### Overview

**Worksheets** Sum ma ry Direct Fertilizer N Indirect Fertilizer N Direct Crop Residues N Indirect Crop Residues N Total N Rate N Landuse(ha) CropProd CRFactors N2OEqu&Factors Lookups Assumptions This workbook calculates Total change in Fertilizer (N, P2O5, and K2O) and Pesticide (fungicide and bactericides, herbicides, and insecticides) consumption based on EPA's predictions for land use change to 2022. Values are provided by country , region, and crop (where available). Change in land use (hectares) was applied to the rate of fertilizer and pesticide consumption (kg per hectare) by country and region to determine the total change in consumption (kg). Regional **rates of** application were calculated by dividing the sum of total consumption for all countries in that region by the sum of total agricultural area. Data is formatted to be easily comparable with EPA’s Land Use spreadsheet. The four purple tabs contain greenhouse gas emisison calculations for changes in fertilizer application applied to the total change in agricultural land use and crop production through 2022. Blue tabs contain data on the total change in fertilizer and pesticide consumption for countries and country /crop combinations due to EPA’s predicted change in agricultural land-use. Tan tabs contain data on the rate of application of fertilizers and pesticides derived by calculating total consumption divided by total area (Area * %Area Fertilizer) across countries and regions. For this analy sis, the category "CIS" is set equal to "Other CIS", and "Russia and Ukraine" is set equal to "Russia". Historical data for fertilizer and pesticides consumption is based on fertilizer consumption data from the INternational Fertilizer Industry Association (IFA) and FAO agricultural statistics for agricultural area harvested, pesticide consumption (FAOStat), and fertilizer consumption (Fertistat), and is provided in the "Pesticides" and "Fertilizer" worksheets. Region definitions and data assumptions are also provided in this workbook. **Info on IFA**

**vs Fertistat data Fertilizer Data**  This dataset computes the N20 emissions associated with camelina production compared to soy bean production. Camelina fertilizer application rates are assumed to be 40 pounds per acre based on the information gathered from a literature review summarized in the FINAL Camelina Calculations.xls. Soy bean application rates are taken from the FASOM model for comparison purposes. Fertilizer application rate is then multiplied by change in agricultural land use to estimate fertilizer-related emissions.**Description**

Sum ma ry

of Greenhouse Gas emissions from changes in feritlizer application through 2022 Direct Fertilizer N2O emissions from sy nthetic fertilizers Indirect Fertilizer N2O emissions from sy nthetic fertilizers Direct N2O emissions from crop residue Indirect N2O emissions from crop residue Total change in Nitrogen fertilizer consumption due to changes in land use (mg) Rate of Nitrogen fertilizer application (kg/ha) Change in land use ('000 hectares) calculated by EPA Change in crop production ('000 metric tons) Default factors for estimation of N added to soils from crop residues IPCC (2006) Tier 1 equations and factors for estimating projections in GHG emissions from fertilizer consumption. Lookup codes Assumptions behind estimating projections for GHG emissions This workbook calculates Total change in Fertilizer (N, P2O5, and K2O) and Pesticide (fungicide and bactericides, herbicides, and insecticides) consumption based on EPA's predictions for land use change to 2022. Values are provided by country , region, and crop (where available). Change in land use (hectares) was applied to the rate of fertilizer and pesticide consumption (kg per hectare) by country and region to determine the total change in application were calculated by dividing the sum of total consumption for all countries in that region by the sum of total agricultural area. Data is formatted to be easily comparable with EPA’s Land Use spreadsheet. The four purple tabs contain greenhouse gas emisison calculations for changes in fertilizer application applied to the total change in agricultural land use and crop production through 2022. Blue tabs contain data on the total change in fertilizer and pesticide consumption for countries and country /crop combinations due to EPA’s predicted change in agricultural land-use. Tan tabs contain data on the rate of application of fertilizers and pesticides derived by calculating total consumption divided by total area (Area * %Area Fertilizer) across countries and regions. For this analy sis, the category "CIS" is set equal to "Other CIS", and "Russia and Ukraine" is set equal to "Russia". Historical data for fertilizer and pesticides consumption is based on fertilizer consumption data from the INternational Fertilizer Industry Association (IFA) and FAO agricultural statistics for agricultural area harvested, pesticide consumption (FAOStat), and fertilizer consumption (Fertistat), and is provided in the "Pesticides" and "Fertilizer" worksheets. Region definitions and data assumptions are also provided in this workbook.

