| 1. |
- 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)
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Calvin, Katherine, et al.
(författare)
-
Bioenergy for climate change mitigation: Scale and sustainability
- 2021
-
Ingår i: GCB Bioenergy. - : Wiley. - 1757-1707 .- 1757-1693. ; 13:9, s. 1346-1371
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Many global climate change mitigation pathways presented in IPCC assessment reports rely heavily on the deployment of bioenergy, often used in conjunction with carbon capture and storage. We review the literature on bioenergy use for climate change mitigation, including studies that use top-down integrated assessment models or bottom-up modelling, and studies that do not rely on modelling. We summarize the state of knowledge concerning potential co-benefits and adverse side effects of bioenergy systems and discuss limitations of modelling studies used to analyse consequences of bioenergy expansion. The implications of bioenergy supply on mitigation and other sustainability criteria are context dependent and influenced by feedstock, management regime, climatic region, scale of deployment and how bioenergy alters energy systems and land use. Depending on previous land use, widespread deployment of monoculture plantations may contribute to mitigation but can cause negative impacts across a range of other sustainability criteria. Strategic integration of new biomass supply systems into existing agriculture and forest landscapes may result in less mitigation but can contribute positively to other sustainability objectives. There is considerable variation in evaluations of how sustainability challenges evolve as the scale of bioenergy deployment increases, due to limitations of existing models, and uncertainty over the future context with respect to the many variables that influence alternative uses of biomass and land. Integrative policies, coordinated institutions and improved governance mechanisms to enhance co-benefits and minimize adverse side effects can reduce the risks of large-scale deployment of bioenergy. Further, conservation and efficiency measures for energy, land and biomass can support greater flexibility in achieving climate change mitigation and adaptation.
|
|
| 5. |
- Cañete Vela, Isabel, 1992, et al.
(författare)
-
Co-recycling of natural and synthetic carbon materials for a sustainable circular economy
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of Cleaner Production. - : Elsevier BV. - 0959-6526. ; 365
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Circular economy approaches are commonly depicted by two cycles, where the biological cycle is associated with regeneration in the biosphere and the technical cycle with reuse, refurbishment, and recycling to maintain value and maximize material recovery. This work, instead, presents an alternative vision to the management of carbonbased materials that integrates the two cycles and enables the phasing-out of fossil carbon from the material system. The aim is to investigate the benefits and global potential of a co-recycling system, as an alternative to conventional recycling systems that separate biomass-based materials (e.g., wood, paper) from fossil-based materials (e.g., plastics). Thermochemical recycling technologies enable the conversion of carbon-based waste materials into high-quality synthetic products, promoting circularity and avoiding carbon losses such as carbon emissions and waste accumulation in landfills and nature. Here, the construction and analysis of co-recycling scenarios show how the deployment of thermochemical recycling technologies can decouple the material system from fossil resource extraction. Furthermore, energy use is reduced if pyrolysis and/or gasification are included in the portfolio of recycling technologies. In a decarbonized energy system, deployment of co-recycling can lead to near-zero carbon emissions, while in more carbon-intensive energy systems the choice of thermochemical recycling route is key to limiting carbon emissions.
|
|
| 6. |
- Cintas Sanchez, Olivia, 1982, et al.
(författare)
-
Geospatial supply-demand modeling of lignocellulosic biomass for electricity and biofuels in the European Union
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Biomass and Bioenergy. - : Elsevier BV. - 1873-2909 .- 0961-9534. ; 144
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Bioenergy can contribute to achieving European Union (EU) climate targets while mitigating impacts from current agricultural land use. A GIS-based modeling framework (1000 m resolution) is employed to match biomass supply (forest and agricultural residues, complemented by lignocellulosic energy crops where needed) with biomass demand for either electricity or bio-oil production on sites currently used for coal power in the EU-28, Norway, and Switzerland. The framework matches supply and demand based on minimizing the field-to-gate costs and is used to provide geographically explicit information on (i) plant-gate supply cost; (ii) CO2 savings; and (iii) potential mitigation opportunities for soil erosion, flooding, and eutrophication resulting from the introduction of energy crops on cropland. Converting all suitable coal power plants to biomass and assuming that biomass is sourced within a transport distance of 300 km, would produce an estimated 150 TW h biomass-derived electricity, using 1365 PJ biomass, including biomass from energy crops grown on 6 Mha. Using all existing coal power sites for bio-oil production in 100-MW pyrolysis units could produce 820 PJ of bio-oil, using 1260 PJ biomass, including biomass from energy crops grown on 1.8 Mha. Using biomass to generate electricity would correspond to an emissions reduction of 135 MtCO2, while using biomass to produce bio-oil to substitute for crude oil would correspond to a reduction of 59 MtCO2. In addition, energy crops can have a positive effect on soil organic carbon in most of the analyzed countries. The mitigation opportunities investigated range from marginal to high depending on location.
|
|
| 7. |
- Cowie, A. L., et al.
