Pulse Brain · Growing Health Evidence Index
Peer-reviewed

Land-Management Options for Greenhouse Gas Removal and Their Impacts on Ecosystem Services and the Sustainable Development Goals

Pete Smith, Justin Adams, David J. Beerling, Tim Beringer, Katherine Calvin, Sabine Fuss, Bronson W. Griscom, Nikolas Hagemann, Claudia Kammann, Florian Kraxner, Jan C. Minx, Alexander Popp, Phil Renforth, José Luis Vicente‐Vicente, Saskia Keesstra

Annual Review of Environment and Resources · 2019

Read source ↗ All evidence

Summary

Land-management options for greenhouse gas removal (GGR) include afforestation or reforestation (AR), wetland restoration, soil carbon sequestration (SCS), biochar, terrestrial enhanced weathering (TEW), and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). We assess the opportunities and risks associated with these options through the lens of their potential impacts on ecosystem services (Nature's Contributions to People; NCPs) and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). We find that all land-based GGR options contribute positively to at least some NCPs and SDGs. Wetland restoration and SCS almost exclusively deliver positive impacts. A few GGR options, such as afforestation, BECCS, and biochar potentially impact negatively some NCPs and SDGs, particularly when implement

Source type
Peer-reviewed study
DOI
10.1146/annurev-environ-101718-033129
Catalogue ID
BFmokjo7hj-eqamwq
Pulse AI · ask about this record

Dig deeper with Pulse AI.

Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.