Biodiversity loss threatens human well-being.

The diversity of life on Earth is dramatically affected by Human alterations of ecosystems. Compelling evidence now shows that the reverse is also true: biodiversity in the broad snsse affects the properties of ecosystem and, therefore, the benefits that humans obtain from them. In this article, we provide a synthesis of the most crucial messages emerging from the latest scientific literature and international assessments of the role of biodiversity in ecosystem services and human well- being. Human societies have beeb built on biodiversity. Many activities indispensable for human subsistence lead to biodiversity loss, and this trend is ikely to continue in the future. We clearly benefit from the diversity of organisms that we have learned to use for medicines, food, fibers, and other renwable resources. In addition, biodiversity has always been an integral part of the human experience and there are many moral reasons to preserve it for its own sake. What has been less recognized is that biodiversity also influences human well- being, including the access to water and basic materials for a satifactory life, and security in the face of environmental change, through its effects on the ecosystem processes that lie at the core of the Earth´s most vital life support system.Fil: Díaz, Sandra Myrna. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; ArgentinaFil: Fargione, Joseph. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; Argentina. University Of New Mexico; Estados UnidosFil: Chapin III, Francis Stuart. University Of Alaska; Estados UnidosFil: Tilman, David. University of Minnesota; Estados Unido

Development by Design: Mitigating Wind Development's Impacts on Wildlife in Kansas

Wind energy, if improperly sited, can impact wildlife through direct mortality and habitat loss and fragmentation, in contrast to its environmental benefits in the areas of greenhouse gas, air quality, and water quality. Fortunately, risks to wildlife from wind energy may be alleviated through proper siting and mitigation offsets. Here we identify areas in Kansas where wind development is incompatible with conservation, areas where wind development may proceed but with compensatory mitigation for impacts, and areas where development could proceed without the need for compensatory mitigation. We demonstrate that approximately 10.3 million ha in Kansas (48 percent of the state) has the potential to provide 478 GW of installed capacity while still meeting conservation goals. Of this total, approximately 2.7 million ha would require no compensatory mitigation and could produce up to 125 GW of installed capacity. This is 1,648 percent higher than the level of wind development needed in Kansas by 2030 if the United States is to get 20 percent of its electricity from wind. Projects that avoid and offset impacts consistent with this analysis could be awarded “Green Certification.” Certification may help to expand and sustain the wind industry by facilitating the completion of individual projects sited to avoid sensitive areas and protecting the industry's reputation as an ecologically friendly source of electricity

The role of plant species in biomass production and response to elevated CO 2 and N

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/72902/1/j.1461-0248.2003.00467.x.pd

Estimates of present and future flood risk in the conterminous United States

Past attempts to estimate rainfall-driven flood risk across the US either have incomplete coverage, coarse resolution or use overly simplified models of the flooding process. In this paper, we use a new 30m resolution model of the entire conterminous US with a 2D representation of flood physics to produce estimates of flood hazard, which match to within 90% accuracy the skill of local models built with detailed data. These flood depths are combined with exposure datasets of commensurate resolution to calculate current and future flood risk. Our data show that the total US population exposed to serious flooding is 2.6–3.1 times higher than previous estimates, and that nearly 41 million Americans live within the 1% annual exceedance probability floodplain (compared to only 13 million when calculated using FEMA flood maps). We find that population and GDP growth alone are expected to lead to significant future increases in exposure, and this change may be exacerbated in the future by climate change

Natural climate solutions for the United States

Limiting climate warming t

Expanding the soy moratorium to Brazil's Cerrado

The Cerrado biome in Brazil is a tropical savanna and an important global biodiversity hot spot. Today, only a fraction of its original area remains undisturbed, and this habitat is at risk of conversion to agriculture, especially to soybeans. Here, we present the first quantitative analysis of expanding the Soy Moratorium (SoyM) from the Brazilian Amazon to the Cerrado biome. The SoyM expansion to the Cerrado would prevent the direct conversion of 3.6 million ha of native vegetation to soybeans by 2050. Nationally, this would require a reduction in soybean area of approximately 2%. Relative risk of future native vegetation conversion for soybeans would be driven by the Brazilian domestic market, China, and the European Union. We conclude that, to preserve the Cerrado's biodiversity and ecosystem services, urgent action is required, including a zero native vegetation conversion agreement such as the SoyM

Natural climate solutions

Our thanks for inputs by L. Almond, A. Baccini, A. Bowman, S. CookPatton, J. Evans, K. Holl, R. Lalasz, A. Nassikas, M. Spalding, M. Wolosin, and expert elicitation respondents. Our thanks for datasets developed by the Hansen lab and the NESCent grasslands working group (C. Lehmann, D. Griffith, T. M. Anderson, D. J. Beerling, W. Bond, E. Denton, E. Edwards, E. Forrestel, D. Fox, W. Hoffmann, R. Hyde, T. Kluyver, L. Mucina, B. Passey, S. Pau, J. Ratnam, N. Salamin, B. Santini, K. Simpson, M. Smith, B. Spriggs, C. Still, C. Strömberg, and C. P. Osborne). This study was made possible by funding from the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation. Woodbury was supported in part by USDA-NIFA Project 2011-67003-30205 Data deposition: A global spatial dataset of reforestation opportunities has been deposited on Zenodo (https://zenodo.org/record/883444). This article contains supporting information online at www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1710465114/-/DCSupplemental.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Energy Sprawl or Energy Efficiency: Climate Policy Impacts on Natural Habitat for the United States of America

Concern over climate change has led the U.S. to consider a cap-and-trade system to regulate emissions. Here we illustrate the land-use impact to U.S. habitat types of new energy development resulting from different U.S. energy policies. We estimated the total new land area needed by 2030 to produce energy, under current law and under various cap-and-trade policies, and then partitioned the area impacted among habitat types with geospatial data on the feasibility of production. The land-use intensity of different energy production techniques varies over three orders of magnitude, from 1.9–2.8 km2/TW hr/yr for nuclear power to 788–1000 km2/TW hr/yr for biodiesel from soy. In all scenarios, temperate deciduous forests and temperate grasslands will be most impacted by future energy development, although the magnitude of impact by wind, biomass, and coal to different habitat types is policy-specific. Regardless of the existence or structure of a cap-and-trade bill, at least 206,000 km2 will be impacted without substantial increases in energy efficiency, which saves at least 7.6 km2 per TW hr of electricity conserved annually and 27.5 km2 per TW hr of liquid fuels conserved annually. Climate policy that reduces carbon dioxide emissions may increase the areal impact of energy, although the magnitude of this potential side effect may be substantially mitigated by increases in energy efficiency. The possibility of widespread energy sprawl increases the need for energy conservation, appropriate siting, sustainable production practices, and compensatory mitigation offsets