If you dont like my assumptions IIASA GGI Land use Scenarios - PDF document

If you don’t like my assumptions…

IIASA GGI Land use Scenarios Michael Obersteiner EMF22, Tsukuba, 11-13 th Dec06,

• The IIASA-GGI Model Framework • Agriculture – AEZ-BLS-MESSAGE • Forestry – DIMA-MESSAGE • Future and Current Work

Scenario Storyline • Economic development Feedbacks Feedbacks • Demographic change • Technological change • Policies Population Economic Projections Projections Regional population & economic projections Downscaling Tools Spatially explicit (and national) projections of economic and demographic growth National, regional & spatially Spatially explicit socio- explicit socio-economic economic drivers drivers DIMA AEZ-BLS Consistency of land-cover Forest Agricultural changes (spatially explicit maps of Management Modeling agricultural, urban, and forest Model Framework land) MESSAGE-MACRO Carbon and Agricultural bioenergy Systems Engineering / Macro- biomass potentials and costs Economic Modeling Framework (all price Potential and costs GHGs and all sectors) Drivers for land-use related of forest bioenergy non-CO2 emissions Endogenous Climate Model and sinks

Multigas Stabilization Portfolios 670 ppmV-eq 40 40 35 35 Annual GHG emissions, GtC eq. Annual GHG emissions, GtC eq. A2r 30 30 B2 25 25 20 20 15 15 10 10 B2-670 A2r-670 5 5 0 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 Energy conservation and efficiency 40 improvement Switch to natural gas 35 Annual GHG emissions, GtC eq. Fossil CCS 30 CO2 Nuclear 25 Biomass (incl. CCS) B1 20 Other renewables 15 Sinks 10 CH4 5 B1-670 N2O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F-gases 9 1 3 5 7 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 1 2 2 2 2 2 Source: Riahi et al. 2006

Land Use Modelling Modelling Land Use Develop a flexible method for generating spatially detailed scenarios of land use, which: • are consistent with IIASA-GGI scenario context, • make best use of available global data sets, • respect quality and distribution of ecosystems and of land resources, • reproduce base-year land use distribution • geographic explicit in order to link to climate models

Agriculture – AEZ/BLS

3 3 2 2 4 4 5 5 1 1 6 6 Source: Tubiello and Fischer, 2006

Spatial Distribution and Distribution and Intensity Intensity ( (percent percent) ) Spatial of Cultivated Cultivated Land, Land, year year 2000 2000 of 0.00 4.17 8.33 12.50 16.67 20.83 25.00 29.17 33.33 37.50 41.67 45.83 50.00 54.17 58.33 62.50 66.67 70.83 75.00 79.17 83.33 87.50 91.67 95.83 100.00 Note: calibration of GLC2000 class weights starts from estimated reference weights and is based on an iterative scheme to match national / sub-national statistics of year 2000 (FAO AT2015/2030 adjusted cultivated land).

Built-up land % dynamics 2010-2100, B2 Fischer et al. 2006

Cropland % dynamics 2010-2100, B2 AEZ/BLS (Fischer et al. 2006) Fischer et al. 2006

0.00 6.25 12.50 18.75 25.00 31.25 37.50 43.75 50.00 56.25 62.50 68.75 75.00 81.25 87.50 93.75 100.00 2000 Percent of cultivated land in grid cell, scenario A2, 2000 0.00 6.25 12.50 18.75 25.00 31.25 37.50 43.75 50.00 56.25 62.50 68.75 75.00 81.25 87.50 93.75 100.00 2080 Percent of cultivated land in grid cell, scenario A2, 2080

Food and Agriculture Development 4500 1. Cereal production, ROW+NES 4000 PAS GGI scenario A2r, 3500 SAS 3000 CPA 1990 to 2080 mln tons 2500 MEA LAM 2000 AFR 1500 EEU+FSU 1000 PAO 500 WEU 0 NAM 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 60.0 ROW+NES PAS 50.0 SAS mln tons protein 40.0 CPA MEA 30.0 LAM AFR 20.0 2. Pork & poultry production, EEU+FSU 10.0 PAO GGI scenario A2r, WEU 0.0 1990 to 2080 NAM 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 Source: LUC World food system simulations of GGI scenarios, IIASA (2005).

