Feasibility of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Methods

A recent Defra funded project conducted by ADAS investigated the economic feasibility of farm greenhouse gas mitigation methods (GHG MMs) and identified drivers and barriers to uptake for 6 farm types and 3 farm sizes through a farm survey in the study, " Feasibility of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Methods- AC0222".

Ten mitigation methods were selected for evaluation based on their potential cost-effectiveness, identified in previous reports. For details see table below.

The headline findings showed that there was generally a poor level of understanding of emissions from agriculture, and often confusion with emissions from the energy sector such as fuel use. In particular the importance of nitrous oxide (N₂O) emissions for fertiliser applications was poorly understood. The level of potential emission reductions from the 10 mitigation methods is relatively low, at between 0.6MtCO₂e and 1.7 MtCO₂e, depending on uptake levels.

By comparison, the UK Government has set a target for agriculture in England to reduce its emissions by 3MTCO₂eq by 2020 attached below.

The Agricultural Industry Greenhouse Gas Action Plan (GHGAP) sets out how the sector intends to do this here.

The greatest potential mitigation identified in the ADAS report comes from improvements in livestock breeding, inclusion of clover in grassland, use of optimal livestock diets and growing low nitrogen crops. All these also had a positive economic impact at the farm level, but uptake was low because of factors often outside the control of the farmer such as market demands.

Potential mitigation by farm size showed that half the potential mitigation comes from large farms, 20% from medium farms and 26% from small farms (based on the 10 MMs and the 6 farm types evaluated). Potential mitigation by farm type showed that all farm types have similar levels of contribution to mitigation. Dairy farms could contribute 26% of the potential, cattle and sheep 31%, mixed farms 15% and arable farms 26% (based on the 10 MMs evaluated).

Here's the table summarising the MM for each measure and the cost implication

The report's key conclusions are as follows:

Key Conclusions

• GHG mitigation from agricultural practices can contribute to the Government targets, however the level is lower than previous reports suggest.
• There is a low understanding by farmers of the importance of nitrous oxide in GHG emissions from agriculture.
• Of the mitigation measures (MM) reviewed, the largest potential mitigation comes from increasing the use of clover in grass leys, the growing of low N use crops and improving livestock breeding.
• These all require strategic changes, and are dependent on factors such as the development of markets for low N crops, or reliable breeding information, but do offer a positive impact on farm income.
• Simple management changes, such as nitrogen and manure planning and timing, are often the implementation of best farm practice, but offer less GHG mitigation potential and some carry a net cost at a farm level.
• Economics and regulation are key drivers to current uptake of MMs and those with largest uptake have a positive impact on farm incomes, or have market or regulatory drivers e.g. requirement for fertiliser spreader calibration for arable crop assurance.
• Increasing awareness, acknowledgement of value of experience, and local evidence of successful practical application and benefits can encourage increased uptake.
• There are additional barriers for small farms and in the beef and sheep sectors where their perception of MMs is that they have high costs.

The full report may be read here.
(This is a pay service.)