Filters

2016 - 201932020 - 20211

More filters

2019 - 201912020 - 20233
Reset filters

Settings

DDC: 500 × Subject: bioenergy ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Spatially explicit analysis identifies significant potential for bioenergy with carbon capture and storage in China
    ([London] : Nature Publishing Group UK, 2021) Xing, Xiaofan; Wang, Rong; Bauer, Nico; Ciais, Philippe; Cao, Junji; Chen, Jianmin; Tang, Xu; Wang, Lin; Yang, Xin; Boucher, Olivier; Goll, Daniel; Peñuelas, Josep; Janssens, Ivan A.; Balkanski, Yves; Clark, James; Ma, Jianmin; Pan, Bo; Zhang, Shicheng; Ye, Xingnan; Wang, Yutao; Li, Qing; Luo, Gang; Shen, Guofeng; Li, Wei; Yang, Yechen; Xu, Siqing
    As China ramped-up coal power capacities rapidly while CO2 emissions need to decline, these capacities would turn into stranded assets. To deal with this risk, a promising option is to retrofit these capacities to co-fire with biomass and eventually upgrade to CCS operation (BECCS), but the feasibility is debated with respect to negative impacts on broader sustainability issues. Here we present a data-rich spatially explicit approach to estimate the marginal cost curve for decarbonizing the power sector in China with BECCS. We identify a potential of 222 GW of power capacities in 2836 counties generated by co-firing 0.9 Gt of biomass from the same county, with half being agricultural residues. Our spatially explicit method helps to reduce uncertainty in the economic costs and emissions of BECCS, identify the best opportunities for bioenergy and show the limitations by logistical challenges to achieve carbon neutrality in the power sector with large-scale BECCS in China.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Environmental co-benefits and adverse side-effects of alternative power sector decarbonization strategies
    ([London] : Nature Publishing Group UK, 2019) Luderer, Gunnar; Pehl, Michaja; Arvesen, Anders; Gibon, Thomas; Bodirsky, Benjamin L.; de Boer, Harmen Sytze; Fricko, Oliver; Hejazi, Mohamad; Humpenöder, Florian; Iyer, Gokul; Mima, Silvana; Mouratiadou, Ioanna; Pietzcker, Robert C.; Popp, Alexander; van den Berg, Maarten; van Vuuren, Detlef; Hertwich, Edgar G.
    A rapid and deep decarbonization of power supply worldwide is required to limit global warming to well below 2 °C. Beyond greenhouse gas emissions, the power sector is also responsible for numerous other environmental impacts. Here we combine scenarios from integrated assessment models with a forward-looking life-cycle assessment to explore how alternative technology choices in power sector decarbonization pathways compare in terms of non-climate environmental impacts at the system level. While all decarbonization pathways yield major environmental co-benefits, we find that the scale of co-benefits as well as profiles of adverse side-effects depend strongly on technology choice. Mitigation scenarios focusing on wind and solar power are more effective in reducing human health impacts compared to those with low renewable energy, while inducing a more pronounced shift away from fossil and toward mineral resource depletion. Conversely, non-climate ecosystem damages are highly uncertain but tend to increase, chiefly due to land requirements for bioenergy.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Europe’s renewable energy directive poised to harm global forests
    ([London] : Nature Publishing Group UK, 2018) Searchinger, Timothy D.; Beringer, Tim; Holtsmark, Bjart; Kammen, Daniel M.; Lambin, Eric F.; Lucht, Wolfgang; Raven, Peter; van Ypersele, Jean-Pascal
    This comment raises concerns regarding the way in which a new European directive, aimed at reaching higher renewable energy targets, treats wood harvested directly for bioenergy use as a carbon-free fuel. The result could consume quantities of wood equal to all Europe’s wood harvests, greatly increase carbon in the air for decades, and set a dangerous global example.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Bioenergy production and sustainable development: Science base for policymaking remains limited
    (Milton Park : Taylor & Francis, 2016) Robledo‐Abad, Carmenza; Althaus, Hans‐Jörg; Berndes, Göran; Bolwig, Simon; Corbera, Esteve; Creutzig, Felix; Garcia‐Ulloa, John; Geddes, Anna; Gregg, Jay S.; Haberl, Helmut; Hanger, Susanne; Harper, Richard J.; Hunsberger, Carol; Larsen, Rasmus K.; Lauk, Christian; Leitner, Stefan; Lilliestam, Johan; Lotze‐Campen, Hermann; Muys, Bart; Nordborg, Maria; Ölund, Maria; Orlowsky, Boris; Popp, Alexander; Portugal‐Pereira, Joana; Reinhard, Jürgen; Scheiffle, Lena; Smith, Pete
    The possibility of using bioenergy as a climate change mitigation measure has sparked a discussion of whether and how bioenergy production contributes to sustainable development. We undertook a systematic review of the scientific literature to illuminate this relationship and found a limited scientific basis for policymaking. Our results indicate that knowledge on the sustainable development impacts of bioenergy production is concentrated in a few well‐studied countries, focuses on environmental and economic impacts, and mostly relates to dedicated agricultural biomass plantations. The scope and methodological approaches in studies differ widely and only a small share of the studies sufficiently reports on context and/or baseline conditions, which makes it difficult to get a general understanding of the attribution of impacts. Nevertheless, we identified regional patterns of positive or negative impacts for all categories – environmental, economic, institutional, social and technological. In general, economic and technological impacts were more frequently reported as positive, while social and environmental impacts were more frequently reported as negative (with the exception of impacts on direct substitution of GHG emission from fossil fuel). More focused and transparent research is needed to validate these patterns and develop a strong science underpinning for establishing policies and governance agreements that prevent/mitigate negative and promote positive impacts from bioenergy production.