Do you see the mitigation signal!? Source: Tubiello and Fischer, 2006

Wheat is more sensitive! Source: Tubiello and Fischer, 2006

Action is in 2 nd half of 21 st century Source: Tubiello and Fischer, 2006

LDC most vulnerable – biophysically!! Source: Tubiello and Fischer, 2006

LDCs would benefit most from Mitigation Source: Tubiello and Fischer, 2006

Additional Millions at hunger almost eliminated by mitigation! Source: Tubiello and Fischer, 2006

Changes in Rain-fed Cereal Potential Reference climate vs climate of 2080s HadCM3-A2 Scenario MAIZE WHEAT Undefined > 25 % 5 to 25 % -5 to 5 % -25 to -5 % < -25 % Not suitable Water MILLET, ALL SORGHUM CEREALS Source: Tubiello and Fischer, 2006

Agriculture: Summary of Results Agriculture: Summary of Results � Additional food/feed required : cereal production to increase from 2.1 bln tons in year 2000 by 1.6 – 2.1 bln tons in 2080. � Fertilizer use : from 83 mln tons nitrogen in 2000 increase by 100 – 150 mln tons N in 2080. � Energy from crop residues : accounting for feed use, estimated bioenergy available from crop residues increases from 18.7 PJ in 2000 to 34.9 PJ in 2080, scenario A2r. � Cultivated land in food production (hence not available for energy crops): from 1.5 bln ha in year 2000 to 1.8 bln ha in 2080, scenario A2r. � Impacts of climate change on agriculture and food security are substantial (LDC); mitigation to 550 ppm atmospheric CO 2 would avoid 75-100% of damage.

DIMA: Fibre, Ligno-Cell Bioenergy and Sinks

Scenario Storyline • Economic development Feedbacks Feedbacks • Demographic change • Technological change • Policies Population Economic Projections Projections Regional population & economic projections Downscaling Tools Spatially explicit (and national) projections of economic and demographic growth National, regional & spatially Spatially explicit socio- explicit socio-economic economic drivers drivers DIMA AEZ-BLS Consistency of land-cover Forest Agricultural changes (spatially explicit maps of Management Modeling agricultural, urban, and forest Model Framework land) MESSAGE-MACRO Carbon and Agricultural bioenergy Systems Engineering / Macro- biomass potentials and costs Economic Modeling Framework (all price Potential and costs GHGs and all sectors) Drivers for land-use related of forest bioenergy non-CO2 emissions Endogenous Climate Model and sinks

Bioenergy and Sinks/GHG Modeling Framework Exogenous drivers Forest Sinks Potential, FSU for CH4 & N2O 350 2050 emissions: 300 Increase in Prices 250 2000 2100 N-Fertilizer use, 200 Rice production, 150 100 Bovine Livestock 50 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Data Sources: Fischer & Tubiello,LUC Rate of carbon sequestration MTC Multigas-MESSAGE Data Sources :Obersteiner & Rokityanskiy, FOR Systems Engineering Bottom-up I A-Model mitigation technologies for non-CO2 Agricultural residue potentials emissions, NAM Biomass supply A2:WEU WEU 7000 Data Sources:USEPA, EMF-21 PAO 6000 12 5000 FSU Bioenergy potential (EJ) 10 4000 EEU Biomass from forests P J 6$/GJ 3000 AFR Black carbon and 8 5$/GJ 2000 LAM organic carbon 4$/GJ 6 1000 3$/GJ MEA 0 emissions CPA 4 1$/GJ 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 coefficients SAS 2 PAS Ag. residues 0 Data Sources: Bond; Klimont & Data sources: Fischer & Tubiello, LUC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 Kupiano, TAP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Data Sources: Obersteiner & Rokityanskiy, FOR; Tubiello & Fischer, LUC

DIMA Model • Grid-based Decision Making – Afforest, Maintain and/or Manage, Deforest – Exogenous prices – BLS cropland expansion – Wood products pool – Site Productivity – ….

Spatial Distribution Distribution of of Forests Forests, , year year 2000 2000 Spatial 0.00 4.17 8.33 12.50 16.67 20.83 25.00 29.17 33.33 37.50 41.67 45.83 50.00 54.17 58.33 62.50 66.67 70.83 75.00 79.17 83.33 87.50 91.67 95.83 100.00

Four Global Land Cover Sets The global level of agreement among the four datasets using complete IGBP classification McCallum et al. 2006

NPP Map

Management Intensity: Human Activity Map

Cumulative biomass production (EJ/grid) for bioenergy between 2000 and 2100 at the energy price supplied by MESSAGE based on the revised IPCC SRES A2r scenario (country investment risk excluded).

Biomass supply

Financials of Biomass Supply Financials of Biomass Supply Bioenergy Expenditures 800 700 600 billion $ (1990) 500 A2 Baseline 400 A2 Stabilization 300 200 100 0 2000 2020 2050 2100

Bioenergy: B2 Baseline 2050

Bioenergy: B2 480ppmv 2050

Sink Development M

Avoided Deforestation Scenario Cutting 50% by 2025

•Compensated Reduction 6 $/tC/5years •Carbon Tax 12 $/tC •9 $/tC if slash-burn •25 $/tC if forest products

21 MtC/Grid Avoided Deforestation Geography