar

[22] Pubule J., et al. Analysis of the environmental impact assessment of power energy projects in Latvia. Management of Environmental Quality 2012:23(2):190–203. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777831211204930 Search in Google Scholar

[23] Hayes R. C., et al. Perennial cereal crops: An initial evaluation of wheat derivatives. Field Crops Research 2012:133:68–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2012.03.014 Search in Google Scholar

[24] Marti A., et al. Structural characterisation of proteins in wheat flour doughs enriched with intermediate wheatgrass (Thinopyrum intermedium) flour. Food Chemistry 2016:194:994–1002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.08.082 Search in Google Scholar

[25] Monforti F., et al. Optimal energy use of agricultural crop residues preserving soil organic carbon stocks in Europe. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2015:44:519–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.12.033 Search in Google Scholar

[26] Monti M., et al. Cereal/grain legume intercropping in rotation with durum wheat in crop/livestock production systems for the Mediterranean farming system. Field Crops Research 2019:240:23–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2019.05.019 Search in Google Scholar

[27] Chuang Y.-S., et al. Fermentative bioenergy production from distillers grains using mixed microflora. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2012:37(20):15547–15555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.01.035 Search in Google Scholar

[28] United Nations Climate Change. FCCC/CP/2011/9/Add.1, Decision 2/CP.17: Outcome of the work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention. Charlotte: UNCC, 2011. Search in Google Scholar

[29] Opricovics S., Tzeng G. H. Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European Journal of Operational Research 2004:156(2):445–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1 Search in Google Scholar

[30] Stocker T. F., et al. Climate Change 2013. The Physical Science Basis. Summary for Policymakers, Technical Summary and Frequently Asked Questions. Geneva: IPCC, 2013. Search in Google Scholar

[31] German R., et al. Agricultural climate mitigation policies and measures. ETC/CME Eionet Report/6/2021. Boeretang: European Topic Centre on Climate, 2021. Search in Google Scholar

[32] Ahmed J., et al. Agriculture and climate change. Reducing emissions through improved farming practices. Stockholm: McKinsey & Company, 2020. Search in Google Scholar

[33] Popluga D., Kreišmane Dz. SEG emisijas samazinoši pasākumi (Measures to reduce GHG emissions). 2019 [Online]. [Accessed 5 March 2022]. Available: https://www.llu.lv/lv/seg-emisijas-samazinosi-pasakumi (in Latvian) Search in Google Scholar

[34] Muñoz R., et al. Estimation of the lifespan of agricultural tractors using a diffusion model at the aggregate level. Ciencia e investigación agrarian 2012:39(3):557–562. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-16202012000300014 Search in Google Scholar

[35] Jiafa Luo et al. Nitrous oxide and greenhouse gas emissions from grazed pastures as affected by the use of nitrification inhibitor and restricted grazing regime. Science of the Total Environment 2013:465:107–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.12.07523374420 Search in Google Scholar

[36] Pedro Pellegrini et al. Crop intensification, land use, and on-farm energy-use efficiency during the worldwide spread of the green revolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2018:115(10):2335–2340. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1717072115587798729463755 Search in Google Scholar

[37] Kanter D., Zhang X., Mauzerall D. L. Reducing Nitrogen Pollution while Decreasing Farmers’ Costs and Increasing Fertilizer Industry Profits. Journal of Environmental Quality 2015:44(2):325–335. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2014.04.017326023952 Search in Google Scholar

[38] Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies. Latvijas lauksaimniecības siltumnīcefekta gāzu un amonjaka emisiju, kā arī CO2 piesaistes (aramzemēs un zālājos) robežsamazinājuma izmaksu līkņu (MACC) pielāgošana izmantošanai lauksaimniecības, vides un klimata politikas veidošanā (Adaptation of Latvia’s greenhouse gas and ammonia emissions as well as CO2 capture (arable land and grasslands) marginal cost reduction curves (MACC) for use in agricultural, environmental and climate policy-making.). Jelgava: LLU, 2019. (in Latvian) Search in Google Scholar

[39] MacLeod M., et al. Cost-Effectiveness of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures for Agriculture: A Literature Review. OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2015:89. https://doi.org/10.1787/5jrvvkq900vj-en Search in Google Scholar

[40] Hoglund-Isaksson L., et al. EU low carbon roadmap 2050: Potentials and costs for mitigation of non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions. Energy Strategy Reviews 2012:1(2):97–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2012.05.004 Search in Google Scholar

[41] Bumbiere K., et al. Ranking of Bioresources for Biogas Production. Environmental and Climate Technologies 2020:24(1):368–377. https://doi.org/10.2478/rtuect-2020-0021 Search in Google Scholar

[42] De Cara S., Jayet P.-A. Marginal abatement costs of greenhouse gas emissions from European agriculture, cost-effectiveness, and the EU non-ETS Burden Sharing Agreement. Ecological Economics 2010:70(9):1680–1690. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.05.007 Search in Google Scholar

Artículos recomendados de Trend MD

Planifique su conferencia remota con Sciendo