Explore the vast range of titles available.

To limit warming, action plans from countries and companies must be fair, rigorous and transparent. To limit warming, action plans from countries and companies must be fair, rigorous and transparent.

Biochar can influence native soil organic carbon (SOC) mineralisation through “priming effects”. However, the long-term direction, persistence and extent of SOC priming by biochar remain uncertain. Using natural 13 C abundance and under controlled laboratory conditions, we show that biochar-stimulated SOC mineralisation (“positive priming”) caused a loss of 4 to 44 mg C g −1 SOC over 2.3 years in a clayey, unplanted soil (0.42% OC). Positive priming was greater for manure-based or 400°C biochars, cf . plant-based or 550°C biochars, but was trivial relative to recalcitrant C in biochar. From 2.3 to 5.0 years, the amount of positively-primed soil CO 2 -C in the biochar treatments decreased by 4 to 7 mg C g −1 SOC. We conclude that biochar stimulates native SOC mineralisation in the low-C clayey soil but that this effect decreases with time, possibly due to depletion of labile SOC from initial positive priming, and/or stabilisation of SOC caused by biochar-induced organo-mineral interactions.

Biofuel systems may represent a promising strategy to combat climate change by replacing fossil fuels in electricity generation and transportation. First-generation biofuels from sugar and starch crops for ethanol (a gasoline substitute) and from oilseed crops for biodiesel (a petroleum diesel substitute) have come under increasing levels of scrutiny due to the uncertainty associated with the estimation of climate change impacts of biofuels, such as due to indirect effects on land use. This analysis estimates the magnitude of some uncertainty sources: i) crop/feedstock, ii) life cycle assessment (LCA) modelling approach, iii) land-use change (LUC), and iv) greenhouse gas (GHG) metrics. The metrics used for characterising the different GHGs (global warming potential-GWP and global temperature change potential-GTP at different time horizons) appeared not to play a significant role in explaining the variance in the carbon footprint of biofuels, as opposed to the crop/feedstock used, the inclusion/exclusion of LUC considerations, and the LCA modelling approach (p<0.001). The estimated climate footprint of biofuels is dependent on the latter three parameters and, thus, is context-specific. It is recommended that these parameters be dealt with in a manner consistent with the goal and scope of the study. In particular, it is essential to interpret the results of the carbon footprint of biofuel systems in light of the choices made in each of these sources of uncertainty, and sensitivity analysis is recommended to overcome their influence on the result.

We synthesized 20 years of research to explain the interrelated processes that determine soil and plant responses to biochar. The properties of biochar and its effects within agricultural ecosystems largely depend on feedstock and pyrolysis conditions. We describe three stages of reactions of biochar in soil: dissolution (1–3 weeks); reactive surface development (1–6 months); and aging (beyond 6 months). As biochar ages, it is incorporated into soil aggregates, protecting the biochar carbon and promoting the stabilization of rhizodeposits and microbial products. Biochar carbon persists in soil for hundreds to thousands of years. By increasing pH, porosity, and water availability, biochars can create favorable conditions for root development and microbial functions. Biochars can catalyze biotic and abiotic reactions, particularly in the rhizosphere, that increase nutrient supply and uptake by plants, reduce phytotoxins, stimulate plant development, and increase resilience to disease and environmental stressors. Meta‐analyses found that, on average, biochars increase P availability by a factor of 4.6; decrease plant tissue concentration of heavy metals by 17%–39%; build soil organic carbon through negative priming by 3.8% (range −21% to +20%); and reduce non‐CO2 greenhouse gas emissions from soil by 12%–50%. Meta‐analyses show average crop yield increases of 10%–42% with biochar addition, with greatest increases in low‐nutrient P‐sorbing acidic soils (common in the tropics), and in sandy soils in drylands due to increase in nutrient retention and water holding capacity. Studies report a wide range of plant responses to biochars due to the diversity of biochars and contexts in which biochars have been applied. Crop yields increase strongly if site‐specific soil constraints and nutrient and water limitations are mitigated by appropriate biochar formulations. Biochars can be tailored to address site constraints through feedstock selection, by modifying pyrolysis conditions, through pre‐ or post‐production treatments, or co‐application with organic or mineral fertilizers. We demonstrate how, when used wisely, biochar mitigates climate change and supports food security and the circular economy. Plant responses to biochar are driven by interrelated biotic and abiotic processes. Biochar properties depend on the feedstock, pyrolysis conditions, and formulation, explaining the variation in responses to biochars. Through its persistence, negative priming effect, and capacity to build soil organic carbon and reduce N2O and CH4 emissions from soil, biochar contributes to climate change mitigation. By improving physical, chemical, and biological soil properties, particularly in the rhizosphere, biochars can stimulate plant growth and increase resilience to disease and environmental stressors. Biochars increase crop yields on average by 10%–42%, with greatest response in acidic tropical soils and sandy dryland soils.

Agriculture is the largest single source of global anthropogenic methane (CH 4 ) emissions, with ruminants the dominant contributor. Livestock CH 4 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 CH 4 . 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 CH 4 emissions to global warming in 2050 is about one-third of that from future net carbon dioxide emissions. Future livestock CH 4 emissions, therefore, significantly constrain the remaining carbon budget and the ability to meet stringent temperature limits. We review options to address livestock CH 4 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)'.

