39 research outputs found

    Energy use in the global food system

    Get PDF
    The global food system is a major energy user and a relevant contributor to climate change. To date, the literature on the energy profile of food systems addresses individual countries and/or food products, and therefore a comparable assessment across regions is still missing. This paper uses a global multi‐regional environmentally extended input–output database in combination with newly constructed net energy‐use accounts to provide a production and consumption‐based stock‐take of energy use in the food system across different world regions for the period 2000–2015. Overall, the ratio between energy use in the food system and the economy is slowly decreasing. Likewise, the absolute values point toward a relative decoupling between energy use and food production, as well as to relevant differences in energy types, users, and consumption patterns across world regions. The use of (inefficient) traditional biomass for cooking substantially reduces the expected gap between per capita figures in high‐ and low‐income countries. The variety of energy profiles and the higher exposure to energy security issues compared to the total economy in some regions suggests that interventions in the system should consider the geographical context. Reducing energy use and decarbonizing the supply chains of food products will require a combination of technological measures and behavioral changes in consumption patterns. Interventions should consider the effects beyond the direct effects on energy use, because changing production and consumption patterns in the food system can lead to positive spillovers in the social and environmental dimensions outlined in the Sustainable Development Goals.Industrial EcologyGlobal Challenges (FGGA

    Current and future technical, economic and environmental feasibility of maize and wheat residues supply for biomass energy application:Illustrated for South Africa

    Get PDF
    AbstractThis study assessed the feasibility of mobilising maize and wheat residues for large-scale bioenergy applications in South Africa by establishing sustainable residue removal rates and cost of supply based on different production regions. A key objective was to refine the methodology for estimating crop residue harvesting for bioenergy use, while maintaining soil productivity and avoiding displacement of competing residue uses. At current conditions, the sustainable bioenergy potential from maize and wheat residues was estimated to be about 104 PJ. There is potential to increase the amount of crop residues to 238 PJ through measures such as no till cultivation and adopting improved cropping systems. These estimates were based on minimum residues requirements of 2 t ha−1 for soil erosion control and additional residue amounts to maintain 2% SOC level.At the farm gate, crop residues cost between 0.9 and 1.7 GJ1.About96 GJ−1. About 96% of these residues are available below 1.5 GJ−1. In the improved scenario, up to 85% of the biomass is below 1.3 GJ1.Forbiomassdeliveriesattheconversionplant,about36 GJ−1. For biomass deliveries at the conversion plant, about 36% is below 5 GJ−1 while in the optimised scenario, about 87% is delivered below 5$ GJ−1. Co-firing residues with coal results in lower cost of electricity compared to other renewables and significant GHG (CO2 eq) emissions reduction (up to 0.72 tons MWh−1). Establishing sustainable crop residue supply systems in South Africa could start by utilising the existing agricultural infrastructure to secure supply and develop a functional market. It would then be necessary to incentivise improvements across the value chain

    Global implications of crop-based bioenergy with carbon capture and storage for terrestrial vertebrate biodiversity

    Get PDF
    Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) based on purpose-grown lignocellulosic crops can provide negative CO 2 emissions to mitigate climate change, but its land requirements present a threat to biodiversity. Here, we analyse the implications of crop-based BECCS for global terrestrial vertebrate species richness, considering both the land-use change (LUC) required for BECCS and the climate change prevented by BECCS. LUC impacts are determined using global-equivalent, species–area relationship-based loss factors. We find that sequestering 0.5–5 Gtonne of CO 2 per year with lignocellulosic crop-based BECCS would require hundreds of Mha of land, and commit tens of terrestrial vertebrate species to extinction. Species loss per unit of negative emissions decreases with: (i) longer lifetimes of BECCS systems, (ii) less overall deployment of crop-based BECCS and (iii) optimal land allocation, that is prioritizing locations with the lowest species loss per negative emission potential, rather than minimizing overall land use or prioritizing locations with the lowest biodiversity. The consequences of prevented climate change for biodiversity are based on existing climate response relationships. Our tentative comparison shows that for crop-based BECCS considered over 30 years, LUC impacts on vertebrate species richness may outweigh the positive effects of prevented climate change. Conversely, for BECCS considered over 80 years, the positive effects of climate change mitigation on biodiversity may outweigh the negative effects of LUC. However, both effects and their interaction are highly uncertain and require further understanding, along with the analysis of additional species groups and biodiversity metrics. We conclude that factoring in biodiversity means lignocellulosic crop-based BECCS should be used early to achieve the required mitigation over longer time periods, on optimal biomass cultivation locations, and most importantly, as little as possible where conversion of natural land is involved, looking instead to sustainably grown or residual biomass-based feedstocks and alternative strategies for carbon dioxide removal

    Tradeoffs in the quest for climate smart agricultural intensification in Mato Grosso, Brazil.

