The global technical potential of bio-energy in 2050 considering sustainability constraints

Haberl, Helmut; Beringer, Tim; Bhattacharya, S.C.; Erb, Karl‐Heinz; Hoogwijk, Monique

doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2010.10.007

Cited by 240 publications

(164 citation statements)

References 44 publications

(36 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

159

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Those uncertainties are largely due to inconsistent definitions of the term bioenergy, large differences in the underlying assumptions of the agronomic potential of bioenergy crops on the respective types of land and limited availability of data on land use Dornburg et al 2010;Offermann et al 2011). Most assessments overestimate the land area available for bioenergy crops because constraining factors such as water, productivity, social aspects and nature conservation are not taken into account (van Vuuren et al 2009;Haberl et al 2010;Beringer et al 2011). Haberl et al (2010), in a critical review of modelling and calculation approaches, conclude that there are no scientific studies at present that resolve the scientific challenges related to the assessment of future bioenergy potentials.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most assessments overestimate the land area available for bioenergy crops because constraining factors such as water, productivity, social aspects and nature conservation are not taken into account (van Vuuren et al 2009;Haberl et al 2010;Beringer et al 2011). Haberl et al (2010), in a critical review of modelling and calculation approaches, conclude that there are no scientific studies at present that resolve the scientific challenges related to the assessment of future bioenergy potentials.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bioenergy from “surplus” land: environmental and socio-economic implications

Dauber¹,

Brown²,

Fernando³

et al. 2012

179

158

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increasing demand for biomass for the production of bioenergy is generating land-use conflicts. These conflicts might be solved through spatial segregation of food/feed and energy producing areas by continuing producing food on established and productive agricultural land while growing dedicated energy crops on so called "surplus" land. Ambiguity in the definition and characterization of surplus land as well as uncertainty in assessments of land availability and of future bioenergy potentials is causing confusion about the prospects and the environmental and socio-economic implications of bioenergy development in those areas. The high level of uncertainty is due to environmental, economic and social constraints not yet taken into account and to the potentials offered by those novel crops and their production methods not being fully exploited. This paper provides a scientific background in support of a reassessment of land available for bioenergy production by clarifying the terminology, identifying constraints and options for ReseARCh ARtiCle BioRisk A peer-reviewed open-access journalJens Dauber et al. / BioRisk 7: 5-50 (2012) 6 an efficient bioenergy-use of surplus land and providing policy recommendations for resolving conflicting land-use demands. A serious approach to factoring in the constraints, combined with creativity in utilizing the options provided, in our opinion, would lead to a more sustainable and efficient development of the bioenergy sector. Unless the sustainability challenge is mastered, the interdependent policy objectives of mitigating climate change, obtaining independence from fossil fuels, feeding and fuelling a growing human world population and maintaining biodiversity and ecosystem services will not be met. Despite the advanced developments of bioenergy, we still see regional solutions for designing and establishing sustainable bioenergy production systems with optimized production resulting in social, economic and ecological benefits. Where bioenergy production has been identified as the most suitable option to overcome the given problems of energy security and climate change mitigation, we need to determine which bioenergy cultivation systems are most suitable for the respective types of surplus land, by taking into account issues such as yields, inputs and costs, as well as potential environmental and socio-economic impacts.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bioenergy from “surplus” land: environmental and socio-economic implications

Dauber¹,

Brown²,

Fernando³

et al. 2012

179

158

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To achieve these reductions of energy sector CO 2 emissions, one proposed mitigation measure is to introduce a global carbon tax which creates incentives to reduce overall energy use and to replace fossil fuels with renewable sources, including bioenergy. Bioenergy can be derived from energy crops or residues from other land uses such as forestry (Haberl et al, 2010). An inevitable effect of increased bioenergy use will be an increasing demand for land (Wise et al, 2009;Hassler and Sinn, 2016), the displacement of lands formerly used for traditional agriculture, or the extension of land use into areas occupied by natural ecosystems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In PLUM we only explicitly model the share of bioenergy produced from energy crops (excluding lignocellulosic feedstocks), which was 3 % in 2000 (OECD/IEA, 2012). The future contribution of energy crops to total bioenergy potential is highly uncertain depending on assumptions as to available croplands and yield development, but considering sustainability constraints has been suggested to fall within the range of 30-50 % in 2050 (Haberl et al, 2010). Lignocellulosic feedstocks are expected to play a major role in future bioenergy production, but as they are excluded here we assume a lower contribution of energy crops to total bioenergy of at most 15 % in 2100 (shareBEcr; see Appendix A4).…”

