Quantifying the threat from ozone pollution to food

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 to be published in late September q How does O 3 damage crops? q By how much? q Which crops are sensitive? q Effects in N and S Europe q Case studies, including S Asia Pre-publication copies available ICP VEGETATION

Ozone indicators for vegetation O 3 conc. in air (e. g. AOT 40) Stomatal ozone flux (e. g. POD 6) Takes into account: • [O 3] in air • temperature • light • humidity (VPD) • soil moisture • plant development

Health vs vegetation indicators, 2000 SOMO 35 AOT 40 Ozone flux (POD 6)

Predicting impacts of ozone on food security Dose-response relationships from ozoneexposure experiments across Europe* Models of ozone transfer to vegetation and uptake by stomata (DO 3 SE – EMEP model) Crops: wheat and tomato Numbers represent “best estimates” Maps of ozone flux (POD 6) and crop production for 2000 National Emissions Scenario, current legislation used for 2000 and 2020 for EU 27+CH+NO * Mills et al, Atmospheric Environment (2011)

Quantifying impacts on wheat production Ozone flux (POD 6) in 2000 * Assumes adequate soil moisture Wheat production (2000)

Economic losses for wheat in Europe 2000 2020 Losses are in million Euro per 50 x 50 km grid square: 0 – 0. 01 – 0. 1 – 1. 0 – 2. 5 – 5. 0 >5 * Assumes adequate soil moisture available

Economic losses for wheat, highest 10 countries ICP VEGETATION

Effects on wheat in EU 27+CH+NO, NAT scenario 2000 Loss in value Loss in production Proportion of grid squares exceeding critical level 1 Area at risk of losses 2 3. 2 billion Euro 2020 1. 96 billion Euro 26. 9 million t 16. 5 million t 84. 8 % 82. 2% 24. 5 million ha 1 In wheat-growing areas 2 Estimated for each grid square from the mean t/ha per country ICP VEGETATION

Quantifying impacts on Tomato production Ozone flux (POD 6) in 2000 *Irrigation assumed *squares with > 3 t production shown Tomato production (2000) ICP VEGETATION

Economic losses for Tomato in Europe 2000 2020 Economic loss in million Euro per 50 x 50 km grid square: 0 – 0. 01 – 0. 1 – 1. 0 – 2. 5 – 5. 0 >5 * Irrigation assumed, squares with > 3 t production shown

Economic losses for Tomato, highest 10 countries ICP VEGETATION

Effects on Tomato in EU 27+CH+NO, NAT scenario 2000 Loss in value Proportion of grid squares exceeding critical level Area at risk of losses* 1. 02 billion Euro 77. 8 % 0. 33 million ha 2020 0. 63 billion Euro 51. 3% 0. 23 million ha * Estimated for each grid square from the mean t/ha per country ICP VEGETATION

Next report: O 3 and C sequestration, including feedbacks to climate To be published, November, 2011 Ø Review of current knowledge O 3 Less CO 2 uptake Less C in roots Increased radiative forcing by CO 2 and O 3 Ø Impacts on carbon storage in grasslands and forests for 2000 and 2040, using climate and O 3 data from EMEP to run the: : (1) DO 3 SE model (2) JULES model (Sitch et al. , 2007. Nature) ICP VEGETATION

Future ICP Vegetation - EMEP Collaboration MSc-West We would benefit from: + Please! Ø New scenarios for ex-Post analysis – use in food security and C sequestration analysis Ø Inputs to forthcoming ecosystems services study (2013/14) Ø Further upgrading of EMEP model to reflect new developments in flux modelling Ø Further collaboration on development of methodology, including in EU-ECLAIRE project ICP VEGETATION

Future ICP Vegetation - EMEP Collaboration CIAM ØWe remain concerned that GAINS runs are based on health impacts (SOMO 35) alone. Vegetation (including impacts on food security and C sequestration) may remain unprotected in large areas of Europe. ØInclusion of flux-based methodology into next version of GAINS TFIAM ØWe welcome inputs and are happy to contribute as needed MSc-East ØFurther 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) ICP VEGETATION

SPARES

Summary of results Wheat Ø The area of medium-high ozone fluxes includes the main wheat growing areas in central and NW Europe Ø Economic losses in 2000 were predicted to be 3. 2 billion Euro Ø 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 Ø 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 Ø Economic losses in 2000 were predicted to be 1 billion Euro. Ø In 2020, ozone flux is predicted to decrease in the tomato growing areas, reducing economic losses to 0. 6 billion Euro.

AOT 40 -based economic impact assessment for wheat 2000 2020 Losses are in million Euro per 50 x 50 km grid square: 0 – 0. 01 – 0. 1 – 1. 0 – 2. 5 – 5. 0 >5

Quantifying impacts on wheat Ozone flux (POD 6) in 2000 AOT 40 in 2000

Wheat yield loss in 2000 AOT 40 POD 6 Losses are in million Euro per 50 x 50 km grid square: 0 – 0. 01 – 0. 1 – 1. 0 – 2. 5 – 5. 0 >5

Wheat: NAT Scenario, EU 27+CH+NO 2000 2020 POD 6 AOT 40 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

Grouping of crops by sensitivity of yield to ozone. Values in brackets represent the percentage decrease in yield at a 7 h mean ozone concentration of 60 ppb compared to that at 30 ppb. Sensitive Peas and beans (including peanut) (30) Sweet potato (28) Orange (27) Onion (23) Turnip (22) Plum (22) Lettuce (19) Wheat (18) Soybean (18) Moderately sensitive 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) Tolerant Strawberry (1) Oat (0) Broccoli (-5)

Flux method To predict impacts on food security we model ozone uptake by stomata using the Jarvis approach: gsto = gmax *[min(fphen, f. O 3)]* flight * max{fmin, (ftemp * f. VPD * f. SWP)} Species-specific value Separate functions for effects of phenology, ozone, light, temperature, VPD (humidity) and soil moisture (SWP) on stomatal conductance See Pleijel et al. , 2007, Atmos. Envt. 41, 3022, for further details