Climate change has brought with it a raft of terms that, unless you’re involved in the field, are unlikely to be common knowledge. To co-incide with the release of The Organic Answer to Climate Change, I thought it might be useful to provide a glossary of commonly used climate change terms. Even though the list is by no means complete it does provide a decent lead into the topic. Like it or not, it looks like we’re all bound to hear a lot more about climate change in the years to come. If you’re keen to learn more right now, you might like to check out Dr Glen Barry’s Climate Ark Blog and also the Climate Change Action blog. Both of these are excellent resources. In the mean time, here are those terms…

Abatement – Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, or enhancement of greenhouse gas removal from the atmosphere by sinks.

Afforestation – Planting of new forests on lands not recently forested.

Biosequestration – The removal of atmospheric carbon dioxide through biological processes, for example, photosynthesis in plants and trees.

Carbon capture and storage – Technology to capture and store greenhouse gas emissions from energy production or industrial processes. Captured greenhouse gases have the potential to be stored in a variety of geological sites.

Carbon – Carbon refers to the six major greenhouse gases.

Carbon dioxide – A naturally occurring gas; it is also a by-product of burning fossil fuels and biomass, other industrial processes and land-use changes. It is the principal anthropogenic greenhouse gas that affects the earth’s temperature.

Carbon dioxide equivalent – A standard measure that takes account of the different global warming potentials of greenhouse gases and expresses the cumulative effect in a common unit.

Carbon footprint – A measure of the greenhouse gas emissions attributable to an activity; it is commonly used at an individual, household or business level.

Carbon market – A generic term for a trading system in which countries, organizations and individuals buy or sell units of greenhouse gas emissions in an effort to meet limits on emissions.

Carbon offset – carbon offsets represent reductions in greenhouse gases relative to a business-as-usual baseline. Carbon offsets are tradeable and often used to negate (or offset) all or part of another entities emissions.

Carbon sequestration – The long-term storage of carbon dioxide in forests, soils, oceans or underground. Studies have found that organic farming has the capacity to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and store as soil carbon.

Carbon sinks – Natural or man-made systems that absorb and store carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, including trees, plants and the oceans.

Climate change – As defined by the UNFCCC, a change in climate that is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and that is in addition to natural climate variability over comparable time periods.

Cogeneration – The production of two useful forms of energy such as high temperature heat (for hot water or space heating) and electricity from the same process. Also known as combined heat and power.

Deforestation – The conversion of forested land to an alternative, non-forest use.

Emissions – The release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

Greenhouse effect – The trapping of heat by naturally occurring heat-retaining atmospheric gases (water vapour, carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane and ozone) that keeps the earth about 60 degrees farenheit warmer than if these gases did not exist.

Greenhouse gases – Gases that cause global warming and climate change. The major greenhouse gases (GHGs) are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride.

Hydrochlorofluorocarbons – Compounds containing hydrogen, chlorine, fluorine and carbon atoms. Although ozone depleting substances, they are less potent at destroying stratospheric ozone than CFCs.

Hydrofluorocarbons – Compounds containing only hydrogen, fluorine and carbon atoms. They were introduced as alternatives to ozone-depleting substances in serving many industrial, commercial and personal needs. HFCs are emitted as by-products of industrial processes and are also used in manufacturing.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – Established in 1988, the IPCC surveys worldwide scientific and technical literature and publishes assessment reports that are widely recognised as the most credible existing sources of information on climate change. The IPCC also works on methodologies and responds to specific requests from the UNFCCC’s decision-making bodies.

Kyoto Protocol – An international treaty negotiated under the auspices of the UNFCCC. It enetered into force in 2005. Among other things, the Protocol sets binding targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by individual developed countries to be met within the first commitment period of 2008-12.

Low-emissions technology – Technology which produces a product with minimal greenhouse gas emissions. The term is commonly used to refer to power generation technologies (such as renewable, nuclear and clean coal generation), but applies equally to other sectors including transport and agriculture.

Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) – A group of artificial chemicals comprising only carbon and fluorine. These chemicals were introduced as alternatives, along with hydrofluorocarbons, to the ozone-depleting substances. PFCs are also emitted as by-products of industrial processes and are also used in manufacturing.

Reforestation – Conversion of land used for purposes other than forestry to forested land.

Sequestration – The removal of atmospheric carbon dioxide, either through biological processes (for example, photosynthesis in plants and trees).

UNFCCC – United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. An international treaty adopted after the Rio Earth Summit in 1992 and aimed at achieving the stabilisation of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.

Agriculture is not only affected by climate change, but also contributes significantly to it. Greenhouse gas emissions from all sectors related to agriculture are estimated to contribute up to 30% of all greenhouse gas emissions. According to Dr. Timothy J. LaSalle, CEO The Rodale Institute, “…agriculture is an undervalued and underestimated climate change tool that could be one of the most powerful strategies in the fight against global warming”. Unfortunately, conventional agricultural practices exacerbate rather than alleviate the effects of climate change. Organic agriculture on the other hand – with its emphasis on closed nutrient cycles, biodiversity, and effective soil management – appears to have the capacity to mitigate and even reverse the effects of climate change.

Conventional agriculture contributes to global warming

Many scientists now believe that conventional agricultural practices are unsustainable. Unlike organic agriculture, which emphasises effective soil management and biodiversity, conventional agriculture (also referred to as intensive agriculture) relies on farming a single crop year after year. To overcome the imbalance imposed upon a conventional farm’s ecosystem, harmful agents, such as pesticides and synthetic nitrogen fertilizers are used.

In 2005, global nitrogen fertilizer consumption (produced by fossil energy) was 90.86 million tonnes (IFA, 2007; http://www.fertilizer.org/). It takes roughly 90 million tonnes of fossil fuel (diesel equivalents) to produce this nitrogen fertilizer. This alone represents about 1% of global fossil energy consumption.

The consequence of conventional farming’s ecological imbalance is a decline in soil organic matter, soil structure, fertility, microbial and faunal biodiversity. Combine these impacts with the nutrient overload that ultimately ends up in waterways, deforestation, and overgrazing that occurs due to changes in land use, and it’s not difficult to see why many are now stating that conventional agriculture represents an unsustainable long-term option.

But from a climate change perspective, it is the loss of carbon from intensively farmed soils that is of most concern. Carbon is lost to the soil through mineralization, erosion (water and wind driven) and overgrazing.

Soil testing conducted throughout the United States over the past sixty years indicates that soils, which in the 1950s were composed of up to 20 percent carbon, now contain only 1- and 2-percent carbon. This phenomenon is widespread and is routinely observed in soils that have been conventionally farmed. It is now understood that intensive agriculture breaks down soil carbon into carbon dioxide. When released into the atmosphere, this carbon dioxide contributes significantly to global warming.

Organic farming practices mitigate climate change

In contrast, organic agriculture exhibits the potential to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. Apart from being self-sufficient in nitrogen, organic farming has been found to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide by pulling it from the air and storing it within the soil as carbon. In a major study undertaken by the Rodale Institute, which analysed 30 years of soil carbon data, organic farming has been found capable of substantially mitigating the impacts of global warming.

While organic farmers have long understood the importance of establishing and maintaining healthy soils, it now appears that their understanding and emphasis on soil is set to become even more important than could reasonably have been envisaged.

Locking carbon in the soil

Researchers have found that agricultural carbon sequestration has the potential to substantially offset the impacts of global warming. The Rodale Institute’s Farming Systems Trial – the longest-running side-by-side comparison of organic and conventional farming systems in the United States, has found that organic farming methods such as the use of cover crops, composting and crop rotation dramatically alter the carbon storage capacity of arable lands, building soil “humic” substances (also referred to as organic matter) that remain as stable carbon compounds for centuries.

The Rodale study found that organic systems showed an increase of almost 30 percent in soil carbon over 27 years, while conventional systems showed no significant increases in soil carbon over the same period.