This dataset computes the N20 emissions associated with camelina production compared to soy bean production. Camelina fertilizer application rates are assumed to be 40 pounds per acre based on the information gathered from a literature review summarized in the FINAL Camelina Calculations.xls. Soy bean application rates are taken from the FASOM model for comparison purposes. Fertilizer application rate is then multiplied by change in agricultural land use to estimate fertilizer-related emissions.**Total Emissions from Inorganic Fertilizer and Crop Residues A pplied to A**  **gricultural Soils (kg N2O)**

**(Per thousand ha) Camelina**  **Soybean**

- - US Average 1,607.3

-

- - Corn Belt

- 706.8 Great Plains

- 587.9 Lake States

- 567.4 North East

- 615.5 South Central

- 522.2 South East

- 550.1 Southwest

- 401.3**Direct N2O Emissions from Synthetic Fertilizer A pplication (kg N2O)** 

**Camelina Soybean** 

- - US Average 704.629

-

- - Corn Belt

- 138 Great Plains

- 126.846 Lake States

- 62 North East

- 138 South Central

- 86 South East

- 144 Southwest

- 111

convert Mg to kg Direct Inorganic Fertilizer EF (kg N20-N/kg N) convert N2O-N to N2O**Indirect N2O Emissions from Synthetic Fertilizer A pplication (kg N2O)** 

**Cotton Soybean** 

- - US Average 229.0043

-

- - Corn Belt

- 45 Great Plains

- 41.225 Lake States

- 20 North East

- 45 South Central

- 28 South East

- 47 Southwest

- 36

convert Mg to kg Volatilization EF [kg N2O–N/(kg NH3–N + NOX–N volatilised)] Leaching/Runoff EF (kg N20-N/kg N leaching or runoff) Volatilization from sy nthetic fertilizer [(kg NH3–N + NOx–N)/kg N applied] N losses by

leaching/runoff (N losses by leaching or runoff/kg N addition) convert N2O-N to N2O**Direct Emissions from Crop Residues (kg N2O)**

Factors not available from IPCC **Camelina Soybean** 

US Average 549.9116

Corn Belt 428 Great Plains 342.731 Lake States 396 North East 353 South Central 334 South East 293 Southwest 207

convert thousand hectares to hectares convert Mg to kg Direct Crop Residue EF convert N2O-N to N2O Fraction of palm crop that is renewed annually *

*Age at replanting is 23 y ears in: Khalid, H, ZZ Zin, and JM Anderson. "Nutrient Cy cling in an Oil Palm Plantation: The Effects of Residue Management Practices During Replanting on Dry Matter and Nutrient Uptake of Young Palms." * Age at replanting 20-25 y ears in Kee, KK. "Nutrient reserves and recy cling from oil palm trunks at replanting" in 4th International Crop Science Congress. Available at: http://www.cropscience.org.au/icsc2004/poster/2/3/376_keekk.htm*Age at replanting is 23 y ears in: Khalid, H, ZZ Zin, and JM Anderson. "Nutrient Cy cling in an Oil Palm Plantation: The Effects of Residue Management Practices During Replanting on Dry Matter and Nutrient Uptake of Young Palms." * Age at replanting 20-25 y ears in Kee, KK. "Nutrient reserves and recy cling from oil palm trunks at replanting" in 4th International Crop Science Congress. Available at: http://www.cropscience.org.au/icsc2004/poster/2/3/376_keekk.htm*Age at replanting is 23 y ears in: Khalid, H, ZZ Zin, and JM Anderson. "Nutrient Cy cling in an Oil Palm Plantation: The Effects of Residue Management Practices During Replanting on Dry Matter and Nutrient Uptake of Young Palms." Journal of Oil Palm Research Vol. 12 No. 2,. December 2000, p. 29-37. Available at: http://palmoilis.mpob.gov.my /publications/joprv12n2-p4.pdf * Age at replanting 20-25 y ears in Kee, KK. "Nutrient reserves and recy cling from oil palm trunks at replanting" in 4th International Crop Science Congress. Available at: http://www.cropscience.org.au/icsc2004/poster/2/3/376_keekk.htmVol. 12 No. 2,. December 2000, p. 29-37. Available at: http://palmoilis.mpob.gov.my /publications/joprv12n2-p4.pdf**Indirect Emissions from Crop Residues (kg N2O)**

Factors not available from IPCC **Camelina Soybean** 

US Average 123.73011

Corn Belt 96 Great Plains 77.114 Lake States 89 North East 79 South Central 75 South East 66 Southwest 47

convert thousand hectares to hectares convert Mg to kg Leaching/Runoff EF (kg N20-N/kg N leaching or runoff) N losses by

leaching/runoff (N losses by leaching or runoff/kg N addition) convert N2O-N to N2O Fraction of palm crop that is renewed annually *

