| 1. |
- Arneth, Almut, et al.
(författare)
-
Restoring Degraded Lands
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Annual Review of Environment and Resources. - : Annual Reviews. - 1543-5938 .- 1545-2050. ; 46, s. 569-599
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Land degradation continues to be an enormous challenge to human societies, reducing food security, emitting greenhouse gases and aerosols, driving the loss of biodiversity, polluting water, and undermining a wide range of ecosystem services beyond food supply and water and climate regulation. Climate change will exacerbate several degradation processes. Investment in diverse restoration efforts, including sustainable agricultural and forest land management, as well as land set aside for conservation wherever possible, will generate co-benefits for climate change mitigation and adaptation and morebroadly for human and societal well-being and the economy. This review highlights the magnitude of the degradation problem and some of the key challenges for ecological restoration. There are biophysical as well as societal limits to restoration. Better integrating policies to jointly address poverty, land degradation, and greenhouse gas emissions and removals is fundamental to reducing many existing barriers and contributing to climate-resilient sustainable development.
|
|
| 2. |
- Berndes, Göran, 1966, et al.
(författare)
-
Bioenergy and Land Use Change-State of the Art
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Advances in Bioenergy: The Sustainability Challenge. - Oxford, UK : John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. - 9781118957875 - 9781118957844 ; , s. 249-271
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The dedicated production of biomass crops and the collection of residues in agriculture and forestry can lead to undesirable negative impacts and it is crucial that practices are found that ensure that these impacts are avoided or mitigated as far as possible. This chapter concerns the use of biomass for energy and the connection between increased bioenergy use and land use change (LUC). Land use and LUC associated with bioenergy can lead to a multitude of environmental and socioeconomic consequences. The chapter focuses on the question whether greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with LUC could undermine the climate change mitigation benefits of bioenergy. There are, however, several options for mitigating these emissions that can be implemented: development of bioenergy feedstock production systems that integrate with existing agriculture and forestry production, enhancement of land use productivity in agriculture and forestry in general, and legal protection of natural ecosystems.
|
|
| 3. |
- Berndes, Göran, 1966, et al.
(författare)
-
Bioenergy and land use change-state of the art
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment. - : Wiley. - 2041-8396 .- 2041-840X. ; 2:3, s. 282-303
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Bioenergy projects can lead to direct and indirect land use change (LUC), which can substantially affect greenhouse gas balances with both beneficial and adverse outcomes for bioenergy's contribution to climate change mitigation. The causes behind LUC are multiple, complex, interlinked, and change over time. This makes quantification uncertain and sensitive to many factors that can develop in different directions-including land use productivity, trade patterns, prices and elasticities, and use of by-products associated with biofuels production. Quantifications reported so far vary substantially and do not support the ranking of bioenergy options with regard to LUC and associated emissions. There are however several options for mitigating these emissions, which can be implemented despite the uncertainties. Long-rotation forest management is associated with carbon emissions and sequestration that are not in temporal balance with each other and this leads to mitigation trade-offs between biomass extraction for energy use and the alternative to leave the biomass in the forest. Bioenergy's contribution to climate change mitigation needs to reflect a balance between near-term targets and the long-term objective to hold the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees C (Copenhagen Accord). Although emissions from LUC can be significant in some circumstances, the reality of such emissions is not sufficient reason to exclude bioenergy from the list of worthwhile technologies for climate changemitigation. Policy measures to minimize the negative impacts of LUC should be based on a holistic perspective recognizing the multiple drivers and effects of LUC.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Berndes, Göran, 1966, et al.
(författare)
-
Forest biomass, carbon neutrality and climate change mitigation. From Science to Policy 3
- 2016
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The Paris Agreement and the EU Climate and Energy Framework set ambitious but necessary targets. Reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by phasing out the technologies and infrastructures that cause fossil carbon emissions is one of today’s most important challenges. In the EU, bioenergy is currently the largest renewable energy source used. Most Member States have in absolute terms increased the use of forest biomass for energy to reach their 2020 renewable energy targets.In recent years, the issue of ‘carbon neutrality’ has been debated with regard to the bioenergy products that are produced from forest biomass. There is no clear consensus among scientists on the issue and their messages may even appear contradictory to decision-makers and citizens. Divergence arises because scientists address the issue from different points of view, which can all be valid. It is important to find agreement on some basic principles, to inform policy makers. Guidance is also needed on how the results should be interpreted.This report provides insights into the current scientific debate on forest biomass, carbon neutrality and climate change mitigation. It draws on the science literature to give a balanced and policy-relevant synthesis, from both an EU and global perspective.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Berndes, Göran, 1966, et al.