Coping with the future

The OECD and Stern Review project that if no action is taken, concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere could reach 2 degrees Celsius higher than their pre-industrial levels by as early as 2035. The consequences of a 2 degree Celsius temperature increase would be catastrophic for millions of people. Death, injury, dislocation due to flooding, fire, disease, impaired water quality, species extinction and reduced agricultural yields are considered likely under such conditions. Some of the poorest countries in the world, such as those located in tropical and sub-tropical climes, are likely to be the hardest hit.

There are a number of factors indicating that organic agriculture is far more future proof than conventional agriculture.

Organic farmers apply traditional skills and knowledge. Rather than placing blind reliance on petroleum intensive agricultural inputs, organic farmers apply practical knowledge, observation, personal experience and intuition. This enables them to get the best out of complex agro-ecosystems. They are adept at breeding locally adjusted seeds and livestock, producing on-farm fertilizers (compost, manure, and green manure) and at devising relatively inexpensive natural pesticides.

By preserving soil fertility, in addition to maintaining – and even increasing – the quantity of organic matter in soil, organic farms are more capable of maintaining productivity during climatic extremes culminating in drought, irregular rainfall, floods, and elevated temperatures. Extensive research (Mader et al., 2002) (Lotter et al. 2003) has concluded that soils under organic management retain significantly more rainwater due to the “sponge-like” properties of trapped organic matter.

Conclusion

Agricultural production in most parts of the world will face less predictable weather conditions to those which were experienced during the intensification of agriculture over the last century. Intensive agriculture was, and remains, a short-sighted option. Organic agriculture is fast emerging as the only sustainable long-term approach to food production. Its emphasis on recycling techniques, biodiversity, low external input and high level output strategies make it an ideal replacement for the petroleum intensive agricultural methods that are currently contributing to global warming.

Resources

Australian scientists have found that fish exposed to sub-lethal concentrations of endosulfan and chlorpyrifos showed significant reductions in the ability to survive in warmer waters. Both endosulfan and chlorpyrifos are commonly used in cotton, horticulture and sugar cane production.

The study published in Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry predicts that global warming will make fish more susceptible to dying from pesticide-contaminated water. According to the study affected fish displayed “erratic swimming…, uncoordinated movement with body quivering, rolling over on sides or back” and loss of the ability to swim upright.

Combine this with the strain already imposed on global fish stocks as a consequence of over-fishing by commercial operators and it’s not difficult to envisage a future without many popular fish varieties.

So, what exactly are endosulfan and chlorpyrifos?

According to the Pesticide Action Network of North America, endosulfan is an antiquated insecticide. Here are some facts about endosulfan:

• It is highly toxic and persistent
• It has been banned in the European Union
• It is used extensively throughout rural U.S., India, China, and many other countries.
• Studies indicate that it endangers the health and wellbeing of children, farmworkers, and those living proximate to affected areas
• Poisoning symptoms include headaches, nausea, vomiting, seizures, and in extreme cases unconsciousness and even death
• It is a suspected endocrine disruptor, with low dose exposure while in the womb being linked to autism, male reproductive harm, and birth defects.

Much like endosulfan, chlorpyrifos is a dangerous yet widely used pesticide. Here are some facts about chlorpyrifos:

• It is a neurotoxic organophosphate insecticide, acaricide and miticide used to control foliage and soil-borne insect pests on a variety of food and feed crops.
• About 20 million pounds of chlorpyrifos are applied in the U.S. every year according to the EPA, with about half for agricultural uses and half for residential uses
• Until recently it was used extensively in homes for pest control (mostly as a termiticide and in pet flea collars)
• It causes cholinesterase inhibition in humans which can result in nausea, dizziness, confusion, respiratory paralysis and even death.

 
What can be done?
Studies such as this are an important reminder of the need to remove dangerous pesticides from our food chain. Apart from the obvious potentially adverse health consequences associated with pesticide use, their persistent nature means that many of them will continue to wreak environmental havoc long after their initial application. Here are some steps to take if you’re keen to remove pesticides from our food chain:

• Support organic agriculture
• Join PANNA.
• Write to your local politician requesting that endosulfan and chlorpyrifos be banned from use.