Editorial note on bioenergy and sustainability—Bridging the gaps

Souza, Gláucia Mendes; Ballester, Maria Victória Ramos; Victória, Reynaldo Luiz; Díaz‐Chavez, Rocío

doi:10.1016/j.envdev.2015.06.001

Cited by 63 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…() and Souza et al . (). These results coupled with the potential carbon and GHG savings made by replacing fossil fuels demonstrate the potential of bioenergy for climate change mitigation and improved energy security (Cannell, ; Styles & Jones, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…However, evidence is still required to support this assertion, particularly with respect to soil properties (Kort et al ., ), greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (see refs within Rowe et al ., ) and a whole basket of associated ecosystem services (Holland et al ., ). Although recent reports suggest that energy and food may be produced in a multifunctional landscape in a sustainable way (Manning et al ., ; Souza et al ., ), many of these positive effects are dependent on land management, vegetation type, and in particular, the land‐use change (LUC) implemented when the bioenergy crop is planted (Milner et al ., ). It is therefore important to consider how these crops will be placed within the landscape (Dauber et al ., ) and the impacts of particular land‐use transitions on ecosystem services, of which climate regulation is of outstanding importance (Anderson‐Teixeira et al ., ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Land‐use change to bioenergy: grassland to short rotation coppice willow has an improved carbon balance

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of a transition from grassland to second-generation (2G) bioenergy on soil carbon and greenhouse gas (GHG) balance is uncertain, with limited empirical data on which to validate landscape-scale models, sustainability criteria and energy policies. Here, we quantified soil carbon, soil GHG emissions and whole ecosystem carbon balance for short rotation coppice (SRC) bioenergy willow and a paired grassland site, both planted at commercial scale. We quantified the carbon balance for a 2-year period and captured the effects of a commercial harvest in the SRC willow at the end of the first cycle. Soil fluxes of nitrous oxide (N 2 O) and methane (CH 4 ) did not contribute significantly to the GHG balance of these land uses. Soil respiration was lower in SRC willow (912 AE 42 g C m À2 yr À1) than in grassland (1522 AE 39 g C m À2 yr À1 ). Net ecosystem exchange (NEE) reflected this with the grassland a net source of carbon with mean NEE of 119 AE 10 g C m À2 yr À1 and SRC willow a net sink, À620 AE 18 g C m À2 yr À1 . When carbon removed from the ecosystem in harvested products was considered (Net Biome Productivity), SRC willow remained a net sink (221 AE 66 g C m À2 yr À1 ). Despite the SRC willow site being a net sink for carbon, soil carbon stocks (0-30 cm)were higher under the grassland. There was a larger NEE and increase in ecosystem respiration in the SRC willow after harvest; however, the site still remained a carbon sink. Our results indicate that once established, significant carbon savings are likely in SRC willow compared with the minimally managed grassland at this site. Although these observed impacts may be site and management dependent, they provide evidence that land-use transition to 2G bioenergy has potential to provide a significant improvement on the ecosystem service of climate regulation relative to grassland systems.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Land‐use change to bioenergy: grassland to short rotation coppice willow has an improved carbon balance

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, the rise in the demand for biomass for food production, feed production, and material use is expected to continue in the future [11][12][13][14]. It is commonly agreed that bioenergy has to be utilized in line with the goals of sustainable development; in particular, food security ranks higher than using biomass for energetic purposes [15,16]. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategy Elements for a Sustainable Bioenergy Policy Based on Scenarios and Systems Modeling: Germany as Example

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bioenergy is an important renewable energy carrier with uncertainties in future development due to sustainability issues. Its further development requires a robust bioenergy strategy on a national level. To provide these strategy elements, a dedicated approach was developed, which includes a new modeling framework, an impact assessment, and stakeholder involvement. Demonstrating the approach on the example of Germany, four bioenergy utilization scenarios for a period up to 2050 have been assessed using seven indicators that cover aspects from local infrastructure to global food security. The devised strategy elements address the national and international feedstock supply, promising fields of utilization, and appropriate frame conditions. The results coherently focus on a wide range of policy fields, which has not been possible in the past. IntroductionBioenergy is made from renewable biomass sources. In recent decades, it has been the most significant renewable energy carrier in Germany, Europe, and the world [1][2][3]. On a global level, bioenergy counts today for 100 % of the renewable transport fuels, over 90 % of modern renewable heat, and 8 % of renewable power [3], with a significant rise in bioenergy utilization through all sectors, which means a doubling of the use between 2006 and 2014, and significantly contribute to global greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction [4]. Advanced renewable energy goals and the availability of a wider spectrum of costefficient renewable energy technologies, i.e., wind power, photovoltaics, heat pumps, and e-mobility, mean the role of bioenergy in future energy systems is expected to change [5][6][7]. However, concerns have also arisen about the availability of feedstock to cover additional energy demands using bio-based energy carriers. Although biomass is a renewable resource, its availability is limited at a certain point in time, especially when environmental impacts on biodiversity, soil quality, natural carbon stocks and sinks, e.g., are taken into account [8][9][10]. Nevertheless, the rise in the demand for biomass for food production, feed production, and material use is expected to continue in the future [11][12][13][14]. It is commonly agreed that bioenergy has to be utilized in line with the goals of sustainable development; in particular, food security ranks higher than using biomass for energetic purposes [15,16].

show abstract

“…Brazil is a major producer and exporter of food, feed, and various biofuels and other bioproducts, contributing to greenhouse gas (GHG) savings as well as to a range of social and economic objectives . Further growth in production is expected due to increasing domestic and international demands for food, feed, biomaterials, and bioenergy products .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainable bioproducts in Brazil: disputes and agreements on a common ground agenda for agriculture and nature protection

Sparovek

Antoniazzi

Barretto

et al. 2016

Biofuels Bioprod Bioref

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A key question for food, biofuels, and bioproducts production is how agriculture affects the environment, and social and economic development. In Brazil, a large agricultural producer and among the biologically wealthiest of nations, this question is challenging and opinions often clash. The Brazilian parliament and several stakeholders have recently debated the revision of the Forest Act, the most important legal framework for conservation of natural vegetation on Brazilian private agricultural lands. Past decades have shown improvements in the agricultural sector with respect to productivity and efficiency, along with great reductions in deforestation and growth of environmentally certified production. However, the opposing sides in the debate have ignored this progress and instead continue to entrench their respective combative positions. A structured exchange involving nine experts associated with major producer interests (livestock, crops, planted forest, and charcoal) and environmental NGOs was moderated based on a framework that sorted viewpoints into four categories: (i) common ground – compatible interests considered to be high priority for Brazilian sustainable agricultural development; (ii) serving exclusive nature conservation interest; (iii) serving exclusive agricultural production interest; and (iv) mainly serving the purpose of sustaining dispute. We conclude that the majority of actions and expected future trends reflect achievements and ambitions to balance production and conservation, but much public opinion – and in turn decisions in the parliament and government for agriculture and conservation – is shaped by a perceived conflict between these objectives and a debate that has become, at least to some extent, an end in itself. © 2016 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

show abstract

Editorial note on bioenergy and sustainability—Bridging the gaps

Cited by 63 publications

References 0 publications

Land‐use change to bioenergy: grassland to short rotation coppice willow has an improved carbon balance

Land‐use change to bioenergy: grassland to short rotation coppice willow has an improved carbon balance

Strategy Elements for a Sustainable Bioenergy Policy Based on Scenarios and Systems Modeling: Germany as Example

Sustainable bioproducts in Brazil: disputes and agreements on a common ground agenda for agriculture and nature protection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About