Sponagel Christian, Weik Jan, Witte Felix, Back Hans, Wagner Moritz, Ruser Reiner, Bahrs Enno
Department of Farm Management (410b), Institute of Farm Management, University of Hohenheim, Schwerzstraße 44, 70599, Stuttgart, Germany.
Rubisco GbR, Liststraße 47, 70180, Stuttgart, Germany.
J Environ Manage. 2025 Feb;374:123884. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.123884. Epub 2025 Jan 9.
Agriculture accounts for a large proportion of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. It is therefore crucial to identify effective and efficient GHG mitigation potentials in agriculture, but also in related upstream sectors. However, previous studies in this area have rarely undertaken a cross-sectoral assessment. There is also a gap in research on the GHG mitigation potential of innovations such as green ammonia in arable farming at a larger spatial scale. The study therefore aimed to analyze how selected technological adaptations or innovations can be used to contribute to efficient and effective cross-sectoral GHG mitigation in conventional arable farming systems. Germany, one of the largest agricultural producers and contributors of GHG emissions from agriculture in the EU, was chosen as a case study. The GHG mitigation potential and abatement cost of four selected measures were analyzed using an integrated land use model and life cycle assessment. Their GHG mitigation potential varied between 0.3 Mt CO-eq. for nitrification inhibitors under lower mitigation rate assumptions and 4.7 Mt CO-eq. for green ammonia with upper mitigation rate assumptions on GHG emission impacts, i. e. rather high mitigation. While crop varieties based on new genomic technologies (NGT) were introduced at no GHG abatement cost, the average mitigation costs ranged from 48 € for the use of nitrification inhibitors (upper mitigation rate) to 1233 € per t CO-eq. for N sensors (lower mitigation rate). There were also regional differences due to different land use structures, regional farm sizes, economic and agronomic conditions. Based on these results we recommend for agricultural and environmental policy to foster the use of nitrification inhibitors due to the identified GHG reduction potential and the comparatively low GHG abatement costs. Additionally, the use of green ammonia in fertilizer production should be further promoted. Although the results are exemplary for Germany, they can be very informative for other EU Member States with comparable socio-economic and agronomic conditions.
农业在全球温室气体（GHG）排放中占很大比例。因此，确定农业以及相关上游部门有效且高效的温室气体减排潜力至关重要。然而，该领域以往的研究很少进行跨部门评估。在更大空间尺度上，对于诸如耕地农业中绿色氨等创新技术的温室气体减排潜力的研究也存在空白。因此，本研究旨在分析如何利用选定的技术改造或创新来促进传统耕地农业系统中高效且有效的跨部门温室气体减排。德国作为欧盟最大的农业生产国之一以及农业温室气体排放贡献国，被选为案例研究对象。使用综合土地利用模型和生命周期评估方法，分析了四项选定措施的温室气体减排潜力和减排成本。在较低减排率假设下，硝化抑制剂的温室气体减排潜力为0.3百万吨二氧化碳当量；在较高减排率假设下，绿色氨对温室气体排放影响的减排潜力为4.7百万吨二氧化碳当量，即减排效果相当显著。基于新基因组技术（NGT）的作物品种引入不产生温室气体减排成本，而硝化抑制剂（较高减排率）的平均减排成本为每吨二氧化碳当量48欧元，氮传感器（较低减排率）的平均减排成本为每吨二氧化碳当量1233欧元。由于土地利用结构、区域农场规模、经济和农艺条件不同，还存在区域差异。基于这些结果，我们建议农业和环境政策应促进硝化抑制剂的使用，因为其具有已确定的温室气体减排潜力且温室气体减排成本相对较低。此外，应进一步推广绿色氨在肥料生产中的使用。尽管这些结果是德国的典型案例，但对于具有类似社会经济和农艺条件的其他欧盟成员国也具有很高的参考价值。