    Get PDF
    Low productivity cattle ranching, with its linkages to rural poverty, deforestation and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, remains one of the largest sustainability challenges in Brazil and has impacts worldwide. There is a nearly universal call to intensify extensive beef cattle production systems to spare land for crop production and nature and to meet Brazil?s Intended Nationally Determined Contribution to reducing global climate change. However, different interventions aimed at the intensification of livestock systems in Brazil may involve substantial social and environmental tradeoffs. Here we examine these tradeoffs using a whole-farm model calibrated for the Brazilian agricultural frontier state ofMato Grosso, one of the largest soybean and beef cattle production regions in the world. Specifically, we compare the costs and benefits of a typical extensive, continuously grazed cattle system relative to a specialized soybean production system and two improved cattle management strategies (rotational grazing and integrated soybean-cattle) under different climate scenarios.We found clear tradeoffs in GHG and nitrogen emissions, climate resilience, and water and energy use across these systems. Relative to continuously grazed or rotationally grazed cattle systems, the integreated soybean-cattle system showed higher food production and lower GHG emissions per unit of human digestible protein, as well as increased resilience under climate change (both in terms of productivity and financial returns). All systems suffered productivity and profitability losses under severe climate change, highlighting the need for climate smart agricultural development strategies in the region. By underscoring the economic feasibility of improving the performance of cattle systems, and by quantifying the tradeoffs of each option, our results are useful for directing agricultural and climate policy

    Biomass residues as twenty-first century bioenergy feedstock—a comparison of eight integrated assessment models

    Get PDF
    In the twenty-first century, modern bioenergy could become one of the largest sources of energy, partially replacing fossil fuels and contributing to climate change mitigation. Agricultural and forestry biomass residues form an inexpensive bioenergy feedstock with low greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, if harvested sustainably. We analysed quantities of biomass residues supplied for energy and their sensitivities in harmonised bioenergy demand scenarios across eight integrated assessment models (IAMs) and compared them with literature-estimated residue availability. IAM results vary substantially, at both global and regional scales, but suggest that residues could meet 7–50% of bioenergy demand towards 2050, and 2–30% towards 2100, in a scenario with 300 EJ/year of exogenous bioenergy demand towards 2100. When considering mean literature-estimated availability, residues could provide around 55 EJ/year by 2050. Inter-model differences primarily arise from model structure, assumptions, and the representation of agriculture and forestry. Despite these differences, drivers of residues supplied and underlying cost dynamics are largely similar across models. Higher bioenergy demand or biomass prices increase the quantity of residues supplied for energy, though their effects level off as residues become depleted. GHG emission pricing and land protection can increase the costs of using land for lignocellulosic bioenergy crop cultivation, which increases residue use at the expense of lignocellulosic bioenergy crops. In most IAMs and scenarios, supplied residues in 2050 are within literature-estimated residue availability, but outliers and sustainability concerns warrant further exploration. We conclude that residues can cost-competitively play an important role in the twenty-first century bioenergy supply, though uncertainties remain concerning (regional) forestry and agricultural production and resulting residue supply potentials

    Global biomass supply modeling for long-run management of the climate system

    Get PDF
    Bioenergy is projected to have a prominent, valuable, and maybe essential, role in climate management. However, there is significant variation in projected bioenergy deployment results, as well as concerns about the potential environmental and social implications of supplying biomass. Bioenergy deployment projections are market equilibrium solutions from integrated modeling, yet little is known about the underlying modeling of the supply of biomass as a feedstock for energy use in these modeling frameworks. We undertake a novel diagnostic analysis with ten global models to elucidate, compare, and assess how biomass is supplied within the models used to inform long-run climate management. With experiments that isolate and reveal biomass supply modeling behavior and characteristics (costs, emissions, land use, market effects), we learn about biomass supply tendencies and differences. The insights provide a new level of modeling transparency and understanding of estimated global biomass supplies that informs evaluation of the potential for bioenergy in managing the climate and interpretation of integrated modeling. For each model, we characterize the potential distributions of global biomass supply across regions and feedstock types for increasing levels of quantity supplied, as well as some of the potential societal externalities of supplying biomass. We also evaluate the biomass supply implications of managing these externalities. Finally, we interpret biomass market results from integrated modeling in terms of our new understanding of biomass supply. Overall, we find little consensus between models on where biomass could be cost-effectively produced and the implications. We also reveal model specific biomass supply narratives, with results providing new insights into integrated modeling bioenergy outcomes and differences. The analysis finds that many integrated models are considering and managing emissions and land use externalities of supplying biomass and estimating that environmental and societal trade-offs in the form of land emissions, land conversion, and higher agricultural prices are cost-effective, and to some degree a reality of using biomass, to address climate change