(författare)
-
Applying a science-based systems perspective to dispel misconceptions about climate effects of forest bioenergy
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Global Change Biology Bioenergy. - : John Wiley and Sons Inc. - 1757-1693 .- 1757-1707. ; 13:8, s. 1210-1231
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The scientific literature contains contrasting findings about the climate effects of forest bioenergy, partly due to the wide diversity of bioenergy systems and associated contexts, but also due to differences in assessment methods. The climate effects of bioenergy must be accurately assessed to inform policy-making, but the complexity of bioenergy systems and associated land, industry and energy systems raises challenges for assessment. We examine misconceptions about climate effects of forest bioenergy and discuss important considerations in assessing these effects and devising measures to incentivize sustainable bioenergy as a component of climate policy. The temporal and spatial system boundary and the reference (counterfactual) scenarios are key methodology choices that strongly influence results. Focussing on carbon balances of individual forest stands and comparing emissions at the point of combustion neglect system-level interactions that influence the climate effects of forest bioenergy. We highlight the need for a systems approach, in assessing options and developing policy for forest bioenergy that: (1) considers the whole life cycle of bioenergy systems, including effects of the associated forest management and harvesting on landscape carbon balances; (2) identifies how forest bioenergy can best be deployed to support energy system transformation required to achieve climate goals; and (3) incentivizes those forest bioenergy systems that augment the mitigation value of the forest sector as a whole. Emphasis on short-term emissions reduction targets can lead to decisions that make medium- to long-term climate goals more difficult to achieve. The most important climate change mitigation measure is the transformation of energy, industry and transport systems so that fossil carbon remains underground. Narrow perspectives obscure the significant role that bioenergy can play by displacing fossil fuels now, and supporting energy system transition. Greater transparency and consistency is needed in greenhouse gas reporting and accounting related to bioenergy.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Englund, Oskar, et al.
(författare)
-
Beneficial land-use change in Europe : deployment scenarios for multifunctional riparian buffers and windbreaks
- 2024
-
Annan publikation (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The land sector needs to increase biomass production to meet multiple demands while reducing negative land use impacts and transitioning from being a source to being a sink of carbon. The new Common Agricultural Policy of the EU (CAP) steers towards a more needs-based, targeted approach to addressing multiple environmental and climatic objectives, in coherence with other EU policies. In relation to this, new schemes are developed to offer farmers direct payments to adapt practices beneficial for climate, water, soil, air and biodiversity. Multifunctional biomass production systems have potential to reduce environmental impacts from agriculture while maintaining or increasing biomass production for the bioeconomy across Europe. Here, we present the first attempt to model the deployment of two such systems, riparian buffers and windbreaks, across >81.000 landscapes in Europe (EU27 + UK), aiming to quantify the resulting ecosystem services and environmental benefits, considering three deployment scenarios with different incentives for implementation. We found that these multifunctional biomass production systems can reduce N emissions to water and soil loss by wind erosion, respectively, down to a “low” impact level all over Europe, while simultaneously providing substantial environmental co-benefits, using less than 1% of the area under annual crops in the EU. The GHG emissions savings of utilizing the biomass produced in these systems for replacing fossil alternatives, combined with the increases in soil organic carbon, correspond to 1-1,4% of total GHG emissions in EU28. The introduction of “eco-schemes” in the new CAP may resolve some of the main barriers to implementation of large-scale multifunctional biomass production systems. Increasing the knowledge of these opportunities among all EU member states, before designing and introducing country-specific Eco-scheme options in the new CAP, is critical.
|
|
| 10. |
- Englund, Oskar, et al.
(författare)
-
Beneficial land use change: Strategic expansion of new biomass plantations can reduce environmental impacts from EU agriculture
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Global Environmental Change. - : Elsevier BV. - 0959-3780 .- 1872-9495. ; 60
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Society faces the double challenge of increasing biomass production to meet the future demands for food, materials and bioenergy, while addressing negative impacts of current (and future) land use. In the discourse, land use change (LUC) has often been considered as negative, referring to impacts of deforestation and expansion of biomass plantations. However, strategic establishment of suitable perennial production systems in agricultural landscapes can mitigate environmental impacts of current crop production, while providing biomass for the bioeconomy. Here, we explore the potential for such “beneficial LUC” in EU28. First, we map and quantify the degree of accumulated soil organic carbon losses, soil loss by wind and water erosion, nitrogen emissions to water, and recurring floods, in ∼81.000 individual landscapes in EU28. We then estimate the effectiveness in mitigating these impacts through establishment of perennial plants, in each landscape. The results indicate that there is a substantial potential for effective impact mitigation. Depending on criteria selection, 10–46% of the land used for annual crop production in EU28 is located in landscapes that could be considered priority areas for beneficial LUC. These areas are scattered all over Europe, but there are notable “hot-spots” where priority areas are concentrated, e.g., large parts of Denmark, western UK, The Po valley in Italy, and the Danube basin. While some policy developments support beneficial LUC, implementation could benefit from attempts to realize synergies between different Sustainable Development Goals, e.g., “Zero hunger”, “Clean water and sanitation”, “Affordable and Clean Energy”, “Climate Action”, and “Life on Land”.
|
|
