Modeling potential freshwater ecotoxicity impacts due to pesticide use in biofuel feedstock production - the cases of maize, rapeseed, Salix, soybean, sugarcane and wheat

Ecotoxicity impacts have seldom been included in Life Cycle Assessments of biofuels. This report demonstrates an approach to model the potential freshwater ecotoxicity impacts due to pesticide use, using the PestLCI and USEtox models. The method is applied to eight biofuel feedstock production cases: maize in the US (two cases), rapeseed and wheat in Germany, soybean (two cases) and sugarcane in Brazil, and Salix in Sweden. Potential freshwater ecotoxicity impacts vary by up to 3 orders of magnitude with Salix at the lower end and wheat and rapeseed at the higher end. Potential mitigation strategies include substitution to less toxic pesticides, and reduction of emissions to freshwater ecosystems, through improved management, e.g. the use of buffer zones

Meeting Sustainability Requirements for SRC Bioenergy: Usefulness of Existing Tools, Responsibilities of Involved Stakeholders, and Recommendations for Further Developments

Short rotation coppice (SRC) is considered an important biomass supply option for meeting the European renewable energy targets. This paper presents an overview of existing and prospective sustainability requirements, Member State reporting obligations and parts of the methodology for calculating GHG emissions savings within the EU Renewable Energy Directive (RED), and shows how these RED-associated sustainability criteria may affect different stakeholders along SRC bioenergy supply chains. Existing and prospective tools are assessed on their usefulness in ensuring that SRC bioenergy is produced with sufficient consideration given to the RED-associated criteria. A sustainability framework is outlined that aims at (1) facilitating the development of SRC production systems that are attractive from the perspectives of all stakeholders, and (2) ensuring that the SRC production is RED eligible. Producer manuals, EIAs, and voluntary certification schemes can all be useful for ensuring RED eligibility. However, they are currently not sufficiently comprehensive, neither individually nor combined, and suggestions for how they can be more complementary are given. Geographical information systems offer opportunities for administrative authorities to provide stakeholders with maps or databases over areas/fields suitable for RED-eligible SRC cultivation. However, proper consideration of all relevant aspects requires that all stakeholders in the SRC supply chain become engaged in the development of SRC production systems and that a landscape perspective is used

Producing Feedstock for Biofuels: Land-Use and Local Environmental Impacts

This report covers Chalmers responsibilities for subtask 1.3 - land-use patterns as well as parts of subtask 3.4 – data for other environmental impacts, in the EU Biofuel Baseline projec

Performance of Jatropha biodiesel production and its environmental and socio-economic impacts. Dissertation

Abstract: In India expectations have been high on production of biodiesel from the oil-crop Jatropha. Jatropha is promoted as a drought-and pest-resistant crop, with the potential to grow on degraded soil with a low amount of inputs. These characteristics encourage hope for positive environmental and socio-economic impacts from Jatropha biodiesel production. The purpose of this study was to explore the performance of Jatropha biodiesel production in Southern India, to identify motivational factors for continued Jatropha cultivation, and to assess environmental and socio-economic impacts of the Jatropha biodiesel production. 106 farmers who have or have had Jatropha plantations were visited and interviewed regarding their opinion of Jatropha cultivation. The result indicates that 85 percent of the farmers have discontinued cultivation of Jatropha. The main barriers to continued cultivation derive from ecological problems, economic losses, and problems in the development and execution of the governmental implementation of the Jatropha programme. The Jatropha characteristics were overrated, and the plantations failed to provide income to the farmer. A common factor for the farmers who continued Jatropha cultivation was that they had the economic means to maintain non-profitable plantations. As the Jatropha programme was not as successful as expected, the expected positive environmental and socio-economic impacts have not been realized

Bioenergy for climate change mitigation: Scale and sustainability

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

Bioenergy for climate change mitigation:Scale and sustainability

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.</p

Bioenergy for climate change mitigation: Scale and sustainability

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

Bioenergy production and sustainable development: Science base for policymaking remains limited

The possibility of using bioenergy as a climate change mitigation measure has sparked a discussion of whether and how bioenergy production contributes to sustainable development. We undertook a systematic review of the scientific literature to illuminate this relationship and found a limited scientific basis for policymaking. Our results indicate that knowledge on the sustainable development impacts of bioenergy production is concentrated in a few well‐studied countries, focuses on environmental and economic impacts, and mostly relates to dedicated agricultural biomass plantations. The scope and methodological approaches in studies differ widely and only a small share of the studies sufficiently reports on context and/or baseline conditions, which makes it difficult to get a general understanding of the attribution of impacts. Nevertheless, we identified regional patterns of positive or negative impacts for all categories – environmental, economic, institutional, social and technological. In general, economic and technological impacts were more frequently reported as positive, while social and environmental impacts were more frequently reported as negative (with the exception of impacts on direct substitution of GHG emission from fossil fuel). More focused and transparent research is needed to validate these patterns and develop a strong science underpinning for establishing policies and governance agreements that prevent/mitigate negative and promote positive impacts from bioenergy production

Status and prospects for renewable energy using wood pellets from the southeastern United States

The ongoing debate about costs and benefits of wood-pellet based bioenergy production in the southeastern United States (SE USA) requires an understanding of the science and context influencing market decisions associated with its sustainability. Production of pellets has garnered much attention as US exports have grown from negligible amounts in the early 2000s to 4.6 million metric tonnes in 2015. Currently, 98% of these pellet exports are shipped to Europe to displace coal in power plants. We ask, ‘How is the production of wood pellets in the SE USA affecting forest systems and the ecosystem services they provide?’ To address this question, we review current forest conditions and the status of the wood products industry, how pellet production affects ecosystem services and biodiversity, and what methods are in place to monitor changes and protect vulnerable systems. Scientific studies provide evidence that wood pellets in the SE USA are a fraction of total forestry operations and can be produced while maintaining or improving forest ecosystem services. Ecosystem services are protected by the requirement to utilize loggers trained to apply scientifically based best management practices in planning and implementing harvest for the export market. Bioenergy markets supplement incomes to private rural landholders and provide an incentive for forest management practices that simultaneously benefit water quality and wildlife and reduce risk of fire and insect outbreaks. Bioenergy also increases the value of forest land to landowners, thereby decreasing likelihood of conversion to nonforest uses. Monitoring and evaluation are essential to verify that regulations and good practices are achieving goals and to enable timely responses if problems arise. Conducting rigorous research to understand how conditions change in response to management choices requires baseline data, monitoring, and appropriate reference scenarios. Long-term monitoring data on forest conditions should be publicly accessible and utilized to inform adaptive management