Animal board invited review: Opportunities and challenges in using GWP* to report the impact of ruminant livestock on global temperature change

Ruminant livestock is a large contributor of CH4 emissions globally. Assessing how this CH4 and other greenhouse gases (GHG) from livestock contribute to anthropogenic climate change is key to understanding their role in achieving any temperature targets. The climate impacts of livestock, as well as other sectors or products/services, are generally expressed as CO2-equivalents using 100-year Global Warming Potentials (GWP100). However, the GWP100 cannot be used to translate emission pathways of short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs) emissions to their temperature outcomes. A key limitation of handling long- and short-lived gases in the same manner is revealed in the context of any potential temperature stabilisation goals: to achieve this outcome, emissions of long-lived gases must decline to net-zero, but this is not the case for SLCPs. A recent alternative metric, GWP* (so-called ‘GWP-star’), has been proposed to overcome these concerns. GWP* allows for simple appraisals of warming over time for emission series of different GHGs that may not be obvious if using pulse-emission metrics (i.e. GWP100). In this article, we explore some of the strengths and limitations of GWP* for reporting the contribution of ruminant livestock systems to global temperature change. A number of case studies are used to illustrate the potential use of the GWP* metric to, for example, understand the current contribution of different ruminant livestock production systems to global warming, appraise how different production systems or mitigations compare (having a temporal element), and seeing how possible emission pathways driven by changes in production, emissions intensity and gas composition show different impacts over time. We suggest that for some contexts, particularly if trying to directly infer contributions to additional warming, GWP* or similar approaches can provide important insight that would not be gained from conventional GWP100 reporting. © 2023

This research is supported by María de Maeztu excellence accreditation 2018-2022 (Ref. MDM-2017-0714), funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033/; and by the Basque Government through the BERC 2022-2025 program. Agustin del Prado is financed by the programme Ramon y Cajal from the Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness (RYC-2017-22143) and Ikerbasque. JL acknowledges funding from Wellcome Trust, Our Planet Our Health (Livestock, Environment and People—LEAP), award number 205212/Z/16/Z. FM and SH are funded by the California Air Resources Board (CARB35C10_18ISD025)