1. Can climate benefits be reconciled with revenues for land management? Annette Freibauer 1, Hannes Böttcher 1, Yvonne Scholz 2, Vincent Gitz 3, Philippe Ciais 4, Martina Mund 1, Thomas Wutzler 1, Ernst-Detlef Schulze 1 1 MPI-BGC Jena; 2 DLR Stuttgart; 3 CIRED - CNRS/EHESS Paris; 4 LSCE Gif-sur-Yvette

2. Outline What to optimize? Case study for forestry and cropland in Central Germany –C stocks –fossil C substitution –Net revenues and C prices Conclusions

3. What to optimize? Reference: functional unit scarcest resource = productive land: hectare Criteria –climate benefits –net revenue System boundaries –C stocks on land –C stocks in sector (including products) –holistic life cycle view: fossil C substitution energy provision energy embedded in products

4. Case study: Thuringia Agriculture –Plains –Rich soils Forest –Low mountain ranges –Poor soils Afforestation of cropland No deforestation

5. Regional constraints Forestry –No deforestation –No fertilizer –No stands with exotic trees –Subsidies for old-growth hardwood forests for non-use (FFH) Agriculture –No C loss from soils –Subsidies: area-based, independent of product extra for renewables Product use –No organic material in landfills: complete waste incineration (assumed: 80%)

6. Elements of study Cropland Incineration Long-lived products Short-lived products Consumption / Decay Landfill Afforestation Food Decay on site Forest Energy Timber Conservation Recycling / reuse Original land usePurpose Products

7. Cropland: a hectare of cereals Food only Food + straw Set-aside –Annuals –Poplar –Afforestation

8. Forestry: a hectare of beech or spruce Land use decisions –Continue timber production –Switch to bioenergy –Sequester carbon on-site: conservation 3 levels of productivity 3 levels of accessibility (slope)

9. C stocks: forest

10. C stocks: cropland

11. C stocks: Timing matters! Trade-off between fast accumulation and large accumulation

12. Fossil C substitution Combined heat and power plant; natural gas Heat plant; light heating oil Power plant; lignite Regional substitution effectiveness in Thuringia Winter wheat, whole crop 0.360.540.750.49 Spruce, slash 0.450.650.890.61 Scaling fraction 0.270.110.17 t fossil-C saved per t bioenergy-C

13. Climate effects in forestry C stocks in soil, biomass & products C stocks + substitution Mean C benefits over 150 years (t C/ha) 311 229 226 311 246 262 0 100 200 300 400 500 time255075100125 Years C stocks + cumulative C substitution, tC/ha Spruce for products Spruce for energy Spruce for sequestration Spruce for products Spruce for energy Spruce for sequestration Benefits by recycling

14. Climate effects in cropland Mean C stocks (t C/ha) over 150 years 168 98 43 28 0 100 200 300 400 500 time255075 Years C stocks + cumulative C substitution, tC/ha Wheat for food Straw for energy Poplar for energy Oak for products Wheat for food Straw for energy Poplar for energy Oak for products 303 153 43 168 First pulp, then energy

15. Forestry: What pays off most? without subsidies with subsidies spruce timber spruce conservation spruce energy spruce timber + conservation

16. Cropland: What pays off most? without subsidies with subsidies afforestation poplar food+straw afforestation

17. Concept of maximum climate benefits Conservation Timber forestry Bioenergy Agriculture Carbon stocks in ecosystem Productivity / accessibility Low High Land use intensity Land use priorities Black: Conservation Grey: Forestry White: Agriculture C sequestration prices C prices by substitution effectiveness

18. What is best? High C stocks: Conserve them High productivity: Use it effectively