*Age at replanting is 23 y ears in: Khalid, H, ZZ Zin, and JM Anderson. "Nutrient Cy cling in an Oil Palm Plantation: The Effects of Residue Management Practices During Replanting on Dry Matter and Nutrient Uptake of Young Palms." * Age at replanting 20-25 y ears in Kee, KK. "Nutrient reserves and recy cling from oil palm trunks at replanting" in 4th International Crop Science Congress. Available at: http://www.cropscience.org.au/icsc2004/poster/2/3/376_keekk.htm*Age at replanting is 23 y ears in: Khalid, H, ZZ Zin, and JM Anderson. "Nutrient Cy cling in an Oil Palm Plantation: The Effects of Residue Management Practices During Replanting on Dry Matter and Nutrient Uptake of Young Palms." * Age at replanting 20-25 y ears in Kee, KK. "Nutrient reserves and recy cling from oil palm trunks at replanting" in 4th International Crop Science Congress. Available at: http://www.cropscience.org.au/icsc2004/poster/2/3/376_keekk.htm*Age at replanting is 23 y ears in: Khalid, H, ZZ Zin, and JM Anderson. "Nutrient Cy cling in an Oil Palm Plantation: The Effects of Residue Management Practices During Replanting on Dry Matter and Nutrient Uptake of Young Palms." Journal of Oil Palm Research Vol. 12 No. 2,. December 2000, p. 29-37. Available at: http://palmoilis.mpob.gov.my /publications/joprv12n2-p4.pdf * Age at replanting 20-25 y ears in Kee, KK. "Nutrient reserves and recy cling from oil palm trunks at replanting" in 4th International Crop Science Congress. Available at: http://www.cropscience.org.au/icsc2004/poster/2/3/376_keekk.htmVol. 12 No. 2,. December 2000, p. 29-37. Available at: http://palmoilis.mpob.gov.my /publications/joprv12n2-p4.pdf**Rate of N A pplication (kg/ha)** 

Colum n Index 3 7 **Camelina Soybean** 

US Average 44.8 33.6 Corn Belt 8.8 Great Plains 8.1 Lake States 4.0 North East 8.8 South Central 5.5 South East 9.2 Southwest 7.1

**Conversions** 1 kgChange in Land Use (Thousands of Hectares)

Blue Print = Terminology changed to match Fertistat/FAO nomenclature

**Column Index 3**  **7 Camelina**  **Soybean**

US Average 1.00000

Corn Belt 1.0 Great Plains 1.00000 Lake States 1.0 North East 1.0 South Central 1.0 South East 1.0 Southwest 1.0Change in Total Production (000 MT)

Blue Print = Terminology changed to match Fertistat/FAO nomenclature

**Column Index 3**  **7 Camelina**  **Soybean**

US Average 1.8491 1.8491 Corn Belt 3.380 Great Plains 2.705 Lake States 3.125 North East 2.787 South Central 2.633 South East 2.314 Southwest 1.636**Table 11.2 DEFA**  **ULT FA CTORS FOR ESTIMA**  **TION OF N A DDED TO SOILS FROM CROP RESIDUES a**  A B C D E

**Crop Crop A**  **rea Crop**  **Harveste d**  **Dry**

**matter fraction of**  **harvested product**  **(DRY)**

**Slope ± 2 s.d. as**  **% of mean**  **Intercept ± 2 s.d. as**  **% of mean**  **Units ha**  **kg** Major crop types Grains 0.88 1.09 ± 2% 0.88 ± 6% Beans & pulses b 0.91 1.13 ± 19% 0.85 ± 56% Tubers c 0.22 0.10 ± 69% 1.06 ± 70% Root crops, other d 0.94 1.07 ± 19% 1.54 ± 41% N-fixing forages 0.90 0.30 ± 50% default 0.00 - Non-N-fixing forages 0.90 0.30 ± 50% default 0.00 - Perennial grasses 0.90 0.30 ± 50% default 0.00 - Grass-clover mixtures 0.90 0.30 ± 50% default 0.00 - Individual crops Maize 0.87 1.03 ± 3% 0.61 ± 19% Wh eat 0.89 1.51 ± 3% 0.52 ± 17% **Above-ground residue dry matter AGDM(T) (Mg/ha):**  **AGDM(T) = Crop(T) * slope(T) + intercept(T)**

Wh eat 0.89 1.51 ± 3% 0.52 ± 17% Rice 0.89 0.95 ±19% 2.46 ± 41% Barley 0.89 0.98 ± 8% 0.59 ± 41% Oats 0.89 0.91 ± 5% 0.89 ± 8% Millet 0.90 1.43 ± 18% 0.14 ± 308% Sorghum 0.89 0.88 ± 13% 1.33 ± 27% Ry e e 0.88 1.09 ± 50% default 0.88 ± 50% default Soy bean f 0.91 0.93 ± 31% 1.35 ± 49% Dry bean g 0.90 0.36 ± 100% 0.68 ± 47% Potato h 0.22 0.10 ± 69% 1.06 ± 70% Peanut (w/pod) i 0.94 1.07 ± 19% 1.54 ± 41% Alfalfa j 0.90 0.29 ± 31% 0.00 - Non-legume hay j 0.90 0.18 ± 50% default 0.00 - Oil Palm