    Identifying energy model fingerprints in mitigation scenarios

    Get PDF
    Energy models are used to study emissions mitigation pathways, such as those compatible with the Paris Agreement goals. These models vary in structure, objectives, parameterization and level of detail, yielding differences in the computed energy and climate policy scenarios. To study model differences, diagnostic indicators are common practice in many academic fields, for example, in the physical climate sciences. However, they have not yet been applied systematically in mitigation literature, beyond addressing individual model dimensions. Here we address this gap by quantifying energy model typology along five dimensions: responsiveness, mitigation strategies, energy supply, energy demand and mitigation costs and effort, each expressed through several diagnostic indicators. The framework is applied to a diagnostic experiment with eight energy models in which we explore ten scenarios focusing on Europe. Comparing indicators to the ensemble yields comprehensive ‘energy model fingerprints’, which describe systematic model behaviour and contextualize model differences for future multi-model comparison studies

    The role of biomass in climate change mitigation : Assessing the long-term dynamics of bioenergy and biochemicals in the land and energy systems

    No full text
    Scientific literature addressing climate change mitigation options have highlighted the potentially important role of biomass as a substitute for fossil fuels in the provision of energy and materials. However significant uncertainties remain concerning the drivers and constraints of the available biomass, the overall greenhouse gas (GHG) benefit, and the most effective supply and demand chains. This thesis builds on the IMAGE integrated assessment model in order to improve the representation of the supply of biomass from different sources and its use in different end use sectors. Improvements include (i) representation of residue costs and supply as a function of agricultural and forestry demand, (ii) investigation of the spatially explicit GHG consequences of energy crop production and how increased production of biofuels affects overall carbon balances, (iii) representation of the long term energy demand and emissions of (bio)chemicals and effects of post-consumer-waste options such as recycling and cascading, and (iv) updating the techno-economic parameterization of different biomass conversion technologies and investigating how different biomass end uses compete with each other and the consequences on GHG mitigation. The improved model is used in order to conduct a scenario analysis covering a broad set of uncertainties concerning the future development of the land and energy systems. The scenarios are differentiated along socioeconomic lines (population growth, globalisation/regionalisation, technological improvements, lifestyle choices, etc.) as well as the application of policies aimed at meeting stringent climate targets, thus presenting a broad overview of different possible futures. The results show that though residues can play an important role in biomass supply (up to 50 EJPrim/yr), the main uncertainty concerning low GHG biomass availability is the development of agricultural production. With increased intensification and land abandonment large volumes of biomass can be produced with small effects on GHG emissions (up to 100 EJPrim/yr with an emission factor below 20 kgCO2/GJPrim). Bioenergy use is driven by fuel demand for transport or heating; however its most effective use (from a GHG perspective) is projected to be electricity production due to the continuing growth and high emissions of this sector. Small volumes are also demanded for the production of chemicals; however the emission mitigation potential of this sector is very small. Land management and technological improvements in second generation biofuel production as well as carbon capture and storage are critical in order to meet stringent climate targets. Overall biomass and bioenergy can contribute up to a quarter of final energy demand and plays a crucial role at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The projections are compared with those of another integrated assessment model in order to highlight the effect of different model techniques and representations of the land and energy systems, showing that the overall trends are robust; however specific supply and demand strategies may differ. This thesis highlights the drivers, constraints and relevant dynamics of biomass availability, bioenergy demand and GHG consequences. The scenario analysis provides insights on uncertainties and the conditions required in order to maximize the GHG benefit of biomass use while highlighting potential synergies, barriers and pitfalls of different biomass strategies
    corecore