Climate change and agriculture: theory and application of mitigation policies

Agriculture’s contribution to climate change is controversial as it is a significant source of greenhouse gases but also a sink of carbon. Hence its economic and technological potential to mitigate climate change have been argued to be noteworthy. However, social profitability of emission mitigation is a result from factors among emission reductions such as surface water quality impact or profit from production. Consequently, to value comprehensive results of agricultural climate emission mitigation practices, these co-effects to environment and economics should be taken into account. The objective of this thesis was to develop an integrated economic and ecological model to analyse the social welfare of crop cultivation in Finland on distinctive cultivation technologies, conventional tillage and conservation tillage (no-till). Further, we ask whether it would be privately or socially profitable to allocate some of barley cultivation for alternative land use, such as green set-aside or afforestation, when production costs, GHG’s and water quality impacts are taken into account. In the theoretical framework we depict the optimal input use and land allocation choices in terms of environmental impacts and profit from production and derive the optimal tax and payment policies for climate and water quality friendly land allocation. The empirical application of the model uses Finnish data about production cost and profit structure and environmental impacts. According to our results, given emission mitigation practices are not self-evidently beneficial for farmers or society. On the contrary, in some cases alternative land allocation could even reduce social welfare, profiting conventional crop cultivation. This is the case regarding mineral soils such as clay and silt soils. On organic agricultural soils, climate mitigation practices, in this case afforestation and green fallow give more promising results, decreasing climate emissions and nutrient runoff to water systems. No-till technology does not seem to profit climate mitigation although it does decrease other environmental impacts. Nevertheless, the data behind climate emission mitigation practices impact to production and climate is limited and partly contradictory. More specific experiment studies on interaction of emission mitigation practices and environment would be needed. Further study would be important. Particularly area specific production and environmental factors and also food security and safety and socio-economic impacts should be taken into account.

Field intercomparison of four methane gas analysers suitable for eddy covariance flux measurements

Eddy covariance (EC)-flux measurement technique is based on measurement of turbulent motions of air with accurate and fast measurement devices. For instance, in order to measure methane flux a fast methane gas analyser is needed which measures methane concentration at least ten times in a second in addition to a sonic anemometer, which measures the three wind components with the same sampling interval. Previously measurement of methane flux was almost impossible to carry out with EC-technique due to lack of fast enough gas analysers. However during the last decade new instruments have been developed and thus methane EC-flux measurements have become more common. Performance of four methane gas analysers suitable for eddy covariance measurements are assessed in this thesis. The assessment and comparison was performed by analysing EC-data obtained during summer 2010 (1.4.-26.10.) at Siikaneva fen. The four participating methane gas analysers are TGA-100A (Campbell Scientific Inc., USA), RMT-200 (Los Gatos Research, USA), G1301-f (Picarro Inc., USA) and Prototype-7700 (LI-COR Biosciences, USA). RMT-200 functioned most reliably throughout the measurement campaign and the corresponding methane flux data had the smallest random error. In addition, methane fluxes calculated from data obtained from G1301-f and RMT-200 agree remarkably well throughout the measurement campaign. The calculated cospectra and power spectra agree well with corresponding temperature spectra. Prototype-7700 functioned only slightly over one month in the beginning of the measurement campaign and thus its accuracy and long-term performance is difficult to assess.

Naudanlihan jalostusketjun hiilijalanjälki Suomessa

Kirjallisuustutkimuksen tavoitteena oli perehtyä kasvihuoneilmiön taustoihin ja kartoittaa aiempia tutkimuksia naudan- ja muiden lihatuotteiden kasvihuonekaasupäästöistä. Lisäksi kirjallisuustutkimuksessa perehdyttiin aiemmissa tutkimuksissa elintarvikkeiden hiilijalanjäljen laskemisessa sovellettuun elinkaarianalyysiin ISO 14040-standardin mukaisesti. Kokeellisen osion tavoitteena oli määrittää naudanlihan hiilijalanjälki Suomessa maatilan portilta kuluttajan ruokapöytään. Tavoitteena oli myös ymmärtää jalostusketjun päästöjen merkitys verrattuna koko naudanlihan tuotantoketjuun ja määrittää jalostusketjun vaiheiden merkitys ketjussa. Työn toiminnallisena yksikkönä toimi kilo naudanlihaa. Työ toteutettiin perehtymällä yksityiskohtaisesti yhteen naudanlihan jalostusketjuun Suomessa. Päästöt laskettiin todellisten yhteistyöyritykseltä saatujen prosessitietojen perusteella. Tiedot kerättiin tiedonkeruulomakkeella vierailemalla yhteistyöyrityksen kahdessa tuotantolaitoksessa ja täydentämällä tietoja haastatteluilla. Naudanlihan jalostusketjun päästöt olivat 1240 g CO2-ekv/lihakilo. Eniten päästöjä tuottivat jalostusvaihe (310 g CO2-ekv/lihakilo), teurastus (280 g CO2-ekv/lihakilo) ja lihatuotteiden kuljetus kuluttajalle (210 g CO2-ekv/lihakilo). Koko naudanlihan tuotantoketjusta jalostusketjun päästöt muodostivat alle 4 %, sillä syntymästä maatilan portille syntyviksi päästöiksi laskettiin kirjallisuuden perusteella yli 30 000 g CO2-ekv/lihakilo. Jatkossa naudanlihan hiilijalanjälkeä voitaisiin pääasiassa pienentää kehittämällä prosessia maatilan portille asti. Tämän työn tulokset olivat hyvin samansuuruiset verrattuna aiempaan tutkimukseen broilerin jalostusketjun päästöistä Suomessa (Katajajuuri ym. 2008). Tämä vastasi ennakko-odotuksia, sillä jalostusketjujen vaiheissa ei ollut merkittäviä eroja. Aiempia tutkimuksia naudanlihan jalostusketjun päästöistä ei ollut saatavilla.