Items highlighted indicate crops where NA data has been pulled from crop categories to estimate N2O emissions in the Crop Residues N worksheet a Source: Literature review by Stephen A. W illiam s, Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory , Colorado State University . (Email: stevewi@warnercnr.colostate.edu) for CASMGS (http://www.casmgs.colostate.edu/). A list of the original references is given in Annex 11A.1. b The average above-ground residue:grain ratio from all data used was 2.0 and included data for soy a bean, dry bean, lentil, cowpea, black gram, and pea. c Modelled after potatoes. d Modelled after peanuts. e No data for ry e. Slope and intercept values are those for all grain. Default s.d. f The average above-ground residue:grain ratio from all data used was 1.9. g Ortega, 1988 (see Annex 11A.1). The average above-ground residue:grain ratio from this single source was 1.6. default s.d. for root:AGB.h The mean value for above-ground residue:tuber ratio in the sources used was 0.27 with a standard error of 0.04.

I The mean value for above-ground residue: pod y ield in the sources used was 1.80 with a standard error of 0.10. j Single source. Default s.d. for root:AGB. k This is the average above-ground biomass reported as litter or harvest losses. This does not include reported stubble, which averaged 0.165 x Reported Yields. Default s.d. l Estimate of root turnover to above-ground production based on the assumption that in natural grass sy stems below-ground biomass is approximately equal to twice (one to three times) the above-ground biomass and that root turnover in these sy stems averages about 40% (30% to 50%) per y ear. Default s.d. m This is an estimate of non-tuber roots based on the root:shoot values found for other crops. If unmarketable tuber y ield is returned to the soil then data are derived from Vangessel and Renner, 1990 (see Annex 11A.1) (unmarketable y ield = 0.08 * m arketable y ield = 0.29 * above-ground biom ass) suggest that the total residues returned might then be on the order of 0.49 * above-ground biomass. Default s.d. n This is an estimate of root turnover in perennial sy stems. Default s.d. p It is assumed here that grass dominates the sy stem by 2 to 1 over legumes.

Khalid, H; ZZ Zin, and JM Anderson. "Decomposition Processes and Nutrient Release Patterns of Oil Palm Residues." Journal of Oil Palm Research Vol. 12 No. I, June 2000, p. 46-63 http://palmoilis.mpob.gov.my /publications/joprv12n1-46.pdf **TA BLE 1. RESOURCE QUA**  **LITY CHA RA**  **CTERISTICS OF FRESH OIL PA LM RESIDUES**  

### Nutrient **Leaflet Rachis**  **Trunk Root** 

N 2.66 0.44 0.58 0.41 P 0.15 0.05 0.06 0.04 K 1.33 1.8 1.86 0.9 Ca 0.62 0.55 0.38 0.07 Mg 0.26 0.17 0.15 0.11 SiO, 1.55 0.39 0.84 0.52 C 47.91 47.34 47.77 48 C/N ratio 18 107 82 117 %

C/N ratio 18 107 82 117 Lignin 24.96 20.96 18.14 23.77 Lignin/N ratio 9.38 47.64 31.28 57.98 Holocellulose 69.86 73.85 83.06 67.39**DEFA ULT FA**  **CTORS FOR ESTIMA TION OF N A**  **DDED TO SOILS FROM CROP RESIDUES a** F G H

**N content of above**  **ground residues**  **(NAG) Ratio of** 

**below ground**  **residues to above**  **ground biomass**  **(RBG-BIO) N content** 

**of below ground**  **residues (NBG)** 

**R 2**  **adj.**

0.65 0.006 0.22 0.009 0.28 0.008 0.19 0.008 0.18 0.019 0.20 0.014 0.63 0.016 0.20 0.014

- 0.027 0.40 0.022

- 0.015 0.54 0.012

- 0.015 0.80 0.012

- 0.025 0.80 0.016

0.76 0.006 0.22 0.007 0.68 0.006 0.24 0.009 **Above-ground residue dry matter AGDM(T) (Mg/ha):** 

0.68 0.006 0.24 0.009 0.47 0.007 0.16 NA 0.68 0.007 0.22 0.014 0.45 0.007 0.25 0.008 0.50 0.007 NA NA 0.36 0.007 NA 0.006

- 0.005 NA 0.011 0.16 0.008 0.19 0.008 0.15 0.010 NA 0.010 0.18 0.019 0.20 0.014 0.63 0.016 NA NA

- 0.027 0.40 0.019

- 0.150 0.54 0.012

0.012

Items highlighted indicate crops where NA data has been pulled from crop categories to estimate N2O emissions in the Crop Residues N worksheet a Source: Literature review by Stephen A. W illiam s, Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory , Colorado State University . (Email: stevewi@warnercnr.colostate.edu) for CASMGS (http://www.casmgs.colostate.edu/). A list

b The average above-ground residue:grain ratio from all data used was 2.0 and included data for soy a bean, dry bean, lentil, cowpea, black gram, and pea.

