The potential of mitigation actions to limit global warming within 2 °C (ref. 1) might rely on the abundant supply of biomass for large-scale bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) that is assumed to scale up markedly in the future2,3,4,5. However, the detrimental effects of climate change on crop yields may reduce the capacity of BECCS and threaten food security6,7,8, thus creating an unrecognized positive feedback loop on global warming. We quantified the strength of this feedback by implementing the responses of crop yields to increases in growing-season temperature, atmospheric CO2 concentration and intensity of nitrogen (N) fertilization in a compact Earth system model9. Exceeding a threshold of climate change would cause transformative changes in social–ecological systems by jeopardizing climate stability and threatening food security. If global mitigation alongside large-scale BECCS is delayed to 2060 when global warming exceeds about 2.5 °C, then the yields of agricultural residues for BECCS would be too low to meet the Paris goal of 2 °C by 2200. This risk of failure is amplified by the sustained demand for food, leading to an expansion of cropland or intensification of N fertilization to compensate for climate-induced yield losses. Our findings thereby reinforce the urgency of early mitigation, preferably by 2040, to avoid irreversible climate change and serious food crises unless other negative-emission technologies become available in the near future to compensate for the reduced capacity of BECCS.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Subscribe to Nature+
Get immediate online access to Nature and 55 other Nature journal
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $3.90 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
Further material is available in the Supplementary Materials. Code and data used for our analyses are available on the GitHub repository: https://github.com/rongwang-fudan/OSCAR_Agriculture_Global.
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Paris Agreement - Status of Ratification https://unfccc.int/process/the-paris-agreement/status-of-ratification (2021).
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Masson-Delmotte, V. et al.) https://www.ipcc.ch/assessment-report/ar6/ (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2021).
Fuss, S. et al. Betting on negative emissions. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 850–853 (2014).
Rogelj, J. et al. Scenarios towards limiting global mean temperature increase below 1.5 °C. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 325–332 (2018).
Muratori, M. et al. EMF-33 insights on bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). Clim. Change 163, 1621–1637 (2020).
Lobell, D. B., Schlenker, W. & Costa-Roberts, J. Climate trends and global crop production since 1980. Science 333, 616–620 (2011).
Zhao, C. et al. Field warming experiments shed light on the wheat yield response to temperature in China. Nat. Commun. 7, 13530 (2016).
Su, Y., Gabrielle, B. & Makowski, D. The impact of climate change on the productivity of conservation agriculture. Nat. Clim. Change 11, 628–633 (2021).
Gasser, T. et al. The compact Earth system model OSCAR v2.2: description and first results. Geosci. Model Dev. 10, 271–319 (2017).
Meinshausen, M. et al. Realization of Paris Agreement pledges may limit warming just below 2 °C. Nature 604, 304–309 (2022).
Jones, M. B. & Albanito, F. Can biomass supply meet the demands of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)? Glob. Change Biol. 26, 5358–5364 (2020).
Creutzig, F. et al. Considering sustainability thresholds for BECCS in IPCC and biodiversity assessments. Glob. Change Biol. Bioenergy 13, 510–515 (2021).
Johansson, D. J. A. The question of overshoot. Nat. Clim. Change 11, 1021–1022 (2021).
Hasegawa, T. et al. Land-based implications of early climate actions without global net-negative emissions. Nat. Sustain. 4, 1052–1059 (2021).
Lenton, T. M. et al. Climate tipping points — too risky to bet against. Nature 575, 592–595 (2019).
van Vuuren, D. P. et al. Alternative pathways to the 1.5 °C target reduce the need for negative emission technologies. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 391–397 (2018).
Rickels, W., Merk, C., Reith, F., Keller, D. P. & Oschlies, A. (Mis)conceptions about modeling of negative emissions technologies. Environ. Res. Lett. 14, 104004 (2019).
Lu, X. et al. Gasification of coal and biomass as a net carbon-negative power source for environment-friendly electricity generation in China. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 8206–8213 (2019).
Xing, X. et al. Spatially explicit analysis identifies significant potential for bioenergy with carbon capture and storage in China. Nat. Commun. 12, 3159 (2021).
Schyns, J. F. et al. Limits to the world’s green water resources for food, feed, fiber, timber, and bioenergy. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 4893–4898 (2019).
Hanssen, S. V. et al. Biomass residues as twenty-first century bioenergy feedstock—a comparison of eight integrated assessment models. Clim. Change 163, 1569–1586 (2020).