(författare)
-
Land sector impacts of early climate action
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Nature Sustainability. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2398-9629. ; 4:12, s. 1021-1022
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 8. |
- Brandao, Miguel, et al.
(författare)
-
On quantifying sources of uncertainty in the carbon footprint of biofuels : crop/feedstock, LCA modelling approach, land-use change, and GHG metrics
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Biofuel Research Journal. - : Greenwave Publishing of Canada. - 2292-8782. ; 9:2, s. 1608-1616
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Biofuel systems may represent a promising strategy to combat climate change by replacing fossil fuels in electricity generation and transportation. First-generation biofuels from sugar and starch crops for ethanol (a gasoline substitute) and from oilseed crops for biodiesel (a petroleum diesel substitute) have come under increasing levels of scrutiny due to the uncertainty associated with the estimation of climate change impacts of biofuels, such as due to indirect effects on land use. This analysis estimates the magnitude of some uncertainty sources: i) crop/feedstock, ii) life cycle assessment (LCA) modelling approach, iii) land-use change (LUC), and iv) greenhouse gas (GHG) metrics. The metrics used for characterising the different GHGs (global warming potential-GWP and global temperature change potential-GTP at different time horizons) appeared not to play a significant role in explaining the variance in the carbon footprint of biofuels, as opposed to the crop/feedstock used, the inclusion/exclusion of LUC considerations, and the LCA modelling approach (p<0.001). The estimated climate footprint of biofuels is dependent on the latter three parameters and, thus, is context-specific. It is recommended that these parameters be dealt with in a manner consistent with the goal and scope of the study. In particular, it is essential to interpret the results of the carbon footprint of biofuel systems in light of the choices made in each of these sources of uncertainty, and sensitivity analysis is recommended to overcome their influence on the result.
|
|
| 9. |
- Brandao, Miguel, et al.
(författare)
-
Quantifying the climate change effects of bioenergy systems : Comparison of 15 impact assessment methods
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Global Change Biology Bioenergy. - : Wiley. - 1757-1693 .- 1757-1707. ; 11:5, s. 727-743
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Ongoing concern over climate change has led to interest in replacing fossil energy with bioenergy. There are different approaches to quantitatively estimate the climate change effects of bioenergy systems. In the present work, we have focused on a range of published impact assessment methods that vary due to conceptual differences in the treatment of biogenic carbon fluxes, the type of climate change impacts they address and differences in time horizon and time preference. Specifically, this paper reviews fifteen different methods and applies these to three hypothetical bioenergy case studies: (a) woody biomass grown on previously forested land; (b) woody biomass grown on previous pasture land; and (b) annual energy crop grown on previously cropped land. Our analysis shows that the choice of method can have an important influence on the quantification of climate change effects of bioenergy, particularly when a mature forest is converted to bioenergy use as it involves a substantial reduction in biomass carbon stocks. Results are more uniform in other case studies. In general, results are more sensitive to specific impact assessment methods when they involve both emissions and removals at different points in time, such as for forest bioenergy, but have a much smaller influence on agricultural bioenergy systems grown on land previously used for pasture or annual cropping. The development of effective policies for climate change mitigation through renewable energy use requires consistent and accurate approaches to identification of bioenergy systems that can result in climate change mitigation. The use of different methods for the same purpose: estimating the climate change effects of bioenergy systems, can lead to confusing and contradictory conclusions. A full interpretation of the results generated with different methods must be based on an understanding that the different methods focus on different aspects of climate change and represent different time preferences.
|
|
| 10. |
- Brandao, Miguel, et al.
(författare)
-
The modelling approach determines the carbon footprint of biofuels: the role of LCA in informing decision makers in government and industry
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Cleaner Environmental Systems. - : Elsevier BV. - 2666-7894. ; 2, s. 100027-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Concerns over climate change have led to the promotion of biofuels for transport, particularly biodiesel from oilseed crops and ethanol from sugar and starch crops. However, the climate-change mitigation potential of the various biofuels estimated in published studies tends to vary significantly, questioning the reliability of the methods used to quantify potential impacts. We investigated the values published in the European Commission’s Renewable Energy Directive (RED), and recalculated the climate-change impacts of a range of biofuels using internally-consistent attributional and consequential modelling approaches to enable comparison of these approaches. We conclude that the estimated results are highly dependent on the modelling approach adopted, to the detriment of the perception of the robustness of life cycle assessment as a tool for estimating the climate-change impacts of biofuels. Land use change emissions are a determining parameter which should not be omitted, even if modelling it introduces a large variability in the results and makes interpretation complex. Clearer guidelines and standardization efforts would be helpful in the harmonization of LCA practice, so that the results can be more useful, robust and reproducible.
|
|