g Ortega, 1988 (see Annex 11A.1). The average above-ground residue:grain ratio from this single source was 1.6. default s.d. for root:AGB.h The mean value for above-ground residue:tuber ratio in the sources used was 0.27 with a standard error of 0.04. I The mean value for above-ground residue: pod y ield in the sources used was 1.80 with a standard error of 0.10.

k This is the average above-ground biomass reported as litter or harvest losses. This does not include reported stubble, which averaged 0.165 x Reported Yields. Default s.d. l Estimate of root turnover to above-ground production based on the assumption that in natural grass sy stems below-ground biomass is approximately equal to twice (one to three times) the above-ground biomass and that

m This is an estimate of non-tuber roots based on the root:shoot values found for other crops. If unmarketable tuber y ield is returned to the soil then data are derived from Vangessel and Renner, 1990 (see Annex 11A.1) (unmarketable y ield = 0.08 * m arketable y ield = 0.29 * above-ground biom ass) suggest that the total residues returned might then be on the order of 0.49 * above-ground biomass. Default s.d.

Khalid, H; ZZ Zin, and JM Anderson. "Decomposition Processes and Nutrient Release Patterns of Oil Palm Residues." Journal of Oil Palm Research Vol. 12 No. I, June 2000, p. 46-63a Source: Literature review by Stephen A. W illiam s, Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory , Colorado State University . (Email: stevewi@warnercnr.colostate.edu) for CASMGS (http://www.casmgs.colostate.edu/). A listl Estimate of root turnover to above-ground production based on the assumption that in natural grass sy stems below-ground biomass is approximately equal to twice (one to three times) the above-ground biomass and that

m This is an estimate of non-tuber roots based on the root:shoot values found for other crops. If unmarketable tuber y ield is returned to the soil then data are derived from Vangessel and Renner, 1990 (see Annex 11A.1) (unmarketable y ield = 0.08 * m arketable y ield = 0.29 * above-ground biom ass) suggest that the total residues returned might then be on the order of 0.49 * above-ground biomass. Default s.d.**N2O Equations and Factors**

Source: IPCC (2006). 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Vol. 4: Agriculture, Forestry ; and Other Land Use. **Direct N2O Emissions Direct Emissions (Overall Equation)** 

Em issions = EF for N additions from mineral fertilizer and crop residues =

**N A dditions from Mineral Fertilizers** 

N additions to soils from mineral fertilizers =

**N A dditions from Crop Residues** 

N additions to soils from crop residues = where,

Above-ground residue dry matter = **Crop residue summary equation [see Crop Residue Defaults tab fro explanation of letters]** N additions to soils from crop residues =

**Indirect N2O Emissions** Note that for indirect emissions, the calculation of N applied to soils from fertilizers or crop residues is the same as for direct emissions **Indirect Emissions from Volatilization**

Em issions = N lost (from sy nthetic fertilizer additions) through volatilization = EF for N lost through volatilization =
**Indirect Emissions from Leaching/Runoff**

Em issions = N lost through leaching/runoff (from all N sources) = EF for N lost through leaching/runoff =Source: IPCC (2006). 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Vol. 4: Agriculture, Forestry ; and Other Land Use.

**Equation** (N additions to soils from mineral fertilizer + N additions to soils from crop residues) × EF 0.01 kg N2O-N / kg N added

kg fertilizer N applied to soils (i.e., change in fertilizer N applications between current and projected y ear)

above-ground residue dry matter × Crop Area × [N content of aboveground residues + ratio of belowground residues to harvested y ield for crop × N content of belowground residues]

Fresh weight y ield (kg fresh weight harvested/ha) × dry matter fraction of harvested crop × slope + intercept **Crop residue summary equation [see Crop Residue Defaults tab fro explanation of letters]** (B / A × C × D + E) × A × (F + G × H)

Note that for indirect emissions, the calculation of N applied to soils from fertilizers or crop residues is the same as for direct emissions **Equation**

N additions to soils from mineral fertilizers × N lost through volatilization × EF 0.1 (kg NH3–N + NOx–N) / kg N applied 0.010 kg N2O–N / (kg NH3–N + NOX–N volatilised)

**Equation** (N additions to soils from mineral fertilizers + N additions to soils from crop residues) × N lost through leaching or runoff × EF 0.3 N losses by

leaching or runoff / kg N addition 0.0075 kg N20-N / kg N leaching or runoff**Change in N A pplication (Mg)** 