Kukal, M. S. & Irmak, S. Climate-driven crop yield and yield variability and climate change impacts on the U.S. Great Plains agricultural production. Sci Rep. 8, 3450 (2018).
Yoshida, R. et al. Adaptation of rice to climate change through a cultivar-based simulation: a possible cultivar shift in eastern Japan. Clim. Res. 64, 275–290 (2015).
Spinoni, J. et al. How will the progressive global increase of arid areas affect population and land-use in the 21st century? Glob. Planet. Change 205, 103597 (2021).
Lade, S. J. et al. Human impacts on planetary boundaries amplified by Earth system interactions. Nat. Sustain. 3, 119–128 (2020).
Milkoreit, M. et al. Defining tipping points for social-ecological systems scholarship—an interdisciplinary literature review. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 033005 (2018).
Hausfather, Z. & Peters, G. Emissions – the ‘business as usual’ story is misleading. Nature 577, 618–620 (2020).
Potapov, P. et al. Global maps of cropland extent and change show accelerated cropland expansion in the twenty-first century. Nat. Food 3, 19–28 (2022).
Zhang, X. et al. Managing nitrogen for sustainable development. Nature 528, 51–59 (2015).
Fajardy, M. & Mac Dowell, N. Can BECCS deliver sustainable and resource efficient negative emissions? Energy Environ. Sci. 10, 1389–1426 (2017).
Friedlingstein, P. et al. Global carbon budget 2020. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 12, 3269–3340 (2020).
Moore, C. E. et al. The effect of increasing temperature on crop photosynthesis: from enzymes to ecosystems. J. Exp. Bot. 72, 2822–2844 (2021).
Asseng, S. et al. Rising temperatures reduce global wheat production. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 143–147 (2015).
Asseng, S. et al. The upper temperature thresholds of life. Lancet Planet. Health 5, e378–e385 (2021).
Ainsworth, E. A. & Long, S. P. What have we learned from 15 years of free-air CO2 enrichment (FACE)? A meta-analytic review of the responses of photosynthesis, canopy properties and plant production to rising CO2. New Phytol. 165, 351–372 (2005).
Wang, S. et al. Recent global decline of CO2 fertilization effects on vegetation photosynthesis. Science 370, 1295–1300 (2020).
Broberg, M. C. et al. Effects of elevated CO2 on wheat yield: non-linear response and relation to site productivity. Agronomy 9, 243 (2019).
Makowski, D. et al. A statistical analysis of three ensembles of crop model responses to temperature and CO2 concentration. Agric. For. Meteorol. 7, 483–493 (2015).
Wang, D. et al. Excessive nitrogen application decreases grain yield and increases nitrogen loss in a wheat–soil system. Acta Agric. Scand. B Soil Plant Sci. 61, 681–692 (2011).
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). FAOSTAT https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data (2021).
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Human Energy Requirements https://www.fao.org/3/y5686e/y5686e.pdf (2001).
Muratori, M. et al. Carbon capture and storage across fuels and sectors in energy system transformation pathways. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control. 57, 34–41 (2017).
Fajardy, M., Koeberle, A., MacDowell, N. & Fantuzzi, A. BECCS Deployment: A Reality Check. Grantham Institute Briefing paper No 28 https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/grantham-institute/public/publications/briefing-papers/BECCS-deployment---a-reality-check.pdf (2019).
Peñuelas, J. & Sardans, J. The global nitrogen-phosphorus imbalance. Science 375, 266–267 (2022).
Ye, Y. et al. Carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus accumulation and partitioning, and C:N:P stoichiometry in late-season rice under different water and nitrogen managements. PLoS One 9, e101776 (2014).
Gasser, T., Guivarch, C., Tachiiri, K., Jones, C. D. & Ciais, P. Negative emissions physically needed to keep global warming below 2 °C. Nat. Commun. 6, 7958 (2015).
Boas, I. et al. Climate migration myths. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 901–903 (2019).
Riahi, K. et al. Cost and attainability of meeting stringent climate targets without overshoot. Nat. Clim. Change 11, 1063–1069 (2021).
Drouet, L. et al. Net zero-emission pathways reduce the physical and economic risks of climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 11, 1070–1076 (2021).
Lenton, T. M. et al. Tipping elements in the Earth’s climate system. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 1786–1793 (2008).
van Zeist, W. J. et al. Are scenario projections overly optimistic about future yield progress? Glob. Environ. Change 64, 102120 (2020).
Lassaletta, L., Billen, G., Grizzetti, B., Anglade, J. & Garnier, J. 50 year trends in nitrogen use efficiency of world cropping systems: the relationship between yield and nitrogen input to cropland. Environ. Res. Lett. 9, 105011 (2014).
