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

ICP Vegetation State of Knowledge Report

Report to be published in late September

How does O3 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

O3 conc. in air (e.g. AOT40)

Stomatal ozone flux(e.g. POD6)Takes into account:

• [O3] in air• temperature• light• humidity (VPD)• soil moisture• plant development

Ozone indicators for vegetation

Ozone flux (POD6)

Health vs vegetation indicators, 2000

AOT40 SOMO35

Predicting impacts of ozone on food security

Aerodynam icresistance

Boundary layerresistance

Soilres istance

C uticularresis tance

R a

R b

R ext

R gs

Stom ata lres istance

R sto

In -canopyaerodynam icresistance R inc Substom ata l

cav ityExterna l

plant tissue

Atm ospheric Oconcentra tion

3

Soil

Dose-response relationships from ozone-exposure experiments across Europe*

Crops: wheat and tomato

Models of ozone transfer to vegetation and uptake by stomata(DO3SE – EMEP model)

Maps of ozone flux (POD6) 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”

Ozone flux (POD6) in 2000 Wheat production (2000)

Quantifying impacts on wheat production

* Assumes adequate soil moisture

Economic losses for wheat in Europe

2000 2020

* Assumes adequate soil moisture available

Losses are in million Euro per 50 x 50 km grid square:

0 – 0.01 0.01 – 0.1 0.1 – 1.0 1.0 – 2.5 2.5 – 5.0 > 5

0100200300400500600700800900

1000

Mill

ion

Euro

lost

2000

2020

Economic losses for wheat, highest 10 countries

ICP VEGETATION

2000 2020Loss in value 3.2 billion Euro 1.96 billion Euro

Loss in production 26.9 million t 16.5 million t

Proportion of grid squares exceeding critical level1

84.8 % 82.2%

Area at risk of losses2 24.5 million ha 24.5 million ha

1 In wheat-growing areas2 Estimated for each grid square from the mean t/ha per country

Effects on wheat in EU27+CH+NO, NAT scenario

ICP VEGETATION

Quantifying impacts on Tomato production

Ozone flux (POD6) in 2000 Tomato production (2000)

ICP VEGETATION

*Irrigation assumed*squares with > 3 t production shown

Economic losses for Tomato in Europe

2000 2020

Economic loss in million Euro per 50 x 50 km grid square:

0 – 0.01 0.01 – 0.1 0.1 – 1.0 1.0 – 2.5 2.5 – 5.0 > 5

* Irrigation assumed, squares with > 3 t production shown

Economic losses for Tomato, highest 10 countries

0100200300400500600700800

Mill

ion

Euro

lost

2000

2020

ICP VEGETATION

2000 2020Loss in value 1.02 billion Euro 0.63 billion Euro

Proportion of grid squares exceeding critical level

77.8 % 51.3%

Area at risk of losses* 0.33 million ha 0.23 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

Next report: O3 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 O3 data from EMEP to run the::

(1) DO3SE model(2) JULES model (Sitch et al.,

2007. Nature)

O3Less CO2 uptake

Less C in roots

Increased radiative forcing by CO2 and O3

ICP VEGETATION

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-WestWe would benefit from:

ICP VEGETATION

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. 6000 moss sites in 2005)

Future ICP Vegetation - EMEP Collaboration

ICP VEGETATION

SPARES

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.

AOT40-based economic impact assessment for wheat

Losses are in million Euro per 50 x 50 km grid square:

0 – 0.01 0.01 – 0.1 0.1 – 1.0 1.0 – 2.5 2.5 – 5.0 > 5

2000 2020

Ozone flux (POD6) in 2000

Quantifying impacts on wheat

AOT40 in 2000

AOT40POD6

Wheat yield loss in 2000

Losses are in million Euro per 50 x 50 km grid square:

0 – 0.01 0.01 – 0.1 0.1 – 1.0 1.0 – 2.5 2.5 – 5.0 > 5

2000 2020POD6 AOT40 POD6 AOT40

Loss in value (billion Euro)

3.2 1.55* 1.96 0.45*

Proportion of grid squares exceeding critical level (%)

84.8 65.7* 82.2 9.0*

Area at risk of losses*(million ha)

24.5 21.6* 24.5 2.0*

* Indicative figures only

Wheat: NAT Scenario, EU27+CH+NO

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.

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