How necessary and feasible are reductions of methane emissions from livestock to support stringent temperature goals?

Agriculture is the largest single source of global anthropogenic methane (CH4) emissions, with ruminants the dominant contributor. Livestock CH4 emissions are projected to grow another 30% by 2050 under current policies, yet few countries have set targets or are implementing policies to reduce emissions in absolute terms. The reason for this limited ambition may be linked not only to the underpinning role of livestock for nutrition and livelihoods in many countries but also diverging perspectives on the importance of mitigating these emissions, given the short atmospheric lifetime of CH4. Here, we show that in mitigation pathways that limit warming to 1.5°C, which include cost-effective reductions from all emission sources, the contribution of future livestock CH4 emissions to global warming in 2050 is about one-third of that from future net carbon dioxide emissions. Future livestock CH4 emissions, therefore, significantly constrain the remaining carbon budget and the ability to meet stringent temperature limits. We review options to address livestock CH4 emissions through more efficient production, technological advances and demand-side changes, and their interactions with land-based carbon sequestration. We conclude that bringing livestock into mainstream mitigation policies, while recognizing their unique social, cultural and economic roles, would make an important contribution towards reaching the temperature goal of the Paris Agreement and is vital for a limit of 1.5°C. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue 'Rising methane: is warming feeding warming? (part 1)'.

How much do direct livestock emissions actually contribute to global warming?

Agriculture directly contributes about 10%-12% of current global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, mostly from livestock. However, such percentage estimates are based on global warming potentials (GWPs), which do not measure the actual warming caused by emissions and ignore the fact that methane does not accumulate in the atmosphere in the same way as CO2 . Here, we employ a simple carbon cycle-climate model, historical estimates and future projections of livestock emissions to infer the fraction of actual warming that is attributable to direct livestock non-CO2 emissions now and in future, and to CO2 from pasture conversions, without relying on GWPs. We find that direct livestock non-CO2 emissions caused about 19% of the total modelled warming of 0.81°C from all anthropogenic sources in 2010. CO2 from pasture conversions contributed at least another 0.03°C, bringing the warming directly attributable to livestock to 23% of the total warming in 2010. The significance of direct livestock emissions to future warming depends strongly on global actions to reduce emissions from other sectors. Direct non-CO2 livestock emissions would contribute only about 5% of the warming in 2100 if emissions from other sectors increase unabated, but could constitute as much as 18% (0.27°C) of the warming in 2100 if global CO2 emissions from other sectors are reduced to near or below zero by 2100, consistent with the goal of limiting warming to well below 2°C. These estimates constitute a lower bound since indirect emissions linked to livestock feed production and supply chains were not included. Our estimates demonstrate that expanding the mitigation potential and realizing substantial reductions of direct livestock non-CO2 emissions through demand and supply side measures can make an important contribution to achieve the stringent mitigation goals set out in the Paris Agreement, including by increasing the carbon budget consistent with the 1.5°C goal.

Probabilistic cost estimates for climate change mitigation.

For more than a decade, the target of keeping global warming below 2 °C has been a key focus of the international climate debate. In response, the scientific community has published a number of scenario studies that estimate the costs of achieving such a target. Producing these estimates remains a challenge, particularly because of relatively well known, but poorly quantified, uncertainties, and owing to limited integration of scientific knowledge across disciplines. The integrated assessment community, on the one hand, has extensively assessed the influence of technological and socio-economic uncertainties on low-carbon scenarios and associated costs. The climate modelling community, on the other hand, has spent years improving its understanding of the geophysical response of the Earth system to emissions of greenhouse gases. This geophysical response remains a key uncertainty in the cost of mitigation scenarios but has been integrated with assessments of other uncertainties in only a rudimentary manner, that is, for equilibrium conditions. Here we bridge this gap between the two research communities by generating distributions of the costs associated with limiting transient global temperature increase to below specific values, taking into account uncertainties in four factors: geophysical, technological, social and political. We find that political choices that delay mitigation have the largest effect on the cost-risk distribution, followed by geophysical uncertainties, social factors influencing future energy demand and, lastly, technological uncertainties surrounding the availability of greenhouse gas mitigation options. Our information on temperature risk and mitigation costs provides crucial information for policy-making, because it clarifies the relative importance of mitigation costs, energy demand and the timing of global action in reducing the risk of exceeding a global temperature increase of 2 °C, or other limits such as 3 °C or 1.5 °C, across a wide range of scenarios.

Broader perspectives for comparing different greenhouse gases.

Over the last 20 years, different greenhouse gases have been compared, in the context of climate change, primarily through the concept of global warming potentials (GWPs). This considers the climate forcing caused by pulse emissions and integrated over a fixed time horizon. Recent studies have shown that uncertainties in GWP values are significantly larger than previously thought and, while past literature in this area has raised alternative means of comparison, there is not yet any clear alternative. We propose that a broader framework for comparing greenhouse gases has become necessary and that this cannot be addressed by using simple fixed exchange rates. From a policy perspective, the framework needs to be clearly aligned with the goal of climate stabilization, and we show that comparisons between gases can be better addressed in this context by the forcing equivalence index (FEI). From a science perspective, a framework for comparing greenhouse gases should also consider the full range of processes that affect atmospheric composition and how these may alter for climate stabilization at different levels. We cover a basis for a broader approach to comparing greenhouse gases by summarizing the uncertainties in GWPs, linking those to uncertainties in the FEIs consistent with stabilization, and then to a framework for addressing uncertainties in the corresponding biogeochemical processes.

Methane emissions from free-ranging cattle: comparison of tracer and integrated horizontal flux techniques.

Accurate measurements of methane (CH4) emission rates from livestock in their undisturbed natural environments are required to assess their impacts on radiative forcing (i.e., enhanced greenhouse effect) and the environment. Here we compare results from two nonintrusive techniques for the measurement of CH4 emissions from cattle. The cows were kept in an outdoor feeding strip that allowed them to follow natural behavioral patterns but contained them within a well defined space. In the first technique, nitrous oxide (N2O) was released as a tracer at the upwind edge of the feeding strip, and the downwind concentrations of N2O and CH4 were measured simultaneously using Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy. Average CH4 emission per cow was calculated each half-hour on three separate days from the correlation between the two gases. The second technique was the integrated horizontal flux (IHF) or 1-D mass-balance method, in which we used the measured vertical profiles of CH4 concentration and windspeed downwind of the cows to determine the total CH4 emission. Comparing the IHF results to the known release rate of N2O allowed us to test the IHF technique independently. We found agreement within 10% for all comparisons on all days. The daily CH4 emission rate averaged over all tracer and IHF measurements was 342 g CH4 head(-1) d(-1). This is within the range of previous measurements for mature lactating dairy cattle (200-430 g CH4 head(-1) d(-1)) but higher than expected for yearling cattle. The high CH4 emissions are accompanied by high CO2 emissions determined from the FTIR measurements. The bias is most likely due to the measurements being made during and after supplementary feeding of the cattle.