**Camelina Soybean** 

- - US Average 44.84000

-

- - Corn Belt

- 8.8 Great Plains

- 8.0720 Lake States

- 4.0 North East

- 8.8 South Central

- 5.5 South East

- 9.2 Southwest

- 7.1Lookups

**EPA Crop Lookup**  **Country Corn-Only Region**  **Al l Corn Regions**  Wh eat 2 Albania Other Eastern Europe Algeria Cotton 3 Argentina Argentina Argentina Corn 4 Australia Australia Australia Sorghum 5 Austria EU Bangladesh Barley 6 Azerbaijan, Republic of Other CIS Brazil Soy bean 7 Belgium EU Canada Rapeseed 8 Bangladesh Bangladesh China Sunflower 9 Bulgaria Other Eastern Europe CIS Palm 10 Belarus Other CIS Colom bia Peanut 11 Bolivia Other Latin America Cuba Rice 12 Brazil Brazil Egy pt Sugarbeet 13 Canada Canada EU Sugarcane 14 Switzerland Rest of W orld Guatemala Chile Other Latin America India China China Indonesia Colom bia Colom bia Iran Costa Rica Other Latin America Iraq Cuba Cuba Ivory Coast Czech Republic EU Japan Germany EU Malay sia Denmark EU Mexico Dominican Republic Other Latin America Morocco Algeria Algeria My anm ar Ecuador Other Latin America Nigeria Egy pt Egy pt Other Africa Spain EU Other Asia Estonia EU Other CIS Ethiopia Other Africa Other Eastern Europe Finland EU Other Latin America Fiji Islands Rest of W orld Other Middle East France EU Pakistan United Kingdom EU Paraguay Ghana We stern Africa Peru Guinea We stern Africa Philippines Greece EU Rest of W orld Guatemala Guatemala Russia and Ukraine Honduras Other Latin America Russia Croatia Other Eastern Europe South Africa Hungary EU South Korea Indonesia Indonesia Taiwan India India Thailand Ireland EU Tunisia Iran Iran Turkey Iraq Iraq Ukraine Israel Other Middle East Uruguay Italy EU Uzbekistan Ivory Coast Ivory Coast Venezuela Jordan Other Middle East Vietnam Japan Japan We stern AfricaKeny a Other Africa USA Cambodia Other Asia South Korea South Korea Kuwait Other Middle East Laos Other Asia Lebanon Other Middle East Sri Lanka Other Asia Lithuania EU Latvia EU Morocco Morocco Moldova, Republic of Other CIS Madagascar Other Africa Mexico Mexico My anm ar My anm ar Mauritania We stern Africa Malawi Other Africa Malay sia Malay sia Nigeria Nigeria Nicaragua Other Latin America Netherlands EU Norway Rest of W orld New Zealand Rest of W orld Pakistan Pakistan Peru Peru Philippines Philippines Poland EU Korea, Dem People's Rep Other Asia Portugal EU Paraguay Paraguay Russia Russia Saudi Arabia Other Middle East Sudan Other Middle East El Salvador Other Latin America Slovakia Other Eastern Europe Sweden EU Sy rian Arab Republic Other Middle East Togo We stern Africa Thailand Thailand Tunisia Tunisia Turkey Turkey Taiwan Taiwan Tanzania, United Rep of Other Africa Ukraine Ukraine Uruguay Uruguay United States of America USA Uzbekistan Uzbekistan Venezuela Venezuela Vietnam Vietnam South Africa South Africa Zambia Other Africa Zimbabwe Other Africa**COUNTRY REGION** 

Algeria Algeria Argentina Argentina Australia Australia Bangladesh Bangladesh Brazil Brazil Canada Canada China China Colom bia Colom bia Cuba Cuba Egy pt Egy pt Austria EU Belgium EU Czech Republic EU Germany EU Denmark EU Spain EU Estonia EU Finland EU France EU United Kingdom EU Greece EU Hungary EU Ireland EU Italy EU Lithuania EU Latvia EU Netherlands EU Poland EU Portugal EU Sweden EU Guatemala Guatemala India India Indonesia Indonesia Iran Iran Japan Japan South Korea South Korea Malay sia Malay sia Mexico Mexico Morocco Morocco My anm ar My anm ar Nigeria Nigeria Ethiopia Other Africa Keny a Other Africa Madagascar Other Africa Malawi Other Africa Tanzania, United Rep of Other Africa Zambia Other Africa Zimbabwe Other Africa Cambodia Other AsiaLaos Other Asia

Sri Lanka Other Asia Korea, Dem People's Rep Other Asia Azerbaijan, Republic of Other CIS Belarus Other CIS Moldova, Republic of Other CIS Albania Other Eastern Europe Bulgaria Other Eastern Europe Croatia Other Eastern Europe Slovakia Other Eastern Europe Bolivia Other Latin America Chile Other Latin America Costa Rica Other Latin America Dominican Republic Other Latin America Ecuador Other Latin America Honduras Other Latin America Nicaragua Other Latin America El Salvador Other Latin America Israel Other Middle East Jordan Other Middle East Kuwait Other Middle East Lebanon Other Middle East Saudi Arabia Other Middle East Sudan Other Middle East Sy rian Arab Republic Other Middle East Pakistan Pakistan Paraguay Paraguay Philippines Philippines Switzerland Rest of W orld Fiji Islands Rest of W orld Norway Rest of W orld New Zealand Rest of W orld Russia Russia South Africa South Africa Taiwan Taiwan Thailand Thailand Turkey Turkey Uruguay Uruguay Uzbekistan Uzbekistan Venezuela Venezuela Vietnam Vietnam Ghana We stern Africa Guinea We stern Africa Mauritania We stern Africa Togo We stern Africa EU-27 EU-27