Thilakarathna, S. K. et al. Nitrous oxide emissions and nitrogen use efficiency in wheat: nitrogen fertilization timing and formulation, soil nitrogen, and weather effects. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 84, 1910–1927 (2020).
Wang, R., Saunders, H., Moreno-Cruz, J. & Caldeira, K. Induced energy-saving efficiency improvements amplify effectiveness of climate change mitigation. Joule 3, 2103–2119 (2019).
Li, B. et al. The contribution of China’s emissions to global climate forcing. Nature 531, 357–361 (2016).
Gasser, T. et al. Path-dependent reductions in CO2 emission budgets caused by permafrost carbon release. Nat. Geosci. 11, 830–835 (2018).
Fu, B. et al. Short-lived climate forcers have long-term climate impacts via the carbon–climate feedback. Nat. Clim. Change 10, 851–855 (2020).
Boden, T. A., Andres, R. J. & Marland, G. Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions (1751 - 2010) (V. 2013) https://doi.org/10.3334/CDIAC/00001_V2013 (Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), 2013).
European Commission, Joint Research Centre/Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. EDGAR - Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research, release EDGARv4.2 http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ (2011).
Lamarque, J. F. et al. Historical (1850–2000) gridded anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions of reactive gases and aerosols: methodology and application. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 10, 7017–7039 (2010).
van der Werf, G. R. et al. Global fire emissions and the contribution of deforestation, savanna, forest, agricultural, and peat fires (1997–2009). Atmos. Chem. Phys. 10, 11707–11735 (2010).
Hurtt, G. C. et al. Harmonization of land-use scenarios for the period 1500–2100: 600 years of global gridded annual land-use transitions, wood harvest, and resulting secondary lands. Clim. Change 109, 117–161 (2011).
Arora, V. K. et al. Carbon–concentration and carbon–climate feedbacks in CMIP5 Earth system models. J. Clim. 26, 5289–5314 (2013).
Li, W., Ciais, P., Makowski, D. & Peng, S. A global yield dataset for major lignocellulosic bioenergy crops based on field measurements. Sci. Data 5, 180169 (2018).
Erb, K. H. et al. Unexpectedly large impact of forest management and grazing on global vegetation biomass. Nature 553, 73–76 (2018).
Giglio, L., Randerson, J. T. & van der Werf, G. R. Analysis of daily, monthly, and annual burned area using the fourth generation global fire emissions database (GFED4). J. Geophys. Res. 118, 317–328 (2013).
Zhou, F. et al. A new high-resolution N2O emission inventory for China in 2008. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 8538–8547 (2014).
Davidson, E. A. The contribution of manure and fertilizer nitrogen to atmospheric nitrous oxide since 1860. Nat. Geosci. 2, 659–662 (2009).
Hoben, J. P. et al. Nonlinear nitrous oxide (N2O) response to nitrogen fertilizer in on-farm corn crops of the US Midwest. Glob. Change Biol. 17, 1140–1152 (2010).
Prather, M. et al. in Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis: Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Houghton, J. T. et al.) Ch. 4 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2001).
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). World Agricultural Production (WAP) Circular Dataset https://ipad.fas.usda.gov/countrysummary/Default.aspx?id=CH&crop=Barley (2021).
Gorelick, N. et al. Google Earth Engine: planetary-scale geospatial analysis for everyone. Remote Sens. Environ. 202, 18–27 (2017).
Cai, X., Zhang, X. & Wang, D. Land availability for biofuel production. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 334–339 (2011).
Bajželj, B. et al. The importance of food demand management for climate mitigation. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 924–929 (2014).
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Annual Population https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/OA (2020).
Dawson, I. G. & Johnson, J. E. Does size matter? A study of risk perceptions of global population growth. Risk Anal. 37, 65–81 (2017).
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Fertilizers by Nutrient https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/RFN (2020).
Lipinski, B. et al. Reducing Food Loss and Waste. Working Paper, Installment 2 of “Creating a Sustainable Food Future” https://www.wri.org/research/reducing-food-loss-and-waste (World Resources Institute, 2013).
Gustavsson, J., Cederberg, C., Sonnesson, U., van Otterdijk, R. & Meybeck, A. Global Food Losses and Food Waste https://www.fao.org/3/mb060e/mb060e00.htm (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2011).
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Food Balances (2014–2019) https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/FBS (2020).
Calories.info. Calories in Food: Calorie Chart Database https://www.calories.info/ (2021).
