Fossil Fuels, Carbon Dioxide Human Environmental Well-Being lndur M. Goklany Partl Human Well-Being GO three warmest years an CL 555 All widens Images r-lews snapping Mere Settings Tnels #13::th IZIIZIIZI setends'} {renal I. I nut? Hr'lwcr- Teresa-rum? Eur-em. Warmest years Flank Tear ?tnemalyr 1 ans 1-59 2 ems 1.s2 M, .1 3 2:114 1-33 4 sum 1-25 a more runs Instrumental temperature - Wikipedia nstrumenta _temperatu re_recerd Human Progress & CO2 Emissions, AD 1‒2015 Update based on World Bank (2017); Le Quéré et al. (2016), via CDIAC Human Progress & CO2 Emissions, AD 1750‒2015 Update based on World Bank (2017); Le Quéré et al. (2016), via CDIAC Average growth rates (%) Population, Prosperity, Life Expectancy, & CO2 emissions, AD 1‒2014 AD 1‒1000 (%) AD 1000‒ 1750 (%) AD 1750‒ 2014 (%) Population 0.02 0.14 0.85 Prosperity (GDP per capita) 0.00 0.05 0.99 Life 0.01 0.01 0.39 Sources: Angus Maddison, Statistics on World Population, GDP and Per Capita GDP, 1–2008 AD, University expectancy of Groningen, 2010, http://www.ggdc.net/MADDISON/Historical_Statistics/vertical-file_02-2010.xls; World Bank, World Development Indicators 2011, http://databank.worldbank.org/; T. A. Boden, G. Marland, and CO2 3.12 R. J. Andres, Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions, emissions http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/overview_2008.html. Living longer and healthier, but CO2 is going up! Life expectancy in 1950 (unadjusted) (yrs) Health-adjusted life expectancy – 2000 (yrs) Health-adjusted life expectancy – 2015 (yrs) China 41 64.6 68.5 India 32 54.2 59.6 USA 68 67.2 69.1 World 49 Atmospheric CO2 level (ppm) 311 63.1 370 Sources: Maddisson (2001), p.30; ESRL Mauna Loa data, ftp:// aftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/products/trends/co2/co2_annmean_mlo.txt; WHO (2016), http://gamapserver.who.int/gho/interactive_charts/mbd/hale_1/atlas.html . 401 Global Poverty, 1820?2013 90 2,000 an i? 1,300 En - 1:10? L000 an 300 percent an ?percent{PDvcalnet} Em 2? 4m headcnunt {Elfdaw 1935 2002}! RH 10 headcnunt {$1.90fday; 2011 5; F'Dvcalnet 201?]! 1320 1340 1360 1330 1900 1920 1940 1930 1930 2000 2020 Headcou nt (in millions) Sources: Morrison Bourginon (2002), World Bank (2017) Global Hunger C02 Emissions, 3393:2035 1200 20 - 13 1000 - - 40:: E- undernourished n' EDD 9:3 undern?urished 4 glubalCDE emissions {Gt} 2 I I I I 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 96 undernnurished glnhal C02 emissions (Gt, (2) Sources: FAO (2016); Le Qu?r? et al. (2016), via CDIAC Trends: CO2 Emissions & Various Measures of Human Well-Being, 1960‒2015 Sources: World Bank (2017); Le Quéré et al. (2016), via CDIAC Global deaths & deaths rates from extreme weather events, 1900‒2015 Sources: Updated from Goklany (2009) using EM-DAT (2017) and World Development Indicators (2017) Global malaria death rates, 1900‒2015 Sources: 1900-1997: World Health Report 1999, Chapter 4; 2000-2015: World Malaria Report 2016 Planet is greener, mainly from FF related factors (70% C02, 9% N- QOL rlima'I-g rhanng\ Relative change in LAI due to 002 fertilization during 1982?2009 -Figure 1. same: pattern er" refan've change due e: E0: rertr'?a'anbn during 1932 The relative dilarge a: each pine! 1's een'ved ?'em dale raeb af?ne rhaemer?efi?l! driven by elevated abnesphenr CD2 be the 23-year average verue ef emulated by made! eneenib?e mean wider scenarlie 51. ?erce: ?gure 51.2, sugefemenary In?rmanbn ?'ern Ehu er (?2015) Earth is more productive [14% increase in gross productivity, 1982‒2011] Zhu & Myneni (2014), A Greener Earth?, Global vegetation monitoring and modelling, Avignon, France, February 3‒7, 2014. Conclusion – Part I As CO2 is increasing: • Global population is becoming wealthier. Poverty is falling • Fewer people go hungry. Malnutrition is dropping • People are healthier and, living longer • Deaths from extreme weather events are down • More people have safer water & better sanitation • Population continues to increase • The world is greener and more productive • Increases in agricultural and forest productivity create more space for Rest of Nature to coexist with humans Part II Fossil Fuels CO2 Reduce Habitat Conversion Biodiversity Losses Habitat Loss and Threats to Ecosystems & Biodiversity • Habitat conversion or “habitat loss” is generally recognized as the greatest current threat to ecosystems and biodiversity [see, e.g. Vié, J.-C. et al. (eds) 2009] • Agricultural activities are the major cause of habitat conversion Fossil fuels have forestalled habitat conversion, lowering risks to biodiversity, even as the demands of an expanding and wealthier population are being met How do fossil fuels reduce habitat conversion? Increase productivity of the entire food and agricultural system → Less habitat converted to cropland → More land for Rest of Nature → Reduced threat to ecosystems & biodiversity How have fossil fuels increased food & agricultural productivity? • Higher net yields on the farm (through nitrogen fertilizer, pesticides, irrigation, agricultural machinery, CO2 fertilization, nitrogen deposition) • Lower losses post-harvest and before crops/foods go to market shelves (via pest control, faster transport, refrigeration, plastic bags and containers) • Fewer losses at markets, stores, homes restaurants, etc., and all points in-between (e.g., refrigeration, plastic bags and containers) Farm machinery, pre-ICE era 16-horse combine. Whitman Co, Washington, circa 1938. Source: Library of Congress, via Rebecca Katzman, 13 Vintage Photos of Combines, Modern Farmer, August 8, 2014, Earth is greener, mainly from FF related factors (70% C02, 9% N-deposition, 8% climate change) Relative change in LAI due to 002 