### Data A

**ssumptions**

1.The United States is excluded from dataset, and not included in "Rest of W orld" calculations 2. Switzerland and Norway are included in Rest Of W orld category , since they are not members of the EU. 3. Sudan is included in "Other Middle East" category (vs. Other Africa) 4. The Rate of fertilizer application is determined by dividing the total consumption of fertilizer by the agricultural area (Area). Please note that individual country rates match those reported by FAO. 6. Rate of chemical (pesticide) application was determined by dividing the total consumption in tonnes of chemical consumption by the "Agricultural Area" statistic from FAO's FAOSTAT dataset. 7. "CIS" and "Russia and Ukraine" were removed from the regions/countries as they are covered elsewhere. 8. Peanut is included in FAO's "Groundnut" category , so data label is switched to Groundnut 9. Crop residue factors: If data were NA for individual crops, then proxies were used based on crop categories. This applies to Groundnut, Sugarbeet, Rice and Sorghum. Groundnut and Sugarbeet factors, if missing, are based on "root crop" factors. Sorghum and Rice factors, if missing, are based on "Grains". 10. Em issions are only

calculated for mineral (sy nthetic) fertilizers. 11. Em issions are not reported for crops where IPCC factors are missing. These crops are indicated using pink shading in the emissions tabs. 12. China pesticide consumption is based on total pesticide use value from USDA ERS, and percentage breakdown by pesticide product is based on average ratio from Vietnam, Thailand and South Korea 13. IFA data for sugarcrops is broken down into sugarcane and sugarbeet based on calculated consumption ratios using Fertistat data for the same country /crop combination. 14. Fertilizer growth rate for Brazil based on annual average growth rate calculated by FAO between avg 1999-2001 and 2011. 15. Fertilizer em issions are based on fertilizer consumption estimates from FAO, IFA, and national datasets for India, Russia, and Brazil. 16. IFA data are used for available country /crop combinations. An avereage of 2006/07 and 2007/08 is taken to account for uncertainties in crop production and fertilizer use due to temporal or other annual variations. 17. IFA data for sugarcane and sugarbeet are derived from IFA estiamtes for "sugarcrop" and sugarcane to sugarbeet ratios from Fertistat. W here Fertistat data were not available to determine ratios for sugarcane to sugarcrop, proxy countries were chosen to split IFA's "sugarcrop" into sugarcane and sugarbeet. The U.S. was used for Canada... 18. European Union**Data A**

**ssumptions**

1.The United States is excluded from dataset, and not included in "Rest of W orld" calculations 2. Switzerland and Norway are included in Rest Of W orld category , since they are not members of the EU. 3. Sudan is included in "Other Middle East" category (vs. Other Africa) 4. The Rate of fertilizer application is determined by dividing the total consumption of fertilizer by the agricultural area (Area). Please note that individual country rates match those reported by FAO for Fertistat data. 6. Rate of chemical (pesticide) application was determined by dividing the total consumption in tonnes of chemical consumption by the "Agricultural Area" statistic from FAO's FAOSTAT dataset. 7. "CIS" and "Russia and Ukraine" are assumed to equal "Other CIS" and "Russia", respectively

. 8. Peanut is included in FAO's "Groundnut" category , so data label is switched to Groundnut 9. Crop residue factors: If data were NA for individual crops, then proxies were used based on crop categories. This applies to Groundnut, Sugarbeet, Rice, Sorghum, Groundnut and Sugarbeet factors, which, are based on "root crop" factors. Sorghum and Rice factors, if missing, are based on "Grains". 10. Em issions are only

calculated for mineral (sy nthetic) fertilizers. 11. Em issions are now reported for crops where IPCC factors are missing using factors for "Root crops, other". These crops are indicated using pink shading in the emissions tabs. 12. China pesticide consumption is based on total pesticide use value from USDA ERS, and percentage breakdown by pesticide product is based on average ratio from Vietnam, Thailand and South Korea 13. IFA data for sugarcrops is broken down into sugarcane and sugarbeet based on calculated consumption ratios using Fertistat data for the same country /crop combination. 14. Fertilizer growth rate for Brazil based on annual average growth rate calculated by FAO between avg 1999-2001 and 2011. 15. Fertilizer em issions are based on fertilizer consumption estimates from FAO and IFA. 16. IFA data are used for available country /crop combinations. An avereage of 2006/07 and 2007/08 is taken to account for uncertainties in crop production and fertilizer use due to temporal or other annual variations. 17. IFA data for sugarcane and sugarbeet are derived from IFA estiamtes for "sugarcrop" and sugarcane to sugarbeet ratios from Fertistat. W here Fertistat data were not available to determine ratios for sugarcane to sugarcrop, proxy countries were chosen to split IFA's "sugarcrop" into sugarcane and sugarbeet. 18. Fertilizer rate of application for EU is based on IFA regional data for EU-27. IFA data only covers wheat, rice, corn, soy bean, palm , cotton, sugarcane and sugarbeet. EU regional fertilizer application rates for barley , peanut, rapeseed, sorghum and sunflower are based on Fertistat data. Calculations are conducted separated at the bottom of the Fertilizer worksheet.2. Switzerland and Norway are included in Rest Of W orld category , since they are not members of the EU.

