Browsing by Person "Angenendt, Elisabeth"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

How effective and efficient is the generation of nature-based carbon removal quantified according to the regulation on carbon removal and carbon farming certification? An evaluation based on the example of a hypothetical agroforestry system in Baden-Württemberg
(2025) Geier, Cecilia Roxanne; Angenendt, Elisabeth; Bahrs, Enno; Sponagel, Christian
Nature-based carbon removal (CR) could play a key role in achieving climate neutrality but it does face quantification challenges. This study evaluates the effectiveness and efficiency of CR quantification under the Carbon Removals and Carbon Farming (CRCF) Regulation, using Baden-Württemberg (Germany) as a case study. We designed a hypothetical agroforestry system for valuable timber production compliant with the CRCF requirements, modelling potential GHG emission reductions and the benefit-potential ratio (share of the CRCF-compliant net CR benefit within the total GHG emission mitigation potential). The results revealed a significant shortfall between the total GHG mitigation potential (350 kt CO2eq) and the actual net CR benefit (205 kt CO2eq), representing only 5 % of BW’s agricultural emissions. The benefit-potential ratio was at most 59 %, with abatement costs ranging from €59 to €153 t CO2eq-1. Conservative estimates to improve reliability further lowered the ratio to 24 %, pushing costs to €244 t CO2eq-1. While agroforestry does manifest regional CR generation potential, it is unlikely to contribute significantly to large-scale CR under the current CRCF framework, as both flaws within its quantification base and the inherent properties of nature-based CR limit its effectiveness. Although transferability is restricted by focusing on valuable timber production in BW, our results highlighted the need for harmonized emission factors, system boundary definitions (particularly indirect land use change), and a clear distinction between CR (e.g., from carbon sequestration in soils) and reduced soil emissions. We advocate balancing the use of agroforestry with more durable CR strategies and imposing caps on nature-based CR contributions to ensure robust climate action.
Implications of large‐scale miscanthus cultivation in water protection areas: A Life Cycle Assessment with model coupling for improved policy support
(2022) Weik, Jan; Lask, Jan; Petig, Eckart; Seeger, Stefan; Marting Vidaurre, Nirvana; Wagner, Moritz; Weiler, Markus; Bahrs, Enno; Lewandowski, Iris; Angenendt, Elisabeth
Two major global challenges related to agriculture are climate change and the unbalanced nitrogen cycle. For both, national and international reduction targets have been defined to catalyse policy support for more sustainable farming systems. Miscanthus cultivation in water protection areas has been proposed as a contribution to achieving these targets. However, a thorough understanding of the underlying system dynamics at various spatial levels is required before recommendations for policy development can be provided. In this study, a model framework was established to provide economic and environmental indicator results at regional and sub‐regional levels. It presents a consequential Life Cycle Assessment coupled with an agro‐economic supply model (Economic Farm Emission Model) that simulates crop and livestock production, and an agricultural hydrology model (DAISY) that assesses effects on the nitrogen cycle. The framework is applied to Baden‐Württemberg, a federal state in southwest Germany with eight agro‐ecological regions. Scenarios investigating the differences between mandatory and voluntary miscanthus cultivation were also explored. While the results show the high potential of miscanthus cultivation for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions (−16% to −724%), the potential to reduce nitrate leaching (−4% to −44%) is compromised in some sub‐regions and scenarios (+4% to +13%) by substantial effects on the crop rotation. Furthermore, the cultivation of miscanthus reduces gross margins in most sub‐regions (−0.1% to −9.6%) and decreases domestic food production (−1% to −50%). However, in regions with low livestock density and high yields, miscanthus cultivation can maintain or increase farmers' income (0.1%–5.8%) and improve environmental protection. The study shows that the heterogeneity of arable land requires a flexible promotion programme for miscanthus. Voluntary cultivation schemes were identified as most suitable to capture sub‐regional differences. Policies should address the demand for miscanthus, for example, support the development of regional value chains, including farmers, water suppliers and the biobased industry.