The influence of biochar on nitrogen (N) transformation processes in soil is not fully understood. This study assessed the influence of four biochars (wood and poultry manure biochars synthesized at 400°C, nonactivated, and at 550°C, activated, abbreviated as: W400, PM400, W550, PM550, respectively) on nitrous oxide (N2O) emission and N leaching from an Alfisol and a Vertisol. Repacked soil columns were subjected to three wetting–drying (W–D) cycles to achieve a range of water‐filled pore space (WFPS) over a 5‐mo period. During the first two W–D cycles, W400 and W550 had inconsistent effects on N2O emissions and the soils amended with PM400 produced higher N2O emissions relative to the control. The initially greater N2O emission from the PM400 soils was ascribed to its higher labile intrinsic N content than the other biochars. During the third W–D cycle, all biochar treatments consistently decreased N2O emissions, cumulatively by 14 to 73% from the Alfisol and by 23 to 52% from the Vertisol, relative to their controls. In the first leaching event, higher nitrate leaching occurred from the PM400‐amended soils compared with the other treatments. In the second event, the leaching of ammonium was reduced by 55 to 93% from the W550‐ and PM550‐Alfisol and Vertisol, and by 87 to 94% from the W400‐ and PM400‐Vertisol only (cf. control). We propose that the increased effectiveness of biochars in reducing N2O emissions and ammonium leaching over time was due to increased sorption capacity of biochars through oxidative reactions on the biochar surfaces with ageing.

The scientific literature contains contrasting findings about the climate effects of forest bioenergy, partly due to the wide diversity of bioenergy systems and associated contexts, but also due to differences in assessment methods. The climate effects of bioenergy must be accurately assessed to inform policy‐making, but the complexity of bioenergy systems and associated land, industry and energy systems raises challenges for assessment. We examine misconceptions about climate effects of forest bioenergy and discuss important considerations in assessing these effects and devising measures to incentivize sustainable bioenergy as a component of climate policy. The temporal and spatial system boundary and the reference (counterfactual) scenarios are key methodology choices that strongly influence results. Focussing on carbon balances of individual forest stands and comparing emissions at the point of combustion neglect system‐level interactions that influence the climate effects of forest bioenergy. We highlight the need for a systems approach, in assessing options and developing policy for forest bioenergy that: (1) considers the whole life cycle of bioenergy systems, including effects of the associated forest management and harvesting on landscape carbon balances; (2) identifies how forest bioenergy can best be deployed to support energy system transformation required to achieve climate goals; and (3) incentivizes those forest bioenergy systems that augment the mitigation value of the forest sector as a whole. Emphasis on short‐term emissions reduction targets can lead to decisions that make medium‐ to long‐term climate goals more difficult to achieve. The most important climate change mitigation measure is the transformation of energy, industry and transport systems so that fossil carbon remains underground. Narrow perspectives obscure the significant role that bioenergy can play by displacing fossil fuels now, and supporting energy system transition. Greater transparency and consistency is needed in greenhouse gas reporting and accounting related to bioenergy. We examine misconceptions about climate effects of forest bioenergy and highlight the importance of a systems approach in assessing options and developing policy for forest bioenergy. Assessment should consider the whole bioeconomy, including the life cycle of bioenergy systems, effects on forest management and landscape carbon stocks, and effects on the energy and building sectors. Focussing on carbon balances of individual forest stands, emissions at the point of combustion and short‐term emissions reduction targets, neglects system‐level interactions and obscures the significant role that bioenergy can play by displacing fossil fuels now, and supporting energy system transformation.

Achieving the long-term temperature goal of the Paris Agreement relies on every actor maximising their effort to reduce emissions. Generic targets claiming a basis in science have been used to justify inequitable efforts that insufficiently stretch the ambition of the best-resourced countries and companies.

The soil carbon (C) saturation concept suggests an upper limit to the storage of soil organic carbon (SOC). It is set by the mechanisms that protect soil organic matter from mineralization. Biochar has the capacity to protect new C, including rhizodeposits and microbial necromass. However, the decadal-scale mechanisms by which biochar influences the molecular diversity, spatial heterogeneity, and temporal changes in SOC persistence, remain unresolved. Here we show that the soil C storage ceiling of a Ferralsol under subtropical pasture was raised by a second application of Eucalyptus saligna biochar 8.2 years after the first application—the first application raised the soil C storage ceiling by 9.3 Mg new C ha −1 and the second application raised this by another 2.3 Mg new C ha −1 . Linking direct visual evidence from one-, two-, and three-dimensional analyses with SOC quantification, we found high spatial heterogeneity of C functional groups that resulted in the retention of rhizodeposits and microbial necromass in microaggregates (53–250 µm) and the mineral fraction (<53 µm). Microbial C-use efficiency was concomitantly increased by lowering specific enzyme activities, contributing to the decreased mineralization of native SOC by 18%. We suggest that the SOC ceiling can be lifted using biochar in (sub)tropical grasslands globally. A decadal-scale field trial revealed 1.01 Mg of rhizodeposit and necromass C was stored in soil microaggregate and mineral fractions per Mg biochar-C applied. Microspectroscopic analyses visualize mechanisms for this elevated soil C storage ceiling.