4. The Rate of fertilizer application is determined by dividing the total consumption of fertilizer by the agricultural area (Area). Please note that individual country rates match those reported by FAO for Fertistat data. 6. Rate of chemical (pesticide) application was determined by dividing the total consumption in tonnes of chemical consumption by the "Agricultural Area" statistic from FAO's FAOSTAT dataset.

9. Crop residue factors: If data were NA for individual crops, then proxies were used based on crop categories. This applies to Groundnut, Sugarbeet, Rice, Sorghum, Groundnut and Sugarbeet factors, which, are based on "root crop" factors. Sorghum and Rice factors, if missing, are based on "Grains".

11. Em issions are now reported for crops where IPCC factors are missing using factors for "Root crops, other". These crops are indicated using pink shading in the emissions tabs. 12. China pesticide consumption is based on total pesticide use value from USDA ERS, and percentage breakdown by pesticide product is based on average ratio from Vietnam, Thailand and South Korea 13. IFA data for sugarcrops is broken down into sugarcane and sugarbeet based on calculated consumption ratios using Fertistat data for the same country /crop combination. 14. Fertilizer growth rate for Brazil based on annual average growth rate calculated by FAO between avg 1999-2001 and 2011.

16. IFA data are used for available country /crop combinations. An avereage of 2006/07 and 2007/08 is taken to account for uncertainties in crop production and fertilizer use due to temporal or other annual variations. 17. IFA data for sugarcane and sugarbeet are derived from IFA estiamtes for "sugarcrop" and sugarcane to sugarbeet ratios from Fertistat. W here Fertistat data were not available to determine ratios for sugarcane to sugarcrop, proxy countries were chosen to split IFA's "sugarcrop" into sugarcane and sugarbeet. 18. Fertilizer rate of application for EU is based on IFA regional data for EU-27. IFA data only covers wheat, rice, corn, soy bean, palm , cotton, sugarcane and sugarbeet. EU regional fertilizer application rates for barley , peanut, rapeseed, sorghum and sunflower are based on Fertistat data. Calculations are conducted separated at the bottom of the Fertilizer worksheet.4. The Rate of fertilizer application is determined by dividing the total consumption of fertilizer by the agricultural area (Area). Please note that individual country rates match those reported by FAO for Fertistat data.

9. Crop residue factors: If data were NA for individual crops, then proxies were used based on crop categories. This applies to Groundnut, Sugarbeet, Rice, Sorghum, Groundnut and Sugarbeet factors, which, are based on "root crop" factors. Sorghum and Rice factors, if missing, are based on "Grains".

16. IFA data are used for available country /crop combinations. An avereage of 2006/07 and 2007/08 is taken to account for uncertainties in crop production and fertilizer use due to temporal or other annual variations. 17. IFA data for sugarcane and sugarbeet are derived from IFA estiamtes for "sugarcrop" and sugarcane to sugarbeet ratios from Fertistat. W here Fertistat data were not available to determine ratios for sugarcane to sugarcrop, proxy countries were chosen to split IFA's "sugarcrop" into sugarcane and sugarbeet. 18. Fertilizer rate of application for EU is based on IFA regional data for EU-27. IFA data only covers wheat, rice, corn, soy bean, palm , cotton, sugarcane and sugarbeet. EU regional fertilizer application rates for barley , peanut, rapeseed, sorghum and sunflower are based on Fertistat data. Calculations are conducted separated at the bottom of the Fertilizer worksheet.17. IFA data for sugarcane and sugarbeet are derived from IFA estiamtes for "sugarcrop" and sugarcane to sugarbeet ratios from Fertistat. W here Fertistat data were not available to determine ratios for sugarcane to sugarcrop, proxy countries were chosen to split IFA's "sugarcrop" into sugarcane and sugarbeet. 18. Fertilizer rate of application for EU is based on IFA regional data for EU-27. IFA data only covers wheat, rice, corn, soy bean, palm , cotton, sugarcane and sugarbeet. EU regional fertilizer application rates for barley , peanut, rapeseed, sorghum and sunflower are based on Fertistat data. Calculations are conducted separated at the bottom of the Fertilizer worksheet.