Section: Land Use Model and Coupling To The Climate-economy Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impacts of climate mitigation strategies in the energy sector on global land use and carbon balance

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions to limit damage to the global economy climate-change-induced and secure the livelihoods of future generations requires ambitious mitigation strategies. The introduction of a global carbon tax on fossil fuels is tested here as a mitigation strategy to reduce atmospheric CO 2 concentrations and radiative forcing. Taxation of fossil fuels potentially leads to changed composition of energy sources, including a larger relative contribution from bioenergy. Further, the introduction of a mitigation strategy reduces climate-change-induced damage to the global economy, and thus can indirectly affect consumption patterns and investments in agricultural technologies and yield enhancement. Here we assess the implications of changes in bioenergy demand as well as the indirectly caused changes in consumption and crop yields for global and national cropland area and terrestrial biosphere carbon balance. We apply a novel integrated assessment modelling framework, combining three previously published models (a climate-economy model, a socio-economic land use model and an ecosystem model). We develop reference and mitigation scenarios based on the narratives and key elements of the shared socio-economic pathways (SSPs). Taking emissions from the land use sector into account, we find that the introduction of a global carbon tax on the fossil fuel sector is an effective mitigation strategy only for scenarios with low population development and strong sustainability criteria (SSP1 "Taking the green road"). For scenarios with high population growth, low technological development and bioenergy production the high demand for cropland causes the terrestrial biosphere to switch from being a carbon sink to a source by the end of the 21st century.

show abstract

“…(e.g., Patzek 2004;Tilman et al 2009;Cushion et al 2010;Haberl et al 2010). One of the key issues is that some biofuel production pathways increase rather than decrease greenhouse gas emissions, due to associated N 2 O emissions (Crutzen et al 2007) or, in the case of palm oil cultivated on peatland soils, because of peat oxidation (Wicke et al 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of First-Generation Biofuels on the Depletion of the Global Phosphorus Reserve

Hein

Leemans

2012

AMBIO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The large majority of biofuels to date is ''firstgeneration'' biofuel made from agricultural commodities. All first-generation biofuel production systems require phosphorus (P) fertilization. P is an essential plant nutrient, yet global reserves are finite. We argue that committing scarce P to biofuel production involves a trade-off between climate change mitigation and future food production. We examine biofuel production from seven types of feedstock, and find that biofuels at present consume around 2% of the global inorganic P fertilizer production. For all examined biofuels, with the possible exception of sugarcane, the contribution to P depletion exceeds the contribution to mitigating climate change. The relative benefits of biofuels can be increased through enhanced recycling of P, but high increases in P efficiency are required to balance climate change mitigation and P depletion impacts. We conclude that, with the current production systems, the production of first-generation biofuels compromises food production in the future.

show abstract

The global technical potential of bio-energy in 2050 considering sustainability constraints

Abstract: Research highlights▶ Food demand, agricultural technology and conservation constrain bio-energy supply. ▶ Global bio-energy crop potentials in 2050 may be 44–133 EJ/yr. ▶ Total global primary bio-energy potentials in 2050 may be 160–270 EJ/yr.

Cited by 240 publications

References 44 publications

Bioenergy from “surplus” land: environmental and socio-economic implications

Bioenergy from “surplus” land: environmental and socio-economic implications

Impacts of climate mitigation strategies in the energy sector on global land use and carbon balance

The Impact of First-Generation Biofuels on the Depletion of the Global Phosphorus Reserve

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About