fertilization during 1982-2009 :14 Figure 1. ?nal? pattern ef refaeire change eva-?lf due E52 dunk-g 19.52? a: 3:195! The relative ?ange elf we: each give! is e?en'vee" ?'em bile raa'e af?ne theremenr driven by efe rated ameephen}: C02 the 23-year average melee 53" MI sham-Eaten" by made! ensemble mean under renamin- 51. grate: ?gure 512, sugafemenary m?u?ma?ien 2'er er (2915) The Earth is more productive [14% increase in gross productivity, 1982‒2011] Zhu & Myneni (2014), A Greener Earth?, Global vegetation monitoring and modelling, Avignon, France, February 3‒7, 2014. Global land biological productivity may be 5% higher now than in preindustrial times Source: IPCC AR5 WG2, Chapter 4, p. 293 Global Habitat Conversion to Agricultural Uses (1700–2012) Sources: Klein Goldewijk et al (2011); FAOSTAT (2015); Maddisson (2009). How much land have fossil fuels saved for the Rest of Nature? Calculation of Lower Bound Estimate of additional land needed to compensate for lost food, fiber & fuel production due to loss of fossil fuels:  Consider only subset of fossil fuel dependent technologies enhancing productivity: • Nitrogenous fertilizers • Synthetic pesticides • CO2 fertilization and nitrogen deposition  Assume productivity of additional cropland (on average) same as cropland currently in agricultural use (unlikely)  Ignore that much of irrigation uses FF-powered pumps  Ignore that FF have increased productivity of pasture land • Globally pastureland is 2 times cropland Other sources of underestimation of land needed to compensate for loss of FF Ignore that FFs have substituted for a variety of products that would otherwise divert land from the Rest of Nature: • FF-derived synthetic fibers account for over 70% of global fiber production • FF account for over 81% of Total Primary Energy Supply and would have to be replaced by lower energy-density renewables (unless nuclear becomes more popular) • Plastics and other materials obtained directly or indirectly via FF have displaced timber and other vegetal based materials Land saved by fossil fuels for Rest of Nature: Lower Bound Estimate for Cropland — 1  Nitrogenous fertilizers, mainly from natural gas via Haber-Bosch process. Responsible for 48% of global food production (Erisman et al. 2008), i.e., these fertilizers have increased production by 92%  Synthetic pesticides. Reduce losses in various food crops from 50–77% to 26–40% in the absence of any pesticides (Oerke 2006). Assuming non-synthetic pesticides are 50% as effective as synthetic pesticides implies the latter has increased production by 29%.  CO2 fertilization from increases in Atmospheric CO2 from 277 ppm (preindustrial) to 400 ppm (current) Land saved by fossil fuels for Rest of Nature: Lower Bound Estimate — 2 Cumulative increase in food production from above 3 factors = 174% To produce same quantity of food in the absence of fossil fuels: • Global cropland area would have to be increased from 1.6 billion hectares to 4.3 billion ha. • Increase = 20.4% of global land area (excluding Antarctica) • About the size of South America and Europe combined • FF have saved more land than ALL land conservation efforts globally (14.7%) by April, 2016 Effect on potential species extinctions from reduced habitat conversion • Barnosky et al. (2012) estimate that 43% of global terrestrial ecosystem has already been converted to human use • Absent FF, we would need to convert at least 21% more land to agricultural uses to sustain humanity at its current level — total of at least 64% • The added land conversion would have put ecosystems and species at greater risk. • Barnosky et al.’s “tipping point” paper in Nature postulates a tipping point if land conversion exceeds 50%. We would already have gone past that postulated tipping point! Effect of increased habitat conversion on magnitude of potential species extinctions • Species at risk of extinction would have increased by 75–80%, based on the species-area relationship (SAR) (crude estimate) Summary —1 • Global ecosystem productivity has increased at least 14% since 1982, mainly from indirect effects of FF usage • FF are responsible for at least 63% of global food production Summary —2 If there were no fossil fuels: • We would need at least an additional 2.7 billion hectares or 20% of global land area just to meet human needs (a gross underestimate) • The postulated tipping point for global land conversion (at 50%) would have been exceeded • Potential species extinction would have increased over 70% Conclusion – Part II • Fossil fuels have saved much of the rest of nature from humanity • Without them, other species would have been in greater jeopardy Take Aways • Fossil fuels allow the Rest of Nature and Humanity to Co-exist • Without fossil fuels, humanity would be living in poverty, starving, and living shorter and unhealthier lives. Back-up slides Contributions of FF to economic growth and human well-being • Increases land productivity: – Increases available food – Reduces hunger – Improves health – Enhances human capital • Substitutes for human and animal labor – Frees up human time and energy to pursue other activities – Enhances human capital Contributions of FF to economic growth and human well-being • Human capital – Electricity (67% worldwide from FF) “creates” more time at humanity’s disposal which allows individuals to accumulate human capital • Bulk of new technology powered directly or indirectly by energy [81% of global energy from FF] Agricultural Productivity, 1300‒2000 Source: N. B. J. Koning, et al., “Long-term global availability of food: continued abundance or new scarcity?” NJAS Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 55 (2008): 229–292 . E- wmzm??m 1