Status and opportunities for improvement in greenhouse gas emission inventories for the cattle production in Latin America and the Caribbean region: A perspective

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) provides the reference for national greenhouse gas emission (GHG) inventories towards standardized, accurate, measurable, and comparable National Inventory Reports (NIR). For compliance with the 1.5⁰C commitments under the Paris Agreement, most countries have made efforts to improve their inventory methods to tier 2 or 3. However, some relevant activities within Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) countries, such as enteric methane emissions and methane and nitrous oxide emissions from cattle manure management are still estimated using tier 1 methods, which leads to a high uncertainty due to the importance of livestock emissions in the national totals for these countries. In this context, reducing the uncertainty in GHG inventories would not only improve the accuracy of national reports but it would also provide solid baselines for national mitigation initiatives e.g., Nationally Determined Contributions under the Paris Agreement, and accurate tools to venture into carbon bonds or payments for ecosystem services. The aim of this study was to review the status of national GHG inventories specifically for these three cattle emission categories in 11 LAC countries. We conducted a survey of GHG inventory experts in the 11 LAC countries, to identify the potential for improvement and the main barriers to achieving this. Despite some initiatives, there is still a large potential for reducing the uncertainty in LAC national GHG emission estimates, the barriers to or solutions can be categorized as technical, policy, and institutional issues. However, improving the GHG inventories of LAC countries, specifically for cattle emissions, is feasible in the medium term, as long as multilateral actions are considered, coherently linked under a comparable and verifiable methodology and including a commitment by countries to invest public funds in relevant research and innovations

Strategies to achieve the GHG Mitigation Goals of the livestock sector in Latin America

Livestock production is a fundamental source of income and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Latin American countries. 20 percent of the region's emissions come from agriculture, 70 percent of which comes from livestock. There are several management and technology options with enteric methane mitigation potential that have been evaluated and their scale is expected to contribute to achieving the GHG emission reduction targets under the Paris Agreement. These technologies include management of the animal diet, reproductive control, administration of supplements, and reduction of the age at slaughter, among others. However, widespread adoption of promising mitigation options remains limited, raising questions about whether the planned emission reduction targets are achievable. Using the results of local studies, we have explored the mitigation potentials of currently proposed management technologies and practices to mitigate enteric methane emissions from livestock production systems in Latin American countries with the highest emissions. We then discuss the barriers to adopting innovations that significantly reduce enteric methane emissions from livestock and the main changes in policies and practices necessary to raise national ambitions in high-emission countries. Drawing on today's latest science and thought, we take our perspective to an inclusive approach and reimagine how the academic, research, business and public policy sectors can support and incentivize the changes necessary to raise the level of ambition and achieve goals of sustainable development, taking into account actions from the farm to the national scale. Some improvements identified and that need to be made are improving access to information through effective technology transfer plans, access to financial products by small producers, and establishing seed multiplication systems for fodder materials

Estado actual y consideraciones sobre la participación del sector agropecuario en el marco de los acuerdos globales de cambio climático- Labor Conjunta de Koronivia

Walter Oyhantcabal, Director de la Unidad de Agricultura & Cambio Climático Ministerio de Ganadería, Agricultura y Pesca de Uruguay Kelly Witkowski Gerente del Programa de Cambio Climático y Recursos Naturales del Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura Rodrigo C. A. Lima, Director General de Agroicone Claudia Vallejo, representante SECACObjetivo general: Apoyar la participación del sector agropecuario en los debates y espacios internacionales sobre agricultura y cambio climático es vísperas de la COP26

Rumbo a la COP28 de la CMNUCC: ¿Cómo ha avanzado la agricultura en las negociaciones?

Participantes: Kathya Fajardo Torres, moderadora. Lloyd Day, subdirector general del IICA. Walter Oyhantcabal, asesor en temas de acción climática. Carlos Ruiz Garvia, doctor en agricultura. Ricardo Montero López, Coordinador Técnico Regional de la Secretaría Ejecutiva del Consejo Agropecuario Centroamericano.Este es un Webinar sobre el avance de la agricultura en las negociaciones para encaminarse rumbo a la COP 28

The petrologic and petrochronologic record of progressive vs polyphase deformation: Opening the analytical toolbox

The concepts of progressive and polyphase deformation have been widely applied by structural geologists to explain complexly deformed rocks, particularly for ductile conditions. Interpreting complex structural patterns as the result of progressive deformation is mainly based on structural and kinematic evidence, applying the Ockham's razor principle: single-phase progressive deformation is the simplest and thus most plausible explanation in many cases. Processes such as strain partitioning and localization are commonly considered to explain such patterns. In this contribution, guidelines to distinguish between progressive and polyphase deformation processes are presented, mainly based on a critical discussion of advantages and pitfalls of P-T-D-X-t (pressure – temperature – deformation – composition – time) data. Such information not only allows for a robust reconstruction on the timing and rates at which deformation operates, but also provides insights into the progressive or polyphase evolution of pressure-temperature conditions and fluid flow. For example, complex structural patterns are common in transpressional and transtensional settings, particularly (but not only) for non-steady progressive deformation, which seems to be the rule in nature. Consequently, assessing the structural and microstructural context is a must, because analytical data commonly record only distinct stages in the protracted evolution of deformation. CPO data are useful to disentangle complex structural histories, particularly in the case of changing deformation mechanisms and related conditions. For petrochronology, it is thus highly relevant to understand equilibrium conditions and mechanisms of intracrystalline deformation and (re)crystallization of dated minerals, in order to properly link the obtained ages with specific deformation stages and mineral reactions. In a similar way, structural facies characterization is critical to interpret geochronologic data linked to ductile and brittle deformation. Though poorly explored, microstructural information of fluid inclusion data is a valuable tool to understand the role of fluids in deformation-assisted settings. The recognition of phases is ultimately related to their tectonic significance and, therefore, may not be easy in cases of overlapping tectonic processes (e.g., subduction during a post-collisional phase) and transitional stages that may not necessarily imply a dramatic change in the deformation pattern (e.g., post-orogenic collapse and intracontinental rifting).Fil: Oriolo, Sebastián. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Instituto de Geociencias Básicas, Aplicadas y Ambientales de Buenos Aires. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Geociencias Básicas, Aplicadas y Ambientales de Buenos Aires; ArgentinaFil: Schulz, Bernhard. No especifíca;Fil: Hueck, Mathias. Universität Göttingen; AlemaniaFil: Oyhantcabal, Pedro. Universidad de la República; UruguayFil: Heidelbach, Florian. University of Bayreuth; AlemaniaFil: Sosa, Graciela. Universität Göttingen; AlemaniaFil: van den Kerkhof, Alfons. Universität Göttingen; AlemaniaFil: Wemmer, Klaus. Universität Göttingen; AlemaniaFil: Fossen, Haakon. University of Bergen; NoruegaFil: Druguet, Elena. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona; EspañaFil: Walter, Jens. Universität Göttingen; AlemaniaFil: Cavalcante, Carolina. Universidade Federal do Paraná; BrasilFil: Siegesmund, Siegfried. Universität Göttingen; Alemani