Exploring marginal and degraded lands for biomass and bioenergy production: An Indian scenario

Edrisi, Sheikh Adil; Abhilash, P.C.

doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.050

Cited by 156 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 118 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Worldwide, there is a variety of options to cultivate crops dedicated to biogas production on lands where food and feed crops are not grown due to unfavorable natural or economic conditions, such as marginal lands [125,126], semi-arid lands [127], degraded lands [128], surplus grasslands [129] or former cutaway peatlands [130]. Here, energy crop cultivation is often the only way to keep or make the land suitable for agricultural use and simultaneously maintain or improve the ecological status.…”

Section: Cropsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Future Agricultural Biogas Plant in Germany: A Vision

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After nearly two decades of subsidized and energy crop-oriented development, agricultural biogas production in Germany is standing at a crossroads. Fundamental challenges need to be met. In this article we sketch a vision of a future agricultural biogas plant that is an integral part of the circular bioeconomy and works mainly on the base of residues. It is flexible with regard to feedstocks, digester operation, microbial communities and biogas output. It is modular in design and its operation is knowledge-based, information-driven and largely automated. It will be competitive with fossil energies and other renewable energies, profitable for farmers and plant operators and favorable for the national economy. In this paper we discuss the required contribution of research to achieve these aims.

show abstract

Section: Cropsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Future Agricultural Biogas Plant in Germany: A Vision

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both the potentials and costs assumptions for each individual commodity are summarised in Chiodi et al (2015a). Non-energy GHG emissions related to growth of energy crops (although not considered in this paper) are also modelled, based on inputs from the FAPRI-Ireland model (Donnellan et al 2013). Additional information regarding the main input assumptions may be found online (Energy Policy and Modelling Research Group 2015).…”

Section: Key Model Sets and Assumptions In Timesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of including land-use change emissions from biofuels on meeting GHG emissions reduction targets: the example of Ireland

Czyrnek-Delêtre

Chiodi

Murphy

et al. 2016

Clean Techn Environ Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions from land-use change are of particular concern for land-based biofuels. Emissions avoided by substituting fossil fuels with biofuels may be offset by emissions from direct and indirect land-use changes (LUC). There is an urgent need to investigate what impact land-use change emissions may have on the expansion of bioenergy and biofuels, in the context of EU mitigation policies. This paper focuses on Ireland, which faces a number of challenges in delivering its renewable energy and GHG reduction targets. The Irish TIMES energy systems model was used to assess the impact of a range of land-use change emissions' levels on the evolution of Ireland's low-carbon energy system. A reference scenario was developed where LUC is ignored and Ireland achieves a least-cost low-carbon energy system by 2050. If high indirect land-use change (ILUC) emissions are included, this results in a decrease by 30 % in bioenergy and a 68 % increase in marginal abatement costs by 2050. Hydrogen is used instead of bioenergy in the freight sector in this scenario, while private cars are fuelled by renewable electricity. If GHG emissions from ILUC were considered less severe, indigenous grass biomethane becomes the key biofuel representing 31 % of total bioenergy consumption. This is in line with recent research in Ireland of the key role that grass biomethane can play.

show abstract

“…In particular, using degraded land sustainably for bioenergy crops could help improve soil quality (Immerzeel et al, 2014;Nijsen, Smeets, Stehfest, & Vuuren, 2011) and avoid competition with food crops, even though the yield will be lower. Several studies have assessed the bioenergy production potential of those degraded lands (Dornburg et al, 2010;Edrisi & Abhilash, 2016;Nijsen et al, 2011;Saha & Eckelman, 2018). In addition, the land use change, expansion of cultivated land area, and increased fertilizer use that accompany bio-crops will also impose huge threats to biodiversity (Immerzeel et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global advanced bioenergy potential under environmental protection policies and societal transformation measures

Hasegawa

Ohashi

et al. 2019

GCB Bioenergy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bioenergy plays an important role in low greenhouse gas stabilization scenarios. Among various possible sources of bioenergy, dedicated bio‐crops could contribute to most of the potential. However, large scale bio‐crop deployment raises sustainability concerns. Policies to alleviate the pressure of bio‐crops on the terrestrial environment can affect bioenergy potential and production costs. Here, we estimated the maximum bioenergy potential under environmental protection policies (biodiversity and soil protection) and societal transformation measures from demand and supply side (demand‐side policy includes sustainable diet; supply‐side policy includes advanced technology and trade openness for food) by using an integrated assessment modelling framework, which consists of a general equilibrium model (Asian‐Pacific Integrated Model/Computable General Equilibrium) and a spatial land use allocation model (Asian‐Pacific Integrated Model/Platform for Land‐Use and Environmental Model). We found that the global advanced bioenergy potential under no policy was 245 EJ/year and that 192 EJ/year could be produced under US$5/GJ. These figures were 149 EJ/year and 110 EJ/year, respectively, under a full environmental policy. Biodiversity protection has a greater impact than soil protection due to its larger coverage and stronger implementation. Societal transformation measures effectively increase them to 186 EJ/year and 143 EJ/year, respectively, even under full environmental policies. These results imply that the large‐scale bioenergy deployment possibly needed for the climate target to limit the global mean temperature increase well below 2°C compared to the preindustrial level might face a trade‐off with environmental protection targets and that possible mitigation pathways in harmony with other environmental issues need to be explored.

show abstract

Exploring marginal and degraded lands for biomass and bioenergy production: An Indian scenario

Cited by 156 publications

References 118 publications

The Future Agricultural Biogas Plant in Germany: A Vision

The Future Agricultural Biogas Plant in Germany: A Vision

Impact of including land-use change emissions from biofuels on meeting GHG emissions reduction targets: the example of Ireland

Global advanced bioenergy potential under environmental protection policies and societal transformation measures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About