Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Quantifying the threat from ozone pollution to food security ICP Vegetation – EMEP collaboration Gina Mills, David Simpson, Harry Harmens et al. > Brief.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Quantifying the threat from ozone pollution to food security ICP Vegetation – EMEP collaboration Gina Mills, David Simpson, Harry Harmens et al. > Brief."— Presentation transcript:

1 Quantifying the threat from ozone pollution to food security ICP Vegetation – EMEP collaboration Gina Mills, David Simpson, Harry Harmens et al. > Brief summary of results of food security study > Ozone and C sequestration study – to be published November, 2011 > Collaboration with EMEP – further development ICP VEGETATION

2 ICP Vegetation State of Knowledge Report Report to be published in late September  How does O 3 damage crops?  By how much?  Which crops are sensitive?  Effects in N and S Europe  Case studies, including S Asia Pre-publication copies available ICP VEGETATION

3 O 3 conc. in air (e.g. AOT40) Stomatal ozone flux (e.g. POD 6 ) Takes into account: [O 3 ] in air temperature light humidity (VPD) soil moisture plant development Ozone indicators for vegetation

4 Ozone flux (POD 6 ) Health vs vegetation indicators, 2000 AOT40SOMO35

5 Predicting impacts of ozone on food security Dose-response relationships from ozone- exposure experiments across Europe* Crops: wheat and tomato Models of ozone transfer to vegetation and uptake by stomata (DO 3 SE – EMEP model) Maps of ozone flux (POD 6 ) and crop production for 2000 National Emissions Scenario, current legislation used for 2000 and 2020 for EU27+CH+NO * Mills et al, Atmospheric Environment (2011) Numbers represent “best estimates”

6 Ozone flux (POD 6 ) in 2000Wheat production (2000) Quantifying impacts on wheat production * Assumes adequate soil moisture

7 Economic losses for wheat in Europe * Assumes adequate soil moisture available Losses are in million Euro per 50 x 50 km grid square: 0 – – – – – 5.0> 5

8 Economic losses for wheat, highest 10 countries ICP VEGETATION

9 Loss in value3.2 billion Euro1.96 billion Euro Loss in production26.9 million t16.5 million t Proportion of grid squares exceeding critical level %82.2% Area at risk of losses million ha 1 In wheat-growing areas 2 Estimated for each grid square from the mean t/ha per country Effects on wheat in EU27+CH+NO, NAT scenario ICP VEGETATION

10 Quantifying impacts on Tomato production Ozone flux (POD6) in 2000Tomato production (2000) ICP VEGETATION *Irrigation assumed *squares with > 3 t production shown

11 Economic losses for Tomato in Europe Economic loss in million Euro per 50 x 50 km grid square: 0 – – – – – 5.0> 5 * Irrigation assumed, squares with > 3 t production shown

12 Economic losses for Tomato, highest 10 countries ICP VEGETATION

13 Loss in value1.02 billion Euro0.63 billion Euro Proportion of grid squares exceeding critical level 77.8 %51.3% Area at risk of losses*0.33 million ha0.23 million ha * Estimated for each grid square from the mean t/ha per country Effects on Tomato in EU27+CH+NO, NAT scenario ICP VEGETATION

14 Next report: O 3 and C sequestration, including feedbacks to climate To be published, November, 2011  Review of current knowledge  Impacts on carbon storage in grasslands and forests for 2000 and 2040, using climate and O 3 data from EMEP to run the:: (1)DO 3 SE model (2)JULES model (Sitch et al., Nature) O3O3 Less CO 2 uptake Less C in roots Increased radiative forcing by CO 2 and O 3 ICP VEGETATION

15 Future ICP Vegetation - EMEP Collaboration + Please!  New scenarios for ex-Post analysis – use in food security and C sequestration analysis  Inputs to forthcoming ecosystems services study (2013/14)  Further upgrading of EMEP model to reflect new developments in flux modelling  Further collaboration on development of methodology, including in EU-ECLAIRE project MSc-West We would benefit from: ICP VEGETATION

16 CIAM  We remain concerned that GAINS runs are based on health impacts (SOMO35) alone. Vegetation (including impacts on food security and C sequestration) may remain unprotected in large areas of Europe.  Inclusion of flux-based methodology into next version of GAINS TFIAM  We welcome inputs and are happy to contribute as needed MSc-East  Further testing/comparing performance EMEP Heavy Metal Model (spatial resolution at 5 km x 5 km?) with measured concentrations in mosses at a high spatial resolution (ca moss sites in 2005) Future ICP Vegetation - EMEP Collaboration ICP VEGETATION

17 SPARES

18 Summary of results Wheat  The area of medium-high ozone fluxes includes the main wheat growing areas in central and NW Europe  Economic losses in 2000 were predicted to be 3.2 billion Euro  Whereas the area of highest fluxes is predicted to decrease by 2020, ca. 24 million ha of wheat remain at risk of damage, with losses still predicted to be 2 billion Euro. Tomato  The area of highest fluxes coincides with the areas of greatest production in S Europe; other tomato growing areas such as the Netherlands have lower, yet still damaging fluxes  Economic losses in 2000 were predicted to be 1 billion Euro.  In 2020, ozone flux is predicted to decrease in the tomato growing areas, reducing economic losses to 0.6 billion Euro.

19 AOT40-based economic impact assessment for wheat Losses are in million Euro per 50 x 50 km grid square: 0 – – – – – 5.0>

20 Ozone flux (POD 6 ) in 2000 Quantifying impacts on wheat AOT40 in 2000

21 AOT40 POD6 Wheat yield loss in 2000 Losses are in million Euro per 50 x 50 km grid square: 0 – – – – – 5.0> 5

22 POD6AOT40POD6AOT40 Loss in value (billion Euro) * * Proportion of grid squares exceeding critical level (%) * * Area at risk of losses* (million ha) * * * Indicative figures only Wheat: NAT Scenario, EU27+CH+NO

23 Sensitive Moderately sensitive Tolerant Peas and beans (including peanut) (30) Sweet potato (28) Orange (27) Onion (23) Turnip (22) Plum (22) Lettuce (19) Wheat (18) Soybean (18) Alfalfa (14) Water melon (14) Tomato (13) Olive (13) Field mustard (12) Sugar beet (11) Oilseed rape (11) Maize (10) Rice (9) Potato (9) Barley (6) Grape (5) Strawberry (1) Oat (0) Broccoli (-5) Grouping of crops by sensitivity of yield to ozone. Values in brackets represent the percentage decrease in yield at a 7h mean ozone concentration of 60 ppb compared to that at 30 ppb.

24 gsto = gmax *[min(fphen, fO3)]* flight * max{fmin, (ftemp * fVPD * fSWP)} Separate functions for effects of phenology, ozone, light, temperature, VPD (humidity) and soil moisture (SWP) on stomatal conductance Species-specific value See Pleijel et al., 2007, Atmos. Envt. 41, 3022, for further details To predict impacts on food security we model ozone uptake by stomata using the Jarvis approach: Flux method


Download ppt "Quantifying the threat from ozone pollution to food security ICP Vegetation – EMEP collaboration Gina Mills, David Simpson, Harry Harmens et al. > Brief."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google