The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Costs and Benefits of Nitrogen for Europe and Implications for Mitigation
Abstract
Cost-benefit analysis can be used to provide guidance for emerging policy priorities in reducing nitrogen (N) pollution. This paper provides a critical and comprehensive assessment of costs and benefits of the various flows of N on human health, ecosystems and climate stability in order to identify major options for mitigation. The social cost of impacts of N in the EU27 in 2008 was estimated between €75-485 billion per year. A cost share of around 60% is related to emissions to air. The share of total impacts on human health is about 45% and may reflect the higher willingness to pay for human health than for ecosystems or climate stability. Air pollution by nitrogen also generates social benefits for climate by present cooling effects of N containing aerosol and C-sequestration driven by N deposition, amounting to an estimated net benefit of about €5 billion/yr. The economic benefit of N in primary agricultural production ranges between €20-80 billion/yr and is lower than the annual cost of pollution by agricultural N which is in the range of €35-230 billion/yr. Internalizing these environmental costs would lower the optimum annual N-fertilization rate in Northwestern Europe by about 50 kg/ha. Acknowledging the large uncertainties and conceptual issues of our cost-benefit estimates, the results support the priority for further reduction of NH3 and NOx emissions from transport and agriculture beyond commitments recently agreed in revision of the Gothenburg Protocol.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A safe operating space for humanity
Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin, F. S., Lambin, E. F., Lenton, T. M., Scheffer, M., Folke, C., Schellnhuber, H. J., et al. (2009) · Nature · doi:10.1038/461472a · Cited by 13,333
Nitrogen and food production: proteins for human diets
Smil, V. (2002) · AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment · doi:10.1579/0044-7447-31.2.126 · Cited by 490
Cited by
Bodirsky, B. L., Popp, A., Lotze-Campen, H., Dietrich, J. P., Rolinski, S., Weindl, I., Schmitz, C., Müller, C., Bonsch, M., Humpenöder, F., et al. (2014) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms4858 · Cited by 577
Chemistry and the Linkages between Air Quality and Climate Change
von Schneidemesser, E., Monks, P. S., Allan, J. D., Bruhwiler, L., Forster, P., Fowler, D., Lauer, A., Morgan, W. T., Paasonen, P., Righi, M., et al. (2015) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00089 · Cited by 522
Self-citationQiao, C., Liu, L., Hu, S., Compton, J. E., Greaver, T. L., & Li, Q. (2015) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.12802 · Cited by 417
Microbial protein: future sustainable food supply route with low environmental footprint
Matassa, S., Boon, N., Pikaar, I., & Verstraete, W. (2016) · Microbial Biotechnology · doi:10.1111/1751-7915.12369 · Cited by 390
Enhanced‐efficiency fertilizers are not a panacea for resolving the nitrogen problem
Li, T., Zhang, W., Yin, J., Chadwick, D., Norse, D., Lu, Y., Liu, X., Chen, X., Zhang, F., Powlson, D., et al. (2018) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.13918 · Cited by 305
Societal benefits of halving agricultural ammonia emissions in China far exceed the abatement costs
Zhang, X., Gu, B., van Grinsven, H., Lam, S. K., Liang, X., Bai, M., & Chen, D. (2020) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-18196-z · Cited by 258
Self-citationLost water and nitrogen resources due to EU consumer food waste
Vanham, D., Bouraoui, F., Leip, A., Grizzetti, B., & Bidoglio, G. (2015) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/10/8/084008 · Cited by 182
Keeler, B. L., Gourevitch, J. D., Polasky, S., Isbell, F., Tessum, C. W., Hill, J. D., & Marshall, J. D. (2016) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.1600219 · Cited by 178
Microbes and the next nitrogen revolution
Pikaar, I., Matassa, S., Rabaey, K., Bodirsky, B. L., Popp, A., Herrero, M., & Verstraete, W. (2017) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.7b00916 · Cited by 120
Redefining marginal land for bioenergy crop production
Khanna, M., Chen, L., Basso, B., Cai, X., Field, J. L., Guan, K., Jiang, C., Lark, T. J., Richard, T. L., Spawn‐Lee, S. A., et al. (2021) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12877 · Cited by 105
“…(2015) propose a simple unit value transfer method by compiling the damage costs associated with nitrogen application (air/ climate, freshwater, drinking water, and coastal- zone- related damages) based on information obtained from existing studies (Compton et al., 2011; Van Grinsven et al., 2013).”
MethodDeclining spatial efficiency of global cropland nitrogen allocation
Mueller, N. D., Lassaletta, L., Runck, B. C., Billen, G., Garnier, J., & Gerber, J. S. (2017) · Global Biogeochemical Cycles · doi:10.1002/2016gb005515 · Cited by 92
Crops, Nitrogen, Water: Are Legumes Friend, Foe, or Misunderstood Ally?
Adams, M. A., Buchmann, N., Sprent, J., Buckley, T. N., & Turnbull, T. L. (2018) · Trends in Plant Science · doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2018.02.009 · Cited by 54
Metadata
- Authors
- Van Grinsven, H. J. M., Holland, M., Jacobsen, B. H., Klimont, Z., Sutton, M. A., & Jaap Willems, W.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Technology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2013-03-26
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 3571-3579
- ISSN
- 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5851
- OpenAlex
- W2085212297
- Cited by
- 361
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 10.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