Kumar, A., Cameron, J. B. & Flynn, P. C. Biomass power cost and optimum plant size in western Canada. Biomass Bioenergy 24, 445–464 (2003).
Ghugare, S. B. & Tambe, S. S. Genetic programming based high performing correlations for prediction of higher heating value of coals of different ranks and from diverse geographies. J. Energy Inst. 90, 476–484 (2017).
Brander, M., Sood, A., Wylie, C., Haughton, A. & Lovell, J. Technical Paper | Electricity-specific Emission Factors for Grid Electricity https://ecometrica.com/assets/Electricity-specific-emission-factors-for-grid-electricity.pdf (2011).
Schakel, W., Meerman, H., Talaei, A., Ramírez, A. & Faaij, A. Comparative life cycle assessment of biomass co-firing plants with carbon capture and storage. Appl. Energy 131, 441–467 (2014).
Graus, W. H. J., Voogt, M. & Worrell, E. International comparison of energy efficiency of fossil power generation. Energy Policy 35, 3936–3951 (2007).
RTE France. eCO2mix - CO2 emissions per kWh of electricity generated in France https://www.rte-france.com/en/eco2mix/co2-emissions (2022).
Hao, H. et al. Biofuel for vehicle use in China: current status, future potential and policy implications. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 82, 645–653 (2018).
Hyrchenko, Y. et al. World market of liquid biofuels: trends, policy and challenges. E3S Web Conf. 280, 05005 (2021).
Sharma, S. & Maréchal, F. Carbon dioxide capture from internal combustion engine exhaust using temperature swing adsorption. Front Energy Res. 7, 143 (2019).
Ardebili, S. M. S. & Khademalrasoul, A. An analysis of liquid-biofuel production potential from agricultural residues and animal fat (case study: Khuzestan Province). J. Clean. Product. 204, 819–831 (2018).
Yang, Y. et al. Quantitative appraisal and potential analysis for primary biomass resources for energy utilization in China. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 14, 3050–3058 (2010).
Wolf, J. et al. Biogenic carbon fluxes from global agricultural production and consumption. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 29, 1617–1639 (2015).
Gustavsson, J. et al. Food and Agriculture Organization. Global Food Losses and Food Waste – Extent, Causes and Prevention (2011).
Ji, L. An assessment of agricultural residue resources for liquid biofuel production in China. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 44, 561–575 (2015).
Gao, J. et al. An integrated assessment of the potential of agricultural and forestry residues for energy production in China. Glob. Change Biol. Bioenergy 8, 880–893 (2016).
Zhao, G. et al. Sustainable limits to crop residue harvest for bioenergy: maintaining soil carbon in Australia’s agricultural lands. Glob. Change Biol. Bioenergy 7, 479–487 (2015).
Sokal, R. R. & Rohlf, F. J. Biometry. The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research (W. H. Freeman, 1981).
R.W. appreciates the provision of funds from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41877506) and the Chinese Thousand Youth Talents Program. R.Z., X.T., J. Chen and R.W. acknowledge support from the Shanghai International Science and Technology Partnership Project (21230780200). X.T. and R.W. acknowledge support from the Fudan-Sinar Mas Think Tank Fund (JGSXK2014). P.C. acknowledges support from the ANR CLAND Convergence Institute 16-CONV-0003. J.P. and J.S. acknowledge the financial support from the Catalan Government grants SGR 2017-1005 and AGAUR-2020PANDE00117, the Spanish Government grant PID2019-110521GB-I00 and the Fundación Ramón Areces grant ELEMENTAL-CLIMATE. T.G. acknowledges support from the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) under grant agreement P31796-N29 (ERM project).
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review information
Nature thanks Gernot Wagner and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer reviewer reports are available.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This file contains Supplementary Figures 1–16, Supplementary Tables 1–6 and further references.
The data used for yield–climate fitting. The data of crop yields with the growing-season temperature, carbon dioxide concentration and nitrogen fertilization intensity are compiled from the literature.
The data of crop yields, nitrogen (N) fertilization, carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration and the average growing-season temperature and precipitation over cropland. The crop yield by species, N fertilization, CO2 concentrations, average growing-season temperature and precipitation for 167 countries in 2019 used in the model are listed in this extended dataset.
The global cropping calendar data. The cropping calendar data in different countries are compiled for wheat, rice and maize from the literature.
About this article
Cite this article
Xu, S., Wang, R., Gasser, T. et al. Delayed use of bioenergy crops might threaten climate and food security. Nature 609, 299–306 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05055-8
This article is cited by
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment (2023)