ICP Vegetation contributions to the LRTAP Convention on Ozone

Gina Mills, Harry Harmens, Felicity Hayes, Dave Norris et al.

Gothenburg Protocol review, indicators, scenario analysis

Impacts on food security

Impacts on C sequestration

ICP VEGETATION

Ozone flux (POD6)

Gothenburg Protocol Review: Indicators

AOT40 SOMO35

Health index – O3 conc. in air

Vegetation index - O3 conc. in air

Vegetation index - modelled O3 uptake by plants*

* See Mills et al., 2011, Atmospheric Environment, 5064 – 5058 for a summary of flux-based critical levels for ozone

Gothenburg Protocol review: Ex-Post “Impacts” analysis

Risk assessment – forest trees

• New scenarios (COB, low, low* etc.)

Economic impact assessment - for crops

NAT scenario

2000 2020 - MID 2020- MFR

Scenario analysis - Broad-leaf forests (e.g. beech, birch)

High risk areas reduced, but medium risk remains

Low risk Medium risk High risk

% change in grid squares with high risk of

damage1Low risk of damage2

2020-COB -61.7 +20.12020-Lowstar -67.1 +22.92020-MID -69.5 +24.12020-Highstar -70.9 +26.62020-MFR -74.7 +41.4

1POD1 values > 30 mmol m-2

2 POD1 values >15 mmol m-2

Scenario analysis - Broad-leaf forests (e.g. beech, birch)

2000 2020 - MID 2020- MFR

Scenario analysis - needle-leaf forests (e.g. Norway spruce)

Lower risk than broad leaf forests, but medium risk remains across W Europe

Low risk Medium risk High risk

Field evidence of effects: ICP Vegetation Evidence Report

ICP Vegetation – Expert groups for ozone

Expert Group Outputs/Activities 2010 -12

Food Security* Report 2011, paper (s)

C sequestration* Report 2012, paper (s)

Further flux model development*

Workshop TFM 2012 on national and local application

O3 and N interaction Review paper, possible workshop in 2013

Outreach activities Funding proposal on food security (India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan & Sri Lanka)

* In close collaboration with EMEP MSC-West

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

Costs provided are “best estimates”

Sensitive Moderately sensitive

Tolerant

Peas and beansWheatsoybeanSweet potatoOrange Onion Turnip Plum Lettuce

MaizeRiceTomatoAlfalfa Water melonOlive Field mustard Sugar beet Oilseed rape Potato Barley Grape

Strawberry Oat Broccoli

Grouping of crops by sensitivity of yield to ozone

Red font: Globally important staple food crops

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

2000 2020

Loss 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

Largest losses in France, Germany, Bulgaria and UK

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

2000 2020

Loss 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

Largest losses in Italy, Spain and Greece

Next report: O3 and C sequestration, including feedbacks to climate

To be published, winter 2011/12

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)

O3

Less CO2 uptake

Less C in roots

Increased radiative forcing by CO2 and O3

ICP VEGETATION

2020 2000 emissions, 2040 climate

2040 emissions, 2040 climate

AOT40

POD1

Very provisional results!* Maps by EMEP using met data from Kjellström et al. (2010) 21st century changes in the European climate: uncertainties derived from an ensemble of

regional climate model simulations, Tellus 63A, 24-40.

ICP Vegetation, ozone: Summary

Gothenburg Protocol ReviewRecent analysis confirms that ozone impacts on vegetation extend into northern Europe, and cover a larger area of Europe than predicted for the human health indicator, SOMO35.

The NAT, low, low* and MID scenarios will provide increased protection of vegetation, but losses will still be significant in 2020 e.g.2 billion Euro for wheat and medium risk of damage to broad-leaved trees over central and southern Europe

Field evidence of effectsConfirming evidence that:O3 impacts found in ambient air in areas with high fluxes

Food securityImportant staple food crops are ozone sensitive, with economic implications for food supply within the ECE region and concerns for food supply being particularly worrying for developing countries such as in S Asia where ozone concentrations are rising rapidly.

Expert groups formed to further improve knowledge exchangeFood Security Report published this yearC sequestration report for 2011/12Ecosystem services report for 2012/13

ICP VEGETATION

SPARES

0

10

20

30

40

0 0 -7.5

7.5 -15

15 -22.5

22.5 -30

>30

% o

f g

rid

sq

ua

res

2020

2020-COB

0

10

20

30

40

0 0 -7.5

7.5 -15

15 -22.5

22.5 -30

>30

% o

f g

rid

sq

ua

res

2020

2020 - lowstar

0

10

20

30

40

0 0 -7.5

7.5 -15

15 -22.5

22.5 -30

>30

% o

f g

rid

sq

ua

res

2020

2020-MID

0

10

20

30

40

0 0 -7.5

7.5 -15

15 -22.5

22.5 -30

>30

% o

f g

rid

sq

ua

res

2020

2020-Highstar

0

10

20

30

40

0 0 -7.5

7.5 -15

15 -22.5

22.5 -30

>30

% o

f g

rid

sq

ua

res

2020

2020-MFR

Comparison of Scenarios: Broad leaf trees